Woman has Octuplets, after having 6 others en vitro

Archive From The 'Tank

Should the woman been allowed to have more children en vitro without being independently wealthy?

Sure! Why not? It's really none of your business!
1
6%
Everthing will work out, would have better had she not.
0
No votes
Dang if I know
0
No votes
Wasn't a real good idea
3
18%
NOt only no, but Hell no!
13
76%
 
Total votes: 17

User avatar
Rawedge Rim
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 5248
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:38 pm
Location: Florida

Woman has Octuplets, after having 6 others en vitro

Post by Rawedge Rim »

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090130/ap_on_re_us/octuplets
Make that 14: Octuplet mom already had 6 kids

Print By THOMAS WATKINS and LAURAN NEERGAARD, Associated Press Writers Thomas Watkins And Lauran Neergaard, Associated Press Writers – Fri Jan 30, 6:05 pm


– How in the world does a woman with six children get a fertility doctor to help her have more — eight more? An ethical debate erupted Friday after it was learned that the Southern California woman who gave birth to octuplets this week had six children already.

Large multiple births "are presented on TV shows as a 'Brady Bunch' moment. They're not," fumed Arthur Caplan, bioethics chairman at the University of Pennsylvania. He noted the serious and sometimes lethal complications and crushing medical costs that often come with high-multiple births.

But Dr. Jeffrey Steinberg, who has fertility clinics in Los Angeles, Las Vegas and New York, countered: "Who am I to say that six is the limit? There are people who like to have big families."

Kaiser Permanente announced the mega-delivery Monday, with delighted doctors saying they had initially expected seven babies and were surprised when the cesarean section yielded an eighth.

Multiple births this big are considered impossible without fertility treatment, but the doctors who delivered the babies would not say whether the 33-year-old woman had used fertility drugs or had embryos implanted in her womb.

However, the children's grandmother, Angela Suleman, was quoted as telling the Los Angeles Times that her daughter had embryos implanted last year, and never intended to give birth to eight, but "they all happened to take." Suleman said her daughter rejected an offer from doctors to abort some of the embryos.

More common among younger women is the use of fertility drugs that stimulate egg production; doctors are supposed to monitor budding eggs and stop the drugs if too many develop.

Some medical experts were disturbed to hear that the woman was offered fertility treatment, and troubled by the possibility that she was implanted with so many embryos.

Dr. David Adamson, former president of the American Society of Reproductive Medicine, said he was bracing for some backlash against his specialty.

In 30 years of practice, "I have never provided fertility treatment to a woman with six children," or ever heard of a similar case, said Adamson, director of Fertility Physicians of Northern California.

Women seeking fertility treatment are routinely asked to give a detailed history of prior pregnancies and births, and "it's a very realistic question to ask about someone who has six children: How does this fit into the concept of requiring fertility treatment?" Adamson said.

The woman's fertility doctor has not been identified. The hospital has not released the mother's name, citing her desire for privacy. There was no immediate information on whether she is married or who the father of the babies is. Her six other children range in age from 2 to 7.

Records show that she held a psychiatric technician's license from 1997 to 2002. It was unclear whether she is now employed.

It was only the second time in U.S. history that eight babies survived more than a few hours after birth. The six boys and two girls were said to be in remarkably good condition but were expected to remain in the hospital for several more weeks.

The mother of the octuplets lives with her parents in a modest, single-story home on a quiet cul-de-sac in Whittier, a Los Angeles suburb of about 85,000. Children's bicycles, a pink car and a wagon were scattered in the yard and driveway.

On Thursday night, the children's grandfather came to the door and angrily told reporters to leave the property.

Court records show Angela Suleman filed for bankruptcy last March, but after she failed to make required payments and appear at a creditors' meeting, the case was dismissed. She reported liabilities of $981,371, mostly money owed on two houses she owns in Whittier.

The births were a hot topic of conversation on the Internet, with many people incredulous that a woman with six children would try to have more — and that a doctor would help her do so. Some criticized the doctor and suggested that the mother would be overwhelmed trying to raise her brood and would end up relying on public support.

Jessica Zepeda, who identified herself as a friend of the mother, said the woman and family would have enough money to raise 14 children. "She is not on welfare," Zepeda said. "She is an awesome mom, and will be able to take care of her babies."

Several doctors said it is not their role to dictate family size.

"I am not a policeman for reproduction in the United States. My role is to educate patients," said Dr. James Grifo, professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the New York University School of Medicine.

But Caplan said not enough attention is paid to the well-being of the children in high-multiple births. Such babies are often premature and underdeveloped, and are almost always found to have some health problem.

Caplan said everyone has a stake in mega-multiple births because they cause insurance premiums to rise when hospitals cannot get reimbursed for the huge costs such babies incur, and because those with disabilities typically require social services.

"To say all you need is cash and the will to have more kids should not be a sufficient standard to access services," he said. "It is insufficient for adoption. It isn't sufficient to be a foster parent. Why would it be sufficient to run down to the fertility clinic to get embryos transplanted or super-ovulated?"

A few years ago, Caplan and others did a survey of U.S. fertility clinics. They found few had policies for deciding whether to help a woman get pregnant. Most clinics said they had patients meet with financial coordinators, but only 18 percent had them see a social worker or psychologist.

With in vitro fertilization, doctors frequently implant more than one embryo to improve the odds that one will take. Mothers-to-be who are found to be pregnant with several babies are given the option of aborting some of them to increase the chances the others will survive.

The U.S. fertility industry has guidelines on how many embryos doctors can implant, with the number varying by age and other factors. The guidelines call for no more than one or two for a generally healthy woman under 35, and no more than three to five, depending on the embryos' maturity, for women over 40.

If eight embryos were implanted at once, that is "well beyond our guidelines," Dr. R. Dale McClure, president of the reproductive medicine society, said in a statement.

Clinics that clearly violate guidelines can be kicked out of another group, the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology, which in turn affects whether insurance covers their services. But the guidelines do not have the force of law.

___

Thomas Watkins reported from Whittier, while Medical Writer Lauran Neergaard reported from Washington. AP writers Alicia Chang and Jacob Adelman in Los Angeles and Medical Writer Maria Cheng in London contributed to this story.
A few questions...

1. How the hell can an unemployed 33 yr. old never married woman who lives with her parents and already has 6 children en vitro, afford to have 8 more implanted (or hell, even 1 more)

2. Who paid for it?

3. Was this an ethical practice by the clinic who performed the proceedure

4. Are the 14 children going to get adequate attention (after all, we are not talking about 14 children spread out as they normally would be, over the course of many years, but all grouped up together.

5. How will she afford these children as they grow older and need clothing and school supplies?
“One accurate measurement is worth a
thousand expert opinions.”
- Adm. Grace Hopper

"Whenever you dream, you're holding the key, it opens the the door to let you be free" ..RJD
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61746
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Post by Avatar »

I don't think you have to be independantly wealthy, but I think you should be able to support them...

I've long been a proponent of licensed parenting, but it's not gonna happen anytime soon.

We can't make a prediction about their standard of care etc, but instinctively my reaction is WTF???

:lol:

--A
User avatar
rdhopeca
The Master
Posts: 2798
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 5:13 pm
Location: San Luis Obispo, CA
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 12 times
Contact:

Post by rdhopeca »

While realizing that it's every person's right to do what they want, I do not think it is ethical for anyone to so blatantly spend insurance money and time and so forth to get fertility treatments when you already have six children.

Poor judgment by all involved.
Rob

"Progress is made. Be warned."
User avatar
Vraith
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 10621
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 8:03 pm
Location: everywhere, all the time

Post by Vraith »

Assuming the facts of the article are true:
I usually try to show a modicum of respect for strangers unless they p#$% me off in a bar when I'm drunk, but this woman is either:
A: a complete (insert worst explitive you can think of)
B: conning someone
C: looking for her 15 minutes
D: all of the above
I can't think of a legal way to have stopped her, though.
[spoiler]Sig-man, Libtard, Stupid piece of shit. change your text color to brown. Mr. Reliable, bullshit-slinging liarFucker-user.[/spoiler]
the difference between evidence and sources: whether they come from the horse's mouth or a horse's ass.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
the hyperbole is a beauty...for we are then allowed to say a little more than the truth...and language is more efficient when it goes beyond reality than when it stops short of it.
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61746
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Post by Avatar »

Yeah, therein lies the problem huh? A legal (or moral) way of stopping her. If nothing else, surely it can't be good economically...I mean...unemployed...

--A
User avatar
Rawedge Rim
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 5248
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:38 pm
Location: Florida

Post by Rawedge Rim »

Avatar wrote:Yeah, therein lies the problem huh? A legal (or moral) way of stopping her. If nothing else, surely it can't be good economically...I mean...unemployed...

--A
Wish I had more details, such as where the money is coming from, how she can afford to care for them, what kind of help she has, etc.

Seems to me this is a clear case of "just because you "can" do a thing, doesn't mean you "should" do a thing.
“One accurate measurement is worth a
thousand expert opinions.”
- Adm. Grace Hopper

"Whenever you dream, you're holding the key, it opens the the door to let you be free" ..RJD
User avatar
Zarathustra
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19636
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am

Post by Zarathustra »

Rawedge Rim wrote:Wish I had more details, such as where the money is coming from . . .
Ha, that's easy: Medicaid. The money is coming from us. She's going to get her own little "bailout." These kids will be welfare babies, all the way. How else does a single unemployed woman with 14 kids afford them? She doesn't.
Joe Biden … putting the Dem in dementia since (at least) 2020.
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61746
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Post by Avatar »

Rawedge Rim wrote:Seems to me this is a clear case of "just because you "can" do a thing, doesn't mean you "should" do a thing.
Agreed. Unfortunately, there's no way to enforce that kind of rationale. People seem to think that if you can, then you can, and that's all there is to it. Can't legislate responsibility.

--A
User avatar
Cagliostro
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 9360
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 10:39 pm
Location: Colorado

Post by Cagliostro »

Image

Ahem...

Pardon me.


Carry on.
Image
Life is a waste of time
Time is a waste of life
So get wasted all of the time
And you'll have the time of your life
User avatar
Blackhawk
Bloodguard
Posts: 944
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 5:10 am
Location: CA

Post by Blackhawk »

LOL Cagliostro,

so this lady is a single mother..something i have supported recently but in this womans case I cannot.... she says she is upbeat and not stressed out, personally i think the lady has a few screws loose to say the least even though she holds a degree in psychiatry, she is unmarried and all of her 14 children came from the same sperm donor. I see this as very irresponsible, though i know this lady is hoping for a multi million dollar payday after the Oprah show and her book she will surely write or have written, then she will be able to afford all these children. but will she be able to care for and love each of them enough to not make any of them feel left out, or feel they only have a 14th of a parent?

Her father is a contractor in Iraq and her mother had to file bankruptcy in 06. this lady put literally all of her eggs in one basket (apparently the first basket of 6 was not enough to get the book deal) and now she is hoping for that multi million dollar book deal.....which unfortunately in this world people love to read Gossip magazines and all the crap which makes people like this Rich. her publicity agent now is saying she is available for paid interviews..big surprise.

If there is justice in this world (which i know there is not) then this woman will get exactly what she deserves which in my view is welfare like anyone else would get....end of story, no front page, do not pass Oprah, no book deals...maybe 10 grand at most for her story to the inquirer, since everything she said would probably be self promoting lies in the first place, that would be a great place to have it ended.
Image
User avatar
sindatur
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 6503
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 7:57 pm

Post by sindatur »

Ludicrous.

Sure, everyone can do what they want, but, the Gov't shouldn't have to pay for abuses of this sort. Supporting her and the 14 kids for one, on top of the Gov't paying for her to have two litters?

I totally understand a married couple wanting assistance to have a single kid or two in this manner, when they are unable to conceive normally, and ending up with more than they bargained, but, 6 in the first litter, and going back again after having 6 and still being single?
I Never Fail To Be Astounded By The Things We Do For Promises - Ronnie James Dio (All The Fools Sailed Away)

Remember, everytime you drag someone through the mud, you're down in the mud with them

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass...
It's about learning to dance in the rain

Where are we going...and... WHY are we in a handbasket?

Image
User avatar
Zarathustra
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19636
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am

Post by Zarathustra »

Where are all the people defending single mothers? :)

Where is Ann Coulter when we need her?
Joe Biden … putting the Dem in dementia since (at least) 2020.
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61746
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Post by Avatar »

Blackhawk wrote:...personally i think the lady has a few screws loose to say the least even though she holds a degree in psychiatry...
C'mon, we all know that shrinks are among the most unbalanced people... ;)
Octuplets: Nasty calls, no gifts

Los Angeles - Where is the lifetime supply of diapers, formula and baby wipes? The free van? The brand-new house?

Women who give birth to six, seven or eight babies are often showered with dazzling gifts from big corporations, local businesses and strangers. But that is not happening with the Southern California mother who delivered octuplets last week.

The news that she is a single mother with six other children - and that all 14 were conceived by having embryos implanted - seems to have turned off many people, and companies are not exactly rushing to get publicity by piling on the freebies.

Nadya Suleman, 33, has been lambasted by talk show hosts, fertility experts, even her own mother, who has her hands full taking care of Suleman's other children, ages two to seven.

A veteran Hollywood publicist said Suleman's handlers have their work cut out for them in trying to win public sympathy for her.

"I think it's a calamity," said publicist David Brokaw, who has handled crises for celebrities. "I don't see, the way this is shaped, how you can say much about it in terms of something favourable."

Makers of diapers, formula and other products would probably want to steer clear of her, Brokaw said. He suggested she lie low for now and concentrate on crafting an image as a responsible parent.

Gerber spokesperson David Mortazavi said that if the baby-food maker was planning to do something for the family, it probably would have done it already, and that the octuplets' birth was not on Gerber's radar. He would not elaborate.

'Freakish'

Procter & Gamble spokesperson Tricia Higgins said that the maker of Pampers does not actively seek out parents to sponsor, but that the octuplets' mother can ask for what is typically provided in multiple births: a jumbo pack of diapers for each child, baby wipes, and coupons for discounts. That is unlikely to last Suleman a week.

Conservative radio talk show host Bill Handel in Los Angeles, who has branded the births "freakish", said on the air on Tuesday that people are ready to boycott any corporations that help the octuplets or their mother.

Suleman's spokesperson Mike Furtney said that he has received some "fairly negative" comments from the public but that offers to help with the babies have come in from nurses, and some baby stores have stepped forward to volunteer their support.

"I don't remember the brand name, but one major disposable diaper company sent some diapers," he said. Furtney said he was confident that once Suleman tells her story, many of her critics will "readjust their thinking a little".

Furtney said Suleman has had offers for TV and other media deals, but he added it was too early to discuss how much money she might receive.

For a single mother, the cost of raising 14 children through age 17 ranges from $1.3m to $2.7m, according to the US Department of Agriculture.

The Suleman octuplets' medical costs have not been disclosed, but the average cost for just one caesarean birth in 2006 was $22 762 in California. The Suleman babies were born nine weeks premature. In California, a single premature birth in 2006 led to an average hospital stay of 25 days and cost $164 273. That would amount to a $1.3m bill for eight.

Suleman's income is unclear. She was employed by a mental hospital from 1997 through 2008.

Outrage

Nasty callers dominated the phone lines in the first few days after the octuplets were born at Kaiser Permanente Bellflower Medical Centre.

"We heard a lot of outrage because there was a vacuum of information and people were going on rumour and conjecture," said hospital spokesperson Socorro Serrano.

But calls of encouragement, particularly from mothers of multiples, have also poured in, along with offers of hand-me-downs and tips, Serrano said.

In 1998, Nkem Chukwu of Houston became the first mother to give birth to octuplets in the US. The family lives in a donated, six-bedroom suburban home, and the stay-at-home mom had a small army of volunteers help feed and care for the seven surviving babies for the first few years.

The parents of the McCaughey septuplets - seven babies born in Iowa in 1997 - received a donated 16-room house, a 15-passenger van, baby food from Gerber, and a lifetime supply of Pampers from Procter & Gamble.

The stars of The Learning Channel's reality show Jon and Kate Plus 8, about a couple with sextuplets and twins, are paid, and have received a slew of freebies through the show, including trips to Hawaii and New York, a tummy tuck for mom and hair plugs for Dad.

TLC President Eileen O'Neill said production companies that work with TLC have already made offers to Suleman's family, but the network is waiting to see how TV-friendly the family is.

"We're certainly like the rest of America; we're waiting to see how this develops," O'Neill said. "The number of children or scale of the multiples is intriguing, but it also comes down to what are the family's lives like?"

- AP
As for Malik's comment, :lol: I think that we can draw a legitimate distinction between single mothers, (willing or otherwise), and this instance, where at least I will grant that she chose to be a single mother.

--A
User avatar
Zarathustra
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 19636
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 12:23 am

Post by Zarathustra »

A hodge-podge of Fox News and MSNBC:
LOS ANGELES — The Southern California mother of octuplets receives $490 a month in food stamps and three of her first six children are disabled and receiving federal assistance, her publicist confirmed Monday evening.

Spokesman Michael Furtney said Nadya Suleman did not want to disclose the nature of the disabilities, or the type or sum of the payments.

Furtney confirmed the public assistance payments after two sources told The Los Angeles Times that Suleman was receiving food stamps and federal supplemental security income.

"In her view these are just payments made for people with legitimate needs and are not, in her view, welfare," Furtney said. "She just believes that there are programs for people with needs and she and her children qualify for some of them."


In an interview that aired Monday, Suleman told NBC "Today" show anchor Ann Curry that she does not receive welfare.
“I’m responsible. I am not on welfare,” Suleman told Curry. “I don’t want to disparage or seem like I’m disparaging any individual who uses welfare as a form of a resource. It can be a valuable resource. I’ve chosen never to go on welfare. I feel that it is my responsibility to do what I can to provide for my children.”

But published reports say that Suleman is receiving at least two forms of public assistance.

NBC chief medical editor Dr. Nancy Snyderman has estimated that the cost of delivering the octuplets and keeping them in neonatal intensive care until they are ready to leave the hospital will be $1.5 million to $3 million. The Los Angeles Times has reported that Kaiser Permanente Medical Center, where the babies will remain for several weeks, has asked California’s medical insurance program, Medi-Cal, to pay the tab.

The California woman who gave birth to octuplets has no income and intends to use student loans to care for them and her other six children at home, all under the age of 8.
This woman is insane. The clinic which impregnated her should pick up the tab for raising these kids.
Joe Biden … putting the Dem in dementia since (at least) 2020.
User avatar
sindatur
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 6503
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 7:57 pm

Post by sindatur »

So, what is her definition of Welfare then, that she believes she isn't a Welfare receipient?
I Never Fail To Be Astounded By The Things We Do For Promises - Ronnie James Dio (All The Fools Sailed Away)

Remember, everytime you drag someone through the mud, you're down in the mud with them

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass...
It's about learning to dance in the rain

Where are we going...and... WHY are we in a handbasket?

Image
User avatar
Avatar
Immanentizing The Eschaton
Posts: 61746
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 9:17 am
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 21 times

Post by Avatar »

She has a publicist...*shakes head* Doesn't that immediately call motive into question?

--A
User avatar
wayfriend
.
Posts: 20957
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 12:34 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Post by wayfriend »

What the heck? Are people actually suggetsing making it illegal for unemployed people to have children? I hope not.

This woman is apparently insane. Given that, I think judging her ethics is not only a waste of time but a display of poor ethics on the part of those judging.

Leave aside unemployment for a minute.

Should people be allowed to have as many kids as they like? I'm sure libertarians would say, hell yes, it's no one elses business. And I would agree. Anyone not agree?

As for unemployment: is anyone suggesting that unemployed people using public assistance should not be allowed to have children? I would never agree to such a statement. I hope no one else would.

Then we can agree that what this thread is really about is whether or not someone is abusing public assistance designed to keep the impoverished alive.

So what we have here is, someone has found a case of someone taking advantage of public assistance, and they're trying to stir up as much angry diatribe as they can.

The unspoken agenda being, public assistance should be ceased.

Wee. Sounds like fun. Or it would be if it wasn't done to death.
.
User avatar
High Lord Tolkien
Excommunicated Member of THOOLAH
Posts: 7383
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 2:40 am
Location: Cape Cod, Mass
Been thanked: 3 times
Contact:

Post by High Lord Tolkien »

wayfriend wrote:What the heck? Are people actually suggetsing making it illegal for unemployed people to have children?
I think proof of income should be a legal requirement for invitro yes.
wayfriend wrote:This woman is apparently insane. Given that, I think judging her ethics is not only a waste of time but a display of poor ethics on the part of those judging.
But judging those that are judging her judgments is ok?

wayfriend wrote: As for unemployment: is anyone suggesting that unemployed people using public assistance should not be allowed to have children? I would never agree to such a statement. I hope no one else would.
I do.
Keeping your pants on until you can afford to feed not only yourself but also your baby seems to be very reasonable.
wayfriend wrote:Then we can agree that what this thread is really about is whether or not someone is abusing public assistance designed to keep the impoverished alive.

So what we have here is, someone has found a case of someone taking advantage of public assistance, and they're trying to stir up as much angry diatribe as they can.

The unspoken agenda being, public assistance should be ceased.
If it's "unspoken" then, to me, you're just making stuff up again.
wayfriend wrote:Wee. Sounds like fun. Or it would be if it wasn't done to death.
Then post somewhere else.
https://thoolah.blogspot.com/

[Defeated by a gizmo from Batman's utility belt]
Joker: I swear by all that's funny never to be taken in by that unconstitutional device again!


Image Image Image Image
User avatar
[Syl]
Unfettered One
Posts: 13020
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 12:36 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Post by [Syl] »

Easy, guys. Debate the ideas, remember. And while it's not exactly kosher to scoff at the group, it doesn't mean it's cool to take the scoffer down a peg, either. And the mods will tell people where and where not to post, thanks. ;)

Yes, this is a 'celebrity' topic. Nothing important or lasting will come out of this (and many other pinpoint topics here). Not like it's a SCOTUS case. We'll solve the poverty situation by talking about it as much as we'd solve the childhood violent crime rate by talking about Caylee Anthony. Don't take it or each other too seriously, eh?
"It is not the literal past that rules us, save, possibly, in a biological sense. It is images of the past. Each new historical era mirrors itself in the picture and active mythology of its past or of a past borrowed from other cultures. It tests its sense of identity, of regress or new achievement against that past.”
-George Steiner
User avatar
Rawedge Rim
The Gap Into Spam
Posts: 5248
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:38 pm
Location: Florida

Post by Rawedge Rim »

wayfriend wrote:What the heck? Are people actually suggetsing making it illegal for unemployed people to have children? I hope not.

This woman is apparently insane. Given that, I think judging her ethics is not only a waste of time but a display of poor ethics on the part of those judging.

Leave aside unemployment for a minute.

Should people be allowed to have as many kids as they like? I'm sure libertarians would say, hell yes, it's no one elses business. And I would agree. Anyone not agree?

As for unemployment: is anyone suggesting that unemployed people using public assistance should not be allowed to have children? I would never agree to such a statement. I hope no one else would.

Then we can agree that what this thread is really about is whether or not someone is abusing public assistance designed to keep the impoverished alive.

So what we have here is, someone has found a case of someone taking advantage of public assistance, and they're trying to stir up as much angry diatribe as they can.

The unspoken agenda being, public assistance should be ceased.

Wee. Sounds like fun. Or it would be if it wasn't done to death.
1. I'm not for telling someone that they can't have children, but I do ask that they be responsible.

2. I think all of her "friends and relatives and neighbors" ought to be saying directly to her "ARE YOU STUPID, OR DID YOU GO TO SPECIAL CLASSES TO GET THIS WAY!!!!"

3. NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE, who already has six children, has any business having even 1 more child "en vitro" on my dollar.

4. In my case, the "spoken agenda" is that the best thing for all of her children would be for them to be removed from her "care" and placed with people who would then teach these children that the public trough is not out there to "fulfill your life long dreams". Second part of this is that she be taken off any public assistance, since she is obviously abusing the shit out of it, and be made to go to work.:bang: :trout: :rocket: :soapbox:

Look Wayfriend, Libertarians aren't against the woman having children. They don't want Uncle Sammy to tell her how many children to have. OTOH, they are against you and me paying for the children that she is purposely having, that she can't afford to care for out of her own funds.
“One accurate measurement is worth a
thousand expert opinions.”
- Adm. Grace Hopper

"Whenever you dream, you're holding the key, it opens the the door to let you be free" ..RJD
Locked

Return to “Coercri”