I don't know if any of you saw the special on TV about the woman who just had the 8 octuplets, but I did and boy was I annoyed. I thought the whole time she was being interviewed, Ann Curry, was very negative and questionable of her. I thought news reporting was supposed to be neutral, but with this I felt like the mom was under the firing squad the whole time. They got into very personal information about her finances and her IVF treatments and just questioned her abilities to provide for these children and show that she is a competant mother.
First off, there are so many people in this country on welfare that have not had to go through the scrutiny that she has. The media has protrayed her as an unfit mother who probably has some psychological problems. She seemed quite coherent in the interview and seemed to know what she was getting into when she started.
My fear is this: that if the government starts limiting the powers of doctors and limiting the number of children you can have, what's next? Have they pushed this far to have a say in our personal lives and a say in how many children we have? They are investigating the dr. who did her IVF treatments to see if he was negligent in any way. But there are plenty of dr.s out there that have done the same thing and the result was different. LIke the mom said during the interview, the chance of all 6 embroys taking was like .00000001%. Now that's not the exact number, but lets just say the number is extremely low!
I thought it was somewhat ironic that on the View they were talking about dr.s being limited on how many embryos to implant and how that goes against pro-choice and a woman's right to choose. It's ironic in the fact that most pro-choice people are pro-abortion, but in this case it would be a woman's right to have children, not to abort them:) I hope I explained that right. I'm pretty sure that the mom of the 8 is not for abortion at all and she even said that she didn't want to take any of the embryos out.
I think somewhere down the line the government will try to step in and limit fertility dr.s and what they can do. It's a slippery slope we get on when that happens. The next step is limiting how many kids you have without using a fertility dr. and that's just something I cannot stand for. We do not need government intervention in people's personal lives. What's next?, taking away all our privacy?
If you want to check out the story here's the link
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/29135989/
I would say this to those critics out there:
These kids are here!!! WE can't go back and change the outcome! Lets take care of them now and try to get them healthy and doing well. And why should she have to divulge her personal information? It's no one's business.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
Wow, I saw the interview and all I can say is I totally agree with you. I felt like Anne was totally judgmental. I just felt the whole time, that its not my place to judge. And who cares if she is on full welfare...that's what its for is the low incomed, it made me sick that she had to defend her self. I think about the 8 baby's plus the 6 she has and am grateful that I have mine one at a time, but I in no way feel that she did anything wrong. It has made me wonder what I would do with the embryo's too, I wouldn't do selective reduction but I don't know if I would have all 6 placed at once, its just not something I'm faced with. But I think people need to get off her case, because she chose to have 14 children on her own and 8 at one time she is getting death threats...it just makes me sick. What makes people think they are better than her, and that threatening to take her life makes them better than her, she who chooses to create life. ITs all maddening, any way I'll get off my soap box now. :)
There is my poli sci grad always, dreamed of being a lawyer, good friend V. I love that you take a stand on your beliefs in every way. Power to you my friend, thanks for being strong!
I agree with you on most everything. But I do want to say that from my family member's experiences when they do in vitro fertilization the rule is that they only ever implanted 2-3 embryos at one time in women under 35. The chance of success is much higher in women that age. The octuplets mother was only 33. Having such a large multiple birth presents numerous problems for the mother and her children. Those babies are here and I'm sure everything will be fine, but I do think it was irresponsible for the doctor to do that.
I'm grateful for fertility treatments and the surrounding advancements in the medical field. But a normal functioning female body almost never releases and fertilizes that many embryos at the same time. We just weren't made to work that way. And I think that when we are playing with our scientific advancements it can become a very slippery slope. Anyway I think it's a very slippery slope in both directions. But thanks for addressing this because I think it is very interesting and I hope I didn't offend you with my opinion.
not at all Emily. Thanks for sharing. I think the only thing I would say is that I know the mother addressed why she had so many put in and it was b/c of her extreme situation as far as her reproductive health goes. She said she had 6 put in everytime and look at her outcome. 4 out of the 5 times she did the IVF, she only had 1 survive. So it seems logical to me that you would put that many in, just b/c her chances of even having 1 were very low. But you are right, when i watch some of these IVF shows, they usually only put in 2-3.
But you know there are so many other dr.s out there doing the exact same thing as this dr. did. Look at John and Kate plus 8, she had 6 implanted and the public loves them. Having these scientific developments is, I think, both a good and bad thing. Woman are now able to have children who normally wouldn't be able to, but now we can also push the limits to which our bodies were designed. I know that women just weren't meant to carry that many kids at once.
It'll be interesting to see what happens with this and what type of laws they try to push forward.
Absolutely! I know I love Jon and Kate plus 8!
What are your thoughts on her financial situation? I heard today on CNN that if you total up the money she's collecting for disability and food stamps it comes to $2,300 a month. She just started a donation website. I'm all for being generous, but it does frustrate me that she took on so much when she has no means to afford it all. Even if she had only had one baby... that's 7 kids with no income.
I guess I just was thinking about it this way. There's a reason we try to prevent teenage pregancy. One because most aren't emotionally prepared to care for a baby and 2.) most aren't financially prepared to care for a baby. In some ways I dont see the difference in her situation. She hasn't had a job for years and she's been living off her parents, student loans, and the government.
I'm sure she loves her children dearly. And a child is always a blessing. It just seems so confusing to me that she was able to save up tens of thousands of dollars to have these children and do IVF but she didn't think to save more ahead of time so she could provide for them.
I completely understand what you are saying. With her reproductive problems it was a low chance that this would ever happen. So that does make sense. Anyway, I have so many thoughts on this. :) And I really appreciate reading your thoughts!
It really will be interesting to see what comes of this situation.
Thinking ahead and planning to take care of even her 6 children, seems as though she took on a lot. Even if she had had only 1 more instead of the eight, you're right, she really doesn't make enough to cover expenses.
In her case specially, I think she could have prepared a little better and maybe not done as many IFV treatments. But what I am mainly against is the public and the media, attacking her for doing what tons of other people have done in this country. I don't see anyone else on tv having to explain their financial situation as she has been expected to do. Are we trying to make an example out of her??
I totally understand your point on not being able to afford it. $2300 is barely enough for 2-3 children let alone 6 or 14. But I do applaud her for wanting to finish her degree and help out in that way. I don't think she is crazy or deluded as the public and media would paint her.
It will be interesting to see what happens. And down the road I can almost guarantee that some tv company will want to tell her story and keep up with the babies development. And i'm sure she'll come out with a book at some point. Who knows what she'll make off these things.
BTW, I love john and kate plus 8 as well:) Very entertaining.
dont get mad, its just my opinion. i dont agree at all. i think she is very irresponsible to bring that many children into the world WITHOUT A FATHER, without money, job, stability and without an education to back it up. i think we should all be able to have as many children as we want, but we should not expect other people to bail us out when we cant support them. She has a website where she is asking for donations.(www.thenadyasulemanfamily.com) If you wanted that many kids, you should have had a plan and money and a way to provide for them. She lives with her parents! 14 kids...wow. I think the death threats she is receiving is going way to far. I can however see why people are a little confused. If she is going back to school, that is time spent away from her 14 kids. If she gets a job, that is time spent away from her kids. Its a lose/lose situation. I am a mom and we had plans in place for just 1 kid. I cant imagine trying for all those kids and not being prepared. Anyway, like I said, its just my opinion. :)
we will see what happens down the road...
p.s. why was she trying to have more kids??
I agree I think she is getting raked over the coals. Why is she doing all of these interviews? I guess they pay well, but dang everyone is up in her business. Uh.... I think she might be a little insane, who would want 14 kids? KIDDING, TOTALLY KIDDING! Kind of. ;)
Katie,
I'm not here to advocate for this lady at all. She could have planned out better her financial situation for sure. And I also agree that having a father to help raise the children is vital to their development. No questions there.
However, what i am against is the mistreatment and the lack of privacy she is receiving just b/c she is making history w/ having 8 to survive at once. If she had had just one more to make 7, no one ever would have known anything about here. I just think that she is being "made the example" by the public and the media on what not to do and she is paying for living off the government, when SO MANY others are doing the exact same thing.
If people are not happy with this woman's situation, then get out there and campaign to change the law, instead of raking her across the coals, b/c lets face it, there's no going back and we can't change what happened.
I guess when doing the interview she said she rents the house from her parents and up to now has been able to provide pretty well by using school loans and her disability checks. But those are just details.
Thank you all for responding. I think down the road we will see changes in this field that will affect our lives in one way or the other. Plus, this is great mind stimulation for me, when sometimes all i talk about all day is kid stuff:)
Hope everyone has a great valentines weekend:)
Quite a discussion you've started here! All I have to say is it's a good thing you and Jason can't go into it on this issue face to face. I think it just might come to blows. haha!...it's really a deep issue, though. I mean, when should the government stop supporting irresponsible people? We certainly can't make the innocent children suffer for the dumb decisions that parents make. You are totally right in the fact that these babies are here now and need to be taken care of but it's necessary, I think, to discuss ways of preventing this type of thing from happening in the future.
jason was always a good sparing partner, LOL:) that's great! Lots to be said in the future i'm sure based on this situation. But I do hope the babies don't have to pay for it.
Living off the government, especially in these hard financial times, makes people judge others, sometimes unfairly. But, the fact of the matter is, that our system needs to have some changes and these changes just might take a long time to get going.
But you can count on this: the day the government steps in and starts to limit my privacy and my right to choose as I will for my personal life (having children, how many etc.) is the day I jump into action to defend those rights. The next step in my mind, after that happens, is pretty much taking away my 1st amendment rights, which I feel, starts the breaking down process of our courts and judicial system. The freedoms we have is practically what makes this country what it is.
Oh, I wish I had gone to law school:) maybe later
Awww V!!! I seriously need to keep up with your blog, but you know my issues with looking at blogs..lol so I try to stay away from blogspot period!
However, I'm so glad you brought this issue into the blogosphere. I totally agree that the media is blasting the poor woman, and like you said, if she had 7 or 6, no one would be talking about this.
But then here is my problem, why did she feel the need to have more? Six is plenty to have without a husband, job, or your own place to live. With the way people are these days, it makes me question whether or not she wanted more children to receive more welfare assistance and it kind of back fired on her? Also, I wonder if maybe she has just never gotten over post-pardom depression from her last babies and she felt the need to have another?
My conclusion is that the woman needs some serious psychiatric help, and she needs support from her friends, family, church, and media. The children are here now, so we need to gather around them. However, I wouldn't be completely opposed to having these children be put up for adoption due to her negligence. Especially special needs children. There is no way those children will get all the attention and mental stimulation they need by only having 1 parent.
I hope she gets the help she needs so she can keep her children though if thats what she really wants.
Like i've said before, there could have been better planning on her part financially etc. But listening to her on tv she seems coherent and seems to understand what's needed of her. Aaron thought that just by listening to her she seemed to have it together.
However, if she does need help, I hope she gets it. But that in now way justifies taking her kids away from her or forcing her to put them up for adoption. Unless, she has some sort of major psychiatric problem or is unable to take care of her kids, than social services should be called. I had to laugh though when on the interview they addressed the same issue and she invited them to come to her house and make an evaluation.
Social services is there for a reason, but unless it's a darn good one, than kids should be able to stay with their parents. I have to think about what I'd want if it were me and taking my kids wouldn't be an option. That's the thing though, do we feel it's ok to do this to her, when we ourselves wouldn't want it done to us?
sorry,
social services should not be called unless they find something wrong with her.
typo
Post a Comment