I'm not one to judge others without knowing them/all the facts, but this one burned me!!! I watched the announcements of the Octuplets being born, and thought; well it must have happened due to follicle stimulation because no Dr. would do invitro with 8 or more embryos. Yesterday I watched as the experts gave their opinions with the same conclusion I came to. There was no way any of them would have done invitro with that many eggs and they would turn someone away who wanted that, so they also felt it must have been egg stimulation that caused this.

Now this morning I learn that the mother, who is currently living at home with her mother, already has six children (we know nothing about the father)!!!! And here's the kicker...it WAS invitro!!!! Holy Cow!!! I get that there are crazy people out there, so I'm writing the mom off as nuts, but what the heck happened to regulating and having rules about ethics for this for the Drs.??!! What's next...cloning? Know that I have family members and friends that have been helped by fertility specialists, so I know the benefit in using one, but this guy crossed the line. Just MO.

I never understood where people come up with these stupid ideas of the cost to raise a child. If you make 30,000. a year, then that's what it costs.

Well.....not really. Not if you're getting food stamps or other government help.

See, I think people ought to be allowed to have 50 kids (or more), as long as they don't need any tax money to support them. That's where I draw the line between personal choice and draining much needed resources from others.

I think you're allowing your background of coming from a large family to color your judgement on the issue, Patty.

Let's say there exists an obese person in Texarkana, Texas. All this person wants to do is eat. He eats so much that his grocery bill is $2000 / month. Is it fair that the government actually give him $2000 / month? Or is his insistance on taking government assistance greedy?

Here is an Associated Press Article:

Meanwhile, the Center for Genetics and Society has joined the call for disciplinary action against the clinic that treated Suleman.

In a statement Wednesday, the nonprofit public interest group said two professional organizations -- the American Society for Reproductive Medicine and the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology -- should revoke the licenses of the fertility program for violating guidelines about embryo implantation.

The American Society for Reproductive Medicine said it's investigating whether fertility treatment guidelines were broken.

Suleman has said she underwent in vitro fertilization at a Beverly Hills fertility clinic run by Dr. Michael Kamrava.

Without identifying the doctor, the Medical Board of California said last week it was looking into the Suleman case to see if there was a "violation of the standard of care."

Plain, I heard her say that she wanted 1 more child and that she put the same amount of embryos inside her in her last pregnancy as all the rest of them (6) She said the chances of them all taking were very slim. She was shocked to find out that she was carrying 7 babies (so she thought)

But that's not entirely true. The standard of care is to implant 2 (in rare cases 3) embryos. It's all good for her to say that she only expected 1 child out of all that, but if IVF ratios were that low, all fertility docs would be implanting 6 embryos.

I understand that not everyone can have alot of children and handle the stress of it or the busyness of the lifestyle it brings, but what makes everyone think that she can't handle it?

Because from what she's shared of her life, she's never been able to handle anything on her own. Her own parents express doubt. I think they probably know her better than we do.

Yes, it is her right to have as many children as she chooses. In this country, we do not have laws that limit this, like in China. I'm not saying that I approve of her making a decision to do this without being financially secure or without having a father to help raise them (I personally would not choose to do it), but I am saying that she has a right to if she chooses to.

Wow, that's a pretty liberal view Patty. What if a woman has a child every year and openly confesses that she will never get a job, since the government will help pay. Does she still have the right to do that? Some would say "yes".....but I've never understood that point of view.

Lastly, Kids don't need 'stuff'.

Ok, I'll tell my kids that the next time they ask for school supplies. Seriously, word it however you like....kids need more than love.

Lastly, Kids don't need 'stuff'. Yes, they need food and clothing and a home and love and attention, but not 'stuff'. I think that she will be able to feed and clothe her children and she will be able to give them alot of love and attention. Probably more love and attention then some who only have 1 child give.

So Pattygreen who is going to pay for her food, clothing and shelter for her 14 children, lets not forget all the medical bills as well?

God's plan was for men and women to get married and procreate through sex. It was man who decided, "If I can't conceive that way, I'll try it this way."(IVF) Man did not take into consideration that embryos would sometimes be destroyed with this process. Something I'm sure would not meet his approval. (Once again, man does what he wants to do to get whatever he wants in life) In this case, a child. Maybe God didn't want her to have children, and she chose to have them anyway. Who knows? Maybe God's plan was for her to meet a nice man and get married and then he would give her children later in life. Either way, she was impatient and wanted them now, so she had IVF. I'm not saying that what she did was right, I'm just saying that we all have done what she's done on some level or other. Many of us have had help from the gov. in some way or other on a smaller or larger scale than she. (Food stamps, energy assistance, WIC, state medical ins., student loans, etc.) Right now it's her turn. So what.

She was irrisponsible to have so many children, at her choice, without the means to support them, but so do so many people in the world. There is such a thing as birth control, but many didn't use it and now have 1 more child to support that they can't afford. How is that different? Oh, I know it will be hard for her, with 8 infants all at once, but she will do it. She will have help, just like we all do when we only bring 1 home from the hospital.

She says she didn't take any money from dateline for her first TV appearance, but if I were her, I would have held out for the highest bidder on an interview and took a million or more to talk with someone. This could have helped her tremendously. The world was waiting to hear from her. She blew that opportunity. (Before you say anything about how wrong that would have been, take a look at some celebrities who sold 1st photos of their babies to magazines for millions.)

Don't lump all of us in with this nutcase. I have never done anything like this; I have never done something that has caused me to need services (and I don't mean just lose a job and need unemployment or temporary help -- I mean do something STUPID that REQUIRES the state to HAVE to take care of you). I had student loans, yes, but that's what they were -- LOANS. I paid back over $8,000 in student loans. She will not be paying back the money she is bilking from the state.

God did not intend for her to have these children. SHE chose to have these children; and worse yet, she made this choice after proving she can't even take care of the first six.

NOBODY has the right to put their wants before the rights of others. Her wants will cost the state dearly. She does NOT have that right, and to do so makes her a bitch in my book -- a spoiled, selfish bitch.

Matt Lauer/Jean Chatzky discuss the costs of raising 14 children. 1.5 million for just the basics and that doesn't include college or the huge costs for any of them that are/will be disabled. They say that even after she gets her Masters degree her salary of 60K max. won't even cover childcare while she's at work.

My 2 cents...IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD A CHILD, DON'T HAVE ONE! It's part of the equation when the rest of us decide on kids, it should be for you!

Here's the link:

msnbc.com Video Player

Dr. Phil was talking about this case today and had the mom from what's-his-face and Kate plus eight, and she was talking about how hard it was for her with SIX newborns and only two other children. She had a crew of no less than 50 people a WEEK helping out, and the only thing she ever got to herself was 15 minutes a day that she was made to eat her lunch on the patio away from everything so that she could have a few free moments.

On Phil they showed the cost of their household -- again, mind you, "only" eight kids -- and they came up with $1.5 million a year. This idiot has six more than that, so you can nearly double that cost. Forget college funds. Ain't gonna happen. That's just the average cost, and frankly, I don't know if it's the first year (i.e. diapers, etc.). OH, and for just the six, it would require 30 hours a day of breastfeeding, an amazing feat no matter who you are.

She has a right to want a large family, just like any of us have a right to decide how many children we will have.

Um, if you are forcing others to have to come to your rescue INCLUDING the state via money, you do NOT have that right. She is not a Duggar, people who, though I think they're nuts for having so many kids, have made it work without relying on the system. They are there for their kids, seem to have a good working system in their home, and did it the right way.

That's like saying I have a right to live in a five-bedroom home and force the taxpayer to pay for it.

What kind of insanity are you espousing, Patty???

Oh, and by the way, did YOU at least pay back the money the state paid to you for your irresponsibility? I doubt it... :crying:

The children will be happy and fine if their mom loves them and shows it.

Very Alice in Wonderland of you. :crying:

She's using these kids to try to fill a need she has. As Dr. Phil said today, kids should not be born with a job to do. Good point.

I understand that not everyone can have alot of children and handle the stress of it or the busyness of the lifestyle it brings, but what makes everyone think that she can't handle it? Is it just because you wouldn't be able to?

No, it's because she's a cuckoo bird!

Yes, it is her right to have as many children as she chooses. In this country, we do not have laws that limit this, like in China. I'm not saying that I approve of her making a decision to do this without being financially secure or without having a father to help raise them (I personally would not choose to do it), but I am saying that she has a right to if she chooses to. Women can do what they want with their bodies in this country dispite that others may feel it is wrong. (We see it every day here with abortions being performed.)

It is NOT HER RIGHT TO FORCE THIS EXPENSE ON THE TAXPAYER!!! What do you not get about this??? If SHE was paying for them all, I say knock yourself out. Once you become beholden to the taxpayer in ANY FASHION, you LOSE your right to not be accountable.

Good lord, people can't even keep housefuls of cats or dogs, but you think it's okay to have kids like this when you can't afford them?? I can only hope CPS gets involved and thins her herd and finds these kids some good, loving homes.

Seriously, word it however you like....kids need more than love.

She won't even be able to give them undivided attention.

They say kids cost a lot of money to raise, pattygreen. And 14 kids are going to cost a lot more than one: housing 14 children, cooking for 14, keeping 'em clean becomes expensive and an exercise in logistics. There are diapers and cribs when they are infants and beds and bed linens when they are a little older.

When they are toddlers you have to keep an eye on them lest they be getting into accidents. Daycare centres have regulations as to the limit of children per childcare attendent and I am sure that one mother per 14 babies is breaking this limit in just about any state, and with good reason!

And the sad truth is that preemies have a greater rate of developmental growth defects. In some cases, these children never catch up to your normal child. They will always be high maintenance children. I can easily understand Suleiman's mother's annoyance with her behaviour and that of the other folks who have posted on this thread for I feel it, too! It seems to me to be crazed, selfish, and thoughtless of others (including those kids of hers).

Okay, I watched the Date-Line video that I recorded on Octo-Mom, and really all I can say is wow! When she talked about raising her family on student loans, I just cringed.

I worked full time, went to school full-time as a single parent and I did take student loans out, but those loans are not for raising children. I could not raise children on student loans, because you do not receive that much money in student loans.

I used my student loans for tutition, lab fees, books, transportation, supplies, and a lap top to take to school for my classes. But really there was not that much left to raise a family and I only had two children.

Um, if you are forcing others to have to come to your rescue INCLUDING the state via money, you do NOT have that right. She is not a Duggar, people who, though I think they're nuts for having so many kids, have made it work without relying on the system. They are there for their kids, seem to have a good working system in their home, and did it the right way.

That's like saying I have a right to live in a five-bedroom home and force the taxpayer to pay for it.

What kind of insanity are you espousing, Patty???

Oh, and by the way, did YOU at least pay back the money the state paid to you for your irresponsibility? I doubt it... :biggrin:

I wonder if you would talk the way you do to people if youwere face to face with them. You are a very nasty person.

Yes, for your information, My husband paid back the state for every penny at $50. a month for many years. Then we increased our payment as we could afford to until it was paid off. You can just thank God that you never were in need of any help from the state at any time in your life. But then again, maybe if you had been in need, just once, you might be a little more understanding when someone tells you that they had to have help at one time. I am not proud of having to be on welfare at age 19 for a year and a half. But I had no other alternative at the time and I am grateful that it was there for me then. You think the Duggars are nuts for having so many kids? How many did you have? Well, what if I said I think you're nuts for having none, or 1, or 2. You must think I'm nuts for choosing 10.

So Pattygreen who is going to pay for her food, clothing and shelter for her 14 children, lets not forget all the medical bills as well?

She can use food stamps, and WIC for the next year and a half till she is done with school and then get a job in her field. I worked out of my home for the last 8 years and averaged an $80,000. paycheck annually. She can do the same until the children are in school full time. She can stay with her parents until she can get a place of her own. If I were her, I would take advantage of the nosiness and buttinskiness of the country and get paid for my interviews. Oh, believe me, more people want to hear from her. She can write a book.(have someone do it for her even) She can sell the rights to a movie on her story. She will have so many opportunities to create funds, you wouldn't believe it!

I wonder if you would talk the way you do to people if youwere face to face with them. You are a very nasty person.

What about this is nasty?

"Um, if you are forcing others to have to come to your rescue INCLUDING the state via money, you do NOT have that right. She is not a Duggar, people who, though I think they're nuts for having so many kids, have made it work without relying on the system. They are there for their kids, seem to have a good working system in their home, and did it the right way.

That's like saying I have a right to live in a five-bedroom home and force the taxpayer to pay for it.

What kind of insanity are you espousing, Patty???

Oh, and by the way, did YOU at least pay back the money the state paid to you for your irresponsibility? I doubt it..."

You can just thank God that you never were in need of any help from the state at any time in your life. But then again, maybe if you had been in need, just once, you might be a little more understanding when someone tells you that they had to have help at one time.

I don't have to thank God. I didn't put myself in a situation on PURPOSE where I had 14 kids out of wedlock with no job, no money, no house, and a bankruptcy under my belt. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out how NOT to be put in that situation!!

I am not proud of having to be on welfare at age 19 for a year and a half. But I had no other alternative at the time and I am grateful that it was there for me then. You think the Duggars are nuts for having so many kids? How many did you have? Well, what if I said I think you're nuts for having none, or 1, or 2. You must think I'm nuts for choosing 10.

There are tons of choices, Patty. IUD, the pill, condoms, spermicides, ABSTINANCE, adoption... You put yourself in that situation, but it's not even near the same as what THIS woman did. Not even close!

I think the Duggars are nuts, but not insane like this freakazoid. I think they're nuts because it is a lot, but I don't begrudge them doing what they want to do and AFFORDING to do it on their own. I don't care if people have 30 kids, so long as THEY support them and not the taxpayer.

You seem to think that people can just do whatever the hell they want no matter the consequences, no matter that it affects innocent taxpayers. The pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness ends when it begins to affect others who do not want to be a part of this experiment gone terribly wrong.

If telling it like it is makes me nasty, then so be it. You're delusional.