Yes, it's her body and her choice.
19% (9 votes)
No, she already had six children.
38% (18 votes)
No, she's unmarried and shouldn't have children out of wedlock, even with sperm donation.
9% (4 votes)
Doesn't matter, the doctors were unethical.
19% (9 votes)
Other (please explain).
15% (7 votes)
Total votes: 47
It's her body so why shouldn't she get to decide how she spends her money. If she had just one baby no one would have cared. It is the fact that she got pregnant with eight babies that makes it so controversial. If she felt she could keep up with one more that is her choice.
It's her body so why shouldn't she get to decide how she spends her money.
Oh... I must have missed the news that she's suddenly started using her own money to take care of her kids.
"What a crazy random happenstance!"
Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog
Read my Blog!
For Octomom to make that choice to have more than six children with her current financial situation, makes me mad. I'm a mother of two children, and I struggle from time to time. But, I don't live with my mother and rely on her income to support my family. It was selfish of her to bring those eight children into the world to start off life in a hospital for the longer stay than the typical three day stay for new mothers. Who knows what kind of health problems that they may face later in life? She had no control of having eight children, and that I do agree with, but she made the choice to have more children. After six children, raising them in poverty, what purpose does that serve? If she was stable, financially and mentally, her goal should have been to focus on the children that she had, and use the money that she "saved" up to have the fertilization done to buy them a bigger home. Come on, they live with their grandparents in a three bed-room house, for crying out loud. That has to be insane, not only for those children, but the grandparents who don't want those grandbabies out on the street. What is the news about her doing an adult film for a million dollars? She wanted the fame and to rely on America's taxes to support her. Dr. Phil comes into the picture to interview her and all this mumbo jumbo. The woman has mental health issues, and should have been evaluated before having this procedure. Why didn't the doctor advise her not to do this? That's the unanswered question. Where is he/she in this matter? And the website tops the cake, flaunting her children in building blocks, right next to the option where you can submit your credit card information. Cheesy and down right money-hungry. Those children need the funds, not her. Living off the welfare of others, while doing nothing to support yourself, makes her lousy. The stories that will continue to surface about her are nothing but negative. I hope she has a wake-up call from this, but that doesn't seem unlikely. She is starving for attention.
I wish nothing but the best to those children. I have no remorse for the mother whatsoever. There are people in this world that cannot have children that can provide them with proper housing and financially support them. Perhaps she should consider her options, for the sake of those children.
I think she can have as many children as SHE CAN AFFORD, not as many children as public assistance can afford. I, for one, am sick and tired of supporting other peoples children when I am struggling to support my own. She had no right to have more children when she can't afford to take care of the six she had.
--------
Respectfully,
Adam L. Labonoski
PUAA Director's Assistant
I'm under the impression that it was totally immature for her to get pregnant with more children (whether or not she knew there would be 8 more on the way). She's single, I think she's got no job, and only has her mother to help out. Weren't they already struggling with 6 children to take care of?
I'm more worried about the children than how she thinks she should impregnate her body, that's all.
I chose other. I don't care that she had 6 kids and then decided to use a fertility clinic for more.
I care that she had 6 kids she couldn't afford and then somehow got the money to pay for fertility treatments and used it on fertility treatments instead of... I don't know... payments on a house. I care that she felt entitled to free housing, free 24-hour childcare, free health care, food stamps, money from the media, free formula, free diapers, etc. just because she decided her wants were more important than her children's needs. Not only does is she currently abusing taxpayer dollars, she flaunts that fact on national TV and then demands more. And the money keeps rolling into her. It's only a matter of time before she's got a reality show and is selling video of the octuplet birth. Someone find me a clip or something of her thanking people for financially supporting her selfishness, because I have yet to see her express any gratitude at all. She has physically, emotionally, mentally, and financially drained the people closest to her, and she just keeps demanding more aid. She disgusts me.
Purposely getting pregnant when you know you cannot financially support the outcome is child abuse. She belongs in jail, not getting plastic surgery and being enabled by Dr. Phil.
"What a crazy random happenstance!"
Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog
Read my Blog!
Thank you.
I am treated as evil by people who claim that they are being oppressed because they are not allowed to force me to practice what they do. ~D. Dale Gulledge
It is comments like these that totally blow mine out of the water. :)
I voted other and was trying to formulate my thoughts when I saw this comment and realized I did not have too, you said it exactly as I could have never said better.
Have I mentioned lately that I loove you?
There are very few human beings who receive the truth, complete and staggering, by instant illumination. Most of them acquire it fragment by fragment, on a small scale, by successive developments, cellularly, like a laborious mosaic.~- Anais Nin
Awww thanks, your love is not unrequited. :-)
That was only a tiny fragment of how I really feel. I almost blogged about it weeks ago, but the level of rage that went into formulating my true feelings somehow didn't seem healthy... ;-) So now only bits and pieces escape into comments every so often.
"What a crazy random happenstance!"
Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog
Read my Blog!
I disagree with in vitro fertilization. Just as I believe children are not simply a "choice," I also do not believe them to be a "right." With in vitro fertilization, the persons involved are saying that they believe children to be a right of theirs. Although I have no doubt that it must be really difficult to be unable to bear children, I believe that everything happens for a reason and that the couple should look at adoption as an alternative, especially considering the thousands of children throughout the world in want of a loving family.
Secondly, I pretty much second everything sawaboof said. I have a problem with her being on welfare. (Correct me if I'm wrong), but isn't in vitro fertilization really expensive? I have a major problem with her throwing herself and her children to become more and more dependent on the government and those around her. When a woman gets pregnant through sex, she conceives through her own actions, but it could be viewed as an "accident". Through in vitro, she is going major OUT OF HER WAY to have kids...and with being a single woman on welfare with six kids already, I think that's just stupid. Not to mention unfair to people who have to pay taxes...our welfare setup in general ticks me off.
RESPECT LIFE
SMILE EVERY DAY
"It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
~Mother Teresa
Some people, such as Nadya, do not do in vitro because they can't have children, but because they aren't in a situation where they can get pregnant... she wasn't in a relationship with a man, thus couldn't have sex to get pregnant in the first place. Lesbians could do the same thing... since they can't have sex to get pregnant with each other, they go out of their way to create a child that is biologically theirs.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
Well, again, I do not believe children to be "rights" that people can claim when they want them and do away with when they don't. Children are a GIFT that are a result of sex and the grace of God.
But honestly...in her case...I'd think just finding some random guy and having a night out would be cheaper than in vitro...o.O
RESPECT LIFE
SMILE EVERY DAY
"It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
~Mother Teresa
Children are a GIFT that are a result of a medical procedure and the grace of God.
"Never go with a hippy to a second location."
~Jack Donaghy
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
But that's not natural...I think the Catechism explains it well:
"They dissociate the sexual act from the procreative act. The act which brings the child into existence is no longer an act by which two persons give themselves to one another, but one that entrusts the life and identity of the embryo into the power of doctors and biologists and establishes the domination of technology over the origin and destiny of the human person. Such a relationship of domination is in itself contrary to the dignity and equality that must be common to parents and children. Under the moral aspect procreation is deprived of its proper perfection when it is not willed as the fruit of the conjugal act, that is to say, of the specific act of the spouses' union." (No. 2377)
I think our culture has warped the ideas and purposes of sex, marriage, children and family to such an extent that it is difficult to distinguish between what science should be allowed to do and what they should just leave to nature.
RESPECT LIFE
SMILE EVERY DAY
"It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
~Mother Teresa
Do you really believe that infertile straight couples commit a sin by having sex? That is a further extrapolation of what you just posted.
One point about science and conception...conception is a biological function. Biology is a science. If an expectant mother is on the ball, doctors are involved at every stage of the pregnancy through delivery. I don't see the big deal about having one involved in the conception as well. It's just biology, not magic.
And I would argue that it in RAISING the child together, the couple gives themselves to one another in a much more sacred and important way.
"Never go with a hippy to a second location."
~Jack Donaghy
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
I believe sex has two purposes: (1) reproduction and (2) unity. Thus, for a married couple to unify through sex, I think that's beautiful. They must be open to life, though. Just because science has deemed a straight couple unable to have kids, that doesn't necessarily mean that they won't have kids. Thus, they must be open to that possibility.
It's not just biology...it's a miracle. Every human life is so sacred and so beautiful. Science is playing 'god' in far too many ways. I'd rather leave the ability to start and end life to nature and not to fallible man. Kinda scary...besides, in vitro is simply the first step to cloning, and that is just beyond scary.
RESPECT LIFE
SMILE EVERY DAY
"It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
~Mother Teresa
Just because science has deemed a straight couple unable to have kids, that doesn't necessarily mean that they won't have kids.
Science simply observes what happens around us. What they observe is that someone with [insert issue here] will most likely not be able to reproduce (and, depending on the condition, if the woman does manage to conceive, it probably won't end well). So yes, just because science says someone will more than likely not be able to conceive, it won't be absolutely 100% accurate, however, I think it's better to tell someone in that situation that they won't be able to (especially when there's a 99.99% chance that they can't, and even more so if there is potential danger), than get their hopes up. Que sera, sera.
That said, science doesn't just arbitrarily say that someone can't conceive. Science observes biology, and when biology says a person can't conceive, then science, and people in general, does well to listen.
For some people, it will kill them if they trying carrying a child to term because of complications with the uterus caused by previous miscarriages. For others, other factors have ravaged their reproductive tract, rendering them physically incapable of supporting life (as in, the zygote won't even implant because it's too hostile). Still others, for one reason or another, their cycle has simply shut down (or never started in the first place).
That's biology saying "no," not just science.
besides, in vitro is simply the first step to cloning, and that is just beyond scary.
In vitro is nowhere near cloning. In vitro is nothing more than artificially doing what's already very common in nature -- fertilizing eggs.
Cloning as you're referring to it (which is, specifically, reproductive cloning) can be done two ways -- artificial twinning (basically reproducing the natural phenomenon), and
through somatic cell nuclear transfer (how Dolly as created). Cloning in general has been around since 1970, so it's by no means anything new, and exists separate from in vitro fertilization. There are already plans to prohibit human cloning when it actually becomes viable to do so (as it stands now, most clones die due to genomic abnormalities or compromised immune systems, if they're successful at all).
And aside from the degradation of "the value of human life" (which one could argue isn't much as it is, considering humanity's affinity to war), what is so scary about cloning? It has just as much potential (if not more) to save than it does to harm. One of the planned uses for it includes not only curing diseases and replacing organs, but to also repopulate endangered (and maybe even extinct) species.
I am treated as evil by people who claim that they are being oppressed because they are not allowed to force me to practice what they do. ~D. Dale Gulledge
I understand what you're saying about science and reproduction. My point was that, although it appears that a married couple will be unable to have children for whatever reason, they can still do the marital act without sin as long as they are OPEN to the possibility of children.
Because there are many other things that cloning could be used for that the bigwigs behind it are not revealing. For example, if during a war, it would be no big deal to send a bunch of clones into battle or something. That idea is disgusting to me, because although religiously I am unsure whether or not they have an immortal soul because they were not brought into the world in the natural order, that is a degradation to humanity. Even things such as organ transplants...why create something for the simple purpose of killing it?
RESPECT LIFE
SMILE EVERY DAY
"It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
~Mother Teresa
I won't argue with you on this - you're not the first person I've met that has tried to say that it's wrong for a woman to try to claim control over her fertility - either to get pregnant or not to get pregnant.
But, just as with my argument for adoption vs. abortion, adoption and in vitro is not for everyone. Adoption doesn't work for everyone - it is not an easy, all-in-one answer.
A couple of years ago, my husband at the time and I were beginning to look into adoption. I wanted an infant at first. But there are no closed-adoption facilities where I live. Everything here is open adoption - which meant I would not be given full parental rights despite having full parental responsibility. It also meant regular visits with the birth parents. While I understood the imortance of such visits - and I do realize the benefits - it was not something I wanted. I wanted a child, a child who was mine whether s/he was selected or expected. An adoption like that - the child would never feel like my own.
Then we looked into adopting through social services. I thought it was a great idea, and we began the process of running tests and background checks to be approved for the foster care classes - a necessary step. Things were beginning to go well and we were looking at adopting a little girl or little boy between the ages of 6 and 11. These were children who needed help, whose parents had abandoned them or lost them because of endangerment, neglect, or abuse. I thought we were doing a good thing.
And then, the open adoption ideology reared its ugly head. I had to agree to regular visits with the birth parents - including monthly home visits from them in my house. I had to allow them to enter my home whenever they wanted to see the child they had abused or neglected. Not something I was willing to do - and I'm still not. I don't see the point. The people lost their child because they abused them - why would I want them near that child while I'm raising that child - and why would I want them in my home? No - to me that's ludicrous.
I'm in the middle of a divorce right now, so my search for adoptive kids has been placed on pause. But due to these two incidents, I will be looking into an overseas adoption or invitro vs. adoption from a local agency here.
And one thing, as well, sometimes adoption turn down great people. I would probably be more of an advocate for adoption if I didn't hear horror stories all the time about foster families and adoptive parents abusing or killing the kids that they've taken in. I had a friend who in high school tried to kill herself. Now, 15 years later, family services refused to let her adopt because of that instance. She's had years of therapy, has been deemed fully recovered, and has never had another episode - yet they view her as unfit because of something she tried in high school. Yet in the news just a few months ago, they had a story of a mother who killed her adopted child in a fit of rage.
Ridiculous.
I will, however, agree with you that children should not be a "right". I'm beginning to believe more and more, though, that you should have to take mandatory parenting classes and attain a license before you can become parents. Too many humans are completely screwing it up.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"when you have nothing else to say, "Fwonk" is always the perfect thing."
"yeah well, fwonk"
--Devon
Fanaile Essence
I understand some of the frustrations involved in adoption. One of my best friends is one of two children...he's almost 20 and his brother is 17. Two years ago, his family began fostering a little girl right after she was born and then a few months later, they began fostering a little boy, too (he was a few months old). This was after trying multiple foster kids who didn't work out. They had to do the parent visits, as well. The girl's mom rarely showed up, but they still had to do them. A few months ago, they adopted the little girl! It was awesome :D "Sissy" (as the boys call her) is officially a part of the family. :D As for the little boy, the family is in the process of adopting him, but it will likely be an open adoption. Although they find that idea kinda difficult, I think they will honor the birth mother's wishes. I'm explaining this mostly because I want to make it clear that I understand the troubles of the adoption process in the US.
Haha, I agree with you on the parenting class. I wish more parents would give their kids a better example. I feel blessed to have grown up in a loving home where I can see different parenting methods, how they work, how they don't work, what I would copy, and what I would not copy. Definitely useful, if I have a family of my own some day!
RESPECT LIFE
SMILE EVERY DAY
"It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
~Mother Teresa
This is really random....
One of my coworkers went to do a PKU on a baby today. The baby was up for adoption, and the mom didn't want anything to do with her when she was out. Didn't want to see her, hold her, anything... and apparently she was the cutest baby in the world.
In theory I realize that some people just can't deal with a baby. But, I have too strong a maternal instinct to understand it in practice. I'm glad for adoption in many cases... people who would otherwise be unable to have kids are able to through adoption. It's just sad that some have to turn to that.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
The question then is, who says your morals are correct? I understand you believe your morals are correct because it's your beliefs but to others, your morals are scewed. The Catechism applies to Catholics, not everyone else.
ICI or IUI with a sperm donor is much less expensive, less invasive, and the the option the vast majority choose over IVF, unless there is a fertility issue that necessitates the more expensive procedure.
"Never go with a hippy to a second location."
~Jack Donaghy
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ediblewoman
I put "no she already has plenty of kids." In my opinion, I don't think it's right of her to be such a drain on society (not to mention that her kids' development will probably not be normal), but on the other hand, it's none of my business. I think she was wrong, but I also think she has the right to be wrong. So all I can do is shake my head...
By the way, I'm no doctor, but I feel like Octomom has some sort of psychological problem. I heard it reported that she said she loves having children- but 14 is excessive. If she really is psychotic in some way, and it can be medically demonstrated, maybe she doesn't have the right to be wrong, and society would be able to prevent her from having all those superfluous kids. Well, too late now... Perhaps future fertility treatment patients should have to undergo psychological evaluation (or do they already?).
I don't know the procedure surrounding fertility treatment, but I know in plastic surgery, if you're continuing to get surgery done, most surgeons will start to reject you as a patient, because you likely have some sort of psychological addiction to it. I personally think that a single mom with 6 kids already at home walking into a fertility clinic would have been a red flag. It's not as if she was a single mom with no kids at home... that would seem to me to be obvious that she has some sort of psychological disorder.
And I don't think she's addicted to babies, persay. I think she's addicted to pregnancy.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
Well, 14 kids in general isn't really that big of a deal. 14 babies? That's a different story. Generally, in families with 14 kids, the oldest is an adult and maybe even having kids. So it's not like you have 14 babies and toddlers you yourself have to take care of. But this is insane O.O
RESPECT LIFE
SMILE EVERY DAY
"It is poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish."
~Mother Teresa
This is where i am tourn...Yes it is her body...and she has rights. HOWEVER, how could she expect to take care of all those children, with NO JOB and NO INCOME other than from donations, WIC and WELFARE? sooo OUR TAXDOLLARS are paying for her misjudgement??? I do not know about you guys, but that makes me mad...why should my tax dollars pay for someone who is taking advantage of the system...furthermore, why is child servaces not doing something??? When i worked at the youth center there was a quota to how many children could be under one persons supervision...I do not know about you guys but it is physically impossibul for one woman, or person to take care of ALL THOSE CHILDREN AT ONCE. NOt to mention i am mad because she has celebrity status for doing something STUPID! So what next...someone is going to have ten babies??? I suppose in our economy it's the smart thing to do, hell our taxpayers will just pick up the bill.
The Lord made me hard to handel...GOOD LUCK!
The real issue is that she has six children that she cannot, and likely will not, take care of. If she had the resources and love to take care of more children then she can have as many children as she likes, but it isn't right for someone to abandon their children for a new batch, which is what I am convinced will happen if she has more children.
Children are a responsibility to be taken very seriously, and with six children and no true means of supporting yourself you need to stop having them.
“Existentialism means that no one else can take a bath for you” - Delmore Schwartz
"Patriotism is often an arbitrary veneration of real-estate above principles." - George Jean Nathan
It's her body, and she should be free to do what she wants with it. Those that believe that since it's their money involved, so they can force her to do or not do something, are no better than pimps and traffickers. Irresponsible of her, yes (and let's not forget the doctors either), but it'd be immoral to force her not to make the mistake.
It's not a matter of forcing her... it's a matter of refusing a medical treatment because it's unethical to do it. Despite what some people think, money cannot, and should not, buy you everything.
~C
Check out the latest entry in the Between The Lines column!
Want the highest rated list to change? RATE those blogs, then!
"money cannot, and should not, buy you everything. "
Especially money you don't have, which is my issue with the whole thing.
"Don't blame me. I voted for Kodos."
Homer Simpson
All 8 fetuses should have been forcibly aborted, she should have been committed for attempting to have more, either that or jail time. Her existing 6 kids should have been taken off her and placed into care. And finally, the doctors who facilitated her should have been struck off the medical register and faced jail time.
Screw all this touchy feely bullshit about how it's a woman's right to have as many kids as she likes simply because she's physically able to shit a over a dozen into existence.
I can't smoke a joint without risking criminal prosecution, even if I grow it myself and thus contribute not a dime to any illegal economy (in fact, if I do that rather than buying it from a dealer, I'm in deeper shit). Even if I live miles away from any other human being and don't step outside my own house, I can face sentencing for doing something to my own body which is really nobody's business but my own and essentially effects nobody.
Yet any women with an active set of ovaries can just spawn potential criminals and welfare suckers to her hearts content, in fact we go one better in many places and actually ban her from aborting her unwanted spawn. Fuck that. Jail time, that's what's called for, jail time and forced abortion for irresponsible reproduction; a step closer to a sustainable future, lower crime rates and less ill-educated resource-sucking morons.
Aptitude tests should determine your right to have kids and how many you can have; you don't see too many people campaigning for downs syndrome couples' rights to parent families of 16 do you? That's not a slur on people with downs syndrome either, I'm just pointing out how selective we are already about who should and shouldn't be having armfuls of kids, we just need to broaden the net.
I still would be all for seeing that smug octo-mom sow flogged though, just to wipe that shit-eating sense of triumph out of her.
_____________________________________________________________
I am the people my mother warned me about.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/tuffgong
TUFFGONG
Senior Executive Administrator™