happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,937
|
Post by happyhoix on Jun 19, 2012 10:41:53 GMT -5
How would you decide which of your children to give up for adoption? The ones who eat the most, grow the fastest, are the dumbest, don't sleep all night? Just curious how you would make the choice IMO the state should have stepped in when she first gave birth to the 8 new ones. Taken them right from the hospital and put them in anonymous homes where they would have the chance of being raised in a normal sized household right from the very start. Let Octomom keep the six she had already, if she worked her butt off she might be able to keep that size family going. There are always adoptive homes for newborn babies. Unfortunately now that she's tried to raise them a couple of years the kids won't be as adoptable, and I have to think they've had permanent damage from living in that circus freak household, where they probably rarely had much individual attention. I'm a middle of the road to left leaning democrat when it comes to most social questions, but when it comes to parents making idiot decisions I come down very solidly in favor of whatever is best for the kids - and the sooner, the better. DH works with troubled families and he sees how long it takes to remove a kid from a really whack job parent and it takes far, far too long to severe the tie. Take them when they're infants, place them with good adoptive families, don't spend 10 years giving the parents chance after chance to get their crap together.
|
|
NoNamePerson
Distinguished Associate
Is There Anybody OUT There?
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 25,755
Location: WITNESS PROTECTION
|
Post by NoNamePerson on Jun 19, 2012 10:53:19 GMT -5
Maybe the state should have stepped in and demanded a late term abortion. Of course lots of people would have to line up for these since they are going to be terrible parents also.
Are her kids going to pay for her stupidity - sure, but who knows but there may be some who rise above the craziness that is going to follow them for a long time.
I would question the motives of anyone who adopted one of the children.
|
|
ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ
Community Leader
♡ ♡ BᏋՆᎥᏋᏉᏋ ♡ ♡
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:51 GMT -5
Posts: 43,130
Location: Inside POM's Head
Favorite Drink: Chilled White Zin
|
Post by ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ on Jun 19, 2012 11:00:37 GMT -5
He's paying dearly from losing his license to practice. Some jail time might have been good fo rhim too, but I don't think he should be financially responsible to HER. She sought HIM out to perform the in-vitro - not the other way around. She had no job when she underwent the procedure, and already had 6 mouths to feed - and no means to support them. She was ALREADY on the public dole BEFORE the procedures were even performed. There's no baby-daddies in the picture, at all. This is an excerpt from a Wiki article. She decided to undergo these procedures AFTER a brief 6 yr marriage ended in divorce, all because she "wanted children". Guess what - so do a lot of people - and they have to jump through hoops, be poked and probed, and have their private lives put under a microscope just to adopt. I know this because my brother and SIL went through it when they couldn't conceive naturally due to medical issues. Even if these children had to be separated, there are probably families out there waiting and praying for a child to become theirs. Here's a brief excerpt from the link below: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nadya_Suleman
|
|
NancysSummerSip
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 19:19:42 GMT -5
Posts: 36,377
Today's Mood: Full of piss and vinegar
Favorite Drink: Anything with ice
|
Post by NancysSummerSip on Jun 19, 2012 11:30:08 GMT -5
OK, how about a compromise: in lieu of spending time in what is likely an already over-crowded jail, he should be sentenced to home detention in HER overcrowded house, with her and the kids?
|
|
NoNamePerson
Distinguished Associate
Is There Anybody OUT There?
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 25,755
Location: WITNESS PROTECTION
|
Post by NoNamePerson on Jun 19, 2012 11:33:11 GMT -5
Just sterilize every MAN and WOMAN you deem unfit to have children. Problem solved....May have to start at age 12 or possibly 11.
|
|
rovo
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:20:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,628
|
Post by rovo on Jun 19, 2012 12:22:52 GMT -5
When implanting embryos, isn't it common to implant a bunch of them because most will not take hold and become viable? Generally they are thinned out a little later to one or two. But what if the mother refuses to have the number reduced? Is it the doctor's responsibility to strap her down and remove them? I think not.
|
|
ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ
Community Leader
♡ ♡ BᏋՆᎥᏋᏉᏋ ♡ ♡
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:51 GMT -5
Posts: 43,130
Location: Inside POM's Head
Favorite Drink: Chilled White Zin
|
Post by ՏՇԾԵԵʅՏɧ_LԹՏՏʅҼ on Jun 19, 2012 12:44:53 GMT -5
No, but we're talking about a woman who already had 6 children by in-vitro with no viable means of supporting them - except by government handout - which she was already on. She then decided to undergo more procedures - all because she "wanted more babies". Those children are the ones who are paying the price for her stupidity - and so is the rest of society. Any money she received for her interviews/stories to the tabloids has been used up on HER - for her tummy-tucks, lip injections, etc. Meanwhile, she's still living in a fantasy - thinking she'll be able to float though life and "someone else" will pick up the slack & take care of things for her. And look at the choices she's considered so far and failed at miserably - adult film actress, stripper, - even those industries don't want her - what next? This angers me no end because there are couples who truly want a child for the RIGHT reasons, and sometimes have to wait years for the chance to undergo this treatment, or to adopt. I wonder how many of the bleeding hearts here who think we're picking on her would be willing to take all 14 of those children under their wings to raise and support.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Jun 19, 2012 13:12:48 GMT -5
When implanting embryos, isn't it common to implant a bunch of them because most will not take hold and become viable? Generally they are thinned out a little later to one or two. But what if the mother refuses to have the number reduced? Is it the doctor's responsibility to strap her down and remove them? I think not. They've gotten a lot more efficient in implantation of embryos these days. So much so that it is uncommon to implant as many as 3. From the news reports, Octomom could not afford to have another procedure, and likely could not afford the storage fees of the remaining embryos in liquid nitrogen. So she wanted all of her remaining embryos implanted. <snort......liquid nitrogen is cheaper than feeding 'em!>
|
|