Her grandmother has been giving the press info in this issue saying that the mother is obsessed with kids. Heres the rest of the story here. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090131/ap_on_re_us/octuplets
I heard a doctor today criticize her for having these extra embryos implanted in her. She took fertility drugs after having six kids.
Sure she will file them as dependent on her W2 but seriously I bet she will be on WIC very shortly. What is she thinking? Does she think she will have a shot on Oprah, Dr. Phil, etc to get endorsements for having her diapers, food, etc to be paid for? If she goes this route shes the lowest of the low.
Welcome to Obama's America, where personal responsibility has been replaced by the government taking care of all your needs! [video=youtube;P36x8rTb3jI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI[/video]
I wonder if the doctor gave her his fertilization "special". We will know if all the kids look like him.
7 times. But don't let facts get in the way. I normally think that it is up to a woman to decide if, when and how many children to have. But I still wonder at a doctor giving fertility treatment to a woman with 6 children under 7. This is not a case of the woman deciding to have a child (or 8), it is a case of a woman seeking assistance to have 14 kids. Still, one can say it is her business. But then it is also her business to find a way to provide for them. Again, I understand hard times and needing a helping hand, but she planned for 14 kids. How does this differ, BTW, from the "quiver full" movement of evangelical Christians who say women MUST have as many children as they physically can, 10, 12, 14, 16, and home school them all so they are never exposed to other faiths, science, etc.? Or the polygamists who marry 8 women, father 5 or 6 children by each and apply for public assistance? Why is this woman condemned so much more? ALL of them show total irresponsibility. But if I tried for just one child I'd be considered immoral and unfit based on one sole criterion.
First, you're usually way too logical to lump "evangelical Christians" in with saying women MUST do anything. Second, there's a fundamental difference between needing public assistance and not. I don't know what the statistics are on professing-Christian families with more than 10 kids who are on public assistance, but in the small sample of churches I've been in it's been zero. Third, do you think homeschooling occurs just so that the children are "never exposed to other faiths, science, etc.?" Fourth, having children is legal. "Neglecting" them is not. Neither is polygamy. I think this thread was "news" b/c an unmarried mother for some reason thought that 6 kids wasn't enough, so she got assistance for insemination of 8 more (at the same time). Fifth, I honestly don't know what the rules/laws are, but it seems in my limited news of the celebrity world that Jodie Foster and Rosie O'Donnell have been able to raise children. I don't know how "immoral and unfit" fall into it...it's either legal or not. I don't know of a morality stigma associated with it. As for me, I'd really like a quiver full of kids. Hasn't worked out for me yet.
If she was in Germany should would get €150 (euro) for every child until they're 18 years old, or further if they stay in school. (up to 24 I believe) So 14 kids X €150 = €2100 = 2,702.64 USD every month. And that's just for taking care of her kids, not even counting other money for food for the babies, etc.
Calm down. The fact is that this one particular segment of evangelical Christians does say just that - women must have as many children as they can, and yes, they explicitly say they home school so the children will only know others of their own faith and will not have evolution, sex education, or literature they find objectionable. That is what they say, not what I say. Of course giving birth is legal. I question whether anyone can really care for 14 children under 7. But this is not a simple issue because I am really uncomfortable with forbidding a woman to have the children. What I do question very strongly is why a doctor would assist such a procedure; this seems to me to violate the ethics of first do no harm. I did not say immoral so don't know to whom you are referring. If you want a quiver full of children, great, you give birth and you care for them.
Sorry...didn't mean to make it seem I wasn't. I don't know of this segment, though I'll believe it when you say it exists...there are a lot of odd religious sects. I don't think "evangelical Christian" is one of them.[/quote] If this is the same religious sect, then I apologize. I don't know of it. I DO know that, while I've been raised in public schools (to my detriment, at some points) and government schools, my wife and her sister were home-schooled, and my small nieces now are being home-schooled, and my father went to private school. The reasons that the parents talk about for doing so are much less based on religious beliefs or the need to have their children shielded from evolution and sex ed, but b/c they don't like subjecting their kids to learning in an environment where lowest common denominator is "achievement" and the mother can teach them more than hooked on phonics and stuff. My 6 year old niece, in addition to already reading and doing basic math, takes co-op art and zoology (or whatever you call the farm animal 4H stuff) classes that would be impossible for a public school to fund. IIRC, you're not allowed to keep homeschooling if your children don't pass standardized tests that all kids have to take, which is NOT the same standard required of those in public schools. I was using the "legal" argument since you brought up polygamy. That's all. I also am uncomfortable with telling a woman she can't have children. It was when you said something about it being thought of as immoral or unfit if you had adopted children. I personally don't think so. I can't. I'm male. I could go all Shawn Kemp, I guess, but that's not part of my moral makeup. It is for her, though.
