Should women be allowed to have 14 kids without job? (page 16)

Mary

Cog Dis said: "Should Independent Ire be allowed to keep his job at the county hospital when he clearly has severe anger issues and is projecting his hatred of all the drug addicted moms who put their newborns in foster care onto some strange woman he has never met?"

CD, I've been reading your postings on this subject in utter disbelief. Your rant above really sticks out in my mind and I'm wondering what the hell you were thinking even posting such a thing. Are you trying to insinuate that someone should NOT be filled with anger when they see drug addicted mothers who either neglect or abuse their newborns or small children?? What should we be filled with when we see these things? Love? Give me a f*cking break. This assinine woman who had the 8 kids is no hero. She's an irresponsible, leeching, moron.

Perhaps people's outrage at someone having 14 children would be more constructively spent in countries where children are starving and women have no access to birth control and no cultural power over their own reproductive choices.

You're right, but since women over here do have access to birth control and do have cultural power over their reproductive choices, it makes this story far more outrageous than in a country where, as you note, women have no choice. It is completely irresponsible for a single mother with no viable means of supporting all these children to have 14 frigging kids. This is not rocket science.

What is it about this woman that sparks so much anger? Could it be because she is unmarried and used a sperm donor?

Yep. That's a good part of why people are so disgusted. That, and she's already demonstrated that she's a shit mother by dumping her responsibilities off on her own mother, plus she obviously cannot afford to have all these kids. Add all these things up and you get a pissed off public.

I think LouBelle's comments on this subject are spot on.

quietlyleaving

oops I must have hit return too quickly

quietlyleaving

here is some recent info on Nadya Suleman

http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/Story.asp?Article=242138&Sn=WORL&IssueID=31322

we don't know as yet if this woman does not have any financial means of support. We don't know how many of her children will survive. One member of the family is said to be earning $100,000 per year.

What we do know for sure is that the media like to hang draw and quarter people in the name of news. At the moment what we have here is akin to a gothic horror story that is a runaway bestseller.

Mary

Here is even more info on Nadya Suleman.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/01/suleman-octuplets-row

It makes no difference if a member of her family is said to be earning $100,000 per year; Nadya herself is not making anything and in fact, still lives with her parents. Her mother declared bankruptcy last year in excess of $1,000,000 due to a "bad housing investment" so they were already severely financially strapped before, supporting Nadya and her 6 kids. This was no 'accident' as happens quite often in marriages. This was a planned procedure by a woman who was already so broke through her own stupidity, that she lets her parents support her and her kids. What's the smartest thing to do when you're already strapped financially and have got more kids than you can properly care for? Why, go have another half dozen plus.

quietlyleaving

Mary the guardian newspaper is looking to triple its sales in America (according to a TV prgramme I've just finished watching about the newspaper industry. Another point mentioned was the lengths they will go to to increase sales). The article above is a case in point as it is full of dramatic embellishments.

beksbks

They live in a 1500 square foot house in Whittier California. At minimum you can say they were ill prepared for this situation. Which makes absolutely no sense to me, since it wasn't an "accident". This was selfish and/or unbalanced pure and simple.

I can't help but wonder why some are so defensive of this loon.

quietlyleaving

beks I like to get lots of practice in making up my own mind and imo there are lots of wider ethical issues at stake here too.

beksbks

As I mentioned above, I personally believe we need to control the population. That's why I feel like I have a right to an opinion about other peoples childbearing habits. In this situation, there is absolutely no evidence that this woman is capable of taking care of these children. There has however been multiple references to evidence that she is not.

I definitely think there are wider ethical issues here.

llbh

The information in the Guardian is full of speculation, and unsubstantiated assertions. Whatever is the reality is difficult to know. If this woman does suffer from mental problems, the barrage of opprobrium heaped upon her here and elsewhere will do far more harm than good. If she is of sound mind we have little to worry about. There are families classed as dysfunctional everywhere, many would cite our own Royal Family as an example of such.

I can cite many examples of poor parenting skills in small families, and good examples of close warm and large families. I remember my uncle who had six children, he and his wife raised six lovely children, when he died they closed a street down in London to allow all the mourners to gather at his house, such was the esteem he and his family were held in!

What is being exposed is the agenda of people who think they know better , they might, and if they do constructive and thoughtful help is of far more value than the vilification of this woman and other large families.

Btw Independent_ Tre to think that this woman's children will emerge as drug addicts or to even imply it is so judgemental, I am surprised at you, a professional, saying this. Drug addicts seem to come from all parts of society from my understanding.

Informed and informative debate is more useful than to fan the flames of unpleasantness

Regards David

Should women be allowed to have 14 kids without job?

Share this