Facebook
Twitter
RSS
Mother of octuplets, Nadya Suleman, was interviewed by Ann Curry on Tuesday's Dateline on NBC.
Watching last night’s Dateline was so irritating; I don’t even know where to start. With that said, I will just put it out there: Nadya Suleman has a serious problem telling the truth. Her story makes no sense. It doesn’t add up. She hides behind deception and controversy.
She is self-indulgent and selfish, and I feel that those children are in a heap of trouble if this is their caretaker. I also blame Suleman’s parents for being enablers and allowing it to get this far. The ones who will pay dearly are those children.
Oh, and for all the supporters of “right to life,” don’t let her con you. Early on in the interview, Ann Curry asks her why she had six embryos implanted. Quickly she uses the word “controversy” and goes on to explain that those embryos were her children and that destroying them is not an option so she asked that they all be implanted.
Good move Suleman. It was a nice attempt to garner sympathy but a bit transparent. However, if you follow her story about the other pregnancies and the IVF treatments, the numbers don’t add up. Based on her interview, she had to go back to the sperm donor after each pregnancy and the IVF treatments were successful after each attempt. This implies that after each IVF treatment there were no leftover embryos. However, for this last pregnancy she went back to the donor and then had two failed IVF attempts until the third worked. So miraculously, this third IVF treatment was the only one to yield enough embryos for three IVF attempts? It just doesn’t add up. This was not about right to life. Her story and logic are immensely flawed.
Suleman is clearly delusional. She even claims she has not had her lips done though pictures clearly show her lips have grown at least four times their original size. Somehow, she paid for the plastic surgery.
NBC even had to re-interview her to clear up some of the things she said, Such as that she doesn’t receive any welfare or taxpayer money. She later said she has been receiving $490 in food stamps for the last 18 months but that it is only temporary. Really? Temporary? She needed the money when she only had six kids but now with 14 she says it is temporary? So she was on food stamps before she spent money on another IVF attempt. So she has $10,000 to spend on IVF but can’t buy her kids food?
Maybe plastic surgeons are now accepting food stamps as payment.
Of Suleman’s six older children, she accepts disability payments for three. She claims that payments for two of the three are also “temporary.” If this woman has learned anything in grad school, it is how to work the system. Something tells me she is counting on donations and payments for her story or that those checks will become permanent.
But Suleman hasn’t only milked the government; she also took advantage of our legal system. The disability checks she had been receiving prior to the octuplet pregnancy were a result of a workplace injury. Suleman states that while working at a psychiatric facility, a riot broke out and a piece of furniture fell on her. Nothing was broken but she said she had to deal with lower back pain. She began accepting disability checks.
The funny thing is, her back pain was so bad she needed disability checks but it didn’t prevent her from having six kids in five years or continuing to go to school during pregnancies. Now, I have always been healthy and I like to exercise, but in my experience, when you are pregnant, there are parts of your body that hurt that you hadn’t even considered. Even people who have good pregnancies can’t deny being uncomfortable. Yet, Suleman had a preexisting condition and kept popping out babies. She accepted disability payments because, presumably, her injury made it impossible to work.
I should also mention that NBC didn’t pay Suleman or make any deals with her, but I wish they had. I don’t believe she should receive donations or taxpayer money. If she wants to sell her story, it is hers to sell, and she has to deal with the consequences, but don’t come to me with your hand out. If she has to deal with probing questions, judgment and lack of privacy, then that should be the price.
She is also deluded into thinking that once she gets her graduate degree as a counselor that the heavens will part and money will rain down like manna. How much money does she plan to make as a counselor? Will it be enough to pay back her growing debt that now stands at $50,000 and to sustain 14 children?
Loading ...Throughout different parts of this interview it is clear that Suleman wanted children the way my daughters want Pet Shop toys. She really didn’t care who or what she had to use to get there. Throughout the interview it also seems clear that Curry thinks she is a bit “off.” Some of Curry’s looks are so telling I almost burst out laughing. She tries to remain objective but every now and then she allows the tiniest break in her façade.
Suleman goes on to explain during the interview why she wanted so many children. She says she was an only child who grew up in a dysfunctional home and she missed that bond with a sibling. Okay, I can see that. I can see the need to have your children have siblings but here is the thing: None of this is about the kids. It is about her. Her kids already had siblings.
As a mother, one of your greatest fears becomes leaving your children. I worried with all of my pregnancies about the health of the baby. But with the third, I also worried about my health. I started fearing blood clots, hemorrhaging, infection, etc. Any pregnancy can be risky. I was scared that if something happen to me I would leave my children without a mother.
It seems that Suleman never had such a thought. This pregnancy was also dangerous for her and that if anything had happened, she would have taken away the only mother those kids have ever known.
During the interview, Suleman says, “I am providing for my children. Everything I do is for them. I’ll stop my life for them and be present with them. And hold them. And be with them.”
But she hasn’t stopped her life to be with them. She has continued to go to school and continued to have babies. That is her life. I would ask her, who is bringing home money, bathing them, feeding them, helping them with homework, combing their hair, washing their clothes while you are “holding” them. They aren’t dolls. They need affection but there are also many practical things to attend to that can be time consuming with so many children.
I should mention that as I type this, my year-old daughter is bringing me a doll and my five and three-year olds were just dropped off at school. It, too, was a miracle I had kids. I had to have surgery to conceive and began the IVF protocol when I got pregnant the good old fashion way. With three small children of my own, each born two years apart, I can tell you that there is no more strenuous and exhausting work than running after your kids.
Perhaps I should hurl myself down the aisle at Wal-mart so I can afford my dream of going to culinary school. Nadya Suleman makes it look so easy.
I totaly agree with you. How selfish & doesn’t she know when people know she’s lying as I could see how Curry gave those looks!!! Nadya…you’re lost in a dream world where only you live. for your precious children; Lord, help them, for they have a selfish mother. GOing to school with one child; how in the world will she do it with “14″ girl get real!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Jay Leno said it best…”the woman’s a wack job”!
This woman does indeed seem to have “worked the system” very well. I do not see any point in getting upset with this woman for taking advantage of existing programs. Isn’t the problem here the programs themselves?
My satellite feed was lost during most of the interview and I haven’t had a chance to watch it online. You bring up an excellent point on how much income will be generated by a Masters in counseling. It’s not an MBA. As a pro-lifer, selective reduction is just not an option but the revealation that she was not simply using frozen embryos but going back to the well for a live IVF was stunning. That’s where the $100K came from. A frozen IVF cycle will run you $1500 to $3K but a live IVF cycle is $10-15K. I’ve read many, many message boards and only read one comment relating to donating extra embryos. It’s called the snowflake foundation and has been an absolute Godsend for certain infertile couples. I pray for those kids.
She has not answered ANYTHING in her interviews. These questions aren’t word for word, just pretty much what they said.
Curry: “How are you going to provide for your children?”
Nadya: “I will provide for them”
Curry: “How is that not selfish?”
Nadya: “I am not selfish”
Curry: “How is that responsible?”
Nadya: “I am responsible”
Curry: “Don’t your children need a father figure.”
Nadya: “I totally agree. In the future he’ll be in their lives.” (even though the question is about needing a father figure while they grow up, not after they have developed serious emotional issues)
Curry: “Did you have plastic surgery?”
Nadya: “I never even thought about Angelina Jolie”
Add in all the contradictions she says, like “Money is necessary. Money is just paper”, “I never received money from the government…because welfare is for people not in need”, and you have one compulsive liar and psychopath. All her “answers” are not answers at all.
This has never been about the children like she says. It has been about her selfish need to have a brood of helpless objects who can give her unconditional love. If it really were about the children, she would have thought about what they need before having children, not after.
How can she be sick enough to not get a job but healthy enough to have children? The woman is a total nut case. The plastic surgery on the lips–oh my god—it was all I could focus on. At first I thought it was just me until that piece on the NBC emails mentioned the plastic surgery and the Angelina Jolie reference. She has lost touch and is in her own world. I feel sorry for her but wouldn’t give her a dime. Bad enough, she’s getting free health care for the 8 babies….I heard that birth cost upwards of 3 million…..Enough is enough.
And she also said that her frozen eggs are her children, which is why she couldn’t discard them. The last time I checked, eggs are just that…eggs. If she feels morally against discarding eggs, I guess every woman is a murderer, because every month their eggs are flushed out of their systems through a very immoral, depraved process called menstruation.
Also when did student loans become just loans? She said she’s using student loans to pay for her children. Student loans are for paying tuition and such.
She also said she planned on moving into a larger home after giving birth. Really? How? She’s bankrupt, unemployed, and in debt. She doesn’t even have her own house right now.
Eggs are different from embryos in that they lack fertilization. I don’t know if she said “eggs” or “embryos” but she clearly meant embryos. Those of us who consider ourselves pro-life would accept her statement that those embryos where her children. With that being said, embryos can be adopted. I had to make the same choice when my wife and I went through IVF. If we had embryos left over, they would be donated to another couple so they could become parents. It’s a tough decision..but the only one that could be made that does not result in an abortion.
Jay, I too am I’m still trying to figure out her financial math. I guess she is banking on that book/TV deal to fund this magical, larer home.
Those lips are fake.
There goes more of our tax money in Temporary cash assistance, food stamps, and medicaid for another low life that uses kids as an excuse not to take her ass to work and just be a lazy stay a home mom waiting for people to donate material things and money for her to live very comfortably not just her but her kids and family as well.
I felt pity for the fish lips until I saw the old photos of Nadya with a normal mouth. The people I feel sorry for are Kaiser Permanente members who will be paying higher premiums to cover hundreds of thousands of dollars in costs for 8 preemies (if any of the babies is disabled, the cost will run into the millions). Kaiser ought to sue the fertility doctor.
The 14 children have a dire future with a delusional and narcissistic mother, no father, and no income. The best outcome would be for Nadya to be committed to a psychiatric hospital and for them to be adopted out.
If you ask me I think the Lady needs a psychiatric evaluation,
before they let her take those babies home…
I hope this disgraceful welfare queen had her tubes tied.
My taxes are already paying for her idiocy.
Your article was PERFECT!! Everything I was thinking you wrote it out. This woman is delusional, she works the system and could not be more full of HERSELF. How can you believe that you are responsible when you use your money to buy more babies and use food stamps to feed your children? She has NO JOB…NO MONEY..and no common sense. I wouldn’t be surprised to find she is hoping to get an offer from TLC for a “John and Kate +8″ type show. Only problem is, listening to her only angers me, there is no way I would watch her week after week, and NO WAY would I donate money to her, she’d probably just buy more IVF!!
Correction, I think Brent’s right in that she probably meant embryo and not egg. So I take back the egg statement.
Kate, why should we feel sorry for Kaiser? Kaiser isn’t going to pay for this. They already applied for aid from the state, which means we the taxpayers are going to pay for the multi million dollar pregnancy. And Kaiser wasn’t forced into this, they accepted Nadya’s proposals when she walked into Kaiser while 3 months pregnant with the octuplets.
Also, why was there no apparent attempt to fix her tubes? There is surgery for that. Also, some women can get pregnant despite ostensibly blocked tubes. Did they try simple artificial insemination and hormonal stimulation first?
Many doctors do IVF when it’s not needed, because they make more money.
I think that it’s okay to be upset with this woman for lying and for what she’s doing from moral and ethical standpoints.
HOWEVER, kudos to her for working the system! The system is there to continue enabling people just like her who manipulate and abuse it. The system isn’t designed to *help* people in need; it’s designed to *keep* people in need.
Wanna change that? Vote. Pay attention to who and for what you vote. We made it this way. Only we can change it.
According to her earlier interviews, she did try IUI (intra-uterine insemination or artificial insemination) multiple times and was never successful. She also indicated that she had some sort of surgery to address the scar tissue on her tubes. That all seems possible but it’s really hard to believe anything she says now.
IUI success rate is pretty low (5-10%) so I can understand the motivation to skip to something with a greater chance of success (40%). Some insurance companies will cover IUI treatments but most won’t touch IVF. Of course, if she wanted 100% success, she could have taken that money she horded and adopted five infants through an licensed adoption agency.
Remember all you ladies who are questioning Ms. Suleman’s choices:
Would you want someone regulating when and how many children you can have?
If you want to rail against her accepting FoodStamps, you should know it is an income-based, and not an asset-based program. Take care that there might be plenty around you getting help with food when there is no income, yet there is plenty in savings, material goods, cars, homes, etc.
Also, some of your writer’s assumptions here may be false. Namely, if she had the initial children with fertilized eggs, and then went back to the sperm donor: how do you know they didn’t whip up another batch of embroys from his one subsequent ejaculation? That would account for all the additional lives she had implanted. And no, Kaiser didn’t know she had octuplets inside her until the birth, from what I heard.
Remember, ladies especially: we don’t force any American to tie her tubes, we don’t limit family size or put it up for a vote. Her mother provides a house; she qualifies for FoodStamps; she is getting educated and will have to pay back student loans.
Personally, I’m hoping for the best for their kids, not hating on them for being born, or their mother for making choices perhaps that I personally would not have. Don’t like all the publicity she’s getting? Turn off the boob tube. Remember, if “journalists” continue to cover stories that are nobody’s business, who the heck is covering all the billions and trillions we are on the hook for?
If you compare, this mother’s take from taxpayers is nothing compared to that fiasco. Anybody following that one???
People nowadays want fame at any price. She’s purchased it with the lives of her babies. How sad.
Kelly, Blaming the welfare programs rather than the abuser of those services is like blaming a gun instead of the abuser of the gun.
That said, I agree we live in a free country where we have the right to make bad decisions. The alternative would mean limiting how many children someone could have and that tramples on life, liberty, and the pursuit of whatever crazy happiness….
Ask the folks in China and Cuba how the alternative looks; pretty damn bleak.
That said, something feels so wrong about this, like a cosmic ungratefulness.
I have one word that best describes her \"crazy\".
Doesn’t that say something about those of us eating up this story though, Nick? How about the media call a holiday on ALL reports of multiple births. This technology isn’t such a big deal anymore, and how many women do you suppose are out there now thinking “Hey, that could be me up on the tv screen and getting talked about on all those blogs?”
Sometimes we need to look closer at the perverse incentives we set up in society, and then wonder why we criticize those who respond to such incentives…
Also, I think she was so much prettier with her earlier set of lips!!! Where do women get the ideas a surgically altered physique is better??
In response to the anon comment about “whipping up another batch of embryos”. A man’s entire ejaculate is prepared during an IVF treatment. Preparation means removing all the slow or sideways swimmers. There would be nothing left over to freeze. What is unclear is which of her six IVF cycles were frozen and which were live. I’m just guessing but I’d say she had at least two frozen cycles and thus went back to the donor multiple times.
Of course, my assumptions could be off.
Student loans are no different from other loans, they could go into default.
While I agree that I don’t want the government regulating family size, implanting six embryos is reprehensible. Humans are not designed for litters. Each one of those kids face significant developmental challenges because of the choice she made. She gambled with their lives..and her own. Her “choice” placed those kids in danger, for the rest of their lives, plain and simple. Ask anybody who was born pre-mature if they don’t have life-long health issues. I’m not hating on her choice to have a large family. I’m disgusted at her selfish choice to have that large family with no regard for the safety of her kids.
She was much more attractive prior to the facial reconstruction.
Anonymous, I am not sure what assumption you mean. Suleman stated that she went back to her sperm donor after each pregnancy. It may not be true, but it isn’t an assumption on my part. She said it in the interview. With that said, I think it is an assumption that she will pay back her student loans. We don’t know that and we certainly don’t know if her paying them back will be a result of her education or her interviews.
Finally, I don’t think we should ever limit family size or force people to tie their tubes, I don’t agree with that but I also don’t think that we should not protect children. I feel for these children. I honestly believe that this woman is not well and it will not be a healthy environment for those kids. Every day children are removed from homes that are not safe and healthy for them and I wonder how this home would fair.
Finally, I have no issue with the publicity she is getting. I think she should get paid for it vs. hand outs and all the negative ramifications with having to open up your life to the masses. I think this story strikes a cord with people for various reasons. An obvious one is that we are in tough financial times and most of us have had to make tough decision but she hasn’t had to. She is leaning on others. As a taxpayer, I don’t want to be one of those “other’s”.
Attn: Anonymous, FYI-It’s a journalists job to cover a story when welfare is failing and tax dollars are being spent. If it involves misuse of tax dollars-it\’s fit for public consumption and her right to privacy just went out the window. You alomost sound like you are defending her choice to misuse student loan money and misuse disability checks. Those programs are for people who can\’t otherwise work-not for those who CHOOSE not to work because they have 14 kids.
No, she said that after she had 6, she went back to the donor and he said, “What, you want more?” That one time ejaculation could have been enough to produce two miscarraiges, and six other embroys. Thus, the six sitting on the shelf that she either could have destroyed, or implanted which she did, which gave her the 8 additional children.
Of course you have no trouble publicizing this family’s plight, and then criticizing her choices. It’s keeping you employed at The Post, no?
Of course it strikes a cord with people — lots of extremely moralistic people who know right about everybody else’s choices get a chance to chime in. Who cares what you folks think? Her body, her choices — right??
As to this: “I also don’t think that we should not protect children. I feel for these children. I honestly believe that this woman is not well and it will not be a healthy environment for those kids. Every day children are removed from homes that are not safe and healthy for them and I wonder how this home would fair.”
You’re a journalist by training, right? Not a social worker obviously. Sadly, most children that are taken are much much much much much much much worse off than those 6 shown on the tv (I think the publicizing of them is the child abuse myself).
Physical abuse? Mental abuse? NEglect? Prove it please. You don’t like the fact that there are now 14. Guess what? Pleny of families with large large numbers of kids — not abuse. They share, sacrifice, and maybe aren’t “held” enough. Not abuse though. No reason for the gov to step in and take over the raising of healthy children just because you think they have too many siblings.
Betcha this mother will prove you all wrong — get her degree, get employed, lose the FoodStamps with the income coming in, continue to put a decent roof over the kids’ heads w/parental help, receive voluntary help from her church/friends/family etc. And those 14 will grow up LOVED, wanted, provided for, etc.
You sure you’re not just jealous, Mrs Frias, that while your daughters came the GOOD old fashioned way, hers came from a sperm donor, and despite their struggles all appear to have survived and are thriving (just like the other 6)?
Hmm… how do some of you know that her disability didn’t limit her from working above substantial gainful employment?
And that she didn’t fairly qualify for student loans (which can be used to cover tuition and living expenses while you are enrolled and are still a student).
And that her income doesn’t qualify her for Food Stamps.
Look, if you don’t like governmental programs, work to change them. But unless there is some proof out there hiding, I haven’t seen any evidence of fraud, which is what so many here are alleging in telling this woman what choices she should have made with her body.
Get a life?
* think it is an assumption that she will pay back her student loans. We don’t know that and we certainly don’t know if her paying them back will be a result of her education or her interviews.*
And like so many other deadbeat student loan defaulters, there are ways of making her pay … if she defaults.
Who cares where the money comes from if it is paid back? Sometimes a woman stays home, and her husband’s income pays off her student loans. Or her parents’ cover it. Or she strips and doesn’t use her degree, but pays it back. SO WHAT?
You Church Ladies here should be venting about the TARP payments to millionaires, instead of picking on a woman who wants nothing from you, and whom you’re feeding daily publicity too. What are your three daughters doing right now, Mrs Frias, and shouldn’t you be with them instead of commenting here. (See — working women can be criticized unfairly, just like women who breed large families)
She wants nothing from us, anonymous? She hired a publicist: she wanted YOUR attention. She’s supporting a website that receives donations: she wanted YOUR money. You clearly see her as an angel when the majority of the evidence indicate otherwise.
It is my understanding (and I could be a little off here) that the miscarriages were a result of the non-IVF procedures (IUI, super-ovulatory drugs). According to her, she implanted the same number of embryos for each cycle (six). That’s 36 embryos, not the 12 you mentioned.
It doesn’t make any sense to use frozen sperm when you have a willing donor. Live sperm are way more desirable than frozen sperm just because they often do not survive the thawing process. Her words are kinda vague but it sounds like she went back to the donor for a “fresh” donation for each IVF cycle. This information seems to corroborate her estimate of $100K for fertility treatments. Anon, the scenario you describe would cost less than $20K.
The her body, her choice argument only holds water when you are talking about her body. Everything in her body has the same genetic code. Her eight children have a distinct, seperate genetic code. It is not her body, it is eight individual bodies. As I said before, her “choice” put those tiny human beings in grave danger. They are doing amazingly well now but they have a lifetime of challenges ahead of them becaise of her “choice”. Her choice put herself in danger which could have made 14 children motherless.
We do agree on CPS stepping in without probable cause. I too believe that these kids will be loved and cared for. I hope and pray for that outcome.
*She wants nothing from us, anonymous? She hired a publicist: she wanted YOUR attention. She’s supporting a website that receives donations: she wanted YOUR money. You clearly see her as an angel when the majority of the evidence indicate otherwise.*
No, she wants VOLUNTARY money and VOLUNTARY people watching. If you don\’t want to give, don\’t already. Tired of hearing about her? Turn off the tv and subscribe to a newspaper that covers RELEVANT stories.
I don\’t think she\’s an angel, nor do I think it is my business what a woman does with her own eggs and how she provides for her children, if she is clearly meeting a minimum standard.
Church ladies cluck. They love a story like this. I\’m for the mother in that I don\’t think it\’s really any of your business, since she clearly did not commit fraud (or it has yet to be proven, just a bunch of clucky allegations and \"I wouldn\’t have done that!!\" judgments here…)
*Live sperm are way more desirable than frozen sperm just because they often do not survive the thawing process.*
I think the fertilized eggs (embryos) were frozen, not the sperm. Those are the “snowflake” babies — or future children — that are often later adopted out, if the original couples chooses to only implant so many and it works.
The woman here did not choose that route, but rather had all 6 remaining implanted in her. Her body; her choice — right liberals?
anonymous, you said she wanted nothing from us. I gave specific examples showing her WANT. It doesn’t matter who satisfies that WANT. The fact is that the WANT existed. So get it clear.
It is the public’s business what she does because the choices she made here affect society at large. This isn’t a decision of what to eat for dinner in her private home. This is a decision that will cost tax payers millions. Hence it is the public’s business.
*The her body, her choice argument only holds water when you are talking about her body. Everything in her body has the same genetic code. Her eight children have a distinct, seperate genetic code. It is not her body, it is eight individual bodies.*
So logically, you support the child’s right to live over the mother’s right to abort once the egg is fertilized, right? ONce fertilized, that future child has a right to life that trumps the mother’s “my body, my choice” argument.
You can’t have it both ways, folks, so take care in choosing up sides here that you’re really on the side you want to be on.
Maybe some people would argue that Mrs Frias should have been content with 2 girls, and that the social costs of more should not be afforded her? Schools cost money after all … and public taxpayers are paying for that, right?
((Slippery slope arguments are a beech, eh?)
nShe doesn\’t WANT your donations, if it doesn\’t come willingly. Get it?
*It is the public’s business what she does because the choices she made here affect society at large. *
So you are ok with my example that the Friases should have been content with 2 girls and just gotten anything more from the pound in the way of a pet that wouldn\’t need an education that would cost the taypayers anything?
*This is a decision that will cost tax payers millions. Hence it is the public’s business.*
LOL, you really aren\’t following the economic expansion that will cost the public TRILLIONS are you? Or the Iraq war adventures? Because I paid for those, and didn\’t like it. So too I pay for Social Security for parents of the wealthy, and for healthcare for those who never practiced preventative medicine a day in their life. Of course, you could pull a Geithner and just not pay your taxes, right?
She WANTS attention. That’s not nothing. Whether I give her the attention or not doesn’t extinguish the initial WANT.
I haven’t read the earlier posts above so I don’t know what this Friar issue is about.
The existence of other poor decisions doesn’t excuse the poor decision of this case. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
*As I said before, her “choice” put those tiny human beings in grave danger. *
No. The way I see it, her \"choice\" gave those 8 life. Tomato/tomahto.
*Her choice put herself in danger which could have made 14 children motherless.*
Thousands of American children risk being mother and fatherless when their parents go off to serve in wartime. You ok with that? Allowing people to make their own \"choices\" or should we regulate that too?
*We do agree on CPS stepping in without probable cause. I too believe that these kids will be loved and cared for. I hope and pray for that outcome.*
She\’s doing something right so far, based on the 6 she has, and the health of the 8 that she was able to successfully incubate due surely to her personal physical choices. (Thank goodness for FoodStamps and healthy eating for the mother and children!!0
*As I said before, her “choice” put those tiny human beings in grave danger. *
No. The way I see it, her “choice” gave those 8 life. Tomato/tomahto.
*Her choice put herself in danger which could have made 14 children motherless.*
Thousands of American children risk being mother and fatherless when their parents go off to serve in wartime. You ok with that? Allowing people to make their own \"choices\" or should we regulate that too?
*We do agree on CPS stepping in without probable cause. I too believe that these kids will be loved and cared for. I hope and pray for that outcome.*
She\’s doing something right so far, based on the 6 she has, and the health of the 8 that she was able to successfully incubate due surely to her personal physical choices. (Thank goodness for FoodStamps and healthy eating for the mother and children!!0
I want a pony.
You don’t have to give it to me. You might think it’s stupid.
But try and stop me from wanting it. Good luck.
Why not just not worry about what other people want, that you don’t? I really do think their is a jealousy factor at play here…
You’re admitting your mistake when you said she wanted nothing from us.
*You’re admitting your mistake when you said she wanted nothing from us.*
Nope. She wants nothing from you, because clearly you are not voluntarily willing to give it. So get over yourself already.
She wants attention — and donations presumably — from those good hearted folks who want to help her family continue to thrive.
From you — she wants nothing. Why do you insist on putting yourself in this story as the “victim” — “She WANTS me and my money, and I’m paying into FoodStamps that she is feeding her children with, and they all shouldn’t have been born in the first place!!!”
This woman made private decisions about how to achieve her family size. Get over yourselves and create some new lives of your own if you so choose.
Of course she doesn’t want something from ME personally. She doesn’t know who I am. You’re caviling over semantics. But the issue is that she WANTED attention from the public, whether that includes people who will give it or not. The people who do give it of course gave it voluntarily. That doesn’t change the fact that she WANTED attention from the people who ended up NOT giving it. The ad hoc conclusion doesn’t change the INITIAL WANT.
She made private decisions with public consequences. That makes it a public matter. This is not a private decision of a family who was prepared to sustain the family on their own.
Thanks for admitting that she doesn’t want anything from US (you and me). You were wrong above, and just “caviling over semantics”.
Clearly, you did not use your student loans to invest in a Logics class: “That doesn’t change the fact that she WANTED attention from the people who ended up NOT giving it.” Um… no.
She never WANTED attention from you. She wanted to increase her family’s size, and PERHAPS she wanted money/attention from those freely willing to give it. She’s not on tv, or in the newspapers, begging for cash, publicity and prizes.
YOU ARE GIVING HER YOUR ATTENTION. So if she clearly doesn’t want that from YOU, why are you fixated on this woman’s personal choices? Becuase she did it the not-GOOD old fashioned way? Because she has more healthy offspring than you? Because she qualified for student loans and FoodShare and disability? Because you don’t want to think of all the fraud and fatcats ripping you off, so you focus on this poor family?
*She made private decisions with public consequences. That makes it a public matter. This is not a private decision of a family who was prepared to sustain the family on their own.*
So does every woman who has a child and expects a tax credit, public education, or medical research dollars to go toward the raising of her child.
Again, she clearly was able to raise 6 without your help, and something tells me she can work within her budget to raise 14. Gifts from loving folks out here, and voluntary help from those who see children as a gift from God. Let it go this idea of yourself as a godfather to this family or taxpayer victim. You just don’t like the personal choices she made.
You clearly don’t have a grasp of logic. It shows when you struggle with the subtle trappings of logic. Your pony example pretty much proves my argument. I don’t have to give you a pony, but that doesn’t change your initial want from me. She wanted the public attention, whether each individual person ends up giving it or not. When someone doesn’t, it doesn’t eliminate her initial want.
Your analogy is also flawed. Tax credits and public education is an agreed system by everyone in the public. Everyone reaps the benefit. Furthermore, the responsible parents have resources to provide for the child in addition to the publicly agreed resources. What Nadya is doing is depending solely on personal governmental aid when she has no private resources.
Lastly, she did not raise the 6 kids herself. Her parents did. And according to her parents, she did not provide anything to helping them out. The house she lives in is also her parents. She bankrupted her parents through her first 6 children.
*I don’t have to give you a pony, but that doesn’t change your initial want from me.*
You misread: I don’t want a pony from you. I want a pony from XXXXXX. You’re just the guy who doesn’t think I deserve a pony, and guess what? I got one any way. But not from you. Nor do I expect you to pay for the stable costs or the feed. So no — never wanted a pony from you at all.
*Tax credits and public education is an agreed system by everyone in the public. *
Not by me. You sure do make a lot of assumptions in your “reasoning.”
LOL at the public schools providing benefits to society as a whole. You kidding me, right? Every American child born somehow benefits from ME the taxpayer. Good thing I don’t take it upon myself to tell women that 2 daughters is plenty — no more getting pregnant.
*Lastly, she did not raise the 6 kids herself. Her parents did. And according to her parents, she did not provide anything to helping them out. The house she lives in is also her parents.*
And the mother says she contributed. So one party is a lying — you conclude one, others conclude another. Guess what? Lots of grandparents provide for their children’s offspring. And they don’t need your permission either.
If they want to put her, and the children out, that is their CHOICE. But it is one they are not exercising, and it is a personal family choice.
Sorry — gotta go feed and play with my pony now.
You know what your problem is? It’s your presumptions that guide your argument, not the actual matter. Why bring up “my children”? I’m a PhD student, I don’t have children. Why bring up “good old fashioned ways”? That isn’t even my sentiment. The majority of your arguments have been ad hominem ones. Let the facts and explicit premises guide you, not your preconceptions.
You already admitted that she wants something, not nothing.
You’re caviling over semantics again over public agreement of public education, etc. Of course there will be individual disagreements, but it is law because the majority agreed it to be that way. I’m not here to debate whether public education should or should not be the case. The case is that public education exists as a publicly agreed system, not as a system approved by each and every individual.
Your grandparent comment proves nothing. It was simply a response to your comment that she raised them herself.
She has a very bad case of mental illness… And the state of California most make her pay for her stupidityyyyy.