Octuplets

Link Stats

Added By: Alex

Added on: 02/12/2009 @ 12:27:35 AM

Link View Count: 852

News
All Categories >> News

Rate this Link

Yours:

Rated 0 times.

I'm not sure what to think about this situation, on a number of levels. I don't think I approve of in vitro fertilization in the first place. And I really don't approve of one individual's actions placing such a cost on taxpayers, but there's really no punishment you can place on the woman that wouldn't indirectly be a punishment on the children (unless you can successfully make the argument that they'd be better off in foster care of some sort). To take it step further, even if her insurance covered all the costs would that really be fair to the insurance company and more importantly to the other policy holders that would inevitably be picking up her costs? For that matter, is there anything "fair" about insurance in the first place? How much more often would things like this happen if government health care/insurance programs were more widespread and easily available? Maybe before receiving fertility treatments such as this parent(s) should be forced to undergo the same vetting process (at the least) as potential adopting parents. The article mentions that this woman has a spokesman, how exactly did that happen? How does someone who received $165,000 for a back injury make it through an 8 baby pregnancy? Back to insurance, why oh why do states require insurance to cover infertility treatments? I actually have pretty decently priced insurance at work but I'd consider switching to an actual "major medical" policy just on principal if such a thing still exists. The last paragraph confounds me. She has $50,000 in student loans and her plan as a single mother of 14 is to go back to school, for of all things, a master's in counseling?
View External Link [news.yahoo.com]
Back to Link List

	Scott - 6225 Posts 02/12/2009 @ 07:28:39 AM
First off, major medical sucks, because an overnight stay in the hosptial for something completely not your fault could set you back close to $10,000. Trust me, I know.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 02/12/2009 @ 10:46:36 AM
I think you could make a pretty good argument for taking this woman's kids away. There is clearly something wrong with her, and even if there wasn't she's not going to be able to care for a classroom worth of kids. This is just going to be a downward spiral where we'll soon be paying for 3 of her 15 year old daughter's 7 kids. I don't remember where I heard the idea (for all I know it was one of you on here), and I know there are lots of reasons not to do it, and that Women's groups would shit a brick, but what about changing it so that the government will help you out with your kids, but in exchange for taking their money you also have to get your tubes tied. If you feel you aren't done having kids shouldn't the corollary be that you are then also saying you'll be able to pay for them yourself? The problem in all of this, like Alex mentioned, is there's nothing we can do about things like this that doesn't hurt the kids (and not all that indirectly) This woman is a leech, in every way imaginable, and the kids should be taken from her and given to people who have tried, unsuccessfully, to have children of their own. Ideally to parents who couldn't even have a baby via in vitro fertilization.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Carlos44ec - 2079 Posts 02/12/2009 @ 12:24:44 PM
Wait- did you suggest, or even hint at the suggestion, that people should seek government or agency approval for pregnancy vs. adopting? I suppose a screening/information session could be required as a step in the in vitro process, but does that infringe on some rights? I think part of the whole reason women have so many fertilized eggs (inplanted? inserted? deployed?) is because there's an x% chance in a successful pregnancy. In this case, if they [tried] 8 embryos and the hope was to get pregnant once, then of course 12.5%... yadda yadda... and this was an unexpected result. I think she should be checked mentally, and some state (not federal) agency should evaluate their ability to maitain a nurturing and healthy environment. 10 kids? 12 kids? Anyone ever hear of strict Catholic families doing this all the time?		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Micah - Bring me the finest muffins and bagels in all the land. 02/12/2009 @ 12:34:01 PM
I think its ridiculous to want another kid when you already have 6. Why not take the 200K or whatever it costs to raise a child these days and take the kids you already have to Disneyland or something.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 02/12/2009 @ 01:26:02 PM
Big Catholic families are another problem altogether. By the time kid #9 comes kid #1 is old enough to be co-mom/co-dad. So instead of selfishly putting the burden of their kids on society, they selfishly put the burden on their other kids. Having 8 kids all the same age is different. I'm not sure her having octuplets is a "freak chance". The reason normal people to this is because there's an actual problem that stops them from conceiving normally. They put a lot in in the hopes any at all take. It's not generally done on crackpot liars who can give birth perfectly well on their own, so there's no way of knowing how much, if at all, this "beats the odds." Besides, even if she just had one more kid it was 3 too many. I never suggested anything like "government approval" for responsible people having a kid. It's another matter altogether if you plan on raising your child using public money. If you have 2-3 kids already, and the government is paying for them, and now a fourth is on the way it seems like at some point we should be able to say, "this is enough." These programs are important in that they do help people that just fell into some crappy luck, it seems like we should be able to do something about the (relatively few) people who are trying to make a business out of having kids.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Jeremy screwed with this 2 times, last at 02/12/2009 1:26:47 pm

	Alex - 3619 Posts 02/12/2009 @ 01:31:25 PM
Carlos44ec Wrote - Today @ 12:24:44 PM I think she should be checked mentally, and some state (not federal) agency should evaluate their ability to maitain a nurturing and healthy environment. 10 kids? 12 kids? Anyone ever hear of strict Catholic families doing this all the time? One key difference is family. Simply have 2 parents doubles the parent/child ratio. + what Jeremy said about spreading them out. I think you could draw a line between natural pregnancy and "assisted" pregnancy and toss "assisted" into the same bucket as adoption.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 1 times.

	Carlos44ec - 2079 Posts 02/12/2009 @ 01:36:55 PM
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 01:26:02 PM I never suggested... Probably not, I haven't gotten to your post yet- I was commenting on Alex's main comment.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Carlos44ec - 2079 Posts 02/12/2009 @ 01:38:46 PM
Micah Wrote - Today @ 12:34:01 PM I think its ridiculous to want another kid when you already have 6. You're right, I think she's nuts and that many kids is completely redonkulous. I wish there were some kind of limitation on how many kids you could have but would hope it was a self-imposed common-sense thing as opposed to something similar to what the Chinese have/had.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Carlos44ec - 2079 Posts 02/12/2009 @ 01:39:26 PM
Alex Wrote - Today @ 01:31:25 PM Carlos44ec Wrote - Today @ 12:24:44 PM I think she should be checked mentally, and some state (not federal) agency should evaluate their ability to maitain a nurturing and healthy environment. 10 kids? 12 kids? Anyone ever hear of strict Catholic families doing this all the time? One key difference is family. Simply have 2 parents doubles the parent/child ratio. + what Jeremy said about spreading them out. I think you could draw a line between natural pregnancy and "assisted" pregnancy and toss "assisted" into the same bucket as adoption. Yessir, I agree.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Micah - 584 Posts 02/12/2009 @ 01:51:35 PM
Carlos44ec Wrote - Today @ 02:38:46 PM You're right, I think she's nuts and that many kids is completely redonkulous. I wish there were some kind of limitation on how many kids you could have but would hope it was a self-imposed common-sense thing as opposed to something similar to what the Chinese have/had. I think your use of "redonkulous" is ridiculous. While not everyone has weighed in, I do believe this may be an issue everyone agrees upon (at least the stupidity of the lady, not necessarily restricting children)		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.
Micah screwed with this at 02/12/2009 1:53:24 pm

	Jeremy - Cube Phenomenoligist 02/12/2009 @ 01:56:30 PM
I know, right? It takes some really bad things to unify our ire as a population. This lady is at about an 8 on the zero to 9/11 scale. (.72727272?)		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Carlos44ec - Since 1980! 02/12/2009 @ 05:42:39 PM
You know what I hate? People who find it necessary to say, "I know, right?" let alone people who need to type it.		Rate this comment Yours: Total: Rated 1 times.

	PackOne - 1528 Posts 02/12/2009 @ 09:01:55 PM
My google reader is blowing up and we are talking about this. I am the one that said people should be forced to get a license before having kids. I still propose that. It's on the can, I am too lazy to look for it. Saving it up for the season.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - Broadcast in stunning 1080i 02/12/2009 @ 10:06:22 PM
Well, that's not what I was referencing.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	PackOne - It's a sin that somehow, light is changing to shadow. 02/12/2009 @ 10:23:45 PM
Well, I was talking to the other people on this site.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Carlos44ec - A Vote for me is a Vote against Terrorism! ...or atleast just wasted. 02/13/2009 @ 08:11:50 AM
Carlos44ec Wrote - Yesterday @ 05:42:39 PM You know what I hate? People who find it necessary to say, "I know, right?" let alone people who need to type it. I don't hate the people I just really dislike west-coast/wannabe west-coast lingo. Turd me if you like, but you gotta live with that mouth.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Carlos44ec - 2079 Posts 02/13/2009 @ 08:13:15 AM
Jeremy Wrote - Yesterday @ 10:06:22 PM Well, that's not what I was referencing. I made reference to the topic, as Alex made a slightly like-minded suggestion in the main topic paragraph at top.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Jeremy - 9543 Posts 02/13/2009 @ 09:56:29 AM
Carlos44ec Wrote - Today @ 08:11:50 AM Carlos44ec Wrote - Yesterday @ 05:42:39 PM You know what I hate? People who find it necessary to say, "I know, right?" let alone people who need to type it. I don't hate the people I just really dislike west-coast/wannabe west-coast lingo. Turd me if you like, but you gotta live with that mouth. Well, I said it to be semi ironic, but now that I know it makes you this mad I'll have to say it more.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.

	Alex - Who controls the past now controls the future 02/13/2009 @ 01:45:09 PM
Carlos44ec Wrote - Today @ 08:11:50 AM Carlos44ec Wrote - Yesterday @ 05:42:39 PM You know what I hate? People who find it necessary to say, "I know, right?" let alone people who need to type it. I don't hate the people I just really dislike west-coast/wannabe west-coast lingo. Turd me if you like, but you gotta live with that mouth. One time on Yahoo! chat I accused someone of speaking Calinese.		Rate this comment Yours: Rated 0 times.