Octuplets + 6 kids + No Job = Why Am I Paying For This?

[joeactor]

I cannot believe what some of you are posting...

People should be allowed to have as many children as they want. But they shouldn't get outside support/money. If they can't handle it then the children can be taken away and put into care/adoption or they may, unfortuantly, live a very harsh childhood. We can't sympathize for all of these people or their children as we then start to get caught up in this socialist mess to try and "fix" everything and make everything "good". It just doesn't work.

At the end of the day its a human right to have children. Its only because of the society that we have built up, that people can get away with having so many kids, and the fact that we have to support them is another "perk" of modern society. Blame the system.

... or not.

At some point, each of us needs to be responsible for not only our own actions, but that of our society, and humanity at large.  The environment, homeless, war, famine, disease, education, etc...  Many stem or are worsened by overpopulation, and our unwillingness to care for our fellow man.  At some point, each of us needs to look beyond our own selfish desires.

Sure, I can "afford" to have 117 kids myself, but that doesn't justify the strain it puts on our culture, society and planet.  Better that I adopt 117 orphans, or treat 117 homeless, or feed 117 hungry.

It's not a right.  It's a responsibility.  But only one of many that need to be weighed.

I think we've got enough humans at present.

It's time we start thinking about quality rather than quantity.

... or not.

[s0cks]

Again, its the system at fault. The system strips people of responsibility. You can have 117 kids because you'll get $400 a week for every child from the government (made up number - not sure of actual figure depending where you live). You'll get state housing, you'll get unemployment benefits, etc...

Now, take away the socialist "love" and yoyu have NO support. Suddenly its all up to you and you have no choice but to be responsible. It only puts strain on our society if we support it.

[Zephyr]

I think the idea of sterilizing everybody at a certain age is taking things a bit far... 'Brave New World' by Aldous Huxley ring a bell?
But I also think that allowing people to have as many children as they wish despite financial/living status is also a bit too much.
As with most everything, there needs to be a happy medium.

When it comes to having children, I think that as long as you can support each child adequately without help, then you're fine.
Prime example being the Duggars in Arkansas.
They can support their children on their own, no help needed, so why bother them as long as they can support their family?

And yes, there is the issue of population control.
But that's a whole other can of worms that I'm too tired to get into right now.

Bottom line, I don't support this if it's going to be coming out of the tax payer's pockets.
I didn't work my but off to have a good 25% of my earnings taken away to help someone who 'just wants to be a mother' live off of the  welfare system. I've seen too much abuse of the welfare system in this manner to be sympathetic in this subject. I am not fully sure of if this woman is on welfare or what, so I can't really give a fulll blown opinion.

 I am aware that it's not the children's fault in the least, but it's the parents who need to have the common sense of what they want vs. what is best.

[karadan]

I'm doing my part. I'm never having kids.

[VanReal]

I cannot believe what some of you are posting...

People should be allowed to have as many children as they want. But they shouldn't get outside support/money. If they can't handle it then the children can be taken away and put into care/adoption or they may, unfortuantly, live a very harsh childhood. We can't sympathize for all of these people or their children as we then start to get caught up in this socialist mess to try and "fix" everything and make everything "good". It just doesn't work.

At the end of the day its a human right to have children. Its only because of the society that we have built up, that people can get away with having so many kids, and the fact that we have to support them is another "perk" of modern society. Blame the system.

"Should be" and unfortunately you acknowledge the current state of our system.  And what about the rights of the children?  It's okay to continue having them when you can't properly support them emotionally or financially and they are better off being taken away and live through the "system"?  No, people should not have the right to have as many kids as they want, take a trip online through your local foster/adoption state agency and see all of the unwanted children (most of them with disabilities) and then say, "well the parents had the right to have them".  Hmmm.

[pedricero matao]

And what about the rights of the children?

That's the point.

At the end of the day its a human right to have children

This is true, but (in my opinion) rights and liberties must be taken with a responsibility. I mean, take freedom of speech for example. It's great to share your views publicly, but one must be responsible for what he/she says and accept the consequences.
Same with having children, one who insn't prepared to raise and properly educate (yes quite ambiguous terms but i think it's more or less clear) a kid shouldn't have one, mostly because you're going to make him/her go through a great deal of suffering and probably ruin his/her life, and it's really unfair make someone pay for your mistakes.
As for the issue with social security it'd be better if this thread didn't "evolve" into bashing the public health and social security system cos although there's obviously something wrong with someone in that situation being able to get all these treatments it's more a topic about personal responsibility/maturity than anything else, as i see it.

And hey, there are more things than money out there. I mean, I'm pretty sure that we all know some "spoiled rich kid" or something like that, unfortunately money is very (too much) important in this world, but isn't the only thing that counts.

Also, with all the hunger and poverty in the world, i'd rather adopt a kid and give him/her a home and chances to have a decent life and become what he/she wants or needs to be.

I hope you could understand my English.

EDIT: changed wrong quote

[s0cks]

A lot of people deem being financially secure as an indicator of being a suitable parent. Who is to say that the rich kid will have a better childhood than a close knit family who, at times, struggle to make ends meet? Money doesn't = happiness. Also, its more likely the child in the poorer family will learn some life lessons before the rich kid ever would.

And, we HAVE to bring the system into this discussion because it is clearly a MASSIVE influence on peoples decisions. The problematic families are those who KNOW they could not care for child, without support, but still have one anyway.

Yes, there will always be those children who are born unfairly and not raised properly, or discarded, but I fail to see anyway to deal with this completely without huge human rights infringments.

[VanReal]

And what about the rights of the children?

That's the point.

At the end of the day its a human right to have children

This is true, but (in my opinion) rights and liberties must be taken with a responsibility. I mean, take freedom of speech for example. It's great to share your views publicly, but one must be responsible for what he/she says and accept the consequences.
Same with having children, one who insn't prepared to raise and properly educate (yes quite ambiguous terms but i think it's more or less clear) a kid shouldn't have one, mostly because you're going to make him/her go through a great deal of suffering and probably ruin his/her life, and it's really unfair make someone pay for your mistakes.
As for the issue with social security it'd be better if this thread didn't "evolve" into bashing the public health and social security system cos although there's obviously something wrong with someone in that situation being able to get all these treatments it's more a topic about personal responsibility/maturity than anything else, as i see it.

And hey, there are more things than money out there. I mean, I'm pretty sure that we all know some "spoiled rich kid" or something like that, unfortunately money is very (too much) important in this world, but isn't the only thing that counts.

Also, with all the hunger and poverty in the world, i'd rather adopt a kid and give him/her a home and chances to have a decent life and become what he/she wants or needs to be.

I hope you could understand my English.

Understand it perfectly!  You and I are actually on the same page, the quote up there was, I was responding to that statement "human right to have children" as I don't agree.  (I think it was S0cks I was who said that, I'd have to go look.)

[VanReal]

A lot of people deem being financially secure as an indicator of being a suitable parent. Who is to say that the rich kid will have a better childhood than a close knit family who, at times, struggle to make ends meet?

Who said rich?  You are assuming being financially secure equals rich?  A family making ends meet is just fine, a women that does not work and lives off of ADC and food stamps is not.  If you are not responsible enough to take care of yourself why would you be responsible enough to take care of someone else, that's totally dependent?

Money doesn't = happiness. Also, its more likely the child in the poorer family will learn some life lessons before the rich kid ever would. And, we HAVE to bring the system into this discussion because it is clearly a MASSIVE influence on peoples decisions. The problematic families are those who KNOW they could not care for child, without support, but still have one anyway. Yes, there will always be those children who are born unfairly and not raised properly, or discarded, but I fail to see anyway to deal with this completely without huge human rights infringments.

We were dreaming of the perfect world, not that this would happen in reality....your point being one of the stumbling blocks that would be nearly impossible to overcome.  There are a lot of things we are prohibited to do that could be considered the same, we can physically have sex but that doesn't mean we can do it for profit (in most places at least) or do it when it's harmful to another, we can physically consume drugs but are limited to where, what and why. We can live with one kidney but can't sell it.  And can have babies for that matter but can't sell them. In some states you have to go to parenting classes if you have children prior to getting a divorce (true in Bell county, Texas) and you have to go through background checks and classes to adopt or foster.  Don't agree that just because naturally we can produce offspring means we should be able to do it at will.  I'm sure this comes from years of seeing absent parents throughout my son's school years.  Kids with parents that don't know or care where they are, me being the only one at the games in support, having his friends stay the night days on end because they are locked out and I never get so much as a call.  It's sad really, but suppose it's their right because they have sperm and ova.  

[pedricero matao]

Understand it perfectly! You and I are actually on the same page, the quote up there was, I was responding to that statement "human right to have children" as I don't agree. (I think it was S0cks I was who said that, I'd have to go look.)

OOOPS!!! SORRY about that!!! Screwed up big time. I'm gonna edit it  
Sorry again compadre

S0cks now i don't have much time to write something useful, i promise i'll answer very soon ok.

[pedricero matao]

Well first of  all sorry for taking so much time to answer, I have been quite busy lately.

A lot of people deem being financially secure as an indicator of being a suitable parent. Who is to say that the rich kid will have a better childhood than a close knit family who, at times, struggle to make ends meet? Money doesn't = happiness. Also, its more likely the child in the poorer family will learn some life lessons before the rich kid ever would.

Well that's more or less what I wanted to say. Having money is not the only requisite to raise a kid.

And, we HAVE to bring the system into this discussion because it is clearly a MASSIVE influence on peoples decisions. The problematic families are those who KNOW they could not care for child, without support, but still have one anyway.

So, just because some irresponsible woman who "wants to have babies", all the social security system must be abolished? Doesn't sound fair to me, only because there is a flaw in it (there's something wrong evidently, if some kind of background check or something like that had been made to ensure that woman was eligible for bringing up children, we wouldn't have this problem) it doesn't mean that someone who has a heart condition and has to undergo surgery must die if he can't afford it. That's cruel. Things like breast implants for aesthetical purposes (for example) would be something social security shouldn't take care of, but I'd rather not live in a country where you can only get decent medical treatment if you cannot afford it.
Look, there are some countries where we have a great national health system - despite some politicians' attempts to privatise all of it (same with water, public education etc) - and there isn't any big problem... maybe the thing is that some people want to make business with things that (IMHO) shouldn't be mixed with profit, because those are vital for everyone, not only for those who can pay for them.
And well, socialism has nothing to do with that (how come can something be "socialist" if there exists a private property of the means of production).
Now I want to apologise because my English got so sucky at this point...

The problematic families are those who KNOW they could not care for child, without support, but still have one anyway

That's where personal responsibility comes in... Honestly, I doubt that anyone who is thinking seriously of having children knows that they can't, or that they think "i'm not being able to raise a kid but hey the state will provide". I suppose those people just want to have children because "they are excited about having children" or "they are looking forward to having children" (I don't know how to say it in English, in Spanish it'd be something like "esque me hace mucha ilusión tener niños"), you know, a sort of childish caprice.

[cynthiak]

I feel bad for the kids plain and simple. This woman doesn’t seem to understand what she’s doing. I agree that she had a plan all along and it would be justice if she alone had to be accountable for the health and well-being of all her children. No help from anyone! What would she do then?

[Faithless]

Wow, I could go on for years about Octomom and what I think about her.  But I'll spare y'all and just give you the short version.

She's the most selfish, narcissistic, immature excuse for a woman I have ever seen.  She got around $165,000 as a workers comp settlement for a back injury which apparently was a legitimate injury.  However, instead of spending that money on living expenses, rent, food, all the necessities of life, she chose to use that money for IVF and plastic surgery.  Hell, I could have given her a fat lip in just a couple of seconds and absolutely free of charge with my fist!  And because of her "religious" views, she couldn't possibly leave those extra embryos frozen, oh noes!  They must all be born because they're already God's little children!

And her parents!  I see so many people feeling sorry for her parents.  As far as I'm concerned, they have done nothing but facilitate their daughter's irresponsible, selfish actions and deserve no sympathy from me or anyone else.  Even worse, after all this stuff, after her mother has spent years caring for her grandchildren in filthy conditions in a house much too small for the family, after her father has apparently arranged to go work in Iraq as some sort of truck driver to earn money to help feed this Octo-community, both parents, on news shows and Oprah, publicly bash their daughter!  WTF?  First they enable her, now they bash her.  Talk about one fucked up family.

And then Gloria Allred has to get into the limelight by trying to help.  And she did get some!  I can't remember the name of the organization, but they were willing to come into the home for a year and provide food, help, counseling, diapers, all kinds of aid to this woman.  They had a few criteria for this aid, something along the lines of mom getting a job or something (I can't remember but it was totally reasonable for care that would have ended up costing approximately $135,000 per MONTH).  But Octomom turned it down.  Apparently she'd rather have a movie or book deal.  Well, hello, no one wants to help her anymore because the public is so pissed about it.

Even better, she got about $400,000 for an interview or something.  But guess what she's doing with that money?  She's looking around the LA area for million dollar mansions to move her brood into!  But her folks' house is going into foreclosure because they couldn't afford to make the payments because they were feeding her frickin' kids.  Does she give them money to catch up?  NOOO!

There's so much more (911 tapes anyone?) but I'll start foaming at the mouth soon!

So here's what I think needs to happen.

1.  CPS definitely needs to get in there immediately and monitor this situation, and yank all the kids if necessary.  Personally I think they should all be yanked now.  It's obvious this family shouldn't be around any children.  The parents only had one, and look how she turned out!  I cant' even imagine the damage they can do to 14 helpless kids, some of them already disabled, and no one even knows the problems the new ones are going to have.

2.  Octomom needs to get some professional help.  She needs to be put away somewhere for awhile in a padded room.  She is seriously disturbed, and that fact alone should tell the state to take those kids out of there.

3.  She needs to be sterilized immediately.

4.  If she ever does work, her wages need to be garnished for the rest of her life to pay back the MILLIONS of dollars of medical care that my tax dollars are paying.

5.  And someone please fix those lips!  She does NOT look like Angelina Jolie, she never WILL look like her, those fat, deformed, slug-shaped lips need to go, and whoever injected those lips needs to be taken out back and shot.

I feel much better now!  

[joeactor]

Wow, Faithless - good thing that was the short version!

I hear you.  It gets worse with every news story.

Plastic surgery INDEED!

Enraged and Outraged,
JoeActor

[VanReal]

She got around $165,000 as a workers comp settlement for a back injury which apparently was a legitimate injury.  

I have serious doubt about the legitimacy of her workers' comp injury due to the fact that workers' comp only pays lumps sums to individuals that have received MMI (maximum medical improvement) with an IR (impairment rating) that is basically a rating issued by a physician that is the percentage of improvement, or the "best" that medical condition is ever going to get.  So, in order to receive an amount like she did the impairment rating had to make her a near cripple (so at least 40%) and I know she would not be able to carry 8 babies with that bad of a back and still be walking around and sitting for interviews with that bad of a back injury that is unrepairable and will never improve better than 60% mobility.  Hmmm.  [/quote]

Can't disagree with any of that.  She needs some serious help, but I fear if she were to get it she may realize the horrific decisions she's made and would then bail to start over.