Comments on: Octuplet Mom, Nadya Suleman, Speaks For The First Time

By: Maggi

Maggi — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 02:27:35 +0000

Too many, and way too much! This is one of the most selfish girls (not a woman) I’ve ever read about! I don’t want my tax dollar spent on her, and her dream fantasies but it will be! Many of us have wanted a large family and we realistically adjust to what we can afford, what are body will produce through God’s will, and consideration for the planet and the population that already exist. Many of us love babies but why didn’t she adopt a dozen! If she even considered it, and I’m sure there are realistic limits for such a single Mom, it wouldn’t be allowed! What about the “goofy ” Dr. that helped her. They got their names on TV etc. It is disgusting! Please no more publicity but then how is she going to support them except through the “dole” and publicity! A true “leach” who should have had a psychiatric exam!

By: sheena

sheena — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 19:33:26 +0000

There are so many children in the world already who need a home. it is so selfish that instead of helping them she *needs* her own so badly. She couldnt get pregnant and that is sad yes, but also means something. like parents with diseases who have kids anyway passing the disease on instead of adopting a needy child. it is tunnel vision, overlooking the systems they tax, the poor life they give their children and the home they could have given others. it’s like buying from the pet store when there are animals dying at the SPCA. Not to mention the tax on the environment. environmentalists are saying that any efforts we are making to reverse global warming are being cancelled out by the growth of the population. Here I am (and many other good, educated people) trying to decide the costs of having one child, can we properly provide? How will this effect our world at this time, are their other children who need my love? And then selfish women like this just go and ruin all our good work. She said she is trying to find something she missed in her childhood buy having children…….that is not ok to put that on her children, she is the mother, she needs to be a complete and healthy person BEFORE she has kids, because she needs to be their support, not the other way around. sheesh.

By: amy

amy — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 20:19:16 +0000

EXACTLY, why arent people calling her on the angelina thing! shes like an obsessed fan!

By: kk

kk — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 19:37:44 +0000

and she totally is trying to be angelina… in addition to her nose, her lips look way over-plumped and why is her hair in her face?

By: kk

kk — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 19:33:38 +0000

1: who paid for her nose job?
2:sack the dr. who twice implanted 6 eggs for this nutcase
3: if she thinks that people only have a problem with her because she’s a single mom then she’s dumber than we all thought

By: Lolly

Lolly — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 06:54:27 +0000

People who are making comments about regulating all of this are FLYING DOWN the slippery slope of turning us into the People’s Republic of CHINA.

By: bb

bb — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 06:51:17 +0000

two things are evident: (1) the state CAN’T & SHOULDN’T interfere w/ her having these (or more) kids. That being said, (2) her statements and actions ALONE warrant a good looking into by the Department of Family and Children Services.

By: Basil

Basil — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 05:15:01 +0000

Umm, how does she think she’s going to get by without taking welfare? If Kaiser Permanente is footing the hospital bill, she’s kind of already going that route… She might say that now but the money is going to have to come from somewhere and we know she’s not working right now. ;) To think that raising children (much less a LITTER) is no big deal is ridonkulous. I guess 8 newborns would go through something like 72 diapers a DAY. How does she plan on paying for that (on top of everything else)? I’d bet anyone $50 she’ll most certainly be on public assistance.

By: Ren

Ren — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 04:51:56 +0000

She keeps saying that she is able to support her children now…but what happens later when the kids are grown and have to go to college/university? who will pay for that? As well as, how about individual attention? Honestly it doesn’t seem like she has fully thought this through…

By: Michelle

Michelle — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 04:31:00 +0000

Ok so let me see if I get this straight. I’ve read several other news reports of her interview and if what I think is true, she has 6 other children who are all under 7, I’m assuming from the age she is now and the year she is listed as having her first child that they are all about a year/year and a half apart. She’s divorced (so are all 6 of those kids with her ex-husband or are some from in vitro?) and she went and had in vitro done ALONE and asked them to implant all of the embryos. And throughout all of this not a single health professional thought to stop and maybe do a more comprehensive examination of her? CLEARLY this woman is suffering from issues with her childhood, work history, relationship and so on and someone actually allowed her to try and well obviously successfully concieve 8 babies? It’s completely unbelievable. How does she make enough money to fully support these kids? How can she feel that as one person she can handle all of these kids by herself? Amazing…

but you know if she can’t handle them all she should give Jessica Simpson a call, she’s been having a rough time lately and she’s wanted to be a mom, maybe she can help… Brangelina don’t seem to have enough arms to carry all of their kids anymore!

By: Carolyn

Carolyn — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 02:55:08 +0000

She does look like Jolie. This woman needs a serious, serious psych eval. What a NUT.

By: Cornfused

Cornfused — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 02:50:56 +0000

It’s my hope that the state steps in an does a complete evaluation of this woman. Mentally, she is unstable and I fear for all her children. I have two beautiful children and went through years of infertility and heartache to have them. I thank God for the experts who helped me and my partner have our kids….this woman needs help…fast!

By: janelle

janelle — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 01:42:03 +0000

true, good for her she’s not going on welfare anytime soon, and that she’s independent and taking care of her children with the help of others. however, she’s stated in this interview that she was an only child and acknowledges the fact she was an only child which helped stem the desire to have a large family. if she can recognize that issue she should most certainly have been responsible to plan a life for her children, so they could grow up in a home where financial issues wouldn’t have been a problem. if not that, then the fact that taxes are going to be taken into account. there’s so many things at stake here. it’s no place for the government to decide on our family situations, but there is something for the individual to decide on what’s healthy. she may appear stable in her interview, but many people do who aren’t in the head. i have no doubt she truly will love each and every one unconditionally, but this is not healthy at all.

By: Canadian

Canadian — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 01:03:29 +0000

Umm, did anybody even watch the interview, ratehr than reading points of it. She made it very very clear that she WILL NOT BE GOING ON WELFARE ANYTIME SOON, AND THAT SHE WILL GET THROUGH THIS THROUGH THE HELP OF HER PARENTS AND FAMILY AND FRIENDS. Geez yall, and i think kudos to her for being a strong independent women, and being very optimistic about whats ahead of her. Instead of focusing on a lady with 14 kids, the government should focus on the medical system, the crimes going on the states, or figuring out how to get out the recession that yall are in.

By: Catlee

Catlee — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 23:43:10 +0000

As a lower elementary teacher, I can tell you that there is a lot more that children require beyond their basic fundamental needs. I can’t begin to express the sadness I feel when I think of those children, as their mother cannot possibly even begin to give them everything they need psychologically and emotionally. This is just a tremendously disappointing situation. It occurred due to a perfect storm of loose medical ethics, a media environment that glamorizes and minimizes the enormous responsibilities associated with multiple births (Jon & Kate) and a system that allows financial support to people who have more children than they can afford. I truly feel the frustrations of those of you who expressed concern about affording even one child. My husband and I will have our first child in August but my husband is losing his job in a few weeks. We are worried but committed to taking care of this baby as best we can. I know that the children you all eventually have will be lucky enough to be wanted and adequately cared for.

By: Elkay

Elkay — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 23:29:54 +0000

I agree that the US government, or any government for that matter, should not be allowed to decide how many children a person is allowed to have or adopt BUT I do see it as a ethical issue on an individual level. Like you said, this woman seems to be a little…well, she has some issues. Most people in their organized mind have the sense not to have that many children if they are unable to support them financially. I think it’s great that this woman wants to be there for her kids and give them the love and attention all children deserve, but there are some other needs that must be met (Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs!). Look at the Duggars. Yeah, they have 18 kids…but they have money and, so they claim, have never been in debt or had to take out a loan. They’re a family that has been very careful with their money – something very smart and keeping in mind for their kids.

By: Lin

Lin — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 23:02:43 +0000

Hello!!! She looks like a drag queen! (not that there’s anything wrong with that)… Calpernia Addams, anyone?

By: Liz

Liz — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 22:15:35 +0000

I agree that if this woman wanted to have a large family that adoption should have been the way to go. Or, perhaps one or two children of her own. Fourteen children under the age of seven is insane. This seems to be all about her and how telling the media her story will get her money, a spot on Oprah, and endorsements. What about the children? What about clothing, food, and education? What about love and attention? It is sad that for one woman to irresponsibly try to achieve her dream that so many others are stuck with the problems that arise from it.
To Chris, I also hope that her family is watched closely by Child Services!

By: Chris

Chris — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 21:47:57 +0000

This reminds me of the lady in Phoenix who had, maybe, 6 babies at once in addition to her toddler. She got lots of loot, but I remember thinking, “Who the hell is going to help her take care of all these kids?” as her husband worked a lot of hours to help pay for them. Well, she ended up in jail after abusing them horribly because “They wouldn’t stop crying.” Hope CPS keeps a CLOSE eye on this chick.

(You’re doing the right thing, Tatiana. You’ll make a good RESPONSIBLE parent some day. Hope it’s soon!)

By: Hannah

Hannah — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 21:21:23 +0000

I agree with you Trent. on the one hand there is something very wrong with the situation, but we can’t dictate to people how many kids they are allowed to have.

It makes me sad, because me and my husband have talked about children but know right now money would be an issue so are going to wait, unfortunately while we wait we get to pay the taxes for this women to neglect her 14.

I also feel sorry for the sperm donor of all 14. as it says up there that they used the same father and he knows. Bet this wasn’t what he bargained for.

By: Megan

Megan — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 20:55:56 +0000

Kaiser Permanente (where she had the babies) has already said they will be footing the bill for the medical costs associated with the octuplets’ births. That means that I, a Kaiser Permanente insured person, will be helping to foot the bill… This is generally known as welfare… It is irresponsible, not only from the standpoints previously put up on this board, but from an environmental standpoint as well… There will be 14 baths daily (just for her kids) and it is likely they won’t all share the same bathwater. Fourteen kids have to eat, putting further strain on the earth to produce this food. It may not seem like a big deal when we’re only talking about 14 children, but if others did the same thing we would have a population explosion. We can’t afford the people already living in this country let alone each of those people having fourteen children… okay, I’ll stop ranting now, but IRRESPONSIBLE all around!

By: wendy

wendy — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 20:04:14 +0000

@Amy…Ann Curry went to LA to interview the crazy lady. It was on the local news and on the Today show that she was on the west coast. The interview continues on Monday.

So we’ll all be talking about this for awhile.

By: Jessica

Jessica — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 19:52:06 +0000

WOW!! She’s deffo had her lips done and her nose. I think that mental institution made her a little loco.

By: Amy

Amy — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 19:42:09 +0000

This woman is batshit crazy. Between the ethical issues involved and the fact she wants to make money off of this, which I think was a big factor in her doing it. She does seem to have a Angelina complex among her many issues. Then there is the money issue. If she can take care of them on her own with no help from the state and no help from anything but her job, then fine go for it, but shut your trap about it. Why is this woman doing interviews in NYC, when her babies are in the hospital in California. That right there should tell you well her priorities are.

By: meh

meh — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 19:38:21 +0000

what an attention seeker… she seems the type that wants to make money off her interview and book deals