0 votes

rhino: I see the following topic in the same view that I viewed the FLDS issue

I don't care what you think about the mom. She is the mom and has done nothing illegal. This is rediculous if it is true ...

And for the record ...

I publicly stated that I would be willing to sacrifice my life if it was to ensure that those FLDS kids were to be reunited with their parents...

Octuplet mom fears hospital may not release babies

LOS ANGELES (AP) - Nadya Suleman has voiced concern that the hospital where her octuplets are being cared for may prevent her from taking them home when they're healthy enough in coming weeks. But in reality, hospitals don't prevent healthy children from going home - child protective services do.

And that's only if a complaint has been filed. Hospital employees are mandated to report to county authorities any concerns they have about unsuitable home environments, a mother's emotional or psychological instability, or any other situation that could result in harm to a child.

According to talk show host Dr. Phil McGraw, the 33-year-old unemployed mother called him Tuesday and said hospital officials were worried that her current living arrangement wouldn't be suitable.

Stu Riskin, a spokesman for Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services, said the agency cannot comment specifically on Suleman's situation and could not confirm whether a case had been opened on her family.

...

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090226/D96J0F0O0.html




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Why is no one wanting to see

Why is no one wanting to see the DR who implanted her with these embryos prosecuted? If I were the judge sitting in on a trial to decide how to place these children I would make the MD pay for their support until all are 18 and let the mother raise them. We keep focusing on the sperm and egg donors. In this case the father really is the MD who implanted her and used the technology to create the inflamed issue and bring these babies unnaturally in this world. By doing this all would be taken care of. The only oversight would be the govt making sure father science pays but mom gets to raise her kids. The precedence of such a legal move will prevent a lot of other MD's doing such an unethical thing. Why isn't HE protected? I still think it's fishy that this happened at all and while I can prove nothing, the whole thing gives me the utter creeps and I pray for those kids and their mom.

1- The Doctor did nothing

1- The Doctor did nothing wrong. No laws were broken.
2- The mother did nothing wrong. No laws were broken.
3- It's not the government's business
4- It's not our business.

This is the fundamental problem with people. They cannot let other people be free to do as they wish. All this arm-chair-quarterbacking from the peanut gallery is the catalyst for tyrannical, big government, socialist/communist ideologies. Aren't we all fighting for more freedom and less intrusion into our lives?

Why can freedom only be linked to arbitrary lines in the sand of the what people perceive is right or wrong? Remember, perception is reality. What you perceive to be true, maybe not what I perceive to be true. The only equal way to resolve this fact, is for both of us to be free to choose without interference.

We need to be more libertarian and less authoritarian. If we continue on the same path we'll have mandatory baby laws and parenting standards where your kids can be taken away at the whim of a CPS agent following said standards.

It's none of our business, leave them alone, or be prepared to suffer the resulting legislation that will continue to grow and encroach on our freedoms.

Sorry, bit of a rant. :)

www.coinaxis.com - ~ Learn more about bitcoin/litecoin, and how they relate to the liberty movement.

I don't

think she should have been inseminated(what did that cost and why would any doctor in thier right mind do it under those circumstances) but If the press wasn't crucifying the woman the 8 babies would be a sensation and everyone would be donating money and baby supplies or volunteering to help any way they could. Others that have had mutiple births by artificial means have become famous and proffited from it. She should be able to do the same and not have to depend on welfare. Unfortunatley it is doubtful because of the negetive press. Doctor Phil makes his proffits from these kinds of stories. Did he make an outcry to the public or companies that make baby supplies to help? Normally they would be donating for the advertisment. What is important is the care of those babies not the condemnation of the mother. You can judge her mental health but can't you do that with all that use artificial means and have mutiple births and decide to keep them all and risk seriuos problems for the children and themselves? Just another way to look at it. I don't agree with her having had artificial insemination ( or whatever it was)but that is done. If money is the only reason for taking the babies away that is wrong even if what she did was stupid IMO. That is wrong. You don't take peoples children because they are poor. The taxpayer shouldn't pay but how about all of these pro lifers. Time to step up and help out. Or should they make the decision wether or not she keeps her living children too? Just some thoughts.People should help people of thier own free will not be forced to by taxation. It has been proven in history that they usually will. If you are pro choice you should understand she made her choice and you should respect that also. Even if you think it was unwise. But I think you should have a choice on wether or not to support it financially.

All the comments are

All the comments are painting this as a black and white issue and I assure you it is not.

let's take the personal freedom/none of my business issue : Here is my problem with that argument. If she was paying for her children herself then you are correct it is none of my business and she is free to do what she wishes so long as she doesn;t not harm anyone else or anyones property; however, If Tax dollars are paying for these kids then it becomes my business. With personal freedom comes personal responsbility, She is getting welfare and that makes it my business. Why should anyone else have to pay for her children if they choose not too?

The issue of the governement shouldn't be involved : this is also not black and white. What is the primary role of governement? To protect LIFE, LIBERTY and PROPERTY. If someone is to be harmed by any of these 3 issues then yes goverment has the obligation to do something.

God gave her 8 babies : This to me is black and white - As a devoted christian I disagree with this statement. God did not give her 8 babies SCIENCE gave her 8 babies and there is a big difference here. She did not conceive naturally, science impregnated her not a man. Science took her EGGS - FROZE THEM - then injected sperm into them. this was in no way divine intervention.

God would not of let her have 8 babies if he didn't want her to have them : I disagree again. If you understand the bible you will see that there are many things god DOES NOT WANT TO HAPPEN but they happen. Does anyone really believe that a child dying in a car accident while the mother lives is what God wanted? God has armies of angels and to think he needed this child as another angel in his army is absurd.

What about the children and people around the world involved in this war. Do you honestly believe that God wants these people blown apart and have to suffer in great pain for weeks until they die?

What about genocide, God wants that? Women being raped while their nipples are being bitten off is what God wants?

How about our war vets that come home after what they have seen? You really believe that this was a purpose of God? The list goes on and on.

If you really believe that God wants these things to happen then what role does Satan play; For if you actually believe this than Satan would not exist.

Not everything is black and white and the sooner we understand this and actually understand our rights and the constitution the sooner we can actually make the changes that need to be done in this country but until then we will not accomplish very much.

www.retakecongress.com

www.rtrradio.com

Do you blame the state and

Do you blame the state and the welfare/tax system? Or do you blame the recipients? Is one recipient better or more deserving than the next? Don't get mad because you are paying taxes to fund welfare recipients. Get mad at you paying taxes for welfare programs. In a way, by justifying the "Recipient" then you are endorsing the welfare/tax system.

I still maintain, it's none of anyone's business. This is all an assumption that she will not be able to take care of her children. Maybe we should shut up and give her a shot at it. Just sayin'

www.coinaxis.com - ~ Learn more about bitcoin/litecoin, and how they relate to the liberty movement.

Yes I blame both the state

Yes I blame both the state and the mother.

Personal freedom also comes with personal responsibility.

It absolutely is my business when my tax dollars being stolen from me to pay for 14 children she cant afford to raise. How can you say it isn't anyone elses business?

www.retakecongress.com

www.rtrradio.com

How about if the state cut

How about if the state cut her off? (as they should). If she cannot provide for her children on her own, then there are other options such as adoption.

Personal freedom does come with responsibility. Why don't you give her a chance first? Let her be responsible, if she fails the kids will be adopted out to those who can take care of them.

Just because your tax dollars go to welfare programs, does not mean that you can set the standards over the crackheads receiving welfare to a mother of 14. Welfare is welfare. It's the welfare program that is the problem, not the recipients. That's like blaming the individual military soldier for killing in Iraq, when the military shouldn't be there in the first place.

We can compare this with any taxpayer funded public program. There are millions who don't contribute, yet reap the rewards. I know, I know, you'll give me an excuse why we need to extend the reach to the non-taxpayers to make it more fair, right? How about we abolish the program altogether? :)

www.coinaxis.com - ~ Learn more about bitcoin/litecoin, and how they relate to the liberty movement.

Read below your comment

Read below your comment where Rhino is asking me for my comment and then see what I said. You assume I want to or have the state do anything at this point and why? I have never made such a comment.

www.retakecongress.com

www.rtrradio.com

Come on patriot ...

I am willing to concede any and all of those arguements ...

The bottom line ...

State or mother?

Which side do you fall?

Let's say that she is a retarded female with a 3rd grade education and she has no option but to be on welfare and disability for the rest of her life.

Or ....

Let's say that we are now in the future and there is no safety net what so ever, she is retarded, she was insiminated by force by a sadistic fertility doctor.

Or ...

take your pick ... put any facts in there you want.

Just leave the fact that she is the biological mother and she wants to raise the kids.

What say you?

WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994

I haven't taken any sides at

I haven't taken any sides at this point that will be up to the mother to do the right thing and support her family as is her obligation not mine.

Sadistic doctors? You are reaching beyond the scope of my comments.

Goverment has the obligation to protect life, liberty and property as to when do they need to step in to protect these rights? I don't know, again that will depend on the actions of the mother.

www.retakecongress.com

www.rtrradio.com

O.K. then ...

Hey People

Hey people. I dont understand why you have to worry about that woman and her babies. Who cares. It is not our business what she is doing.

And some of you said that child abuse. I dont think it is child abuse. If it would be a child abuse and it would be abortion. And she refuse to abort and I applaud for her doing the right thing. It is done. God allowed her to have 8 babies. It is always a reason for that. God will stop her from having 8 babies. But for some reason He wants her to have 8 babies. And I dont care.

I would love to have BUNCH of babies to overpopulated in USA. I dont mind. Becuz the children are wonderful to have. Yes we should have freedom. That is what it is suppose to be about. I dont care if people wants to have large families and that is freedom. Okay.. If people wants to have gun in their home and that is freedom also. There is sooo much about freedom.

Come on and think about freedom. Dont let the govt take over this and tell us what to do. It is same idea about having families. I dont want to see this usa becomes like china. I dont want that happened.

It is so sad to see people dont care but themselves. Come on and think about freedom and for children's sake. Good Luck!

I would like to know why is

I would like to know why is it most freedom folk cannot look beyond the first glance on this issue, and see what it is really about? Why do we say we are for individuals' freedom, yet first chance we get, we are meddling in someone else's personal life? It sickens and saddens me that nearly every time a subject like this is brought up, so many in the group, fall for the same tactics and think the way the most of the general public does who is still being fed all the lies-have we learned nothing at all since we began listening to Ron Paul? Look folks if you can't put your own personal feelings aside on things like this, and make a stand for what is right according to the Constitution, you don't have a single hope to stand up for more issues in the future. Lets keep our heads on straight and not fall for the tactics being used on the general public-you have to realize, if it is acceptable to condemn and take her children, because she has used the programs that were available, it will also be acceptable at some later date to infringe on your own personal choices, for some other trumped up reason.

The FLDS folks took taxpayer money for their kids?

I guess I never heard that. I don't mind people taking public assistance when they fall on hard times, but Ms Suleman went and got multiple embryos implanted in her when she KNEW she would need public assistance to feed, clothe and shelter them. VERY different situation. Half of "LIBERTY" is about our rights, the other half is about our RESPONSIBILITIES. The FLDS folks took responsibility for their own, Ms. Suleman PLANNED on charity to survive. That is "entitled" mentality, not liberty-loving.

Truth exists, and it deserves to be cherished.

Where is she getting money

Where is she getting money for all that botox? She is obviously deranged. she told her mother she had a tumor and wasn't pregnant. This is one case where I don't mind a little investigation. I know it's a slippery slope.

I really don't understand

where some of you people on this thread are coming from !

You say it's none of our business.
You say it's not the government's business.
You say this woman should be just left alone, to do whatever she wants with these children.

If she were to take these 8 new children home, and stack them in the corner like cordwood, and let them starve to death because she cannot provide for them, ...

Is it really nobody's business ?

Who cares about these kids ?

There's 14 of them now ! And it's nobody's business, except for this spaced-out mother ?

First ....

if that happens ... the death penalty would be way too comfortable in my opinion.

What if these kids grow up to be the John Galt's of the future ... because of how they were raised.

I care deeply about the kids ...

That is exactly why I think they should stay with their mother.

WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994

OK, rhino, this is getting personal now.

I come from a family of 7, who were abandoned by our parents when I was 3 years old.
We became wards of the state.
It wasn't a lot of fun growing up, but we all grew up to be productive, tax-paying members of society.
Are you saying we should have been left on our own, in an abandoned rental, to fend for ourselves, and IF WE HAD DIED from neglect .... then our parents should have been punished ?

Get a grip on reality ! There are 14 kids here who need help !

And you blather on about FREEDOM !

GIVE YOUR F%*KING HEAD A SHAKE !!!!!!

Yes, I'm yelling - I'm getting really angry with some of you people with your head up your ass !!

What if ... what if ... they grow up to be John Galts ? How the hell are they going to grow up without some help ?

that has NOT happened...yet.

and while it appears quite likely that it will happen, preemptively jumping in would be wrong.
growing up poor, will not hurt these or any other kids.
I think Rhino's point is that it needs to play out, charity is best done by those closest to the situation, NOT the gubermint.

" the important thing is to never stop questioning, curiousity, has it's own reason for existing..
Albert Einstien

Right, HVACTech !

Nothing has happened yet ... it's appears quite likely something will happen ... but let's not do anything pre-emptively about the welfare of these kids, at this time.
But, IF, down the road, some of these kids start dying off from neglect, THEN something should be done !
Sorry, but I see you as another person with their head up their ass !

I have sympathy for your journey ...

and I am glad you all made it out and are successful ...

but this woman is not abandoning her children.

On the contrary ...

She claims she would do anything for them.

Again ... I think you are off topic.

If you want anecdotal evidence ...

just research the probabilities of what is going to happen to these kids if they become wards of the state vs. staying with their single parent.

Their chances of success are increased dramatically if they stay with their mother.

They will not be left alone ...

They will have their mother, and family, and friends.

What if they become foster children ...

Is it possible that they could become physically abused and killed by them? If so, is that a greater possibility than the same fate at the hands of their mother?

We had a local case here a few years back when an autistic child was left in a locked closet for the weekend by his foster parent and he died. So, they decided to burn the body in a fire pit to get rid of the evidence and claimed that he was kidnapped.

His biological mother was retarded ... and was forced to give up the child. The retarded mother had a network of parents and friends that could have helped raise the child.

Do you think Marcus would have been better off with his retarded mother?

WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994

My last comment on this

I don't need anecdotal evidence ... I have lived it !
This woman says she loves her kids.
She does not want to abandon them.
This woman, living in some dream world, says she will do anything for her kids ... but she's incapable of providing for them !
As a compassionate society, we have to provide for these 14 kids, whose mother cannot !

Then get involved and help them out ...

If I had my choice between the lesser of evils ...

I would rather have my tax dollars help this mother and her children ....

than help the state confiscate these kids.

While it sends a wrong message to the mother ...

It furthers the cause of freedom ... a greater cause.

WAHOR!!
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/48994

Did you mean you'd rather

Did you mean you'd rather have your "donations" help her? Why do you want taxpayer dollars going to assist her?
..................
"The main thing that I learned about conspiracy theory is that conspiracy theorists actually believe in a conspiracy because that is more comforting. The truth of the world is that it is chaotic..." —Alan Moore

..................
"The main thing that I learned about conspiracy theory is that conspiracy theorists actually believe in a conspiracy because that is more comforting. The truth of the world is that it is chaotic..." —Alan Moore

reedr3v's picture

My only concern would be for the kids.

Already the multiple babes were born weak and premature. They may suffer ongoing health problems, and seem to have the misfortune of only one parent with poor judgment. That's a lot of bad luck to start life with; I'd be happy to see people charitable to them.
Of course it is not the State's business in any way. Parents' rights are important, but the childrens' rights would be my first concern. When children are taken by the State, they often go to foster homes or institutions where they are treated very badly, frightened, traumatized from loss of their parents and by feeling deprived of any control or rights over their own lives.
Even though the mother may be a total flake, there is no reason to imagine some State-appointed foster situation would be any better.
Life is not fair. All I can see is for people to freely choose to help when they see an opportunity to do so.

I may be alone in thinking

I may be alone in thinking this, but...

I'm a bit disturbed at the use of the term "Octo-Mom" by people and the press to describe this woman. It reminds me of Nazi propaganda demonizing Jews and comparing them to rats and disease. The moniker is dehumanizing and it's a disgusting display of "gang" mentality that seems to permeate our society.
..................
"The main thing that I learned about conspiracy theory is that conspiracy theorists actually believe in a conspiracy because that is more comforting. The truth of the world is that it is chaotic..." —Alan Moore

..................
"The main thing that I learned about conspiracy theory is that conspiracy theorists actually believe in a conspiracy because that is more comforting. The truth of the world is that it is chaotic..." —Alan Moore

That's quite a stretch, Jesse

Drawing a comparison between a nickname "Octo-Mom" and demonizing Jews, and rats, and disease.

You must have had a sleepless night to come up with that one !

Heaven forbid someone should refer to a mother of quadruplets as "Quad-Mom".

Or ... lordy, lordy ...

calling the mother of sextuplets ......... "Sex-Mom" ! !
.
.
.

ROTFLMAO !

Despite your impression that

Despite your impression that it's a harmless, humorous nickname, it appears to be an attempt to demonize and dehumanize. It's schoolyard bullying.
..................
"The main thing that I learned about conspiracy theory is that conspiracy theorists actually believe in a conspiracy because that is more comforting. The truth of the world is that it is chaotic..." —Alan Moore

..................
"The main thing that I learned about conspiracy theory is that conspiracy theorists actually believe in a conspiracy because that is more comforting. The truth of the world is that it is chaotic..." —Alan Moore