It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Octuplet Mom Defends Her ‘Unconventional’ Choices

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 6 2009 @ 10:30 PM
Update guys, the medical clinic is now under investigation, I have posted the story here.

posted on Feb, 6 2009 @ 10:58 PM
This woman is clearly delusional, and since she is religious id say she probably feels its her god given right to overbreed the population of the earth with her god given mission of being a 'mother'. People dont go into psychiatry unless theyve had some problems themselves. She struggled with depression and then had a lightbulb moment and decided that she should have babies instead of fixing her own internal issues. People like this need to be handed over to the state. We did this a century ago- i think we need to return to that system.

[edit on 6-2-2009 by xynephadyn]

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:17 AM
i SO feel for her children. they are going to grow up messed up due to the lack of personal attention, etc. plus her little "carbon footprints" are going to exhaust the planet.

so weird how medicine can do this. poor kids...

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 02:39 AM
I would like to make a few points here:

1. Anyone who wants 14 kids has to be insane. I mean, after the first lot, to do it again...???

2. If you had 14 kids, you would have to be very wealthy and very well adjusted to raise them properly. It seems that she is neither.

3. This reminds me of a girl I know who just keeps having kids to different fathers. Eventually Child Welfare removes one or two and/or the father absconds with the latest baby. So she just gets a new partner and gets pregnant again, deliberately. I think she is just looking for someone to love her but no-one ever has, and it started with her parents (as usual). She is totally disfunctional and so it goes on, from generation to generation.

I think this woman is totally nuts and I pity those kids.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 03:04 AM
What a disgraceful woman!!

Maybe if she had to provide for them herself,she might have thought twice about having so many kids!

As for the disability allowance,well i am suprised she can even walk straight after all those kids!

She must be an absolute wreckage down under!!

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 03:11 AM
She’s an Anjelina Jolie wanna be.

Gawd that lip fat makes me gag just looking at it.
Who’d want to go around with a monkey butt for lips.
Disgusting practice.

Anyway, this woman just leaves me shaking my head.
How any mother can say she *loves* her children and wants the *best* for them - yet knowingly brought them into the world under these circumstances, and on top of it fatherless?
She’s a selfish and delusional.

By the way, (most) any woman can give birth - not every woman can be a Mother.
If she thinks one equals the other she’s quite wrong.


posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 10:54 AM
It's obvious this woman has had a support system helping her raise the 6 children she already had. 6 children under 7 in itself was too much for any grandma. What was this woman thinking when she decided to bring home even 1 more much less 8. What if grandma was to get sick or worse? Did this woman even have a plan B? For her sake I hope so.

If she is to raise 14 children on her own working and going to school there will be little time to enjoy her children. Most working single parents I know are stretched pretty thin with just a couple of kids.

While some feel it's unethical to legislate procreation to plan a large family with the hope that others will help is not the reality based decision of a mature adult.

In larger cities in my state daycare runs $1000.00 per month per child. That's for a one year old child newborns and infants I'm certain cost more. So if at least 10 of her children need daycare for a time that will be $10,000.00 a month! Who is really going to be footing that bill? To rely on donations of help and money is not a viable plan.

Maybe if she had 1 or 2 children at home prior to this pregnancy people would be willing to help. I think most will feel she is taking advantage of their generosity. It's quite an imposition to expect and depend on others to help raise so many children. The very kids she wants to enjoy and love will suffer. How could they possibly get enough of mom's time and attention?

Imo this woman will need a lot of help both physical and financial from society to fulfill her goal. It's simply not fair to all those young parents out there who would love to have more children yet can't afford more than 1 or 2 based on their income. Why should my tax dollars assist her gluttony for children and who's to say she will stop at 14?

posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 11:14 AM
She has at least one nanny.

posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 04:49 PM
reply to post by Aeons

I wonder if the one nanny you mention was hired to help grandma with the 6 children at home? I know in daycare there are limitations on how many infants can be cared for by one caregiver. If this nanny is attached to a service they may consider one nanny watching so many small children a liability especially if grandma leaves.

Imo I don't think she intends on going to school or working but it sure sounds good. Here's some figures estimating the cost of raising a child in the US to age 17. The numbers do not include the cost of college.

For a single parent family making $39,100 it will cost an estimated $250,260.00 per child from birth to 17. It is estimated private college costs $23,578 annually, public college $9008. She want's to become a counselor? The $39,100 figure is in line with a Master's level psychologist salary, here's a link.

This would be overwhelming for a couple working full time with good pay/benefits and a strong support team. Idk this is so sad family should have intervened seeing where she was going with all this. I would say she is right this is a dysfunctional family. I have sons but no way would I let them bring child after child home for me to raise before I had enough. I think after 2 or 3 I would tell them to shut that thing down!

posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 04:54 PM
reply to post by Morningglory

I think the nanny is meant to deal with the autistic child. I am wonder who is paying for her services?

As I mentioned before the mother told her 6 was enough already, and she sneaked behind her parents backs and had these last embryos transferred and THEN only did she inform them. What could her poor mother do at that point.

posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 05:01 PM
reply to post by Mynaeris

I think the mother could go to court and present evidence to declare her mentally unfit, and ordered into counceling if that is found to be the case. But to be fair she was afraid to do that because of what would happen to the children.

posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 05:08 PM

Originally posted by Mynaeris
I am wonder who is paying for her services?

She was asking for $2 million for an interview. I wonder if NBC paid it?

NBC got Interview

As for the comparisons to Angelina Jolie, it's none of our business how many children people have as long as they are cared for. When it becomes our business is when they are dependent on our tax dollars to take care of those kids. And I don't see Jolie standing in line for food stamps. As far as I'm concerned, there is no comparison.

We have no business in women's wombs and their reproductive choices whether they're getting an abortion or having 14 kids. But I don't think this lady is crazy. She's just taking advantage of the system. And for that, whe should be punished.

I mean, I would have 14 dogs if someone else was paying for their food and vet bills... That doesn't mean I'm crazy.

Does it?

[edit on 8-2-2009 by Benevolent Heretic]

posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 05:42 PM
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.

posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 05:42 PM
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

I do agree with you we have to be careful on issues of procreation. That's why I feel it should have been handled within the family with advice and counseling from Dr's well before it got to number 6. Or a simple push out the door after #2 or #3 would have worked as well. It's possible she was supporting her parents with settlement monies so they put up with it.

I don't think caring for a brood of puppies is quite the same as caring for 14 young children to adulthood even if food and medical is provided. Someone could end up with that many dogs with one litter no one would think you were crazy but children are quite another thing altogether.

posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 07:12 PM

Originally posted by Morningglory
I don't think caring for a brood of puppies is quite the same as caring for 14 young children to adulthood even if food and medical is provided.

Well, no, it's not the same, I"m sure.
My point was that if a woman wanted to have 20 children and all of them were well-cared-for, WITHOUT government assistance, then I wouldn't consider her crazy at all. If she was wealthy and had plenty of room, food and time for them, I don't feel like it's our place to judge her as crazy or a bad mother or whatever.

What makes this octuplet mother's situation unacceptable to me is NOT that she wants a whole brood of children, but that (I highly suspect) she is getting government assistance in the form of our tax dollars. I am of the belief that someone living off the government should be punished by reduced benefits if they have more children.

posted on Feb, 9 2009 @ 12:15 AM
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Imo she will eventually have to depend on government assistance to provide proper care for those children. Obviously she feels a sense of entitlement as her need is greater than societies. We can all just cope with the fact that she will more than likely burden us with her children. If she is resourceful enough to provide for 14 kids on her own more power to her. If not let her family members get jobs and support them all. No she should not be awarded an increase in any disability payments she receives.

I wonder what kind of counseling this clinic is providing especially for "disabled" women? Most women I have known with prior medical conditions are counseled by their doctors before taking on a pregnancy. Often the doctor will strongly advise limiting the number of pregnancies. If she were truly disabled an ethical doctor would not continue doing a procedure he felt went against his medical advice. I gotta question the severity of her disability or the integrity of her doctor.

posted on Feb, 9 2009 @ 05:47 AM
Okay, we know who the doctor is now.

Top video is from a KTLA news report in 2006 and the IVF doc speaks on camera.

Also, there are reports that she has been receiving $800/month per child from the state of California. That means up until now she has received $4800/month for the first six, and is looking at $6400/month more...that's $11k/month of the state. $132,000/year! And I'm assuming that's tax free, but not sure how that works.

posted on Feb, 9 2009 @ 07:51 AM
reply to post by Valhall

Way, way here, why I didn't got into the great give away in California when I was there, and to top it, Immigrants?

Darn I got in the wrong line of job, I should had stay in California and become a breeder at the expenses of the California tax payer.

But then again no wonder California is bankrupt, with all the breeding going on.

Can she feed her brood with IOUs?

posted on Feb, 9 2009 @ 06:56 PM
Thanks for the link Val. I agree with marg will IOU's feed the kids?

If her boyfriend is the father I would say he is more than an anonymous donor. He says he loves and wants to marry this woman then maybe he should get a job or two cause she's high maintenance.

The article states that mom has been absent from home so we can't judge the condition of her home based on that. Hogwash enough excuses! If she has it so together she should have made arrangements prior to her absence. Sounds like she is getting plenty of money from the state with extra to spare for face work why not hire a part time cleaning service? No there is more to being a mother than spitting out children for the rest of us to support.

If this woman is getting public assistance she needs to agree to counseling with parenting classes and home checks as a condition for keeping her children. Such a lifestyle choice at public expense should be open to scrutiny. If we are going to pay to raise these kids we become responsible for safeguarding their care. This is a unique set of circumstances for those so young and vulnerable. If she refuses the children should be removed and she should be brought up on charges of neglect and possibly fraud.

After hearing the grandmother speak out today I must retract what I said in an earlier post. I suggested it was possible the grandparents were receiving support from settlement money and just put up with it all. This is far from the case that worthless woman did not even tell her mother about the settlement money yet promised to help with food and bills but never did. If that doesn't beat all how could she justify paying for face work? I’m afraid this is only going to get worse. These small innocent babies could have real health & developmental issues. This is so incredibly sad.

I tried to give her the benefit of the doubt as far as her sanity goes but after hearing what grandma had to say about the situation at home I think it’s obvious this woman has been clueless and irresponsible for sometime. Can people on public assistance really afford plastic surgery? Boy do I feel stupid who knew?

posted on Feb, 11 2009 @ 09:16 PM
reply to post by skeptic1

This woman should be cited and ticketed for litter-ing!

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in