What is your opinion on the Octuplet mom with 14 children all out of wedlock. She is on welfare and she lives in a 3 bedroom 1500 squ ft. home with her parents.

I personally have two issues with this. On one hand I see her decision as irresponsible.  On the other hand I'm beginning to get aggravated by the same people who fight for choice, entitlement programs, ect getting on her.

You can't have it both ways. You either accept that "Choice" is not limited to the choice to abort but the choice to do what you want with your body as well.  Whether others agree or not.

I also have a problem with the same people who think entitlementsare a good way to help the poor now complaining because she receives said programs? Statistically more people on welfare are in similar situations as her. They continue to have children, out of wedlock and live on the government dole because they can and it's thier to provide health care, food and shelter for them.  Consequences of your personal decisions don't matter as much when someone else pays for you life.  So we either accept that these programs are littered with people who choose to be poor or we admit they do more harm than good and end them becuase we don't want to pay for such people.  The minority of people who get on these programs do so for a short period of time or ever get back off these programs.  Free money is addictive.   

I don't care about the size of her home, I don't care that she lives with her parents. My grandparents raised 8 children in a three bedroom house he built with his own hands.  At one point they didn't even have indoor plumbing.  It can and has been done for poor people to raise children well.  In todays society we seem to deem poor people as irresponsible to have children.  We bascially say if you don't have money then we don't think you have the right to make a choice to have children.  All of this circles back to the above arguments.

Do we really think we can have it both ways?

 

Add A Comment

Comments:

sunfl...
Feb. 6, 2009 at 10:51 AM

No I don't think we can have it both ways, but why am I paying for her to have children when my insurance company won't pay for the same services she rec'd.  That's what I don't like about what she did or my question is did the insurance pay for the invetro or is she paying for all this b/c if she is paying for all of it then she's on the same playing field as me but if the ins she rec'd is paying for it then I want my tax dollars back from her and I want to spend it on myself and not her.

Message Friend Invite

Devin...
Feb. 6, 2009 at 10:56 AM

sunflowerfreak

I wondered that too.  Medicaid won't pay for invetro.  In some rare cases it will pay for tests related to infertilty but no treatments.  Most women can't get on it until their pregnant and you can't stay on it for long afterwards. Some how she had to pay this or someone did it for free. I almost wonder if the doc did it for free for publicity.  A lot of other fertlity docs have been outspoken and said this was unethical for a doc to put 8 embryos in a women with no fertilty issues under 35. (She is 33)

 

 

Message Friend Invite (Original Poster)

Kajen...
Feb. 6, 2009 at 12:21 PM

I have six children. I have a husband--the same man who fathered all my children. I would love to have more. I have to look at the responsibility, both financial and emotional though. I'm not sure what the future holds, but I would never expect others to be held responsible for MY decision.

Message Friend Invite

Devin...
Feb. 6, 2009 at 1:19 PM

I agree I have four and one on the way and yes, same father! (Gotta love that question, LOL)  I don't think nor have I ever ask for assistance with raising or providing for my children. I disagree with her thinking but I don't think we can critize someone for choosing to have lots of children.  My gripe is more with the idea that we okay Choice, but on one condition. We okay welfare but we gripe when people we disagree with use it.

It's just the double standards in this country especailly when people suddenly grow a conscience only when they think thier money is involved. Until then immoralty and bad decisions are okay. Make sense?

Message Friend Invite (Original Poster)

jus1jess
Feb. 6, 2009 at 10:19 PM

I'm pro-choice. Sounds like she's really pro-life. It was her choice to have all her kids for ethical reasons. (she didn't want any embryos wasted) I don't see a thing wrong with that. It is upsetting that the main problem people have with her is that she's on assistance. She shouldn't be called irresponsible for choosing not to abort or for needing financial help. I'd only care if she had kids she couldn't afford AND didn't meet their physical/emotional needs as a mother should. If she loves & takes care of her kids, that's all that should matter. Not how much our tax dollars are paying. Tax payer money will always help fund something that not every taxpayer agrees with. Period.

Message Friend Invite

jus1jess
Feb. 6, 2009 at 10:48 PM

I have to add that pro-choice is awesome. Women have the right to do as they please with THEIR bodies whether it be have lots of babies or none. We don't have anyone deciding to FORCE abortions, sterilization,  or continued pregnancies on anyone. Pro-choice isn't pro-abortion. It's choice all around. Pro-life seems pretty anti-choice.

Message Friend Invite

Want to leave a comment and join the discussion?

Sign up for CafeMom!

Already a member? Click here to log in