Octuplets' Mom Has Six Other Kids and Absent Husband
Filed under: Toddlers Preschoolers, Health & Safety: Babies, Development/Milestones: Babies, Day Care & Education, Feeding & Sleeping, Opinions, Baby-sitting, Research Reveals: Babies, Nutrition: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Expert Advice: Babies, Health & Safety: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Development: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Behavior: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Activities: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Gear Guides: Babies, Gear Guides: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Research Reveals: Toddlers & Preschoolers, Expert Advice: Toddlers & Preschoolers
It is terrifying enough to most of us to imagine bringing home one new baby, never mind eight. But how's this for overwhelming: The California octuplets born this week have six older siblings at home. The oldest is seven, and the youngest is two.That's fourteen kids, in case you're too stunned to count. Including a set of twins. And reportedly, all six were conceived using some form of reproductive technology.
While the mother's identity is still a mystery, the babies' grandmother, Angela Suleman, said that her daughter never expected to have eight more children, although she acknowledges that the young woman underwent fertility treatment to get pregnant with "just one more girl." According to MomLogic, she used donor sperm provided by a friend; the same man is rumoured to be the father of all six of her children, although he has no involvement with the family.
The mother and the six older kids have been living with Suleman in Whittier, California. And just over eighteen months ago, the woman's parents filed for bankruptcy after buying a home for their daughter and her children. The babies' grandfather, Suleman's husband, is planning to return to his native Iraq to work, in order to help support his daughter's brood.
With six older children and no father on the scene, it's hard to imagine what motivated this mom to take the risk of eight babies. "What do you suggest she should have done?" Anita Suleman asked the Los Angeles Times. "She refused to have them killed. That is a very painful thing." Suleman said the new babies are "so tiny and so beautiful." As of today, seven of the eight are breathing on their own.
There's a lot going on here -- the babies face serious health risks, of course, and expensive medical treatments, which makes the family's precarious financial situation an issue. The mother will need a lot of help with fourteen kids, eight of whom are infants, but where's dad in all this? Taken all together, it's hard not to wonder how on earth she ever convinced a fertility specialist to transfer so many eggs in the first place, and what will become of these wee babies when they go home.
What do you think -- are these babies a medical miracle, or a social disaster?
Your<span>Voice</span>
Ask Us Anything About Parenting
Recently Asked
- The owner of the property or debit creditor can relieve the person(s) of the debt,(a employment position or (court) is not ownership
- When did American Girl stories change?
- Discuss Derian douglas hickman's answer to: 01/16/2013 Order Sua Sponte to/for: Entered 2 day's before initial scheduling conference 01/16/2013











ReaderComments (Page 5 of 5)
2-03-2009 @ 10:42AM
Annie said...Ok people......think about it......everybody loves a pregnant woman...you give up your seats in restaurants, on buses and any place you find people waiting, for "her". This woman, loves, even craves the attention a pregnant woman gets in public. Once the pregnancy is over with, so is the attention. The worst part about this scenerio is, to what extent will these children.....ALL 14 of them......suffer, when the attention is no longer on the woman who gave birth to these babies??
The long and short of it is, I doubt very seriously that there is any doctor in the continental United States, who would implant 4 or more embryos in an unmarried woman who already has 6 children.
So, she either went into Mexico or quite simply.....she lied about her fertility status to a qualified doctor......just to get the attention being pregnant brings. And think about this.......Kaiser stated that she "presented" herself to them for prenatal care at 12 weeks gestation.......which means, this IVF procedure took place under circumstances that Kaiser wouldn't advocate, because most insurance companies do not cover fertility issues.
She's taken a tremendous chance on her children's lives in hoping that someone would pick up the story and pay her the big $$ for it. There's no guarentee that there will be money to feed, clothe or educate these children in the future......she obviously didn't think this through or consider the consequences of her actions......or more to the point, she didn't consider the quality of life that she would be denying her children. Shame on...... HER.
Reply
2-03-2009 @ 11:18AM
Jennifer said...I have no problem with a single mother having babies...I would just like to know how she supports them??? That's where my problem lies...Doesn't sound like she can support the kids she already has...and she is going to choose to have more? It's irresponsible.
Reply
2-03-2009 @ 11:40AM
di said...Ever wondered why your medical insurance/bills are so expensive - that's if you can even afford it at all -- it's people like this who cannot pay their bills - the delivery of eight babies with a staff of 45 must have been a fortune - IVF is also costly -- I worked in management in a hospital and saw the 'no pays' - usually high risk pregnancies, often drug related with very sick babies = just another example why those of us who try to support ourselves and our families have such a tough time.
Reply
2-03-2009 @ 2:16PM
cb said...I agree with most all of these comments, but I also agree that the reduction would have been wrong.The doctors should have told this woman to be thankful for the children she already has and refused to treat her. It was never even stated that she was unable to naturally have kids on her own, just unable to have a COMMITTED RELATIONSHIP WITH A SECOND PERSON TO PARENT THEM. Every one talks about the obvious -- food & diapers, etc. but how about the actual space to bed these innocent kids- all of them? I dont think the government needs to become involved just because a family happens to have financial difficulty and another unplanned addition. But come on... to PURPOSLY ADD to the situation should be investigated. They are going to need alot throughout thier lives and if she cant house and provide for them, maybe it would be in the best interest of ALL to consider alternative placement, in general I dont believe they should just be able to come and take away peoples children because theyre poor, thats none of the governments business, but the mental issues certainly must be considered. And the doctors licenses revoked, especially if it turns out that this was some sort of sick joint money/ publicity venture. In the mean time, we should pray for them all. They deserve THAT.
Reply
2-03-2009 @ 12:06PM
Pat said...This woman is not a nice person. The operation she should of had was her tubes tied. She only did it to get hand outs. Her kids should be cared for and she should be made to go to work to help pay for their up-bringing. She is a no good piece of turd. Sincerely hope no one gives her a dime! Hopefully her children grow up to be respectable and self sufficient unlike their mother. What a piece of work.
Reply
2-03-2009 @ 9:07PM
idlivru said...it is our business and the governments when she can't afford to care for these children and applies for food stamps and Medicare/Medicaid to help pay for them and their health problems stemming from prematurity. Not to mention that her parents have filed for bankruptcy...we pay for that. And she is selling her story for TV with Oprah or Diane for a measly $2 million and maybe a TV show so she can rake in the goodies so she wont have to pay for them. I am a reproductive infertility practitioner. So totally irresponsible to keep doing AID/IVF/embryo transfers on a single mother
Reply
2-05-2009 @ 4:02PM
Emilija said...Do not take the children away! Please.
When my family came from Poland we had no money. My mother was pregnant and we already probably had too many children. It was difficult but we made it through. My mother gave birth to a little boy. When my father left to go back to Poland to take care of his mother, he got trapped and was not able to return. My mother had to go on food stamps. During this time our neighbors called the police and told them my mother was mistreating us. My little brother was taken from her while we were in school. She had no idea what was going on because she could not speak a word of English. We were not starving. Our clothing, while not new, was in fairly good condition. A hole does not mean something is ruined, just needs to be patched. I never had a proper barbie doll, but that is not what matters in life. It took years to get Artek back.
Unless these children are starving or complaining of abuse I do not believe this mother deserves to have her children taken. She had many more children then we had, but I believe she can spend time with each. And she has much more support with her mother and father living with her.
I am married now and have my own children. I would simply die if my Ewalyna or Jerzy were taken. I too want a large family so perhaps this is why I sympathyse with this woman. Perhaps I am just a bit defense. (After all people say it is wrong of me to not teach my children English though we live in America).
I hope I am not rambling. I am sorry if I am boring to you!
--Emilija
Reply
2-12-2009 @ 10:29PM
Sam said...Well, if you have the means to support your big family then by all means go right ahead and have as many kids as you can afford. But if you can't afford them then you shouldn't have them.
2-13-2009 @ 6:33AM
Not Nadya said...In an attempt to bring men's right's up to par, I'm going to clone myself 14 times and go on welfare.
...unless people buy me beer instead of donating to this woman's less intriguing cause.
http://notnadya.blogspot.com/
Reply
2-19-2009 @ 10:40AM
Ric said...I'll marry her.
Reply