MY TURN

The Truth About Multiple Births

Lost in the octuplets saga is the scary medical reality: without selective reduction, lots of lives are at risk.

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: sgillsp @ 03/03/2009 9:23:26 PM

    JUST ANOTHER OPTION:
    I am a 36 year old that would desperately love to raise a child w/ my husband. I have PCOS do to a condition called Insulin Resistance. Or at least I think this is the correct way to say what my issue is. Anyway, I went through some basic shot treatments and that was just too much mentally and financially. I am writing this post to give other "want to be parents" another option to consider before IVF.

    Due to my strong beliefs that life begins at concepcion, I have made the choice to not go through IVF. I love my un-conceived children so much that I have put the idea of IVF aside. Just in case all the stories we were taught about a better place called Heaven are true, I choose to not have to face my unborn children and have to tell them why I took away their life. Just another option.............

    • Posted By: BensMama @ 06/30/2009 10:55:07 AM

      I also have PCOS with Insulin Resistance. It isn't an "infertility sentence" and I didn't use artificial means to get pregnant. There are several ways to control PCOS on a daily basis, the most important being diet and exercise. Controlling your weight goes a long way toward controlling your insulin levels, which regulates your other hormones. Otherwise, I take Metformin, daily, to help my body use the insulin it makes so that it does not overproduce, and when I am not trying to conceive, I take birth control pills, which, believe it or not, actually went a long way in helping me to conceive. The birth control pills regulate your testosterone and estrogen levels, which in turn, will tell your body whether or not to ovulate. When I went off birth control, I got pregnant the first month. My doctor said this was because my hormones were still regulated from having been on the BCP. I have several issues besides that, and I was a high-risk pregnancy and actually had to take blood thinner shots to keep both mine and my son's blood from becoming too thick to pass nutrients. In the end, I have a perfectly healthy, and extremely smart, little boy who I thank God for every day.

      Due to my secondary issues (not the PCOS), he was at risk for Spina-Bifida, but because I took above average care of myself, and by the grace of God, he turned out perfectly. I did not opt for genetic testing to find out if he had problems, because it wouldn't have made a difference. I would never have dreamed of terminating my pregnancy, and I would not have loved him any less had there been an abnormality.

      I, also, don't believe in IVF. Even knowing I might have problems conceiving, I decided before hand that this would not be an option. There are too many discarded children out there already. So many people site the cost of adoption as a turn off, but there are other ways, such as private adoption. Besides, most people don't get pregnant on the first IVF treatment, and will spend just as much money getting pregnant with multiples that they end up killing so that 1 or more of the others may live. I just couldn't do that.

  • Posted By: Frederick Furreal @ 02/20/2009 1:23:27 PM

    Just to throw my hat in the ring I don't believe in fertility treatments at all. Look up "exponential population increase" and realize that it is not prudent to have more than two children, anywhere on the planet, and somehow not contribute to the exploitation of the planets declining resources. What make fertility treatments so selfish, as well as pathetic, is that there are millions of orphaned children, in the U.S., Africa, Asia... It's easier to say that there is an overflowing well of human child resources that need to be adopted. Before they are sold into the sex slave trade or worse.

    I understand the conservative christian outlook on "having your own" genetic material propagated. And with that I also see what a moron you must be about your own faith. Where is the mercy and compassion, especially concerning children, that you are showing when your God gives you a barren womb. Or a husband who has junk that doesn't work for that matter. I don't know about you, but I would take that as a "sign" to adopt, not use secular science to force a child out of yourself. I'm done with my rant. May peace be upon you and withing you all.

    • Posted By: nimodahooligan @ 02/20/2009 2:36:10 PM

      good post...

      if this woman wanted 14 kids, all she had to do was head over to her nearest orphanage, or walk down a street in a 3rd world country.

      ive seen the need in these countries, ive seen the need in the childrens faces, in they're lives....and then along comes mommy that got pumped full of donor sperm and purposely pops out 8 infants. good call mom.

      "but i love all my children" she said... heres why:

      1) your going to make bank on those kids
      2) someone is going to by you a house to put them all in
      3) someone is going to buy you a new vehicle to transport them all
      4) youve been watching too much tim and kate plus 8 show, or whatever it is
      5) your expecting sponsored vacations, sponsors giving you clothes, giving you food, giving you diapers, and sponsors paying for the health care of these 14 kids....


      its sad, its selfish, its irresponsible, and whether that woman knows it or not, the burden WILL end up falling on us taxpayers sooner or later. personally, i dont feel like shelling out more money to "support" a woman that put herself into a bad situation knowing what the outcome would be. and when is the last time she worked? where did she go to school? she will never work again with that many kids all by herself...


      and someone made a comment about the "loser sperm donor" father....HE DONATED HIS SPERM FOR MONEY, THATS HOW IT WORKS, HE HAS 0 OBLIGATION TO THESE KIDS....IT WAS THE WOMANS CHOICE TO HAVE THAT MANY KIDS, NOT THE MANS...IT WAS THE WOMANS CHOICE TO USE THAT SPERM, IT WAS THE WOMANS CHOICE THROUGHOUT... the man in a situation like this has no legal/moral/ethical obligation to 8 kids he doesnt know are his, and thats how its supposed to be with sperm donation.

      • Posted By: sregis @ 02/26/2009 4:41:25 PM

        you, sir, obviously know little about the motivations or processes of adoption.

        • Posted By: rleiva @ 02/28/2009 11:15:59 AM

          This article saddened me in many ways. I realize that parents unable to conceive must go through immense pain, and therefore it is hard to judge them for resorting to IVF, but the idea that a desire to have children justifies actions such as bringing other human lives into being and later taking some of those lives (selective reduction) with a criteria of convenience, strikes me as contrary to everything right. I don't think I had ever read a more vivid portrayal of how the manipulation of human lives through medical technology is wrong. And anguish is no justification for wrong. I disclose a faith motivation of my reaction: I believe that the beginning and ending of human life is God's business. But I also think that even for a non-believer there are certain things that should be considered sacred (i.e. the natural course of human life) and that there are some boundaries that should not be crossed. Roberto Leiva, Costa Rica

          • Posted By: hominid @ 06/30/2009 9:25:05 AM

            So I must ask, if you believe the begining of human life is God's business, then creating these embryos is in direct oposition of God? In effect, by having these embryos created, the couple is playng God, would you agree? It always amazes me that people can spout the importance of keeping all the embryos alive because it's was God's plan for them. In reality, the people never are willing to admit they idgnored waht God had in store for them and took the issue into their own hands.

          • Posted By: mrsavizdrav @ 03/12/2009 1:53:38 PM

            What is the natural course of human life? Placing a 90 years old on a ventilator? Doing organ transplants on people over 70? There are too many other wrong things in modern medicine, and I don't think selective reduction is one of them.

        • Posted By: rleiva @ 02/28/2009 11:18:20 AM

          This article saddened me in many ways. I realize that parents unable to conceive must go through immense pain, and therefore it is hard to judge them for resorting to IVF, but the idea that a desire to have children justifies actions such as bringing other human lives into being and later taking some of those lives (selective reduction) with a criteria of convenience, strikes me as contrary to everything right. I don't think I had ever read a more vivid portrayal of how the manipulation of human lives through medical technology is wrong. And anguish is no justification for wrong. I disclose a faith motivation of my reaction: I believe that the beginning and ending of human life is God's business. But I also think that even for a non-believer there are certain things that should be considered sacred (i.e. the natural course of human life) and that there are some boundaries that should not be crossed. Roberto Leiva, Costa Rica

        • Posted By: rleiva @ 02/28/2009 11:16:47 AM

          This article saddened me in many ways. I realize that parents unable to conceive must go through immense pain, and therefore it is hard to judge them for resorting to IVF, but the idea that a desire to have children justifies actions such as bringing other human lives into being and later taking some of those lives (selective reduction) with a criteria of convenience, strikes me as contrary to everything right. I don't think I had ever read a more vivid portrayal of how the manipulation of human lives through medical technology is wrong. And anguish is no justification for wrong. I disclose a faith motivation of my reaction: I believe that the beginning and ending of human life is God's business. But I also think that even for a non-believer there are certain things that should be considered sacred (i.e. the natural course of human life) and that there are some boundaries that should not be crossed. Roberto Leiva, Costa Rica

      • Posted By: Butterfly1963 @ 02/21/2009 12:48:35 PM

        /

      • Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 02/20/2009 2:59:55 PM

        "good post..."

        We should outlaw fertility medicine because of one nutcase woman?

        • Posted By: nimodahooligan @ 02/20/2009 4:59:43 PM

          thats not what i ment, thats not what i said, and thats not a viewpoint that i hold.

          dont over simplify a statement like that.

      • Posted By: nmbrldy69 @ 02/20/2009 3:36:24 PM

        This woman epitomizes the terms irresponsible and selfish. If you can't financially take care of the children you already have, why on earth would you have more? Part of being a parent is being responsbile, and using good judgement. This woman is sadly lacking in both. If I wanted to have children, I would have, and would have accepted all obligations, fnancial and otherwise, that come with children. However, I am still being forced to support children of parents who make bad decisions via state and federal welfare funds. Shouldn't child services step in? The mother obviously isn't capable of being a responsbile parent, and is incapable of providing anything for these children on her own. It's not a question of big government stepping in and "allowing" or "disallowing" the childbearing process on someone - it's an issue of recognizing when someone isn't capable of functioning as a responsible parent. I wish my mother would have had to pass some kind of credential process before reproducing; it would have saved a lot of heartache, and thousands of dollars of welfare funds.

    • Posted By: Treeling @ 02/22/2009 12:15:44 AM

      Listen, fella... have you looked into adoption lately? IVF? $10,000. Adopt one of those kids you're referring to from Africa or Asia? $50,000 and up. Plus, there's the years of waiting. The not knowing what kind of nutrition and care the adopted baby had in utero and postnatally that may lead to lifelong problems. There's the potential for attachment disorders that make the adopted child nightmarishly difficult to raise. The feelings of alienation and culture clash that adopted children (especially internationally adopted children) often experience... The grief of the mother who may give up the child under pressure... Adopt locally and go through the waiting and the begging to be chosen and the intrusive questions and examinations only to have the child snatched back at the last minute by a birth parent or WORSE, snatched back after you've been loving it as your own for a while.

      There are many beautiful adoption stories and many great reasons to adopt... but let's not pretend that adoption is the obvious, easy choice that folks like you make it out to be.

      • Posted By: Frederick Furreal @ 02/22/2009 11:22:42 AM

        Listen Treeling...Do you not think that if more energies were focused in the direction of adoption (of which there are thousands of children readily available in the U.S. if children in foriegn coutries prove too diffiult to adopt for some) that there would be a shift in the consiousness of the people as well as the legal proceedings that are so difficult and expensive now? Of course there would. With legal precedents set in stone the parents of the unwanted children would be informed that there is no going back; that any claim they had to the children they are giving up is gone with thier signature on the bottom line.

        This would not only relieve the worries of adoptive parents but put into a legal perspective what the biological parents can and cannot do once the child is handed over. Nationally or internationally this would not be a difficult concept to explain to people. You give up your child for adoption, it is as though you never had them at all. The problem with adoption culture is that it's like a private corporation of sorts; meaning that the price is set by whatever the entity with the children wishes it to be. To me, that shows more interest in money than the welfare of the children themselves. With a legal standard solidly in place these children's future would be dictated by love (I know, how idealistic) rather than the dollar.

    • Posted By: Treeling @ 02/22/2009 12:15:24 AM

      Listen, fella... have you looked into adoption lately? IVF? $10,000. Adopt one of those kids you're referring to from Africa or Asia? $50,000 and up. Plus, there's the years of waiting. The not knowing what kind of nutrition and care the adopted baby had in utero and postnatally that may lead to lifelong problems. There's the potential for attachment disorders that make the adopted child nightmarishly difficult to raise. The feelings of alienation and culture clash that adopted children (especially internationally adopted children) often experience... The grief of the mother who may give up the child under pressure... Adopt locally and go through the waiting and the begging to be chosen and the intrusive questions and examinations only to have the child snatched back at the last minute by a birth parent or WORSE, snatched back after you've been loving it as your own for a while.

      There are many beautiful adoption stories and many great reasons to adopt... but let's not pretend that adoption is the obvious, easy choice that folks like you make it out to be.

    • Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 02/20/2009 2:31:39 PM

      "I understand the conservative christian outlook on "having your own" genetic material propagated."

      How the hell is that a conservative christian outlook? That's an outlook that has existed as long as sexual reproduction has.

      And if you want to adopt, that's great. Good on ya. But you don't get to tell other people whether or not they can use medical science to have kids.

      Sorry about that.

      • Posted By: Frederick Furreal @ 02/21/2009 5:16:09 PM

        By far the largest proponent against adoption in the U.S. is the conservative christian establishment. The scriptures are full of references concerning the propagation of the mans "seed." While I can agree with your statement that this is a true historical attitude to breed your own babies, I must remind you what century we live in and the increased understanding that modern humans have, or at least should have concerning over-population. This conversation is not only about an emotionally disturbed woman, it also stands as an example of the excessive numbers of humans that are being produced. If two people have more than two children to replace them they are responsible for the extra mouth or mouths the planets increasingly diminished resources must feed. The government should not have to step in any more than to educate people on the unsustainable exponential population explosion that is occuring. Artificial insemination is not saving lives nor is it essential medicine in a world that already has too many people on it. Reality should be shining upon the faces of all the people of this world. And they should be enlightened by the fact that we are on a path that will lead to extinction. So yeah, I have no quams telling people not to use invitro to have more than the previously mentioned two children, somebody has to.

  • Posted By: Ivana @ 03/03/2009 6:55:11 PM

    I do believe that if you cannot have children naturally that you were not meant to have children naturally. If you do not want to adopt, then don't, but accept that you can't have children. The earth is WAY too overpopulated for making babies in tubes. And I believe that what happens naturally is what is meant to be.

    I have yet to try having children and if I can't, I will then consider adoption or accepting the hand I've been dealt and make something else of my life. If it is that I can't conceive, maybe God didn't mean for me to be a mom, but something entirely different and more fulfilling for me.

    • Posted By: KoshkaBubaRN @ 03/03/2009 9:16:28 PM

      Yes lets see.You never know when you will be on this side,struggling with infertility.Then I will see what you will be saying.Never say never!

      • Posted By: Ivana @ 03/04/2009 10:36:24 AM

        While that could be true for some, I'm certain that I know what I'm thinking, how I feel, what I believe and what my decision is concerning my resposibilities to myself, my (possible) children and planet as a whole, thank you.

        • Posted By: Atlanta1922 @ 03/20/2009 1:53:36 PM

          Ivana, it could be something as simple as hostile cervical mucus that causes someone to seek more extreme fertility measures. I don't think just because someone's body doesn't properly produce one little thing, and there's an easy solve (IUI), that they shouldn't have a child.

          There's a lot more to it than you may know, but you are entitled to your opinion. I wish you easy times when trying to conceive your own.

          • Posted By: Janine Burton @ 04/05/2009 12:26:21 AM

            It is a shame that those people who are victims of simply complications such as hostile cervical mucus somehow are never taught the principals of how nutrition and lifestyle effect nutrition and the many other ways to increase one's fertility that are far less drastic than medical fertility treatments. Or that simply monitoring one's natural fertility cycle (which does differ from one woman to the next) in many cases can help tremendously in trying to conceive. Tis a shame that most women have chosen to believe the rhetoric that is fed to us by the media and the medical profession that the only way to solve these problems is by some form of artificial procedure and they are not taught the truth about how our bodies work.

            • Posted By: Janine Burton @ 04/05/2009 12:53:11 AM

              I meant how nutrition and lifetyle effect fertility.

              • Posted By: sregis @ 06/12/2009 12:58:06 PM

                yes and no. sure, nutrition is inportant in all apects of our physical well-being, but infertility is alive and well even w/ those knowledgeable in the field. this is not a simple matter, nor should we be blaming victims.

      • Posted By: sregis @ 06/12/2009 12:52:01 PM

        ...and that's fine for you. the problems come when these judgements come my way.

    • Posted By: mrsavizdrav @ 03/12/2009 1:59:24 PM

      OK, if you get cancer don't you dare to get treatment because that is your destiny. Infertility is a medical condition like any other!

  • Posted By: cjk12 @ 03/03/2009 12:05:43 PM

    I wonder how many of the parents who resort to IVF first looked into adoption. There are literally millions of children in foster care today who need loving parents. We adopted our children after 10 years of infertility. We never once thought of IVF or any other medical intervention. And no, they weren't babies when we adopted them. and we had our own share of issues to overcome. But after 3 years with them, I wouldn't trade my kids -- yes, MY kids -- for anything. They didn't come from my body, but they are as much mine as if they had.

    • Posted By: sregis @ 06/12/2009 12:49:06 PM

      of course adoption was considered- how could it not be? these are highly emotional and moreover personal decisions. certainly not ones that welcome patronizing.

    • Posted By: joys of boys @ 04/09/2009 1:42:16 PM

      Thank you for adding a positive note about adoption. We have adopted two beautiful, healthy boys from our area (domestic). They were both adopted as young infants, and we have no regrets.
      To the poster that states that the birth family can return and reclaim the child "after you've had it a while" - brush up on your facts. There are laws. After the legal risk period has passed, you are no longer worried about that - provided everything was done legally along the way. Don't believe everything on the made-for-TV-movies. :)

  • Posted By: DrAlanSinger @ 05/12/2009 10:03:29 PM

    Dr Evans did a terrific job with this essay.
    What a horrific decision for a couple to make, severly testing the strength of their marriage. And the trend of multiple births is increasing just as the trends which lead to it, namely delayed marriage and childbearing. Maybe if couples better understood the consequences of their decisions, they would not delay childbearing and put so much faith in science to rescue them.

    AMS
    www.FamilyThinking.com

  • Posted By: juliaros @ 03/14/2009 1:33:42 PM

    I just want to applaud the courage of Mark Evans, MD and other medical professionals speaking out about the ethics and risks associated with multiple births, depsite a growing number of conservatives in this country who feel any termination of any embryo, once created, is murder. In the case of embryos created during fertility treatments, this is just simply ridiculous and completely contrary to common sense.

    • Posted By: Janine Burton @ 04/05/2009 12:29:20 AM

      Are you really tryin gto argue that in the case of IVF the babies are anything less than babies? If so, what are they? Chickens?????

  • Posted By: Janine Burton @ 04/05/2009 12:20:54 AM

    As I read your article I am increasingly disgusted and shocked at the brazen lack of concern for the fact that those fetuses that you are selectively reducing based on factors that you can only speculate about are PEOPLE by every definition of the word! It sickens me to hear you describe the process. When will we stop trying to control everything and have things exactly the way we want them to be? If each and every one of these couples could somehow find a way to accept the fate they are given by their higher power--be it God, Allah, or simply mother nature--then high order multiples and the "recommended" selective reduction (which is abortion no matter what you call it) would never be an issue!

  • Posted By: Observerguy @ 03/22/2009 8:09:39 PM

    The issue is one of personal values. A patient decides. The physician is absolutely nothing more than a hired service-provider. Multiple births, though not my cup of tea either, are absolutely an individual preference. We are fortunate to have been born into a unique political experiment; to wit, an attempt to construct a system centered on the principle of the sanctity of the individual (with its implicit "free market" consequence). When anything intrudes on this principle, the experiment suffers. Lately, one of the salient intrusions is the argument that health care costs of the indivual should be considered superior to individual's liberty of lifestyle choice -- an especially unsavory argument when set forth by health care providers who, rather than accepting a market price for their services, have constructed a legalized extortion racket to provide an artificially inflated income (i.e., threat (implicit denial of full health care), payoff (protection money from each paycheck) called insurance. As with any greed-based intrusion into the free market's forces of supply and demand price-setting, the parasitic greed kills the host (e.g., the UAW and the american auto industry) and, ultimately, the parasite.

  • Posted By: momoftwins @ 03/19/2009 11:16:42 AM

    I agree with Treeling. Although it was many years ago, I looked in to adoption, foreign and domestic. I was one of the lucky ones; through treatments I conceived twins, so I did not look further into adoption. I was standing out in front of a grocery store selling cookies for my daughter's troop, and an elderly woman struck up a conversation with me. She said her daughters had been scouts, and one of her daughters adopted a girl from Russia. She wanted to adopt again, but the agency she went through has changed their policies; no one over 40 and no single parents. And this agency is a very well-known and reputable agency in my area.

    I also want to add that in my scout troop I have a girl who was adopted from Russia, along with her brother. These children have a myraid of problems, both physical and emotional. This girl in particular is on more medication than I am and I have high blood pressure. She's a good kid, but can be challenging at times to deal with.

    So I don't believe there are thousands of children waiting to be adopted or that agency would not have put restrictions on adoptions. Obviously, there are more parents than children to go around.

  • Posted By: flawedexistence @ 03/18/2009 8:20:29 PM

    Bravo, Dr. Evans.

  • Posted By: kafn8d @ 02/20/2009 12:51:19 PM

    Someone seriously needs to do something about this octuplet situation -- and I don't mean 'freebie' offers. She's got serious mental problems! Where in the heck is Child Protective Services in all this, huh? And what kind of message are we sending out to our kids in this whole thing? OUR LAWS ON IVF NEED SERIOUS HELP WHEN THIS IS ALLOWED TO HAPPEN! No wonder the State of California is so screwed up!

    • Posted By: Osama Bin Login @ 02/20/2009 2:32:33 PM

      "OUR LAWS ON IVF NEED SERIOUS HELP WHEN THIS IS ALLOWED TO HAPPEN!"

      While I agree that this woman is a nutcase, do you REALLY want to start regulating who can have kids and when?

      • Posted By: bartsimpson2008 @ 02/20/2009 7:22:46 PM

        You betcha! Every adult should have to pass a series of tests before they can have children and if you are under the age of 21 you should not be allowed to have children at all.

        • Posted By: life2go @ 02/20/2009 11:07:14 PM

          Although the situation with these children makes me furious on SO many levels....the LAST thing I want is more of the gov't trying to tell me what I can and can't do...next thing you know we will end up being like China where they tell you how many you can have...then what is next who can have boys or girls....

          Why don't we change our system that creates a society where people are making money for doing NOTHING..and that the more children they have the more money they make. That is what needs to be changed. This is suppose to be the land of OPPORTUNITY....not let me sit here do nothing and have others pay for the things I "deserve". I'm not saying that everyone in the system is like that but there are definitely way too many and we all know.

          Problem with situations like this is the kids are the innocent VICTIMS in this vicious cycle.

          • Posted By: thinkinggirl @ 03/05/2009 10:54:00 PM

            YOU ARE RIGHT
            THIS IS NOT CHINA
            LET'S KEEP OUR FREEDOM.

  • Posted By: momoftwins @ 03/05/2009 2:01:54 PM

    There is an old Indian saying that goes, "Do not judge a man until you have walked a mile in his moccasins". And what I mean by that is not that I support what Nadya Suleman did in any way, because I don't.
    What I am talking about is experiencing years of infertility, then treatment, not having it covered by insurance, spending every dime you make on this, just to have what other people take for granted. Anyone that ever experienced infertility knows what I am saying.
    I did not have IVF, I had artificial insemination, and I looked into adoption, both domestic and foreign, and yes, it is way more expensive than IVF, not to mention the other problems associated with it, like were mentioned by another poster.
    All of this is a personal decision, to go through the treatments, the pain and the potential heartbreak. I took that chance, and I was blessed with beautiful, healthy twins who are now almost 12. And not a day goes by that I do not thank God for my gift, because it truly was a gift, treatments or not. And unless you sit behind a desk, pregnant and hormonal, and listen to your doctor tell you that your life and the life of the 4 children you are carrying is in jeopardy can you understand the anguish one goes through in deciding on selective reduction. You just can't know what it is like.
    Three months after my healthy twins were born, my husband of 10 years walked out the door and left me to raise these children by myself. My decision to selective reduce was the hardest decision I ever had to make. I truly believe things happen for a reason. How could I have ever raised 4 children by myself. Me and my children are happy and healthy. I have a good job, I have never been on welfare, and now over time, they have a relationship with their dad. We are just a normal, typical family. I have chosen over the years to put all that pain of the infertility treatments, etc. behind me. Not even my family knows the very personal choice I had to make. I do not like attention bestowed upon myself, so I keep all of what I have gone through private, unlike Ms. Suleman. And I have absolutely no doubt in my mind, when I see how happy and healthy my kids are, that I did the right thing. I know lots of people would not agree with me, and that's fine. All I have to worry about is myself and my children and God when I meet him in the next life. All I know is that there have been ups and downs, happiness and sadness in my almost 12 years of raising my twins. And all I can say is that I don't know how I would have done it with two extra children to care for. I don't expect anyone other than a woman who has gone through what I have to understand. I just am grateful for my blessings, that's all.

  • Posted By: cant think of a name @ 03/04/2009 12:07:52 PM

    In my humble opinion, the doctor who implanted the embryos is just as responsible as Ms Suleman. He should have never implanted 6 embryos in a woman who already had 6 children through IVF. On another forum, someone said the doctor should pay child support for the children instead of the state paying her welfare payments each month. I think I almost agree with that statement.

  • Posted By: cant think of a name @ 03/04/2009 12:05:25 PM

    In my opinion, the doctor who implanted that many eggs is just as responsible as Ms Suleman. She should never have had more children than the 6 she already had and he should never have implanted 6 viable embryos in her!

  • Posted By: derj @ 03/04/2009 3:02:28 AM

    The headline teaser indicates "This is [my] fault. I beg to differ. If some stupid doctor implants that many eggs into a woman who already can't support 6 children, then he ought to be disciplined. SHe ought to be disciplined for having so many children she can't legally or financially take care of them. She relied on her mother for the first 6 - hey, guess what: Mothers of adults have already done their time (speaking for myself). This is no way, nowhere, no how "my fault." If he or she is speaking about the general fascination "society" has with multiple births, count me out. I had two children, 3 1/2 years apart and supported them through their entire childhood and somewhat into adulthood without financial assistance. I held a good job, went to college at the same time, and spent time with both of them (a boy AND a girl). They are both successful and responsible adults. One has a son himself, who couldn't be better loved and taken care of. I resent being told "that it's my fault" and lumped into some inept category.

  • Posted By: jamaica6 @ 03/03/2009 10:24:50 PM

    Wouldn't it be more ethical to never give a woman more than two fertile eggs at a time through IVF? It would take away that possible risk, and save lives of innocent children.

  • Posted By: jamaica6 @ 03/03/2009 10:21:07 PM

    I think it's terrible in general to terminate a pregnancy because the baby could possibly have Downs syndrome. Hitler rounded up people with "disabilities" and killed them- is our society much better than the one he was trying to establish??

  • Posted By: bull @ 02/28/2009 11:16:02 AM

    It should be VERY clear to everyone that Nadia Suleman is a BIG liar. It looks like the motive for having kids was fame/publicity/money. She is very clever and manipulative. (See her old videos with boyfriend, changing statements about EVERYTHING, reality TV show)
    Clearly she is NOT fit to raise kids. So her kids should be taken by Child-Services and given for adoption immediately.
    After that she is free to do whatever ... reality TV show, Porno,...

  • Posted By: Qidisrupt @ 02/27/2009 8:06:05 PM

    We all have to realize that Ms. Suleman is not mentally competent to properly raise 14 kids. She has no job, dumped much of the responsibility of the first six kids on Grandma, and then suddenly decided that it was "God's" will for her to pump out more kids? Give me a frickin' break! She was not responsible with the first six...even 1 more kid was too much more for her situaution. The Grandmother described how it was to raise the six kids and how she shouldered most of the work for the kids...that is WRONG! Piles of clothes and other crap laying around the house and not put away cleanly??? Something is not right with this picture at all. Ms. Suleman needs tough love...NOT THE PITY CARD...and positive intervention from someone that cares enough to get her into intensive psychotherapy. It is a shame that these kids are the ones that will suffer the MOST!!!

  • Posted By: dlvolk @ 02/26/2009 9:05:05 PM

    Dear Dr. Evans, "crack down on egregious behavior" Your killing babies is egregious. You are "one of a small cadre of experienced, high-risk obstetricians who now offer selective reduction" Oh, it that we only because most experienced, high-risk obstetricians were morally above killing children. You do not say whether you kill children other than during selective reduction. Do you? You do say that you are motivated to help "couples who have suffered years of anguish" by not being able to have their own children - no matter how many dead children it takes. David Volk, Peoria, IL

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse