The Responsibility Project^®. Exploring what it means to do the right thing

Octomom: The Mother of Irresponsibility?

797 Comments

February 23, 2009 by Kathy McManus

America’s latest responsibility riddle is defined by simple math and compounded by complex issues:

1 single mother 8 newborn octuplets

14 total offspring

15 minutes of fame

From miracle mom to mother of all outrage, Nadya Suleman’s spectacular fall from public grace continues in an avalanche of revelations: disability, inability, food stamps, no job, no spouse, and no viable plan for raising 14 children under the age of eight.

The responsibility dragnet snared her fertility specialist—at a clinic now under government scrutiny—and settled squarely on Ms. Suleman, who declared in a TV interview that she is a responsible parent, even though California taxpayers have been asked to pay the million dollar-plus hospital bill for her eight preemies.

“I personally do not believe I'm irresponsible,” Ms. Suleman said. “Everything I do revolves around my children.” Saying she was a single parent by choice, she questioned a perceived double standard between her unconventional lifestyle and that of couples who experience multiple births. “Why are they exempt from being called irresponsible?” she asked.

Selfish. Unstable. Irresponsible. The opinions continue to pour in by the thousands on talk shows and blogs, in headlines and on the street: Put her in therapy. Change the laws. Take her kids away. In a season of Wall Street bailouts, a Sesame Street bailout for the 14 kids of America’s mega-mom has not only angered many people, but, as one journalist put it, “exposes how publicly divided and personally judgmental we are” about the reproductive decisions of others and the question of how many children is too many.

“The ‘right’ number seems to lie somewhere between China and Nadya Suleman,” wrote another journalist. “But on what do we base that belief? The ability to pay for the children? The limits on the attention they will receive? How many is too many, and who gets to decide?”

Tell us what you think: Is there such a thing as too many children? Other families receive welfare, food stamps, and disability payments for their children; should Nadya Suleman be held to a different standard? Should Ms. Suleman’s reproduction—usually a private matter of personal responsibility--be the subject of such public debate?

797 Comments

What do you think? Leave a comment

• February 24, 2009 by Sara Douglas

  I think that Nadya has the right to the children that she has. Yes, there are people who not agree with her. The children need support and help and that should not be denied to those children. They should not have to suffer because other people are passing judgment on their mother. They did not make this choice. We should never restrict the number of children that a person can have. The beauty of the United States is to have choices. Also the beauty is that we all have the right to express our opinions.

  Reply

  • February 26, 2009 by J

    Yes there should be no limit on how many kids someone can have. But she has no job, about ready to lose her home, and can't pay any of the hospital bill. Who will do that?

    Reply

    • March 13, 2009 by stephanie

      These are her kids and she loves them so leave her alone. What about 75 years ago when most people had 10 kids and the whole family and friends helped care for the kids? Come on people: is all people think to do is cut others down? This is awful; we’ve stooped so low. What is wrong with this world? You know God gave us free will so suck it up or write to your government about it. Chances are they won’t care any way so deal with it.

    • March 24, 2009 by Shaneesha

      I agree with you. There shouldn't be a limit on the number of children you can have if you are financially stable to take care of them. But if you are living with you parents in a three or four bedroom home, no job, and already have six children; then no you should not have fourteen children.

    • April 21, 2010 by Adrian Rosemblum

      Back in the days, is back in the days. Today, life is more expensive. If someone wants to have 14 kids, that is that person's choice, I agree. But, it becomes a public problem when that person is not working, had already 6 and didn't have a spouse if you are talking about back in the days. You should take everything in context when you are talking about old days and especially if you are talking about God. Don't you think there is something immoral about having kids without being married. She had them, she should take care of them not the taxpayers.

  • February 26, 2009 by Heather

    I do not agree with you. It would be different if she was able to financially take care of these kids. We should restrict the number of kids people are having, when we are the ones paying for them. Yeah it's nice when the government pays for your housing, food, clothing , everything. Now people like me are suffering paying medical bills on my own, but hey maybe all of us women should have 14 children. Then we can all get help. What is wrong with people. Concerned Tax Payer.

    Reply

    • March 2, 2009 by Barbara

      I HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING THIS SAGA OF THE OCTOMOM AND HAS ANYONE HEARD HER SAY SHE HAS A "PLAN"FOR WHEN THE BABIES COME HOME??? I HAVEN'T AND I HOPE THAT SOCIAL SERVICES STEPS IN AND DOESN'T LET HER HAVE THEM. ALL I HEAR HER SAY SHE IS GOING TO SCHOOL AND BECOME A COUNSELOR RIGHT SHE NEEDS SERIOUS COUNSELING AND THE KID'S DESERVE A BETTER LIFE. NAYDA IS SO BUSY GOING ON TV AND BEATS AROUND THE QUESTION'S ASKED OF HER. I THINK TV SHOULD NOT CATER TO HER AND IF SHE IS GETTING MONEY FROM INTERVIEW'S SHE HAS TO REPORT THAT MONEY AND THEN SHE MAY END UP POORER THAN SHE IS NOW. CALIFORNIA GOVERMENT STEP UP TO THE PLATE AND STOP HER. DON'T MAKE THE TAX PAYERS PAY HER WAY. NAYDA IS CONFUSED AND A CON ARTIST.

    • March 3, 2009 by Stacey

      I don't think a limit should be set on how many kids someone has, that is a personal choice. I also don't think taxpayers should pay for another person’s bad choices. I personally think that Medicaid, Social Security, Welfare, Food Stamps, it should all go away. I don't care if it's 1 or 100 kids; I don't want to pay for someone else to sit at home (or at a fertility clinic) and make babies.

    • August 3, 2009 by mister logic

      How are you proposing that we do this? Some government bureaucrat would give you a baby license, like a driver's license? So who decides how many each person would get? What if a woman gets pregnant after having her permitted allotment? She would be forced to abort? What about couples who were "allowed" to have only 2, but who are great parents? What about when couples divorce and remarry? Do they get to have more kids? What if it's a first marriage for one party, a second for the other? What happens to their permission? This sounds like you would love to move to China, where people are told how many to have...

  • February 27, 2009 by BRIDGET HUNT

    I wanted four children. We had two because that was all we could afford to have, and, keep a roof over their heads, food in their stomach and clothes on their back. It is irresponsible to have children you can not care for financially yourself. It is wrong to ask someone else to foot the bill. Choice is a wonderful thing, but it comes with responsibility.

    Reply

    • February 27, 2009 by Soteloclan

      I agree with the statement above regarding wanting more children and not being able too financially. I have four children and would love more, but we just cant do it financially. It is wrong to bring children into this world and not even be able to supply them the basics. It is a very selfish stunt she did. So are we saying I can have as many children as I want and depending on you the tax payer to support me and them. I do not think so.

    • March 5, 2009 by vixen

      If anyone was allowed to have as many children as they wanted without responsibility then the world would be in more financial burden then it is currently. She needs to have a job and a house to care for all the children. or give them up for adoption... to someone who can provide and care for them... She can't live off of our tax payer dollars to raise the 14 kids, it's not ethical or just... maybe she needs to go back to school and learn about how to be parent instead of wasting our money on her...

    • March 6, 2009 by Darlene Tsopanides

      Simply put: amen. I too want to have more children and as a single parent of one child I too would love the "choice" to have more children but as a mother I choose to be responsible novel. It's too bad we all don't share that same sense of parental duty.

    • March 11, 2009 by Michelle Dunn

      I totally agree with Ms. Hunt. I would absolutely LOVE to have a bunch of children and stay home with my babies and cook and clean and make sure I'm there for every single step in my children’s' life. However, my husband and I have 2 children and honestly that’s all we can afford. AND with this terrible economy I HAVE to work to make sure my family and I have all the things we need so I cannot stay home as much as I would like to. There is ALOT that goes along with raising your children in a healthy and happy way. Obviously the more children you have the less time you have to spend individually with each one, in which children need to prosper in confidence and relationships with others, and when that is not given to them there will most likely be issues they will need to deal with in their adulthood. I believe everyone has a choice in their individual lives but there are consequences and responsibility that come along with decisions that you make. I just feel these children are not going to get everything they need to be happy, healthy adults in the future. And the welfare system is there to help and does, but sometimes people take advantage of that and in this case I believe that entirely. She just HAD TO HAVE 1 more child after already having 6, but in the end she knew she would get the "help" she needed. I just don’t think she has taken any responsibility for the decisions she has made and these children are going to suffer for it. God bless her and her children.

    • March 11, 2009 by jill

      You hit it right on the mark!

    • October 19, 2010 by Mary

      I agree with your comment. I also am I mother who would have liked to have more children but financially knew what are limits were. I work in a pediactric clinic and it is very frustrating to see these poor kids who have young parents (many single) and multiple siblings and who are on welfare because they can be. Many of these people continue to have children knowing that they will receive more money from the government and they will not have to work. I believe the government should step in and put a stop to things. If you are not financially able to care for your kids you should not have them in your home until you can. Break the cycle, the elderly people are losing the benefits they worked so hard for because of people like her. If you can not take care of them don't expect me to do it. I work very hard for my money yet I am paying her to stay home and have more babies, it isn't fair to her children or to me!

  • March 1, 2009 by mother of 3

    Choices have responsibilities and consequences. Poor choices usually have responsibilities and consequences the chooser doesn't like. That's how people learn. First, California should go after the fertility doctor for the hospitalization costs. It is irresponsible to do IVF on someone with no insurance to cover medical and hospitalization costs. Second, it is in the best long-term interest of the octuplets to send a pair home with the birth mom and adopt the others out as twins to parents screened for stability, both psychologically and financially. Common sense dictates you don't have children you can't afford to care for. Responsible people make the choice daily NOT to have more children because they cannot afford it. Citizens and lawmakers need to look at legislation that makes it LESS comfortable for those who reproduce irresponsibly.

    Reply

  • March 2, 2009 by Shannon Shaw

    Have you lost your mind?! That woman has decided to have all these children with the make believe notion that love can raise them. She had them and expects the tax payers to pay for her choices. I think she should get NO INCREASE in financial hand outs........otherwise she may decide to have 8 more for Americans to foot the bill for. These children suffer NOT BECAUSE AMERICA DENIES THEM HELP.......BUT BECAUSE THEIR MOTHER IS IRRESPONSIBLE ........SO LETS JUST TELL EVERY BROKE UNWED MOM OUT THERE TO KEEP SPITTING OUT KIDS BECAUSE WE WILL PAY FOR SOMETHING THAT IS THEIR RESPONSIBLITY? I cannot stand people who pretend to be do-gooders and say.........Awww, let the kids have it.....its not their fault. THEY HAVE A PARENT AND HER NAME IS NOT AMERICAN TAXPAYER!!!! IF YOU AGREE SO MUCH.,....HOW MUCH MONEY HAVE YOU SENT TO SUPPORT HER KIDS? PROBABLY NONE CAUSE YOU DONT HAVE ANY MONEY EITHER.....JUST LIKE HER.

    Reply

    • March 26, 2009 by Michelle

      I agree with you! Love will not support those kids. And you are right it is not kids fault, they have a so-called Mom?

  • March 2, 2009 by Ellen

    I also have a right not to have to pay for these children. And I agree that we should be able to have as many children as we want - however we also need to be able to provide for them ourselves. I also agree that the children should not suffer - they could be placed in homes that can love and support them.

    Reply

  • March 2, 2009 by Kati

    In reply to Sara Douglas' comment that we should never restrict the number of children that a person can have - we already do. I adopted a baby girl in the United States. I was not able to do so until I could show that I had the financial resources to provide her with a home, food, clothing, and healthcare. Nadya already had 6 kids that she was unable to support. How does she have the right to have more children she cannot support, even if it had only been one instead of eight?

    Reply

    • March 4, 2009 by Katie B. Winakur

      My husband and I are unable to have children naturally. We have decided to use the route of adopting a child through the state through the foster program. We are and have been amazed at the rights that these parents have! They can be drug users, unable to give a child a stable home and on and on... But my husband and I have a very stable home with the means to take care of the children that are placed in our homes. BUT, the rights of the parents over-ride our commitments. They more than likely go back into homes that were just the same as when they are taken out with no stability. The government NEEDS to step into these homes and take away the children. These children did not ask to be born and brought into these situations that they are living in. I am glad that this is being brought into the spotlight but this something that everyone that is in the "system" has and will continue to fight with. I do not have faith that the government will step in and do "the right thing". They will continue to suffer, the parents will continue to con the government and so forth... It is just ridiculous!!

  • March 3, 2009 by tammy raybo

    Yes, a woman has the right to have one hundred children but if you cannot afford the first one, what would possess you to have thirteen more? We, the taxpayers, have a right to be outraged at having to pay for her responsibility. Put her to work seven days a week and we will pay for the babysitting. We will probably will pay for it anyway. Maybe she will think twice about having more children.

    Reply

  • March 4, 2009 by Jeni

    Sorry but I disagree. Obviously she does need to be limited. She has no job, no house, no husband and fourteen kids. Why let her raise them when we the taxpayers are the ones supporting her? I could understand if she was trying but she is not. I had natural triplets when I was 18 and I would never sell their story to make money like she is. She does not deserve those kids

    Reply

  • March 5, 2009 by Vitoria

    I think that Nadya has the right to the children that she has. Yes, there are people who not agree with her. The children need support and help and that should not be denied to those children. They should not have to suffer because other people are passing judgment on their mother. They did not make this choice. We should never restrict the number of children that a person can have. The beauty of the United States is to have choices. Also the beauty is that we all have the right to express our opinions.

    Reply

    • March 11, 2009 by Di

      I was just reading all the comments and was going to stay out of it, even though I STRONGLY AGREE with what everyone is saying. I have a daughter who is a single mother and has only one child and is the SOLE-SUPPORTER of her child with NO assistance from the government. She struggles but IS working and does support her son. So to hear what Victoria just stated totally boiled my blood. Yes, you are right, she like everyone else has the right to however many children she wants, but it is also HER responsibility to CARE FOR THEM financially, mentally, and responsibly AS A PARENT. Yes, you are right, it is NOT the fault of the children, but IT IS the fault of THEIR mother, still does that GIVE HER the right to take advantage of the government and the taxpaying citizens of the US. I like many others am tired of footing the bill for these incompetent people who do not have the audacity to see what is the correct action of one's life, much less of that of their children. Obviously, you do not pay out of your taxes to help support another who you do not know for you to make such a comment; and there are plenty of loving families who do not have the ability to have children that CAN give them a loving home. It is MY OPINION as I gather that of MANY, MANY others that she has done this to benefit her and no one else. In any person’s right mind one cannot individually support that many children without financial help, supportive help of a husband or father, or a job. Come on, get real she is not doing this for their benefit but hers only. Where is the father? He should be held accountable also since he is the father of all 14 children. Why does she not go after him and not of the tax payers who have lives of their own and families of their own to support? I could go on and on, as many of us could on this subject and we all know in our hearts and beliefs that WE AS ADULTS AND PARENTS should be responsible for what we have done and will do with our lives and MOST IMPORTANTLY with that of our children. Obviously, she is NOT responsible!

    • March 13, 2009 by Mother of Two

      I have two sons. I worked two jobs so I could pay my doctor and hospital bill when I had my first son. Why should an unemployed woman feel she has the right to keep having kids when she has no way to support them? What will stop her from having more? If six wasn't enough, why would she think 14 are enough? Just because somebody CAN does not mean they SHOULD. There are limits on other things -- why not children? A man or woman can only have one spouse at a time. Most people don't question that law. If you can't afford the kids, you DON'T have them. If you do, and you are irresponsible they are given to loving homes that CAN afford them. My mother was adopted; the people who adopted her loved her and raised her. Just because you want 100 kids does NOT give you the right to have them.

    • March 26, 2009 by Michelle

      You're right she does have the right to choose how many children to have, but you also have to know your limits. She should be able to proudly be able to support her children. She made this choice, it was not a mistake that she is working hard to support, this was a decision.

  • March 5, 2009 by kh

    I can't see others having to pay for this woman's idea that she needed more kids when she can not even support the ones she has. I'm sorry I wouldn't give a dime to this lady. She could pay for the sperm she can pay for the kids.

    Reply

    • March 11, 2009 by Di

      In response to KH, it is not her that is paying for the sperm donation, she is asking the public/US citizens to pay for the invitro fertilization that she has attained to the octupulets. Hence, she is not putting out ANY of her money, which she does not have to have been impregnated/pregnancy care/birthing of these children. This has all been stated in the TV news!

  • March 9, 2009 by John

    I do not agree with your comment. I agree that the mistake was made and her children are not at fault. I perceive that you are ok to have your hard earned money be spent on someone's poor decision. I work hard for my money and i refuse to to have my money be spend on someone's personal interest to have 14 kids that she cant support.

    Reply

  • March 9, 2009 by Vince Hamblin

    These are not choices they are demands, in the end who is responsible for our own actions and who will pay the highest price. I fear sometimes that it is too late to stop the selfish and self-centered insanity that has distorted our values; it seems we have become a nation that rewards bad decisions. GOD BLESS US ALL.

    Reply

  • March 12, 2009 by Francine

    The tax payers should not have to support these children. Obviously, the mother can't either. Open adoption maybe the right thing to do.

    Reply

  • March 16, 2009 by usokwasi

    I think that Nadya has the right to the children that she has. Yes, there are people who not agree with her. The children need support and help and that should not be denied to those children. They should not have to suffer because other people are passing judgment on their mother. They did not make this choice. We should never restrict the number of children that a person can have. The beauty of the United States is to have choices. Also the beauty is that we all have the right to express our opinions. Well that is one way of looking at it. I feel you should be able to have as many kids as you like but one at a time no fertility drugs should be involved since you have to care for these kids with tax payers money.

    Reply

    • March 23, 2009 by Elizabeth M

      To: Usokwasi You state that "The beauty of the United States is to have choices". You also said: We should never restrict the number of children that a person has". That is absurd. If you are a millionaire and want to adopt a few dozen needy kids - GO for it. If you need and demand money from taxpayers, go to some other country.

  • March 18, 2009 by Norma

    If you have the money to support the children, that is fine. If you are a single mother with no help, income, or even parental support it is totally irresponsible and expecting public assistance to support you and your brood is NOT acceptable. If she has the money of Oprah and wanted to have the 14 kids, she could afford to hire someone to help and pay her own way. This woman hasn't even for a basic education and expects everybody else to support her and her addiction. That is a serious mental problem and the children should not have to pay the price for her mental instability. She needs some serious mental help and if her parents can't/don't want to help her, then the children need to be placed in temporary foster care or put up for adoption so they will have a quality life and not be stuck in a situation where she comes unglued every time one of them gets outside her line of vision. This woman scares the daylights out of me. She is very unstable and is calling 911 and saying she is going to kill herself because one of the children went with her mother BEFORE the litter was born. To me, that shows how unstable she is and how little she thinks about the impact of her actions on the children.

    Reply

  • March 18, 2009 by dolores foster

    I agree with Sara, thank you. This is America and we can agree to disagree:)

    Reply

  • March 19, 2009 by M

    She has a right to the number of children she can afford! I'm tired of paying for other people's mistakes. I'd like to have 5 kids, but as a responsible person, I had only three - which I can provide for.

    Reply

  • March 21, 2009 by Paula Hartman

    If you think choosing to bear fourteen children with no money or support is fine, use your own paychecks to support her. Even Suleman's own mother has rejected her due to her reckless behavior and egocentric decisions. Her decisions and behaviors prove she is an unfit mother and others must bear the costs of her recklessness.

    Reply

  • March 24, 2009 by Lois Tatum

    You completely expressed my feeling. I couldn't agree w/you more.

    Reply

  • March 26, 2009 by Debbie Zimmerman

    Are you kidding me??? We have rights as long as they do not infringe on others rights. Do we as citizens not have the right to be protected by law from being 'milked' by other people's irresponsible behavior. We may not have another octo-moms out there, but we do have a lot of single moms who keep having children and no means other than us taxpayers to support them. There is no accountability in our system for this kind of irresponsible behavior. Once the children are born, we as taxpayers are put between a rock and a hard place as what to do. The children are innocent. We, as taxpayers need to be able to say at some point enough is enough. Unfortunately, by rescuing the irresponsible, we have perpetuated a needed society. When the scales tip to where there are more people depending on the taxpayers than there are taxpayers, then maybe we will wake up and smell the coffee.

    Reply

  • March 29, 2009 by Beverly

    I agree with Sara Douglas wholeheartedly. This mother is a loving mother and do you know how many mothers have kids and don't care where they are and give them no attention at all? Someone just needs to stop by and see Nadya and make friends with her and as soon as she gets to know them maybe she will accept help, just enough for her to take shower's and keep herself cleaned up. She always looks clean to me and she is always having a baby or older child kissing them and telling them that she loves them. I really think she can hold the fort down and I wish I lived closer so I could help her out. I just really think that a judge would be wrong in separating this family. Not many mothers want this many children but she does and is perfectly satisfied. Let us help her out even if someone tells her of these postings. From being a nurse and listening to her on TV I think she is very capable of raising these children. I do agree that she needs help here at first and maybe Dr. Phil can help her again on this. She had a reason to release the help that she had or she would still have them helping her. Good luck Nadya and best wishes. Kiss all of those kids as much as you can and I know you will. If you ever want to email me please do so. Thinking of you and all 14 of your blessings.

    Reply

  • March 30, 2009 by Terry

    If Octomom could be responsible for her own children without government supplement payments she can buy all she wants to have. Remember she paid to have these children by medical means not by natural means. She planned to have these babies and therefore should not receive any money for her to buy a hot tub for her master bedroom. She had received $165,000.00 that would have paid for the house back payments and took some pressure off her parents; instead she paid for another pregnancy and plastic surgery. That was very irresponsible.

    Reply

  • April 3, 2009 by CHERYL KNOWS

    I want to start off saying my heart goes out to those 14 children. I'm sure there's not one person who has written their comment/opinion blame the 14 children. What I have read and seen from the news media and Dr. Phil show is that we all agree that NADYA SULEMAN IS NOT REALISTIC. First and foremost, nobody has mention at all, including Ms. Suleman, what is the realistic goal for all 14 of her children if, God forbid, something drastically happen to Nadya. What if she passed away? Who is the next of kin to care for 14 kids? She can not say that can't happen because I have experienced first hand in my family where the mom passed away leaving six kids behind. The blessing in this case the kids did have their father to step-in and the two oldest were teenagers by then and could help a little. As a home health caregiver who has taken care and experienced caring for the developmentally challenge (like autism, respiratory, etc.), there is one on one challenge alone. I’m not here to judge Ms Suleman, that's God's duty, but I am going to say the real reason people is outrage and others are supportive is: IT'S NOT WHAT YOU DID.. IT'S HOW YOU DID IT!!! If Nadya had the WEALTH AND STABILITY already in place, like Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt where there are two working parents with the income they have, even Madonna, they are all able to care for all the children. When you imposing on others without their permission; where we have to take from our own household without our own free will; and, where it’s being imposed on us especially the time of the economy. Seeing how you getting free help when we as the model citizen strived to do everything right but still being penalized causing a struggling in our own household for your unrealistic and selfish act, then it is a cause to be outraged. On the other hand, these babies are innocent and the older ones are going to be lacking quality time with their mother to fill their needs. FOR GLORIA AND ANGELS IN WAITING: COUNT YOUR BLESSINGS YOU WERE ABLE TO HAVE A DEPARTURE FROM THIS SITUATION BECAUSE HONESTLY Ms. Suleman is not protecting the babies in a safe environment. Dr. Phil, I agree with attorney Gloria Allred these babies are in harm’s way. Social Services is not going to do anything until one or not more of these children lose their life. Nadya is not wanting help for these kids she want it for herself! Her so called attorney is going to get most of the money dollars come in. A mother needs to be there in the home with the help at the beginning to oversee that the well being of her kids are met to her satisfaction and she needs to build a comfort rapport with her hired caregivers. I’ve changed Nadya's story name because she don't just have octuplets she has 14. Octuplet name leaves the other six out. HER STORY NAME: MOTHER GOOSE, FROM STORY LIL OLD LADY LIVED IN SHOE, HAD SO MANY KIDS DIDN'T KNOW WHAT TO DO? MOTHER GOOSE IS HER NEW NAME. STOP THAT FERTILITY CLINIC ASAP! PLEASE PUT THAT DOCTOR WITH ANNA NICOLE'S DOCTORS. PUT NADYA WITH ANDREAYATES, CASSIE, AND SUSAN. NADYA AND HOWARD STERN CAN GET HITCHED. THEY BOTH ARE GOLD DIGGERS AND MADOFF CAN BE THEIR BROKER. THEY ALL SCANTLESS.

    Reply

  • April 13, 2009 by Caroline

    You can have as many kids as you want to. No one can dictate how many would be "enough". Take this for example: the Duggars. They are married and devoted to each other. They have 18 children. Their food bill is $3000 a MONTH. They home school(ed) every child. Each one of them is taught to play piano and violin. They even have their own show! They are not on assistance and they can afford BY THEMSELVES every child that they have. They are not a "strain" on the taxpayers. Now, let's look at Nadya. She's a single mother with no income other than what is left of a disability settlement. She has 14 children (and no one's quite sure who paid for the implantations). She has called the police numerous times because she "misplaced" a child or two. She is on welfare yet claims she gets help from no one. She had nannies that she fired because they were "spies". She is clearly unstable and at least a pathological liar. THERE is why the public is outraged. NOT because she had 14 children, but because WE support her 14 children. Even her own parents have told her to stop. We have a right to be outraged because WE are her income.

    Reply

  • April 15, 2009 by Tressie Osmun

    You must be a democrat because Nadia deserves to have those children removed from her custody; absolutely and immediately. She is acting like a child and needs to grow up and start PAYING FOR HER OWN CHILDREN. I am tired of being the working woman and now I have to pay for things like social security and for people like Nadia. Sweetheart, please get up and get a job! You got your fifteen minutes of fame now start actually acting like a mother instead of like your children for the next fifty years. If you could not take care of them then don't have them planted in your stomach. Children are not like dogs; you can't just feed them once a day and then leave them at home all day with a sitter so you can go out shopping. You're children are going to learn to hate you if you keep acting like this.

    Reply

  • May 2, 2009 by Barbara Gies

    I agree completely with Sarah Douglas comment - it's a free country and people should mind their own business. There's another show on TV about a large family and no one criticizes it. More and more our country and the people in it are butting into each other business and that not good.

    Reply

  • May 3, 2009 by Pamela Jenkins

    No one should be able to tell us how many children we can have. That is taking away another right. As grown adults, that decision should be up to us and no one else!

    Reply

  • May 11, 2009 by Natalie

    Well, since you think that she should have as many children as she wants, maybe you should support them then or maybe baby sit them while she finds a JOB so she can support those little babies by working her butt off. I think that only then she would know how hard it is to support 14 children. I HATE, but I mean HATE having to pay taxes so this SELFISH woman can get her nails done. She wanted attention, she has had it but using those little babies that never ask to be born.

    Reply

  • June 6, 2009 by Marlene

    She is the most irresponsible person I have heard of. I am an immigrant to this great country. I have raised two beautiful children, I was married. She is not married, has no income, no education. Tthe children need to be taken care of by some responsible people. I cannot understand that she gets to keep these children. In the meantime, we, the average taxpayer, are paying for her bills, and she does not care. What kind of a mother is she? Well, it's good to get this of my chest. Marlene, retired, recently remarried, living in San Diego

    Reply

  • January 26, 2010 by jana Bradford

    My mother was a single mom 3 kids and a social worker we sometimes didn't eat because she was too proud to take food stamps but we all survived and remain happy as adults and remember our childhood as an adventure but to pay for some whack jos to have an enormous amount of children on the publics dime I don't thin k is even legal is it???? Where'd she get the monet to be implanted and that doctor shame on him...

    Reply

  • August 4, 2010 by sah42859

    Leave her alone!! She is doing a great job with her children. She love's them and at home with them. At least she is not another Kate, using her children for fame and money and not spending time with her children.

    Reply

  • September 18, 2010 by C. Elliott

    You can have as many children as you want, as long as the taxpayers do not have to pay for them. There are already too many children in this situation that have to be taken care of from cradle to grave because they were born to irresponsible unwed mothers and unwed fathers who will not step up and take care of them.

    In this case the doctor should be footing the bill for these children, because if he had did his homework, he would have seen that she was not capable of taking care of the children she already had.

    Reply

• February 25, 2009 by Gwen

  Nobody should help this woman. She deserves to suffer the consequences of her actions. Society owes her nothing at all. They should all be adopted into responsible families.

  Reply

  • February 26, 2009 by alsish`

    I think that this is a ridiculous comment. Society has given her the right to have 14 children. She can take care of the 6 children she currently has and am sure she can figure it out.. Who are you to say that she is not a responsible parent.. What gives you the right to judge and base opinions??

    Reply

    • February 26, 2009 by karen

      I also think that she is irresponsible because what responsible person would take food out of her 6 childrens mouths to have 8 more children to feed

    • March 1, 2009 by Kat

      She has not taken care of the six she has. She lives with her mother on food stamps. The mother states she has not helped pay for the children's expenses. The mother is losing her house. How does this qualify for "care"?

    • March 3, 2009 by stupified

      We can say that she is irresponsible because the only way that she was able to "take care of" the other six is from her disability, welfare, and two or three of the children’s disability payments. She is not providing for them, everyone else is. So, the more children she has, the more government money she gets... get it? She is not supporting them, we are. She is a leech on society!

    • March 3, 2009 by tammy

      She cannot take care of six. Smarty is living at home and on public aid. No job and her mom are probably doing most of the work. The woman needs to grow up and who is going to help her with eight screaming babies when they come home plus 6 older jealous children? The older six are the ones I am feeling sorry for. They will be practically forgotten when the octuplets come home.

    • March 3, 2009 by Stacey

      Why is it ridiculous to expect someone to care for their own children? Sure, society gave her the right to have 14 children; unfortunately society also gave her the right to exploit the welfare system. Yes, food stamps and disability are a form of welfare. She can't possibly be a responsible parent if she spends all the money she has to have more babies instead of to care for the babies she already has. It is irresponsible, if not downright child abuse, to knowingly get pregnant with 8 (or even 6 since 2 split) babies. Those kids will have many disabilities because of this woman's choices, but I suppose it'll be ok because they'll qualify for disability their entire lives (the cost will be in the millions for all those babies).

    • March 19, 2009 by syl* 3-19-09

      The word responsible, should be put up and posted all over. People seem to have forgotten the meaning. What gives you the right to say she can figure it out, you start paying the bills. While she is figuring it.

  • February 27, 2009 by Melisa

    I agree the mom has huge problems or she would have wanted all those kids alone. At the same time, I wonder how she paid for that invitro so many times. I know that procedure cost more than $10,000.00 at a time as my husband and i have looked into it for us. She gets more than a grand alone a month for her disabled children not to mention all the help she gets from the government. Is she realy fit to be a mother at all? Come on people, figure it out; she has taken away from her already here kids to bring more life into this world. She does not need to be a mom to any just for that reason alone.

    Reply

  • February 27, 2009 by Monti DuCoty

    I totally disagree with you. There are people out their that can help. Are you a mom? Put yourself in this situation.

    Reply

    • March 11, 2009 by Di

      That is the problem that the good citizens of the US are having with this lady and her issue; that she has abused the help for herself. It has been in the news that she has had help through taxpayers not only for her fertilization and birth of her children but for her plastic surgeries that she has had--Come on people are we not listening to the news and seeing what this lady is doing? Now she is getting help with our taxpayers’ money to fund her house and her nanny, not to say what else she is abusing this from mine and our money. We complain about supporting the immigrants who come in to our country, as well as our homeless who live here, but we condone what she is doing--that is totally mind blowing and unacceptable to hear that we allow it and that some of you say it is ok, because it is not. Again, we don't do it for the immigrants or homeless or poor why her?

  • April 2, 2009 by melissa

    I like her. Let her be. Everyone needs to leave her alone and let her liver her life.

    Reply

    • January 26, 2011 by LULU

      what would jesus do? I don't the understand the ones who speak bad about this. what is the point of it. I dont know why people condemn her. let you who are without sin to cast the first stone.I not particulately religous. but couldnt let this go by without saying something. All of the self rightous.people should help her out or give her little cash.if you are worried about the children. that is what jesus would do. do. do you think there will be a rash of octomoms. I think nadia has acted with complete class

• February 25, 2009 by Jane

  This mother is extremely selfish. I think it would be a personal matter IF this mother could take care of the children on her own. If she wasn't accepting money from the government, by all means, she should be able to have as many as she wants. Being the taxpayers are paying her way and, I'm sure, will be paying for their health care, education etc. for the rest of their lives, it is definitely NOT a private matter. The doctor who helped with this mess is equally responsible and should be thoroughly investigated. Maybe he/she should be the one to foot the bill for these beautiful children! I'M ONE TAXPAYER WHO IS TIRED OF PAYING FOR THESE IRRESPONSIBLE PEOPLE AND THEIR ACTIONS!

  Reply

  • February 26, 2009 by Sheila

    I agree with the idea that the doctor should foot the bill for raising and providing staff and care for these children. Another thing, who was paying for the IVF? That cannot be a cheap process, especially in California.

    Reply

    • March 1, 2009 by Kat

      She got a payout from a former job to the tune of $168,000. It is obvious to me that she used a portion of this to pay for the IVF treatment.

  • April 5, 2009 by papapanoel

    Thousands of Cubans arrive in the USA via the "Wet foot Dry foot Policy." The moment their feet are dry, the Government provides for them in excess of $3000.00 per month to keep their feet dry. Question: Who would you rather get that money, Dry foots or the 14 American born angels?

    Reply

  • March 1, 2010 by KYM GOINS

    I agree that taxpayers should NOT be responsible for taking care of children that were born of choice such as this. I know that there is a need for food,formula,diapers, clothing, care, medical etc. However, this Mom chose to have these 8 babies at one time knowing she already had children at home. So, the plans should have been in place on how to feed, clothe, etc. these children before having them. I am all for people having as many children as they desire within reason. The problem arises when it becomes the taxpayers responsibility to take care of these children when most of us are having enough problems taking care of our own children on our incomes, WHY should the taxpayers have to pay for children that are NOT their responsibility in the first place? We all need help, especially now! But it seems that the system is backwards. Why are taxpayers that are working to try to make ends meet not eligible for help of any kind simply because they DO WORK? Shouldn't THEY be the ones eligible for the help this woman is receiving?

    Reply

  • March 20, 2010 by Lucy Fowler

    Those children should be taken from her and put in foster care. It is a fact, she can't afford them. The public will have to bare the cost for the next 17 years. It is not fare for her to sit back and do nothing and get welfare.

    Reply

    • June 19, 2010 by willconnie

      If she can't take care of her kids they should be put in foster homes with the option to be adopted. Years of foster care will cost more than having them adopted out, and the children will get better care and attention if they are split up and have loving parents who can't have children. They have a much better future than being left in that environment. I hope that she does what's right for the kids. Where are the social workers in all this?

• February 25, 2009 by Lisa

  As long as she is accepting handouts from the government, on the backs of WORKING citizens and taxpayers, does she have the right to have 14 kids and expect someone else to foot the bill? She is lazy and needs to be held accountable.

  Reply

• February 25, 2009 by Julie Pytlak

  I have yet to hear how she came up with the money to get the in vitro. It is no cheap venture. Also, how she thinks she can go to school and still be emotionally and physically available to her children is beyond me. She also stated she would like to work full time, can't imagine daycare costs!

  Reply

  • February 26, 2009 by Todd

    From what I have been told, if someone is already on government assistance, then that will pay for the invitro. In other words, we as tax payers pay for the invitro?

    Reply

  • February 27, 2009 by Season

    Her disability checks paid for the IVF. That news has been said all over the place.

    Reply

  • February 28, 2009 by celeste

    She got we don't know how many thousands from some injury settlement. She was hurt during a riot at a place she was working. Apparently, she had enough to do the procedures she wanted at the fertility clinic she choose. Now you know.

    Reply

  • June 9, 2009 by Denise

    I watched an interview not long after the babies were born and from what was said, she apparently saved up money for each set of in vitro treatments. She had stated that when most people were saving up for cars and such, that she was saving the money to get pregnant. And pregnant she got! She also said that she used up the grant money that the government had given her for school to take care of whatever else she needed. She was given that money for school not to take care of her every need. She wants to go to school? In my opinion, she should get no more help from the government for school since she misused the money they gave her or if they do, and then none of it should go into her hands. Work? Right. It will take more money than she would make in 2 months for 1 week of child care. But, hey, she got her fame, what does she care?

    Reply

• February 25, 2009 by Nicole

  I am single with a nine year old boy. I know first hand how hard it is to raise one child without child support or a responsible partner. I can't even begin to imagine raising fourteen. Working full time, taking care of the household duties, homework, it all wipes me out. I feel this woman is not mentally well. These poor children, When will she just have time to sit and love on these children. How is she going to get them all out of the house if there is an emergency? Social Services needs to step in and give this woman a reality check. Daycare businesses can not have a one to fourteen ratio. She needs full time help and I as a tax payer feel I shouldn't have to pay for this. There are plenty of loving couples in the U.S. who would love to have a baby.

  Reply

• February 25, 2009 by AMY SPEZIALETTI

  Anyone who believes it is her right to try to populate the world is as off balance as she is. She did not do this because she and her partner wanted kids they would care for and raise to be normal healthy adults. As a parent, I know that it is my husband and my own responsibility to provide for our children. We work so we are able to give them shelter, education, clothing, entertainment/culture, food etc. We give up things that we may want to do, or have because we are the type of parent who puts the child's needs ahead of our own. We teach them responsibility for their actions so that one day they will be exemplary adults. This little girl, thought hey I will use my body to have a bounty of children and get famous, stay home, live off of others and use the children as my livelihood. I say let her support them, let her raise them, let her live the life she chose.

  Reply

• February 25, 2009 by Tiffany

  As a taxpayer, I say that we get the right to limit people like this from having children that we are going to pay for. I have to live within my means and I have worked hard for every dollar that I have earned in my lifetime and to now have to pay for someone else to have the children that I don't even have yet (because we can't afford it as of now, weird how that logic works in the real world) makes me sick to my stomach. What is this country coming to, that this is something we are going to plaster on TV and give this woman exactly what she was looking for, and that was her 15 minutes. I say put the children in a home where they will be cared for and loved properly and make this woman get a job to pay for the accrued bills herself. I'm sure they could use a janitor at the hospital she birthed these babies, if it were the only way they would get payment. Work for it lady, the rest of us do.

  Reply

  • August 3, 2009 by Super Lady

    Do you really mean it? So how would this work? Every time a woman gets pregnant, she is supposed to go to a government office and report her pregnancy? And if they say thumbs down, she is forced to get an abortion? Oh, really? Or does she have to have government permission to have sex? And if you decided to have your first baby, and were thrilled to be expecting, what if the government told you that you were not allowed? I do think Nadya is irresponsible. I do think the doctor who planted a crop of embryos in her womb was irresponsible. However, I don't think it is the government's business when and whether and how many kids to have. It's too personal a decision. If you disagree, you are free to move to China.

    Reply

• February 25, 2009 by Cory

  You know what, people like this young lady do not need anymore criticism than they already received. How about praying for her and her children and love them regardless, just like Jesus loves us. Yes it was a selfish act, but how many of us have also made very selfish decisions in our lives. Prayer changes things, so lets pray for them and see how Jesus handles it.

  Reply

  • February 26, 2009 by Fredda

    Amen! I agree with you, it is not for us to judge but to pray for the situation. I do agree that she did not use good judgment, but the deed is done and we cannot undo it.

    Reply

  • February 28, 2009 by Carla

    I have to say prayer does a lot and you just made me realize in the mist of my anger that I never even thought to stop for a second and Pray "Thank You" Because we should be more like Jesus and We should not throw stones... Thank you I gave all my anger to Jesus.. On this subject... And I just said a prayer that everything works out for all involved... Now I feel better!!!! Amen.LOL

    Reply

  • March 8, 2009 by Cindi

    I agree she does not need anymore criticism. She also does not need to continuously exploit her children and give interviews which are all time away from all 14 of her children. She needs to get a real job and divide her time between work and her children. She has assured that not one of those poor children will get fully what they need from their Mother, its not humanly possible to be a nurturing responsible parent to that many kids. I don't think Jesus can help her in this situation, only a good adoption agency and a very good Psychiatrist are going to help this woman. I have personally volunteered to help this family, with my time, not money, I have my own family to take care of, but as a lot of the volunteers heard, she is looking for a reality show to come in and pay her way and help with volunteers, this woman is truly beyond help. I have three children , I don't recall having the time or energy to give interviews after they were born, I was too busy taking care of them!

    Reply

  • April 23, 2009 by Dee

    Yeah right........shes taking food outta my kids mouth. This is when logic needs to come in to religion. Pray for her, yes. but I have a right as a citizen and soldier/.

    Reply

  • May 27, 2009 by terry

    How can people throw so many stones their way? God will bless them any way. Look to your own faults first before you look to others.

    Reply

  • June 12, 2009 by emma

    I thank you for expressing your religion. In what sense (outside of personal cultures and believes) will essentially talking to someone who may or may not be real or link to any reality at all (real meaning physical present and able to make a change based on some actual physical action)? In fact, yes we should be kind to them but "praying" is in my belief and is not going to change a thing. It is worth about as much as when you were two years old and talked to your doll.

    Reply

    • June 14, 2009 by jennai

      I find it truly sad how many of you are only concerned with how this is affecting you! How selfish! I keep reading comments that say how " I would have loved to have more children but I just couldn't afford it." Thats a bunch of hog wash! Its just an excuse. They didn't want more children. Why do people think you have to have material wealth to be a parent? How shallow has society become. I'm not saying that it was right of Nadia to have all these children, but it happened..they're here! Why would anyone want to break apart these children for the sake of a better material based life? Angelina Jolie is looked upon as an idol because of how wonderful that she adopted some kids and had a bunch of her own...just because shes rich! How much time do you think shes actually spending with them between upholding her status as humanitarian and Worlds Most Powerful Celebrity! Shes constantly making another movie. Like she doesn't have enough money as it is between her and Brad...but wait she's Supermom! Every time she pops out a kid shes ready to have another one... if Nadia needs to be mentally evaluated then so does Angelina...Oh yeah and for the person who said prayer doesn't work.. You should really try it sometime.

    • June 14, 2009 by Jan

      Who are we to say that God isn't real? Let's just say for a second that He is real. Well then that would mean that He created us, therefore, don't you think He would be the right guy to deal with this problem? We don't have to believe, that's your own personal choice, but don't get upset with someone one else for praying. Some of us believe that God is real and whether you find that out now or when you're dead is up to you. I know from personal experience that prayer can be extremely helpful and beneficial. I hope for your sake that you one day know the truth..God Bless you.

  • November 18, 2009 by Dana Nelson

    I can not believe,how people are mean,bad!! All these negative comments!!! Yes it is wrong,to get pregnant again without father and she had already so many children at home...these kids didn't choose their mom!!!! She did wrong thing to have so many kids.....she is NOT ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF THEM...I do have twins...raising them by myself...it's imposible.....but we everybody can help her.It's a miracle to have 8 kids.GOD choosed her,to have so many kids.Maybe it's a test on us??? We are helping everywhere in the world,why we can not help to our people....it want be that much from us!!! Problem number 1 in the USA is:expensive day care,expensive kindergarden and expensive health insurance,expensive school,the goverment is not supporting families!!!!! In Europe is normal,when mother give a birth to a child,she get around $1000 for one baby,$2000 for twins.What she get in the USA? Diapers,cooling bag and syringe ball and coupons....After delivery ,she can stay 2 years at home and take good care of her child and if she was before delivery working,she get monthly paycheck 75% of her previous check,if she didn't work,the goverment is helping her-they are not taking her child,they are helping her.In the USA is normal,that mothers are returning to the work one week after delivery!!! and grandmoms are watching a newborn babies.What is wrong with the goverment WAKE UP!!! Mother is the best for the children!!! Health insurance-in Europe is minimum people without a health insurance (only homeless,people on drugs and foreigners) EVERYBODY HAS AN INSURANCE.Here in the USA is minimum people who has an insurance. What is wrong with the goverment.And expensive school....in the USA it is normal to have a super dumm spoiled rich person in university and smart poor person in the factory...in Europe,if you are smart,you don't have to pay anything to go to the university.LETS TALK ABOUT MORE IMPORTANT THINGS !!!! I am not rich,BUT if I know her address ,I will send her every month something,clothes,food,...AND if I am her neighbour,I will help her with her kids.....because YOU NEVER KNOW ,WHEN YOU WILL NEED HELP FROM ALL OF US TOO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DOES SOMEBODY KNOWS HER ADDRESS?? I WANT TO HELP HER??? DANA MOM OF TWINS

    Reply

• February 25, 2009 by Hannah

  She should have a chance to support her family. But I think it's a given that there's a CPS agent with a file on her already. She has to provide for her own family and live with the decisions she made. If she's not a fit mother, she shouldn't keep her kids.

  Reply

• February 25, 2009 by Renee

  I am saddened for the children. I have a set of triplets that arrived from in vitro fertilization. When my ex husband and I were going through treatments before we began, our doctor, Joseph Garza, San Antonio gave us a book on his requirements before we began. First Thing: Married couples only! My doctor only implanted 3 fertilized eggs and all 3 took. He would not do more than that. I became a single mother 10 years later with another baby added to my family. Let me tell you that is when it got hard. No money, no help, and then I had to go back to work. I just feel so much for the children. Something is very wrong with this picture. I think the doctor who implanted all of these eggs should go to jail and have his license taken away. I believe all the children need as much help as possible. It is not their fault they have an irresponsible mother. The doctor should help support those children.

  Reply

• February 25, 2009 by Lyn

  I must be the only person who thoroughly understands Nadya. What I don't understand is people who cannot see that the only issue at this point is, "How can I help". You see, .the babies are here now! I wish I could meet and get to know this mom. I'd let her know my infertility struggles. The heartache of being alone and desire to be a mom or a sibling or just a family of my own. I'd be willing to move in and help her and love those babies with her. I've fostered parented teens and their child(ren) in my home for many years. Fostering means that they always leave. I just wish Nadya could contact me and we get those children home with their own mom and family.

  Reply

  • February 27, 2009 by tonya

    I know the struggle of infertility. I fostered my two sets of twins before adopting them. Fostering doesn't mean they will always leave. Don't give up on your dream to have a baby even through adoption. I agree the babies are here now and they are what is important. But if Nadya cannot give them the life they deserve shouldn't she allow someone else to do so? I would never want someone to lose their children. But you are talking about what is best and the talk of the babies going into foster has been brought up. I know that in the system no one can take all 8 babies. I just pray that if those little Angels do go into the system the system is smart enough to keep them together 2x2 at least and they get to see each other once a week min. I do believe that Nadya did this for the money. I think she is trying to play us all for fools. But you are right the babies are what matters. So what is best for them? If she doesn't get all the money she has planned and everything, how is she going to feed, cloth, one on one time, educate, and everything else that comes with being a mommy to 14 children?

    Reply

  • February 28, 2009 by esmeralda

    I agree with you Lyn.I would offer my help to her too.I know how hard taking care of kids is and if Nadya needs help she deserves it. Just because there are people that don't have a heart, doesn't mean everybody does. She needs help and she should get it.

    Reply

    • March 23, 2009 by Beth

      I'm confused.You say you "know how hard taking care of kids is" and "if Nadya needs help she deserves it". Well....if it was hard caring for her original 6 children that she was forced to invade her mother's home and finances 3 years ago and then lied about the last set of twins and litter of 8, perhaps she shouldn't have chosen to be artificially inseminated repeatedly?! You, Esmeralda and Lyn, claim you have a heart and most of us don't? I say we have intelligence and common sense. "We" are not suckers.

  • March 9, 2009 by Kim

    I agree with you 100%. I had seven children and I did it all alone; not to say I didn't have my fair share of problems. Those babies are already here so I would love to get to know Nayda and help her any way I can.

    Reply

  • March 13, 2009 by stephanie

    If I could talk to Nadya, I would offer her as much help as I could. She needs it with these beautiful babies that should not to be punished.

    Reply

  • March 22, 2009 by Beth

    You are infertile and 'thoroughly understand Nadya'? WOW. Fantasy Land.

    Reply

Tell us what you think.