Okay, you have all heard of the woman in California who gave birth to eight babies right? I guess that was not a record, but we can hope the human body cannot hold many more than that.
Now, before I start, let me make this clear. I don’t object to multiple births, even those induced by fertility drugs. I understand the desire on the part of some to have children, and thus the use of drugs to help in that process when the old fashioned ways don’t work. I even understand the “moral” decision not to reduce the number of fertilized eggs that implant successfully.
But here, I draw the line! The lady in question, I learned today, has already given birth to SIX kids, she is single, and lives with her parents. A photo of the family home suggests that they are not rich.
What is wrong with this picture? I don’t object certainly to single women deciding to have children. I don’t object as I said to fertility drugs in general. But please!!!! This was not a decision made out of necessity, as the only means by which this woman could have children. She has them, a six pack in fact. She apparently refused, after being told she had a kazillion implanted in her uterus that she would not participate in removing any of them.
Who is paying for all this? There were some forty-six doctors and nurses involved, she was hospitalized for weeks beforehand. Of course she will no doubt depend on donations of time, money and product to get along for years to come. She will sell her story, documentaries, movie deals and so on to finance this litter. The kids will never get the type of attention they deserve.
My question: are their absolutely no guidelines used by the participating doctors before such procedures are approved? This whole thing seems unnecessary and frankly self indulgent in the extreme. What do you think?
I actually sympathize with Ted Haggard. I didn’t at first, when it all came to light that he was strangling the banana while being “massaged” by the gay call guy and doing the drugs.
I was even less sympathetic when a few months later, he declared himself cured and was ready to resume the pulpit and and lucrative lifestyle.
Ted is again making the circuit of the talk-shows, promoting his documentary aired I believe on HBO. (tell me if you saw it) The guy does seem genuinely honest at last. While not wanting to be labeled as gay, he doesn’t even deny now that there may be more men coming forward to chat about his “indiscretions.” He says he doesn’t expect to return to preaching.
I can’t fault a guy who says he and his wife have patched up their 30-year marriage. I mean, among heteros, sex is of huge important to some, and almost none to others. Although I suspect Haggard is truly gay, sex may not be THE most important part of his life. He and his wife have every right to declare that on balance they wish to continue their marriage. And I can’t fault the guy for thinking this religion believes gay behavior wrong, although I most strenuously disagree.
It seems he has the right to make his life the best for him. He’s not required, as some suggest, to “come out” and admit his homosexuality. Perhaps he is predominately bisexual, or mostly hetero with “tendencies.”
Whatever, if he and his family are happy with the arrangement, who am I to complain. As long as he isn’t claiming he’s been “cured” and he doesn’t seem to be, it’s none of my business.
Sex is a complicated affair and we all have our unique arrangements with spouses, significant others, or partners however described. And as long as he don’t preach what he don’t practice, I’m okay with Ted. How bout you?
It appears our new President likes to work in his shirt sleeves in the Oval Office.
Now, this may come as seem like an “okay, so what, kind of thing” but oh no, the national press was absolutely captivated by this.
It was on every major news outlet yesterday. And not just the photograph, but commentary too. You’d have thought he showed up nude or something. They claimed he was being “casual” though with that strangled piece of tie around the neck, I’d hardly call it casual. All that is missing is the jacket, and don’t most men like to keep the back from getting all wrinkly from sitting in a chair?
Apparently, I was way off my noggin. This is important chit as they say. For you see, Mr. has been Prez, Dubya, ALWAYS wore his jacket and moreover, insisted that everyone else do likewise, even on Saturdays!
And we of course, all know how well that administration went! It seems that Bush and his commandos thought that Bill Clinton who appeared in the sacred location occasionally in t-shirt and baseball cap, was most unseemly in their considered elitist mentality. They insisted that a return to the proper bowing and scraping to the “office” was required.
Which all goes to say that the accouterments of office don’t make the man, and it is unwise to attribute worship qualities to a room or office.
Worse yet, I’m told, Mr. Obama has committed a worse faux pas. He actually said the following words after a meeting with his Joint Chiefs of Staff: “We kinda lost track of time.” Yikes, the sticklers for protocol and schedules fairly fainted. The Prez must stay on schedule!!!!!
I’m fairly happy to see my chief exec without his jacket. Now if he would only get those sleeves rolled up, I can feel even more comfortable that he is on the right track. So how many of you are reading this all dressed in business ready? Huh? Opinionnate away readers!
![]()
I have a real problem with the baby lady. A REAL problem. I’m outraged by the fact that this is a person who already has six kids to take care of, who has now brought into the world eight more children, some if not all of whom are going to face real challenges as developmentally disabled kids, if history is any indication. Many kids who come into the world this way face these issues. Now, don’t peg me as a person who believes in aborting every challenged kid who’s conceived: no, that’s not me. But this is a family that already has issues, and this makes them worse. Did I hear right that this woman’s dad now is signing up to go back to IRAQ as a contractor to make the family’s ends sorta meet? Sorry, that’s wrong.
Yes, the state will be paying for these kids. because this is a single mom with 14 kids and no income. I HATE talking like this, but this is not really right.
I sound like a cheap Dr. Phil, but what wonders what really is at the root of this. Why would a mom with so much already on he rplate choose to do this? Why would any fertility doctor choose to go along with this? Like Momma Agitator used to say, just because you can doesn’t mean ya should.
Besides, there are too many kids out there who need homes with loving parents for folks to indulge in this procedure.
As for Ted, yeah, I feel sorry for him. But his way of doing things also hurts lots of other people. He’s gay or bi. He neds to face facts and move on. Sad.
I’m with Quaker Dave on this one. And it’s wrong from so many angles that I’m not sure where to start or which one holds the key to the others. So, I’ll just leave a big “ditto” on QD’s comment.
Re Haggard: Sherry, I’m with you. (Boy am I agreeable today!) First, will we ever get over our need to categorize? Is Ted gay or straight or bi, a Christian or a heretic, a good husband or a louse? Is it any of our business?
I hope his candor in talking about his mishaps and mistakes will indeed unlock a lot of other minds and hearts to understand (in some cases, accept for themselves) that life isn’t a board game where everything works out according to preset rules and expectations. I don’t mean to imply blind admiration for Haggard; there is definitely room for suspicion and concern about this latest turn in a life not known for its integrity. Yet we must forgive and have faith always. Remember, St. Paul stoned Christians and defied Christ FIRST, and then after his humbling and confrontation with his own evil, became the great lion of God.
Finally, do ya think there’s a correlation between business attire and effectiveness? I think so. A President who works in shirtsleeves is a President who’s busy and engaged. Maybe if W had shed the jacket, Obama wouldn’t be up to his elbows in crises!
After reading the post and comments, I’m feeling very agreeable, too. I think the woman having all these kids is being selfish in the extreme. It feels like some variation of the Munchhausen syndrome in that it’s all about drawing attention to herself. She’ll be able to go after that attention time and time again.
I feel sad for both Ted and his wife as he deals with his sexual orientation, and at the same time has to condemn himself because of his religion. I am saddened that his tradition is so mistaken in its beliefs. But it does seem like he is the one putting himself and his wife in the public eye again. Probably needs the money.
As for Obama’s style of dress, I’m all for it. I think Bush was all about appearance, with no substance behind it. Bush liked the office of presidency, but lacked the ability to be president.
I don’t think I’m objective enough to comment on the woman with the babies. (We chose not to have certain fertility treatments because of ethical issues on several levels.)
I’m thrilled that Obama is more about effort than appearance.
W. was ” all hat and no cattle” as they say in Texas, so attire was important, brains were not required.
As for the eight new members of a family of six…good luck letting Mom know you need something in THAT house, whoever pays the bills. Oddly, in LA this “Miracle” is being wrung out by the media as just “maavahlous” and this is the first mention I have read of her single status.(although I have been camping for three days)
As Linda Ellerbee used to say as a salute to Edward R. Murrow…” And so it goes…”
I hadn’t heard that the mother of all of those children is single. Interesting.
A few years ago, when my husband and I were considering fertility treatments, I met a woman, mother of three, undergoing fertility treatments so she could have a fourth. In her words, her son “needed a brother.” Not that she would do anything to ensure that. Her doctor told her that the treatments would significantly increase her chances for uterine and / or ovarian cancer. She said “I don’t care.” Like it was more important to make a baby than to be a mother for years to come to the three children she already had.
The doctor we went to when considering fertility treatments told us that he RARELY implanted more than two blastocysts at a time. He firmly believed that women were not made to deliver, his words, litters. Where were these ethics in the case of this woman?
It is crazy and unethical and it bugs the shit out of me that the right wing-nuts will take this up as a right-to-life message. Because she was “brave” enough not to eliminate any of the embryos. They won’t castigate the doctor. They will celebrate the technology that made this possible.
They are all for science that allows infertile women to make babies, but against science that could lead to a cure for Parkinson’s.
Gah! This whole thing has me pretty pissed off!
As for our president and his shirt sleeves, I say, two wars, economic collapse, infrastructure crumbling, schools failing, record unemployment. To the media – Focus, people!
News Media is a Business, not a service. Controversy sells ads. And some Use media for free self-promotion. . Few of us men think or realize How Much women work, do. Where would we be without them? Tony
Jennifer, you brought up an important ethical — and practical — point. Why implant more than two blastocysts? I know nothing about fertility augmentation, and less than nothing about what the effects may be on a woman with repeated implantations.
But a single mother with six kids already … Unless there are some extraordinary people in that lady’s life who will faithfully help her to raise such a huge brood … it’s a recipe for disaster. Another variation on the ethics theme: Some folks (including me) consider it ecologically irresponsible to have so many kids when the number of humans being born is exploding, and exploding, and exploding … and, of course, so many of those babies are being born into horrific or just plain lousy circumstances.
Ted Haggard … He sure does look haggard these days. Kudos to him if he’s finally starting to face the truth and be real about it. He’s done a lot of harm; now he might choose to do some real good.
Obama in shirtsleeves. Wow … Everybody has to kvetch about something, eh? — Not that you, dear Sherry, are kvetching
Anyway, the man’s in shirtsleeves, in a (relatively) private and informal context. We can bet, from what we’ve seen so far, that President Obama (it’s got a great ring, doesn’t it) dresses appropriately to a top-notch degree for whatever he’s doing. The man is *elegant*!
Bush in a jacket. Big deal. Lotta good it did. ;-P
Dave, the more that has come out, the more you are clearly right in my opinion. I concluded that the woman had some psych issues and the mother has apparently confirmed this, saying her daughter has wanted to be a mother since high school. This was just wrong from so many places.
Tim, I wondered how you might feel about Haggard. I’m wary to be sure, but I found his candor rather refreshing. I think he is not really facing reality, but if they are happy with the way things are progressing, that is definitely their business I think. As long as he stays out the pulpit, I’m okay with Ted.
Kedda, well we all seem in basic agreement. I thought I would definitely be getting some negativity! Especially about the baby thing. It seems that most agree, this woman is unbalanced in some fashion, and there should be rules in place that keep women like her from using these methods. There is also talk now that the state of the art is advanced enough that the implantation of so many eggs was simply wrong from the start. It will continue to be a fascinating story no doubt.
Ruth, I completely understand. There are ethical issues and everyone has a right to make their choice accordingly. My point is that given certain choices, there should be standards as well. Why were 8 implanted?
I guess we all feel pretty much the same about Obama’s work ethic!
Reamus, indeed. I feel for the grandparents who are gonna be stuck with doing a lot of the grunt work here. And the kids have a sad future in store no doubt.
Jennifer, that is exactly what is coming to light. That the science means that there is no need to blanket the womb with eggs. This is intolerable in my estimation. Simply unethical in the worst way, and I agree, the right wing will tout this woman as courageous. Another poster child for right to life.
Jaliya, you have touched another sore point with the ultra right wing. There is no population problem dear. God told us to go forth and multiply and we should do so, like rabbits, as this woman did. I hate this head in the sand kind of mentality, but that is how it will be viewed by some no doubt.
QuakerDave pretty much covered everything I was going to say.
I am totally with you on the woman with the octuplets. I cringed when I heard she already had six kids. Where is the fertility problem here??? I think there is something seriously wrong with people who want that many kids. How can they possibly give each kid the attention he or she needs, not even thinking of the financial part of it.
And I love it that Pres. Obama is less formal and regimented than W. I work in a corporation and we are always “business casual” – with jeans on Fridays. And our “business casual” isn’t even all that “business.” Just no jeans. I am all for a less formal administration that spends their efforts getting things done rather than standing on useless protocols.
What an engaging post, Sherry! I screened out the Haggard story, so I can’t comment there, but I’m totally with you on stories #1 & #3. omg, that photo for #1 says it all (can tell where you live!)