1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Taxpayers may have to cover octuplet mom's costs (she goes into hiding)

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by DcProWLer277, Feb 12, 2009.

  1. DcProWLer277

    DcProWLer277 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,569
    Likes Received:
    20
    LOS ANGELES – A big share of the financial burden of raising Nadya Suleman's 14 children could fall on the shoulders of California's taxpayers, compounding the public furor in a state already billions of dollars in the red.

    Even before the 33-year-old single, unemployed mother gave birth to octuplets last month, she had been caring for her six other children with the help of $490 a month in food stamps, plus Social Security disability payments for three of the youngsters. The public aid will almost certainly be increased with the new additions to her family.

    Also, the hospital where the octuplets are expected to spend seven to 12 weeks has requested reimbursement from Medi-Cal, the state's Medicaid program, for care of the premature babies, according to the Los Angeles Times. The cost has not been disclosed.

    Word of the public assistance has stoked the furor over Suleman's decision to have so many children by having embryos implanted in her womb.

    "It appears that, in the case of the Suleman family, raising 14 children takes not simply a village but the combined resources of the county, state and federal governments," Los Angeles Times columnist Tim Rutten wrote in Wednesday's paper. He called Suleman's story "grotesque."

    On the Internet, bloggers rained insults on Suleman, calling her an "idiot," criticizing her decision to have more children when she couldn't afford the ones she had and suggesting she be sterilized.

    "It's my opinion that a woman's right to reproduce should be limited to a number which the parents can pay for," Charles Murray wrote in a letter to the Los Angeles Daily News. "Why should my wife and I, as taxpayers, pay child support for 14 Suleman kids?"

    She was also berated on talk radio, where listeners accused her of manipulating the system and being an irresponsible mother.

    "From the outside you can tell that this woman was playing the system," host Bryan Suits said on the "Kennedy and Suits" show on KFI-AM. "You're damn right the state should step in and seize the kids and adopt them out."

    Suleman's spokesman, Mike Furtney, urged understanding.

    "I would just ask people to consider her situation and she has been under a tremendous amount of pressure that no one could be prepared for," Furtney said.

    Furtney said he, Suleman and her family had received death threats and had been getting messages that were "disgusting things that would never be proper to put in any story."

    In her only media interviews, Suleman told NBC's "Today" she doesn't consider the public assistance she receives to be welfare and doesn't intend to remain on it for long.

    Also, a Nadya Suleman Family Web Site has been set up to collect donations for the children. It features pictures of the mother and each octuplet and has instructions for making donations by check or credit card.

    Suleman, whose six older children range in age from 2 to 7, said three of them receive disability payments. She told NBC one is autistic, another has attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, known as ADHD, and a third experienced a mild speech delay with "tiny characteristics of autism." She refused to say how much they get in payments.

    In California, a low-income family can receive Social Security payments of up to $793 a month for each disabled child. Three children would amount to $2,379.

    The Suleman octuplets' medical costs have not been disclosed, but in 2006, the average cost for a premature baby's hospital stay in California was $164,273, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Eight times that equals $1.3 million.

    For a single mother, the cost of raising 14 children through age 17 ranges from $1.3 million to $2.7 million, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

    Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who is struggling to close a $42 billion budget gap by cutting services, declined through a spokesman to comment on the taxpayer costs associated with the octuplets' delivery and care.

    State Sen. Sam Aanestad, R-Grass Valley, an oral surgeon who sits on the Health Committee, said that once a state Medical Board investigation is complete, lawmakers could review issues from government oversight to standards in fertility treatment.

    Suleman received disability payments for an on-the-job back injury during a riot at a state mental hospital, collecting more than $165,000 over nearly a decade before the benefits were discontinued last year.

    Some of the disability money was spent on in vitro fertilizations, which was used for all 14 of her children, Suleman said. She said she also worked double shifts at the mental hospital and saved up for the treatments. She estimated that all her treatments cost $100,000.

    Fourteen states, including California, require insurance companies to offer or provide coverage for infertility treatment, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. But California has a law specifically excluding in vitro coverage. It's not clear what type of coverage Suleman has.

    In the NBC interview, Suleman said she will go back to California State University, Fullerton in the fall to complete her master's degree in counseling, and will use student loans to support her children. She already owes $50,000 in student loans, she told NBC. She said she will rely on the school's daycare center and volunteers.

    ----------------

    Threats send California octuplets mom into hiding

    LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – California's octuplets mom, already jobless and receiving food stamps, has gone into hiding with her six older children because of death threats, her spokesman said on Wednesday.

    Nadya Suleman, 33, has come under mounting public ridicule for expanding her already large family via fertility treatments that led to the January 26 birth of six boys and two girls at a Los Angeles-area hospital.

    That criticism has mushroomed as it was reported that she was divorced, living with her parents, unemployed for several years, receiving disability checks for three of her children -- one of whom is autistic -- and collecting nearly $500 a month in food stamps.

    She acknowledged those circumstances in a series of NBC television interviews but insisted in a segment aired on Tuesday on "Dateline NBC" that she was "not living off any taxpayer money" and that assistance she now receives is temporary.

    The broadcast drew the highest "Dateline" ratings since a 2007 interview with Britain's Prince William and Prince Harry.

    Suleman, who was working toward an advanced degree in counseling, said she owes close to $50,000 in student loans, which also are her sole source of non-government income.

    According to the Los Angeles Times, the Kaiser Permanente hospital where the newborns remain is seeking reimbursement for the cost of their care from Medi-Cal, the state's health care program for the poor. Those costs are expected to reach into the hundreds of thousands of dollars, the newspaper said.

    'UNDISCLOSED LOCATION'

    For the past few days, Suleman and her six older children, ages 2 to 7, have moved into "what we are referring to as an undisclosed location," said Michael Furtney, a public relations consultant working for the family. The Web site RadarOnline.com reported the family was staying at a hotel.

    Furtney said Suleman and the PR firm have been deluged with hostile telephone and email messages in recent days, some of them containing threats of violence and death.

    "The bulk of them just rail against her being, as they would refer to her, as a person who's taking advantage of the system, and they just go from there," Furtney said.

    He also acknowledged that the hostile messages have so far outnumbered the well-wishes, but added, "the positive notes are beginning to catch up with the not so positive ones."

    Some have been directed to a new Suleman family Web site that solicits private donations to help support them.

    The site is adorned with photos of the mother and her eight newborns, along with images of a baby bottle, a pacifier, a rainbow and alphabet blocks spelling out the word "love."

    Below the greeting, "We thank you from the bottom of our hearts -- Nadya Suleman and children," are heart-shaped links that invite visitors to comment and to make a contribution.

    Furtney said people have primarily been offering furniture, clothing, food and other essentials, and someone even promised to donate breast milk. He said one Indiana farmer has offered to have the whole family live with him and his family.

    He said "volunteers" were paying for her temporary living arrangements.

    Suleman might temporarily move back into her mother's three-bedroom house in a Los Angeles suburb, but that house will likely prove too small for all 14 children, Furtney said.

    Suleman's mother, Angela, has called her daughter's decision to keep expanding her family "unconscionable" and she said she had pleaded with her daughter's fertility doctor not to implant her with more embryos.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090211/us_nm/us_octuplets

    WOW! All I can say is that this b**** is crazy...someone needs to tie her tubes.
     
  2. rhadamanthus

    rhadamanthus Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    14,304
    Likes Received:
    596
    Death threats?

    This country is weird.
     
  3. rocketsjudoka

    rocketsjudoka Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    58,168
    Likes Received:
    48,335
    Yeah I posted the same article in the hangout thread but this topic might belong in D & D.

    I think Suleman's case is raising some serious questions regarding the ethics of fertility treatment and I'm wondering if this will lead to some more regulation on that industry.
     
  4. mc mark

    mc mark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 1999
    Messages:
    26,195
    Likes Received:
    471
    I'm sure all you right to lifer's are opening your checkbooks as we speak.

    right?
     
  5. rocketsjudoka

    rocketsjudoka Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    58,168
    Likes Received:
    48,335
    I think it is very sad that there are death threats but given the state of the economy and the amount of coverage this story has received I'm not surprised there are some angry people out there.

    The real sad part of this whole story is that Suleman's children are the ones who could suffer the most from this. As much as I think she has been very irresponsible and selfish I still hope things work out for her for the sake of those kids.
     
  6. MadMax

    MadMax Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 1999
    Messages:
    76,683
    Likes Received:
    25,924
    If I hear anyone from a church demonize this woman or be anything less than charitable to these children, I'll vomit.
     
  7. A_3PO

    A_3PO Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Messages:
    46,747
    Likes Received:
    12,274
    I think this lady's children should be taken away from her. She has no hope of ever being able to take of them and, on top of that, she's probably mentally ill or has some kind of disorder. The children deserve a better life than she could ever give them.
     
  8. fmullegun

    fmullegun Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2008
    Messages:
    3,279
    Likes Received:
    23
    didn't a doctor implant like 20 zygotes in her? This has nothing to do with an abortion of a poor woman. This crazy lady wanted to to have a litter.
     
  9. rhadamanthus

    rhadamanthus Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    14,304
    Likes Received:
    596
    Angry I could understand. But death threats? That's just deplorable.

    "I'm so mad at you for having children I'll kill you?"

    Hysterical. People are ****ing hysterical.
     
  10. gwatson86

    gwatson86 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,664
    Likes Received:
    191
    Couldn't agree with you more. Someone so incredibly stupid and selfish deserves to have her children taken away. The fact that her plan right now is to try and ride it out at the expense of others is deplorable and disgusting. If the state doesn't step in to put these children somewhere where they won't live in poverty... just ridiculous.
     
  11. rhadamanthus

    rhadamanthus Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    14,304
    Likes Received:
    596
    If we applied this logic universally, I think the foster care system would explode.

    All foster parents are rich and pleasant then? Look, I realize that the woman is a shade nuts, but taking away the children to punish the mother is just as stupid and selfish, and, in reality, will harm the kids way more than the mother.
     
  12. DcProWLer277

    DcProWLer277 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2007
    Messages:
    1,569
    Likes Received:
    20
    The only way the kids will be taken is if she is found mentally unfit to care for them. It looks like she's just having kids to get money from the taxpayers. She seems like she doesn't want to work and maybe she isn't as stupid as I thought.
     
  13. bnb

    bnb Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2002
    Messages:
    6,992
    Likes Received:
    316
    The medical community has been pretty universal in condemning the doctor who treated her. Especially the fertility specialists. I wouldn't be surprised if he's brought up on ethics charges fairly soon by whatever medical board licenses him.

    I *think* the US has some of the most lenient fertility laws/guidelines of the western world in terms of how many embryos can be implanted at a time. There's significant risk to the mom and kiddies with multiple births -- so maybe this provides the excuse to develop better guidelines. Could be a good thing.

    And the people hating on the family because the mom is nuts are truly sad. She, and the kids need all the help they can get. Can't undo this now.
     
  14. gwatson86

    gwatson86 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,664
    Likes Received:
    191
    You really think it's as punishment to the mother? I could care less about her receiving a slap on the wrist.

    I understand that foster care isn't a perfect system, but it's a better shot for these kids than what they've got in store for them. 14 children is entirely too many for one person to spread their love to, much less their money (or lack thereof). I think they'll grow up feeling more neglected if they're not given up for adoption than if they are.
     
  15. bnb

    bnb Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2002
    Messages:
    6,992
    Likes Received:
    316
    They're not puppies. You can't just give them away.
     
  16. rhadamanthus

    rhadamanthus Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    14,304
    Likes Received:
    596
    Really?

    That sounds like retribution to me. :confused:

    Whether or not you view it as punishment or not is really moot, it will be a punishment as far as she is concerned.

    I disagree. The foster care system is almost never preferable.

    And a large family does not preclude anything you might consider "family-esque" - I find that rationale absurd.
     
  17. gwatson86

    gwatson86 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,664
    Likes Received:
    191
    Just because I think she deserves it doesn't mean I really care if she feels it to be a punishment. The ultimate goal would be for the benefit of the children. But you are correct, it's a moot point.


    I find it absurd that anyone could think that one person is physically, mentally, and emotionally capable of raising 14 well-adjusted children.

    However, I really think we're on differing sides of the same coin; heads or tails, these kids lose.
     
  18. rhadamanthus

    rhadamanthus Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    14,304
    Likes Received:
    596
    The "one-person" detail is duly noted. That is a very good point.

    Probably. I'd argue it's a guarantee in foster care though. Better chance with crazy kid lady.
     
  19. F.D. Khan

    F.D. Khan Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2000
    Messages:
    2,456
    Likes Received:
    11

    What a great incentive to have more, disabled children! Cha-CHING!!!

    If the state gave NO MONEY and wouldn't pay for her medical bills, she would probably have one child. If we leave out the cheese, I don't blame the mouse for eating it.
     
  20. bnb

    bnb Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2002
    Messages:
    6,992
    Likes Received:
    316
    Wouldn't it be amazing if the state were to look to a workable and beneficial solution without worrying about the 'optics'

    14 kids -- broke. Messed up. Would it cost less to assign a full time nurse/caregiver to help raise them as a family rather then waiting for things to go wrong and then getting social workers/ foster families/ etc all involved. I guess there's an understandable urge to shun, to condemn, to judge, and possibly to punish -- but these kids are here. They're likely going to cost the 'system' at some time. I know we somehow don't want to be seen as 'rewarding' her bad choices -- but not sure there's a net gain to be had by leaving the situation as is and then trying to patch things together later with existing programs of existing agencies if it doesn't work out.
     

Share This Page