twitter facebook stumble upon rss

Taking Octuplets Away Not the Answer!

sign up for the momlogic newsletter Tweet This
Taking Nadya's kids away is not the answer, says one mom.
nadya suleman touching baby

Jackie: I think by now we've all read enough about the octuplets mom. I've had it just as much as the next mom. But there's one thing keeps getting mentioned that I just can't let go.

"They should take those kids away."

Listen, I get it. Nadya Suleman is a bucket overflowing with all kinds of crazy. She has some serious emotional issues and is in desperate need of help -- of the therapist and nanny kind.

But should she really lose her kids?

I'm sure some just say it flippantly and don't necessarily believe it. But others are seriously calling for the removal of her 14 children. And that just makes me sad.

"What about her finances? She's on welfare!"

Are California taxpayers footing the bill? Yes. And being from the bankrupt Golden State, that ticks me off too. But there are millions of people all over this country receiving some sort of financial assistance -- disablity, welfare, you name it. And many of those families continue to have kids (gasp!). The difference is, they have them one at a time, falling under the radar of the rest of the country. There's nobody outside their door (or on national television) calling to have their kids ripped from them.

"She couldn't possibly give them all the love they need."

If you are a person who has uttered the above statement, come closer so I can slap you. Have we forgotten that in countless cultures around the world, it is customary for big families to all co-exist under one roof? Are we going to seek out all of them and pull them apart, just because it doesn't seem to fit what we think is 'normal'? Being my mother's eleventh child, I can honestly say that I couldn't have been loved any more than I was growing up. Was it chaos? Hell, yeah. But it was my chaos. They're my family -- my lifeline. Not a day went by that I didn't know my parents, brothers and sisters would do anything for me -- they still would. But how would you feel if you knew sometimes I felt sorry for you, growing up with one sibling. Looks pretty lonely from this angle.

"But have you seen her house? What a mess!"

Yeah, I get it... she's a slob. I saw the pictures, too. But I'd be the first mom to start worrying if families were torn apart every time the house was out of control... or children weren't given enough attention... or Mommy was acting a little nuts. Damn, CPS would be on their way to my house right now. What do you think is happening here while I write this post?

Unless in danger of abuse -- emotional, physical or mental, children belong with their mother. Period. And we, as a society, should do everything in our power to help families stay together, supporting them in any way possible.

Being an adoptive mother myself, I am thankful every day that I get to raise my daughter. But I wish it were different. Raising Lucy is Plan B. It doesn't mean I don't love her like she came from my own flesh and bones -- oh my God, I do. It just means Plan A would've been that her birth mother be in better health with enough support and resources to care for her. Plan A would be that my daughter wouldn't grow up feeling such a tremendous loss, wondering if her biological mother really loved her.

So before get on your high horse and judge, take a good long look at your own life.

It should be easy to spot from that glass house you're living in.

Want more? Connect with Jackie in the Momlogic community.

next: Tiger Woods Debuts New Baby Boy
117 comments so far | Post a comment now
C February 19, 2009, 9:18 AM

Okay, I tend to agree. This woman is clearly a whack job, but the total outrage at her for “being on welfare” is kind of shocking. Women on welfare keep having babies every day because it raises their check—where’s the outrage for them? Are we going to take the kids of every welfare mom who has another baby? I think she’ll have more scrutiny from child protective services than anyone in history, so let’s at least wait until she screws up before we take them…Do we really want the government to be able to take our kids because they “think” we won’t be able to handle them?

Kelsey February 19, 2009, 9:47 AM

I can relate.

I once took my daughter (20 mo.) to a Feist concert. I was sitting in VIP (in the back) and a member of event staff approached me to simply tell me that a woman in the crowd threatened to call CPS if I didn’t leave. My daughter had fallen asleep in my arms and the security guard offered me ear plugs for her. He said I didn’t need to leave, but thought I should know.

I thought it ridiculous that this woman thinks my child is better off in a home or with foster parents than with me at a concert (where she was lulled to sleep). Think twice before you question someone’s parenting capabilities. While many still won’t understand, I chose to take my daughter to the Feist concert after much thought (calling ahead to ask, knowing what the venue grounds where like and arrived very early to see how loud it would be), because my husband had bought the tickets for me. He died 12 days before, and I couldn’t think of anyone else I would rather go to the concert with than myself, my daughter and my current support (encouraging friend). I felt completely uncomfortable thinking someone would take my child away from me too and left feeling even more sad than I had been. What a birthday to remember. It may have seemed selfish on my part but my daughter surely wasn’t being abused.

C February 19, 2009, 10:42 AM

Kelsey—that’s terrible! People don’t know the meaning of abuse, apparently. I’m just saying that she should actually NOT be able to care for them before we take them away. It doesn’t sound to me like she has any support in place at all except grandma, so there is no human way she can possibly care for 8 preemie newborns with two people, let alone 6 other kids. It’s just a matter of time, I think….

Karen February 19, 2009, 10:42 AM

It’s not about her finances or how much love she can give them or a cluttered house. The public’s general concern is based on the fact that she went to extreme lengths to have all these children in order to fill a void in her life. The void wasn’t filled with 6 children, and it’s not going to be filled by the additional 8 newborns. She’s “using” her children to compensate for her emotional/mental issues which she has YET to face. As long as her psychological issues remain undetermined and untreated she can’t possibly PARENT these children based on THEIR best interests because her focus is still on satisfying her own needs.

Paige February 19, 2009, 10:58 AM

Sorry I disagree. I read(on Fox) she’s losing her home(which is awful lots of people are in that situation) but the difference with her was despite knowing the dire financial bind she was already in with six kids she put her health and the health of eight babies on the line to fulfil her “loneliness”. This woman gambled that the American public would hail her as a hero and support her and her brood. She got a wake up call- so now I think these children do deserve a loving stable home with some couple who can pay them attention and provide for them. Why should the kids live in squalor or be homeless because we all want to be PC?

NotKaren February 19, 2009, 11:02 AM

You just described MILLIONS of women.

Jettie  February 19, 2009, 11:53 AM

I too think that children should remain with their mother unless suffering from abuse of some kind, the lady may be under financial stress and her house may be a mess but geeze people she is willing to love these children and be there for them who cares what her house looks like! I have two children and we are a miitary family and move around alot and our house is always a mess but we still love our children.

Anonymous February 19, 2009, 11:58 AM

I think abuse/neglect is having 14 kids, and having outstanding bills ranging up to thousands if not millions of dollars, and asking the public for handouts, did we as taxpayers have a say in this, no. You know why Jackie 1.) She didn’t care, she’s a selfish woman and thought of one person-herself, if she was thinking about her 14 kids like she claimed she would’ve waited until she had the money to support them period. One word Cps.-Josh

Jay Lahr February 19, 2009, 11:59 AM

The kids should have been taken away at birth. Clearly this woman is insane.
She has no way to take care of herself much less 14 kids. We’re paying for them 100% and they should get adopted out to loving families that can’t have kids of their own. Octo mom is pitiful and without shame…that makes her dangerous.

Nancy Estenzo February 19, 2009, 12:02 PM

I do not think we should just take the children away, but the mom, grandma and kids are going to need a lot of outside assistance, and not just financial. It is going to take more than a village to raise these children. The children are not to blame.

Brenda February 19, 2009, 12:20 PM

My grandmother birthed, loved and raised 14 children. She NEVER relied on welfare or any other public assdistance. My grandfather worked two jobs (16 hours a day, 6/7 days a week) and my grandma took in laundry and ironing and yes even babysitting to provide for her “brood”. Each and everyone of my aunts and uncles grew up to be happy, healthy and mostly successful adults. I hate to think that if she had chosen not to have one of those children that myself and my siblings or any of my cousins would not be here today. Are we not apalled at the Chinese laws that dictate how many children a woman is “allowed” to have. Let’s be realistic here, we live in a country where we are free to make our own life decisions. I agree that tax dollars should not be used to support the large family this woman has “chosen” to have, but shouldn’t we help her with assistance to a) further her education so she can financially support her family? b) assist her with proper child care while she works to provide for her family? or/and c)help her to get counseling to help her deal with her situation. Is the answer REALLY to take her children from her and place them in foster care where the will be separated, unloved with no sense of family and STILL supported by tax dollars? I think not.

Samantha February 19, 2009, 12:21 PM

She is a certified nut job for sure, I had commented earlier after hearing her mom saying they were going to lose their house because they owe approx $21k well that didn’t happen overnight. she suddenly loves the babies now that she’s seen them, please are we all suppose to be idiots? She probably planned that whole thing out just like Nadya did to pull on the public heartstrings to get even more handouts than they already get. This is shocking disgrace, I don’t think she had them because she was lonely, she had 6, 3 of which have health problems, the government gave her money that she was able to use to have multiples that the government along with all the caring people out there will now give her more money, she is lazy and wants a handout! The doctor who did this should lose his license as he was surely in it for what he thought was going to be the new kate + 8 show, He has definitely gotten more publicity than he could have ever begun to pay for, the losers are the babies. It is my strong belief that children learn what they live, what kind of chance do they stand? Before the mom who is one of 11 gets upset, I think that large families that choose to add to it are usually loving and everyone within that family helps, this situation is not the same thing.

jhpgh February 19, 2009, 12:21 PM

“Have we forgotten that in countless cultures around the world, it is customary for big families to all co-exist under one roof? “

Does she have an extended family network to help her out? I came from a culture with big families, village style of economy and culture. Big families have many off-springs of different ages. The older ones take care of the younger ones for their parents. They have aunts, uncles, second and third cousins volunteer their time, resources and etc.

Ms. Suleman has none of those.

She has 10 infant/toddlers. Each demand at least 4 minutes/diaper change, and at least 6 diapers/day. That is at least 4 hours of her time. Feeding takes longer. She have to bath them one by one, at least 10 minutes each, I do not want to do the calculation anymore.

As a mother of two youngsters, I feel very sorry for Ms. Suleman’s children.

Nicole February 19, 2009, 12:27 PM

First off I want to start off by saying this blog was well written and totally understandable. I love the fact that you talk about people living in glass houses. I want to know from all the negative people out there, can you walk on water? When you can then you can be able to judge the OCTO mom. Untill then sit down, shut up and stop your bitching. None of us are perfect, and I can openly admit from a single mothers stand point its not easy even with just one child and I dont even want to amagine 14. But seriously yes she could have adopted needed children or been happy with her 6 or whatever but we are all human and selfishness is part of our nature, so untill that is cured we are all going to have ME tendances. Life isnt about who is the best, who has the most money, its about whats RIGHT FOR YOU AND YOUR FAMILY!!! No one has the right to tell me what to do how to do it or when. To comment about the government steping in and raising our kids, I have a HUGE issue with that. They can’t get our budget right, they can’t get us out of this issue with wall street or the banks (which here again is from someone being selfish)I don’t want them raising my child. How do I know that he would turn out to be a great man who understands money and its PROPER use, how will I know he wont just react immediatly when someone hits him he has to hit back. When we look at our country we see flaws, but things can be worked out. Just like in the case of OctoMom she can work things out and get help and love all 14 of her kids. So before anyone goes pointing fingers I believe you should look back in that glass house and see how perfect your life is.

Anonymous February 19, 2009, 12:34 PM

number one jackie. you are supporting your children wheather thier adopted or not. this woman had six children already that she can’t support so she knew that she could have multiple birth and she didn’t care. we know everyone needs help form the gov. from time to time. but she has no man to support her and no one works to help out. I have four children myself with a husband. after my last birth ended with twins i stopped!!! and said oh i think that’s enough two boys (not twins) and twin girls . My husband and I made that choice to not have anymore children because we couldn’t afford it. if we had alot of money we would have more but were realistic and know what we can handle and have a 3brm house with four children and knew we could never afford another house because it was out of our budget. i’m a stay at home mom that provides for my children . my husband works and we get no help from gov. or family memebers . so this women is lucky to have her mom help her with her messed up life!! the public doesn’t care that she has 14 childen they care that there paying for her & 14 children when this country is in a economic crisis !!! we can barley support our own families but were supposed to support the oct-mom ????!!!!!

Gio February 19, 2009, 1:05 PM

Okay, re your first comment — No, we don’t take the children away from families on wefare — we take the CHECK away. There needs to be reform. The sytem has been out of control for over 20 years and nobody — Democrats or Republicans — seems to know why.
Welfare and Assistance for the first 2 children ONLY — Then it stops. That is how it works in many other countries.
Nadya Suleman’s sole purpose may not be just to birth babies … she may single-handedly have shed some light on this public welfare travesty!

MB February 19, 2009, 1:06 PM

I have to agree with anonymous, she already had 6 kids that she couldn’t afford and yes there are lots of people who have kids that they can’t afford. I think if she was married and at least one income people wouldn’t be so outraged. I’m not saying single parents can’t make it on their own,they can. There’s more to this then just someone wanting kids. Most people who plan to have kids which she did plan, the one thing I know I thought about can we afford it, who’s going to look after them when I go back to work, do we have the room. OMG “planned pregnancies” those are the things you make sure are crossed off your list. I wanted my kids to have food on the table without the stress of wondering where the heck I”m going to get the money to buy it. I came from a large family and growing up we didn’t always have food in the table, it was the worst thing. I don’t think things have changed that much with that. There are still kids that go to school hungry. what will make her situation any different.
As for taking those kids away.. umm well they won’t know the difference now, or maybe they will in the sense you leave them with her some are going to be very hungry and sitting in a wet diaper for longer then most babies would be. I just had a baby not to long ago and I can tell you with every feed they need a diaper change. Not to mention it takes about 30 minutes to feed a baby every 2 to 3 hours so do the math.. this is an around the clock job just to feed and change them. what about those times when they cry because they just want to be held. Unless she has 4 people around the clock with her and that’s even pushing it with only 4 adults. Those babies are going to be neglected.. and thats just the babies, what about her other 6 kids those poor kids are not going to have her mothers love, she’s going to be so stressed and tired.

MB February 19, 2009, 1:17 PM

Nicole..I don’t live in a glass house.. Im not a selfish person, I’m a responsible person. I thought about what it would be like to have a baby, that’s what most people do when they “plan” to have a baby. So am I being a selfish person when I don’t think I”m ready to have a baby or im I being a selfish person when I’m ready to have a baby?? yeah we are selfish when we make these disissions, BUT most of us can afford to make that choice. She went in knowing she had no money and 6 other kids at home.. I think i’m entitled to have my say if I’m going to pay for stupidity.

Anonymous February 19, 2009, 1:26 PM

I’m with the previous commenter who pointed out that most large families have kids of varying ages. This mom isn’t going to get any help from her older children.

She was doing this for attention and her kids are going to suffer.

Linda February 19, 2009, 2:32 PM

I am a psychiatric nurse and have so for many years. I’ve worked with children as young as four in an acute inpatient psychiatric setting and Residential Treatment setting. It’s a tough call to take someones children from them but as unpopular as this may be, I agree. I have seen too many kids severely damaged from being brought up in well meaning dysfunctional homes. This mother is a little “off” if not a lot. She is not even realistic in her expectations. Does she have cribs? What are her day to day plans for feeding , rocking, changing these babies and taking care of her other six. There are many couples praying for a child to adopt. It would be nice if two or three couples with the means would adopt these kids in small groups and assure contact between them all. I feel for the other six. How safe can these babies be with older siblings that could easily harm them. I know of children that have attempted to kill siblings by throwing them out of second floor windows. One sibling I came across smothered his baby sister. Not getting enough attention breeds anger and rage. Many children develop Reactive Attachment Disorder from failing to bond with anyone. Let’s not compare this mom to anyone but herself.

Back to top >>