CA Mom who gave birth to octuplets has SIX other kids at home under age 7!

[Ellen]

Date: 1/30/2009 2:07:40 PM
Author: .Jenevieve.
I wasn't going to post on this subject because I'm not in good mood and I felt I would probably say something I would regret. However the majority of the responses are judgmental and uncalled for, especially since I'm sure most of you do not know this woman or her family.

First, I read the article, in the link provided, and no where did I read/see that she was in her late 20's and/or single and jobless. Did you ladies read/hear this somewhere else or are you just presuming? If I'm wrong please feel free to correct me and point me to precisely to where it states these 'facts' the media has spouted. They [the media] are notorious for reporting fallacies or for stretching the truth. I personally have heard them report several different stories about this woman, so how about all the facts be gathered, from a reliable source, before you jump on this woman for being 'irresponsible'.

Besides, whether she's in her late 20s and single or if she's in her 40s and married, what does it matter to any of you? Unless she's on welfare, and sponging off your hard earned money, mine too, I don't see how her marital status and number children -or anything else pertaining to this woman- could possibly be the business of any of the posters here. I mean come on!! Are you so perfect that you can put down others for their choices, good or bad? I think not!
And to the poster that said this... ' I'm sorry, this is one of THE most irresponsible things I've ever heard. I have no words, that are nice.' Give me a f**king break! I have no nice words about your exceedingly judgmental and presumptuous remark either.

Normally I find the people that post here to be wise, level-headed and fairly compassionate individuals. However the majority of the posts -and posters- here [in this thread] are beyond judgmental and just plain rude with their assumptions.

That was me. Gee, I think this is the first time in my 3 years here I've been called out for saying something controversial. And what I said here is about the "harshest" thing I think I've ever said. I can't even be mad. lol

To answer your questions, yes, I had read a previous article yesterday that stated she was single, living with her parents, and did not want her name released. In the articles I've found so far, but not the one I read (there are many), they all refer to the mother-no dad. No father is mentioned anywhere. And it states in the articles she does not want her name released.

As for the monetary issue, unless, as someone said, she has TONS of money, someones tax dollars will most likely help pay for them. No, we don't know that, it remains to be seen. But I am seriously skeptical she's got that kind of cash. (note, figures are for 2004, so it's more)

But let's forget that part, and look at the VERY important fact, that the more babies there are, the more risks to the babies there are. That is a fact. Why would any mother want to put unecessary risks to her children? Would you?

It is also stated, by a doctor in this article, that having that many babies is almost impossible to do naturally. I'll provide the link.

And having children of my own, 3, I know how hard it is to pay attention to them all equally, WITH a husband. Do not tell me one mother, and 2 grandparents, can give 14 children equal time. They cannot. I dated a guy that was one of 16, they get ignored, lost in the shuffle, with the older ones having to raise the younger ones. I was best friends with one of 12, talk about one messed up family, though I'm sure the parents "thought" they were doing well. I'm sure there are exceptions to the rule on families that big, with everyone turning out well balanced. Just find me one.


I'm sure I did sound judgemental. But as a mother, looking at it from the perspective of the children, I stand by what I say. And this may be the first time on here I refuse to apologize for something I've said.


I really am a nice person though.

Extreme multiple births carry tremendous risks

It's considered fairly reckless for reproductive endocrinology in the United States," Hinckley said. "Through guidelines, we've really altered this so [large multiple births] are incredibly uncommon here in the U.S. It's usually if the doctor is not doing what he was trained to do or the patient is not following the doctor's advice."

The more premature the babies are born, the greater risks they have of dying or facing significant lifelong problems, said Dr. Norbert Gleicher, medical director at the Center for Human Reproduction in New York.

"The media should not make this into heroic case," Gleicher said. "This is anything but a heroic case. This is very bad medicine."

 

[tlh]

Date: 1/30/2009 3:04:54 PM
Author: Ellen
That was me. Gee, I think this is the first time in my 3 years here I''ve been called out for saying something controversial. And what I said here is about the ''harshest'' thing I think I''ve ever said. I can''t even be mad. lol

To answer your questions, yes, I had read a previous article yesterday that stated she was single, living with her parents, and did not want her name released. In the articles I''ve found so far, but not the one I read (there are many), they all refer to the mother-no dad. No father is not mentioned anywhere. And it states in the articles she does not want her name released.

As for the monetary issue, unless, as someone said, she has TONS of money, someones tax dollars will most likely help pay for them. No, we don''t know that, it remains to be seen. But I am seriously skeptical she''s got that kind of cash. (note, figures are for 2004, so it''s more)

But let''s forget that part, and look at the VERY important fact, that the more babies there are, the more risks to the babies there are. That is a fact. Why would any mother want to put unecessary risks to her children? Would you?

It is also stated, by a doctor in this article, that having that many babies is almost impossible to do naturally. I''ll provide the link.

And having children of my own, 3, I know how hard it is to pay attention to them all equally, WITH a husband. Do not tell me one mother, and 2 grandparents, can give 14 children equal time. They cannot. I dated a guy that was one of 16, they get ignored, lost in the shuffle, with the older ones having to raise the younger ones. I was best friends with one of 12, talk about one messed up family, though I''m sure the parents ''thought'' they were doing well. I''m sure there are exceptions to the rule on families that big, with everyone turning out well balanced. Just find me one.


I''m sure I did sound judgemental. But as a mother, looking at it from the perspective of the children, I stand by what I say. And this may be the first time on here I refuse to apologize for something I''ve said.


I really am a nice person though.

Extreme multiple births carry tremendous risks

It''s considered fairly reckless for reproductive endocrinology in the United States,'' Hinckley said. ''Through guidelines, we''ve really altered this so [large multiple births] are incredibly uncommon here in the U.S. It''s usually if the doctor is not doing what he was trained to do or the patient is not following the doctor''s advice.''

The more premature the babies are born, the greater risks they have of dying or facing significant lifelong problems, said Dr. Norbert Gleicher, medical director at the Center for Human Reproduction in New York.

''The media should not make this into heroic case,'' Gleicher said. ''This is anything but a heroic case. This is very bad medicine.''

I am a nice person too!

and Ellen, I would also agree that you are a very nice poster.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 1/30/2009 3:08:37 PM
Author: tlh

Date: 1/30/2009 3:04:54 PM
Author: Ellen
That was me. Gee, I think this is the first time in my 3 years here I''ve been called out for saying something controversial. And what I said here is about the ''harshest'' thing I think I''ve ever said. I can''t even be mad. lol

To answer your questions, yes, I had read a previous article yesterday that stated she was single, living with her parents, and did not want her name released. In the articles I''ve found so far, but not the one I read (there are many), they all refer to the mother-no dad. No father is not mentioned anywhere. And it states in the articles she does not want her name released.

As for the monetary issue, unless, as someone said, she has TONS of money, someones tax dollars will most likely help pay for them. No, we don''t know that, it remains to be seen. But I am seriously skeptical she''s got that kind of cash. (note, figures are for 2004, so it''s more)

But let''s forget that part, and look at the VERY important fact, that the more babies there are, the more risks to the babies there are. That is a fact. Why would any mother want to put unecessary risks to her children? Would you?

It is also stated, by a doctor in this article, that having that many babies is almost impossible to do naturally. I''ll provide the link.

And having children of my own, 3, I know how hard it is to pay attention to them all equally, WITH a husband. Do not tell me one mother, and 2 grandparents, can give 14 children equal time. They cannot. I dated a guy that was one of 16, they get ignored, lost in the shuffle, with the older ones having to raise the younger ones. I was best friends with one of 12, talk about one messed up family, though I''m sure the parents ''thought'' they were doing well. I''m sure there are exceptions to the rule on families that big, with everyone turning out well balanced. Just find me one.


I''m sure I did sound judgemental. But as a mother, looking at it from the perspective of the children, I stand by what I say. And this may be the first time on here I refuse to apologize for something I''ve said.


I really am a nice person though.

Extreme multiple births carry tremendous risks

It''s considered fairly reckless for reproductive endocrinology in the United States,'' Hinckley said. ''Through guidelines, we''ve really altered this so [large multiple births] are incredibly uncommon here in the U.S. It''s usually if the doctor is not doing what he was trained to do or the patient is not following the doctor''s advice.''

The more premature the babies are born, the greater risks they have of dying or facing significant lifelong problems, said Dr. Norbert Gleicher, medical director at the Center for Human Reproduction in New York.

''The media should not make this into heroic case,'' Gleicher said. ''This is anything but a heroic case. This is very bad medicine.''

I am a nice person too!

and Ellen, I would also agree that you are a very nice poster.

Indeed you are, and thanks.

 

[Ellen]

double post

 

[Ellen]

double post

 

[Ellen]

Date: 1/30/2009 3:04:54 PM
Author: Ellen

That was me. Gee, I think this is the first time in my 3 years here I've been called out for saying something controversial. And what I said here is about the 'harshest' thing I think I've ever said. I can't even be mad. lol

To answer your questions, yes, I had read a previous article yesterday that stated she was single, living with her parents, and did not want her name released. In the articles I've found so far, but not the one I read (there are many), they all refer to the mother-no dad. No father is mentioned anywhere. And it states in the articles she does not want her name released.

As for the monetary issue, unless, as someone said, she has TONS of money, someones tax dollars will most likely help pay for them. No, we don't know that, it remains to be seen. But I am seriously skeptical she's got that kind of cash. (note, figures are for 2004, so it's more)

But let's forget that part, and look at the VERY important fact, that the more babies there are, the more risks to the babies there are. That is a fact. Why would any mother want to put unecessary risks to her children? Would you?

Hmmmm.....

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/30/earlyshow/health/main4764432.shtml

(CBS) CBS News has learned that the family of the octuplets born this week outside Los Angeles filed for bankruptcy and abandoned a home a little over a year-and-a-half ago.

 

[iluvcarats]

Very interesting article Ellen.
And I agree with your point of view.
My question is - what about her health insurance provider?
Did they cover all the costs of her implantations, high risk birth, and neo-natal care for 8 babies?
Correct me if I am wrong, but it doesn''t sound like she has the money for that.
Either way *we* end up paying higher premiums and medical care costs because of situations like this.
I feel it was irresponsible on everyone''s part.

 

[VegasAngel]

There is some stuff about this family on PH... but he isnt a reliable source. If it is true

 

[iluvcarats]

Date: 1/30/2009 3:25:04 PM
Author: iluvcarats
Very interesting article Ellen.

And I agree with your point of view.

My question is - what about her health insurance provider?

Did they cover all the costs of her implantations, high risk birth, and neo-natal care for 8 babies?

Correct me if I am wrong, but it doesn''t sound like she has the money for that.

Either way *we* end up paying higher premiums and medical care costs because of situations like this.

I feel it was irresponsible on everyone''s part.

I just wanted to add:
Everyday there is a new story about someone in need of a transplant or cancer treatment, and he/she is denied.
Stories of families going bankrupt for their medical problems.
Recently there was an article posted here about an elderly couple who had to divorce just to qualify for medicare to buy medicine.
And this gets funded?
I don''t get it?

 

[Ellen]

I don''t get a lot of things lately iluv. Seriously.

 

[tlh]

Ok...Just going to throw it out there...
Cost of in vitro fertilization ranges from 9K-20k+
Do you think that this money could have prevented a foreclosure?

Plz don''t shoot the messenger!

 

[Miranda]

This is a crazy head scratcher for sure. Lots of things just don''t stack up. I read in the paper a few days ago that they (she?) and the doctors only thought there were going to be 7 babies. How do you miss an entire baby? Now, I''m not a fan of Kaiser from my own personal experiences, but, I wouldn''t expect them to miss a WHOLE baby. Crazy!

 

[Ellen]

Date: 1/30/2009 3:47:26 PM
Author: tlh
Ok...Just going to throw it out there...
Cost of in vitro fertilization ranges from 9K-20k+
Do you think that this money could have prevented a foreclosure?

Plz don''t shoot the messenger!

 

[InLuv101]

Date: 1/30/2009 3:48:44 PM
Author: Miranda
This is a crazy head scratcher for sure. Lots of things just don''t stack up. I read in the paper a few days ago that they (she?) and the doctors only thought there were going to be 7 babies. How do you miss an entire baby? Now, I''m not a fan of Kaiser from my own personal experiences, but, I wouldn''t expect them to miss a WHOLE baby. Crazy!

I heard this too! I heard it was completly hidden by another baby. Maybe it was just super crammed in there? (I''ve never been preggo so I don''t really know if that is feasible or not)

 

[decodelighted]

Date: 1/30/2009 3:48:44 PM
Author: Miranda
How do you miss an entire baby? Now, I''m not a fan of Kaiser from my own personal experiences, but, I wouldn''t expect them to miss a WHOLE baby. Crazy!

Just the other day a lady had a surprise twin drop into her pants ... ugh I don''t wanna google for source but I swear it was *this* week''s news or last.

 

[Miranda]

Date: 1/30/2009 3:56:29 PM
Author: InLuv101

Date: 1/30/2009 3:48:44 PM
Author: Miranda
This is a crazy head scratcher for sure. Lots of things just don''t stack up. I read in the paper a few days ago that they (she?) and the doctors only thought there were going to be 7 babies. How do you miss an entire baby? Now, I''m not a fan of Kaiser from my own personal experiences, but, I wouldn''t expect them to miss a WHOLE baby. Crazy!

I heard this too! I heard it was completly hidden by another baby. Maybe it was just super crammed in there? (I''ve never been preggo so I don''t really know if that is feasible or not)

I''ve been preggo three times and I don''t know if it''s feasible! I would think she would have VERY frequent ultrasounds and they would pick up on an extra kid at some point. She made it to 31 weeks after all. Who knows? My guess is that the whole story will surface soon. Probably in the National Enquirer.

 

[tlh]

I''m sure w/ 7 heart beats and the mothers... it may just get lost.

Date: 1/30/2009 4:07:37 PM
Author: Miranda

Date: 1/30/2009 3:56:29 PM
Author: InLuv101

Date: 1/30/2009 3:48:44 PM
Author: Miranda
This is a crazy head scratcher for sure. Lots of things just don''t stack up. I read in the paper a few days ago that they (she?) and the doctors only thought there were going to be 7 babies. How do you miss an entire baby? Now, I''m not a fan of Kaiser from my own personal experiences, but, I wouldn''t expect them to miss a WHOLE baby. Crazy!

I heard this too! I heard it was completly hidden by another baby. Maybe it was just super crammed in there? (I''ve never been preggo so I don''t really know if that is feasible or not)

I''ve been preggo three times and I don''t know if it''s feasible! I would think she would have VERY frequent ultrasounds and they would pick up on an extra kid at some point. She made it to 31 weeks after all. Who knows? My guess is that the whole story will surface soon. Probably in the National Enquirer.

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 1/30/2009 3:04:54 PM
Author: Ellen
That was me. Gee, I think this is the first time in my 3 years here I''ve been called out for saying something controversial. And what I said here is about the ''harshest'' thing I think I''ve ever said. I can''t even be mad. lol

To answer your questions, yes, I had read a previous article yesterday that stated she was single, living with her parents, and did not want her name released. In the articles I''ve found so far, but not the one I read (there are many), they all refer to the mother-no dad. No father is mentioned anywhere. And it states in the articles she does not want her name released.

As for the monetary issue, unless, as someone said, she has TONS of money, someones tax dollars will most likely help pay for them. No, we don''t know that, it remains to be seen. But I am seriously skeptical she''s got that kind of cash. (note, figures are for 2004, so it''s more)

But let''s forget that part, and look at the VERY important fact, that the more babies there are, the more risks to the babies there are. That is a fact. Why would any mother want to put unecessary risks to her children? Would you?

It is also stated, by a doctor in this article, that having that many babies is almost impossible to do naturally. I''ll provide the link.

And having children of my own, 3, I know how hard it is to pay attention to them all equally, WITH a husband. Do not tell me one mother, and 2 grandparents, can give 14 children equal time. They cannot. I dated a guy that was one of 16, they get ignored, lost in the shuffle, with the older ones having to raise the younger ones. I was best friends with one of 12, talk about one messed up family, though I''m sure the parents ''thought'' they were doing well. I''m sure there are exceptions to the rule on families that big, with everyone turning out well balanced. Just find me one.


I''m sure I did sound judgemental. But as a mother, looking at it from the perspective of the children, I stand by what I say. And this may be the first time on here I refuse to apologize for something I''ve said.


I really am a nice person though.

Extreme multiple births carry tremendous risks

It''s considered fairly reckless for reproductive endocrinology in the United States,'' Hinckley said. ''Through guidelines, we''ve really altered this so [large multiple births] are incredibly uncommon here in the U.S. It''s usually if the doctor is not doing what he was trained to do or the patient is not following the doctor''s advice.''

The more premature the babies are born, the greater risks they have of dying or facing significant lifelong problems, said Dr. Norbert Gleicher, medical director at the Center for Human Reproduction in New York.

''The media should not make this into heroic case,'' Gleicher said. ''This is anything but a heroic case. This is very bad medicine.''

That reminds me of the heartwrenching story of the family with 9 (I believe) kids. They were moving the kids from one car to another and somehow lost count. Someone forgot to move the infant, who dead in the car from heat.

 

[Ellen]

Date: 1/30/2009 4:32:11 PM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 1/30/2009 3:04:54 PM
Author: Ellen
That was me. Gee, I think this is the first time in my 3 years here I''ve been called out for saying something controversial. And what I said here is about the ''harshest'' thing I think I''ve ever said. I can''t even be mad. lol

To answer your questions, yes, I had read a previous article yesterday that stated she was single, living with her parents, and did not want her name released. In the articles I''ve found so far, but not the one I read (there are many), they all refer to the mother-no dad. No father is mentioned anywhere. And it states in the articles she does not want her name released.

As for the monetary issue, unless, as someone said, she has TONS of money, someones tax dollars will most likely help pay for them. No, we don''t know that, it remains to be seen. But I am seriously skeptical she''s got that kind of cash. (note, figures are for 2004, so it''s more)

But let''s forget that part, and look at the VERY important fact, that the more babies there are, the more risks to the babies there are. That is a fact. Why would any mother want to put unecessary risks to her children? Would you?

It is also stated, by a doctor in this article, that having that many babies is almost impossible to do naturally. I''ll provide the link.

And having children of my own, 3, I know how hard it is to pay attention to them all equally, WITH a husband. Do not tell me one mother, and 2 grandparents, can give 14 children equal time. They cannot. I dated a guy that was one of 16, they get ignored, lost in the shuffle, with the older ones having to raise the younger ones. I was best friends with one of 12, talk about one messed up family, though I''m sure the parents ''thought'' they were doing well. I''m sure there are exceptions to the rule on families that big, with everyone turning out well balanced. Just find me one.


I''m sure I did sound judgemental. But as a mother, looking at it from the perspective of the children, I stand by what I say. And this may be the first time on here I refuse to apologize for something I''ve said.


I really am a nice person though.

Extreme multiple births carry tremendous risks

It''s considered fairly reckless for reproductive endocrinology in the United States,'' Hinckley said. ''Through guidelines, we''ve really altered this so [large multiple births] are incredibly uncommon here in the U.S. It''s usually if the doctor is not doing what he was trained to do or the patient is not following the doctor''s advice.''

The more premature the babies are born, the greater risks they have of dying or facing significant lifelong problems, said Dr. Norbert Gleicher, medical director at the Center for Human Reproduction in New York.

''The media should not make this into heroic case,'' Gleicher said. ''This is anything but a heroic case. This is very bad medicine.''

That reminds me of the heartwrenching story of the family with 9 (I believe) kids. They were moving the kids from one car to another and somehow lost count. Someone forgot to move the infant, who dead in the car from heat.

Oh T, that''s awful.

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 1/30/2009 4:53:28 PM
Author: Ellen

Date: 1/30/2009 4:32:11 PM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 1/30/2009 3:04:54 PM
Author: Ellen
That was me. Gee, I think this is the first time in my 3 years here I''ve been called out for saying something controversial. And what I said here is about the ''harshest'' thing I think I''ve ever said. I can''t even be mad. lol

To answer your questions, yes, I had read a previous article yesterday that stated she was single, living with her parents, and did not want her name released. In the articles I''ve found so far, but not the one I read (there are many), they all refer to the mother-no dad. No father is mentioned anywhere. And it states in the articles she does not want her name released.

As for the monetary issue, unless, as someone said, she has TONS of money, someones tax dollars will most likely help pay for them. No, we don''t know that, it remains to be seen. But I am seriously skeptical she''s got that kind of cash. (note, figures are for 2004, so it''s more)

But let''s forget that part, and look at the VERY important fact, that the more babies there are, the more risks to the babies there are. That is a fact. Why would any mother want to put unecessary risks to her children? Would you?

It is also stated, by a doctor in this article, that having that many babies is almost impossible to do naturally. I''ll provide the link.

And having children of my own, 3, I know how hard it is to pay attention to them all equally, WITH a husband. Do not tell me one mother, and 2 grandparents, can give 14 children equal time. They cannot. I dated a guy that was one of 16, they get ignored, lost in the shuffle, with the older ones having to raise the younger ones. I was best friends with one of 12, talk about one messed up family, though I''m sure the parents ''thought'' they were doing well. I''m sure there are exceptions to the rule on families that big, with everyone turning out well balanced. Just find me one.


I''m sure I did sound judgemental. But as a mother, looking at it from the perspective of the children, I stand by what I say. And this may be the first time on here I refuse to apologize for something I''ve said.


I really am a nice person though.

Extreme multiple births carry tremendous risks

It''s considered fairly reckless for reproductive endocrinology in the United States,'' Hinckley said. ''Through guidelines, we''ve really altered this so [large multiple births] are incredibly uncommon here in the U.S. It''s usually if the doctor is not doing what he was trained to do or the patient is not following the doctor''s advice.''

The more premature the babies are born, the greater risks they have of dying or facing significant lifelong problems, said Dr. Norbert Gleicher, medical director at the Center for Human Reproduction in New York.

''The media should not make this into heroic case,'' Gleicher said. ''This is anything but a heroic case. This is very bad medicine.''

That reminds me of the heartwrenching story of the family with 9 (I believe) kids. They were moving the kids from one car to another and somehow lost count. Someone forgot to move the infant, who dead in the car from heat.

Oh T, that''s awful.

I felt sick when I heard that story. Especially because it was just an honest mistake...with that many kids, it sounded a bit chaotic and they were obviously devastated. I think they may have realized it on the drive, but it was too late.

 

[Ellen]

Yes, with that many kids, it does get chaotic. I''m sure it was an honest oversight. I can only imagine how they felt.

 

[Definitely. Maybe]

Date: 1/30/2009 4:32:11 PM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 1/30/2009 3:04:54 PM
Author: Ellen
That was me. Gee, I think this is the first time in my 3 years here I''ve been called out for saying something controversial. And what I said here is about the ''harshest'' thing I think I''ve ever said. I can''t even be mad. lol

To answer your questions, yes, I had read a previous article yesterday that stated she was single, living with her parents, and did not want her name released. In the articles I''ve found so far, but not the one I read (there are many), they all refer to the mother-no dad. No father is mentioned anywhere. And it states in the articles she does not want her name released.

As for the monetary issue, unless, as someone said, she has TONS of money, someones tax dollars will most likely help pay for them. No, we don''t know that, it remains to be seen. But I am seriously skeptical she''s got that kind of cash. (note, figures are for 2004, so it''s more)

But let''s forget that part, and look at the VERY important fact, that the more babies there are, the more risks to the babies there are. That is a fact. Why would any mother want to put unecessary risks to her children? Would you?

It is also stated, by a doctor in this article, that having that many babies is almost impossible to do naturally. I''ll provide the link.

And having children of my own, 3, I know how hard it is to pay attention to them all equally, WITH a husband. Do not tell me one mother, and 2 grandparents, can give 14 children equal time. They cannot. I dated a guy that was one of 16, they get ignored, lost in the shuffle, with the older ones having to raise the younger ones. I was best friends with one of 12, talk about one messed up family, though I''m sure the parents ''thought'' they were doing well. I''m sure there are exceptions to the rule on families that big, with everyone turning out well balanced. Just find me one.


I''m sure I did sound judgemental. But as a mother, looking at it from the perspective of the children, I stand by what I say. And this may be the first time on here I refuse to apologize for something I''ve said.


I really am a nice person though.

Extreme multiple births carry tremendous risks

It''s considered fairly reckless for reproductive endocrinology in the United States,'' Hinckley said. ''Through guidelines, we''ve really altered this so [large multiple births] are incredibly uncommon here in the U.S. It''s usually if the doctor is not doing what he was trained to do or the patient is not following the doctor''s advice.''

The more premature the babies are born, the greater risks they have of dying or facing significant lifelong problems, said Dr. Norbert Gleicher, medical director at the Center for Human Reproduction in New York.

''The media should not make this into heroic case,'' Gleicher said. ''This is anything but a heroic case. This is very bad medicine.''

That reminds me of the heartwrenching story of the family with 9 (I believe) kids. They were moving the kids from one car to another and somehow lost count. Someone forgot to move the infant, who dead in the car from heat.

OMG that is sooo horrible! I cannot imagine, but I am sure it happens... unfortunately..

This whole story with this woman just doesn''t make sense... it''s totally bizarre. It seems to be going back and forth with information and new information is still being unfolded.

 

[innerkitten]

regarding the cost of IVF, perhaps she had it done in another country where it''s cheaper? I''ve heard of people going to India and Canada. Or maybe it was clomid or something similar. Doesn''t sound like she had any fertility problems though in the first place though. Which is of the things that makes the story so bizzare.

 

[Kaleigh]

IVF is extremely expensive, my SIL had it done twice, and think the cost was about 30K total? I want to hear from the doc. This amounts to mal practice IMHO.
So much doesn''t make any sense. I am sure as the days go on we will learn a lot more....

 

[rockzilla]

I will not comment on the judgements of decisions of the mother. However, I will comment on all the judgements about how "irresponsible" and "immoral" it was for the doctor to implant the embryos, because I think it brings up a very important issue that is manifesting itself more and more frequently in our society.

That is, at what point does a doctor''s personal beliefs (religious or otherwise) allow them to decide to withhold care.

You say the doctor should have never given fertility treatments to someone who had so many children (let''s not get into the # of embryos; doctors frequently implant multiple embryos when the chances of them sticking are low). Who is a doctor to say, "No, I think you''ve had enough" or "I don''t think you should have a child." Sure, go ahead and ask about how they see it impacting their family, but it starts a very slippery slope. What if she was single and had 3 children? Or 4? Would that have been ok?

Is it okay for the doctor to object because someone is unmarried? What if they are married to someone of a different race, which goes against the doctor''s beliefs? What if they are in a same-sex relationship? What if they are in a dangerous profession? How much money do they have to make before it''s "responsible" for them to have another child?

Bush''s administration supported several "conscience" laws allowing health care providers to object to something based on their conscience. Pharmacist morally opposed to birth control? Should they be able to not dispense it to someone who has a prescription?

Sorry for the related-but-partially-tangental rant. Its quite easy to pass judgement on an individual for something that is well out of the "normal" range of possibility, but it is also important to recognize and consider how those same judgements would apply to related, and much more common situations.

RZ

 

[diamondsrock]

Something just doesn't add up. I thought it was common knowledge in the field of repro. medicine that they shouldn't implant more than 2 or 3 embryos. Why would a doctor do such a thing, especially knowing (if he did) the woman was against selective termination? What doctor would risk his integrity and reputation to do such a thing? Not to mention the obvious risk to the mother and the babies?
I really am thinking she got a hold of some fertility drugs, hyperovulated, then got pregant on her own, although this goes against what the grandmother has said about in vitro.
I am still baffled by the Jon and Kate story. Even back then, it wasn't too long ago, I thought that doctors knew about the risks of multiples. I still haven't heard the whole story on how she became pregnant with 6. I'm thinking maybe she hyperovulated and then got pregnant on her own? I would assume the doc would know she would be at a risk for multiples. I doubt a doctor back then would implant 6 or 7 embryos in a woman. I've heard theories but never heard the whole story. Then again, I don't watch their show (except for a brief glimpse of those cute kids!) and I don't read their books.
Regardless, I think the bottom line is it's super irresponsible to carry that many babies. The risks are far too great. I wish the media would point to more of the risks and horror stories associated with high order multiples rather than sugar coating the whole thing, which I feel is being done to a point. I don't think they should promote this sort of thing.

 

[cara]

Rockzilla:
Any doctor involved in her getting pregnant with 8 fetuses was irresponsible for the MEDICAL judgment involved. 8 is too many for medical reasons unrelated to the challenge of raising them. If it was in vitro, less embryos should have been transferred. If is was drugs only, too much drug and not enough monitoring. Since the woman has had 6 kids in 7 years, she is clearly not having too much difficulty on the fertility front, so more caution was warranted.

IMO you cannot ignore the question of 'how many embryos were transferred?' because that goes to the root of the medical irresponsibility in the case.

As an additional area of doctor responsibility, if he suspected the woman was not right in the head, or had highly questionable judgment, he should have declined treatment without a psych referral. But we don't know what the woman's motivation was, what she told the doctor doing fertility treatments, if there was a doctor doing fertility treatments, etc., so its hard to evaluate with the evidence in hand.

In other words, doctors should exercise their medical judgment, as that is their expertise. But they are not always allowed to impose their non-medical beliefs onto others through their medical practice. For example, a fertility doctor that performs in vitro on many patients but declines to treat Couple X because they are interracial would probably be violating some discrimination law. In CA, the law also protects gay couples in the same vein.

The Bush admin's health care provider conscious clause makes my skin crawl because it is about allowing certain health professionals or even the janitor who mops the floor to dictate and restrict the health services available to the general population or to specific populations according to their beliefs. I have as much respect for it as I do the notion that restaurant owners in the South have a right to operate their own business in a segregated fashion according to their beliefs. These people may be entitled to their beliefs, but not their actions, if they prevent others from utilizing public facilities or receiving appropriate medical care.

 

[joflier]

I''m seriously in shock over reading that article. I just cannot phathom how someone would feel the need to have fertility treatments after having 6 children and your still living WITH YOUR PARENTS! Yikes. I tend to agree with whomever it was that posted about her perhaps having a mental illness. I just can''t see any other logic to it.

 

[tlh]

Date: 1/30/2009 6:24:49 PM
Author: cara
Rockzilla:
Any doctor involved in her getting pregnant with 8 fetuses was irresponsible for the MEDICAL judgment involved. 8 is too many for medical reasons unrelated to the challenge of raising them. If it was in vitro, less embryos should have been transferred. If is was drugs only, too much drug and not enough monitoring. Since the woman has had 6 kids in 7 years, she is clearly not having too much difficulty on the fertility front, so more caution was warranted.

IMO you cannot ignore the question of ''how many embryos were transferred?'' because that goes to the root of the medical irresponsibility in the case.

As an additional area of doctor responsibility, if he suspected the woman was not right in the head, or had highly questionable judgment, he should have declined treatment without a psych referral. But we don''t know what the woman''s motivation was, what she told the doctor doing fertility treatments, if there was a doctor doing fertility treatments, etc., so its hard to evaluate with the evidence in hand.

In other words, doctors should exercise their medical judgment, as that is their expertise. But they are not always allowed to impose their non-medical beliefs onto others through their medical practice. For example, a fertility doctor that performs in vitro on many patients but declines to treat Couple X because they are interracial would probably be violating some discrimination law. In CA, the law also protects gay couples in the same vein.

The Bush admin''s health care provider conscious clause makes my skin crawl because it is about allowing certain health professionals or even the janitor who mops the floor to dictate and restrict the health services available to the general population or to specific populations according to their beliefs. I have as much respect for it as I do the notion that restaurant owners in the South have a right to operate their own business in a segregated fashion according to their beliefs. These people may be entitled to their beliefs, but not their actions, if they prevent others from utilizing public facilities or receiving appropriate medical care.

Yup, she is a woman, not a cat.

 

[meresal]

Date: 1/30/2009 5:11:10 PM
Author: innerkitten
regarding the cost of IVF, perhaps she had it done in another country where it's cheaper? I've heard of people going to India and Canada. Or maybe it was clomid or something similar. Doesn't sound like she had any fertility problems though in the first place though. Which is of the things that makes the story so bizzare.

I have been thinking the same thing for a few hours now... though, not nesessarily only for the price aspect. I have a feeling she may have had trouble finding a doctor that would do this in the US.

If she had a doctor here that did the implantation, her name will be linked to them somehow, and it will come out.

ETA: She is 33 yrs old.

Per: The Practice Committe of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology: It is stated that any patient under the age of 35 should have no more than 2 embryos implanted. I think my sister paid upwards of $30k as well to try the fertility treatments twice, and they never implanted more than 3 or 4. Not sure if that was total or per time.