too many children rant

[glenn kangiser]

(not having a man around is not a medical issue) 

...but it could be an indicator of deficiencies in her mentality and reason to prevent her from procreating if possible....

[StinkerBell]

Note the fist item on my list of layers.

[tanya]

I see nothing wrong with her having the invitro.  No husband/father required.  Lots of single parents have proven over and over again their children are as adjusted as well as two parent households.  I am sure that the govt. figured in her settlement check and she received the assistance she was entitled to,(probably zero).  Just because her three children are disabled does not mean that they are getting social security checks, not all disabled children qualify. In fact if they did qualify very likely the houselhold income would be so high they would not qualify for other assistance.  As far as the medical costs, well then is medical care only for the rich?  Caps on invitro?  Well obvioulsy the babies are dong well, so I see no reason why they should cap it.  "Mentally unstable" is an opinion, sometimes an educated one, but certainly not black and white or all inclusive.  Should taxpayers pay for children even when the parents cannot provide?  YES!!! they are citizens and they will be the ones "providing/paying" soon enough. IVF should be offered just like any other procedure it is irrelevant if a "man being around" or if a medical condition exists, plenty of women might see it as a way of PREVENTING a medical condidtion from their man around!!! I see NO reason for CPS involvement she obviously did a wonderful job taking care of herself and her pregnancy and her other children or by now we would have heard about it.

I know here in WA that the state regulates financial assistance, in other words your welfare check will go up about $50 if you have one child and then have another but after the second one it doesn't go up anymore, the most is about $640. So 2 kids or 10 you get the same check.  Food Stamps is different though, each person after the first one gets an additional $50-$100.  Using the numbers below she will need about 4 million dollars to care for the babies until they are raised, wanna bet the movie makes more than that?

[Ernest T. Bass]

I'm taking a break for here for a while.  This whole thing here is making me sad. 

That's not good! Please don't take personal offense at what I or anyone else here has said; we're simply throwing our different views into the jackpot so we can all benefit from them. Obviously no one has every answer; just a clue to the mystery. As long as we build our houses to code (our moral code, that is), there's no danger of failure. God's not trying to trip you up; He will gently steer each of us down our own individual path.

[StinkerBell]

Tanya, you are probably a very lovely person, but your views and your opinions are way to socialist for me.

[tanya]

Be more specific and it will be my pleasure to reply.  I prefer socialist to facist anyday by the way.  (not saying you are facist but I think the views in this country are headed that way)

[StinkerBell]

I oppose about everything you pointed out in your post. My reply is specific to this case.
The argument No husband/father required. I think that is the most selfish of things. This women imo is selfish. She demonstrates this by having all these kids at the tax payers cost. She placed a burden on her parents with her selfish behavior. But above it all she can not provide for her children.

The fact you have the belief that people are Entitled to assistance. I have issue with that.

You suggest that that everyone should have medical care, that it should not be for only the rich. Yes, everyone should have medical care, and obviously she has received it. BUT this was an ELECTIVE medical procedure. This was not to help her extend her life by regular checks ups or receive emergency care because she was in need. It was elective.

You say all the babies are doing well, they are doing well for being premies does not mean they are over all healthy. Know one knows the long term problems they may. She does already have three other children that have issues.

Your argument that tax payers should pay because they are citizen and they will be paying their taxes soon enough... Well if they model them self after their mother they will not be contributing to the tax pool, but will be drawing off it.

You think CPS should not be involved because she had taken care of herself during her pregnancy. That not all true and misleading. The tax payers have taken care of here through medical treatment, and assistance her mother has and is taking care of her other children. Everyone has taken care of her because in fact she does not take care of herself or her responsibilities.

The finally assumption you made is she will make millions of dollars on the situation she created. Maybe. Seeing the overall reaction she is receiving I would think that maybe she will not have Hollywood beating down her door, and if she did I would hope that the state would garnish any funds received to help make them whole in the funds they have laid out for her choices. She also runs a risk by making a large income having her children disqualified for assistance because her household makes to much money.

[NM_Shooter]

Dang... i hope I am not too late to join in the fray.

I say to let any woman have as many babies as she can adequately support completely on her own.  

If she requires welfare or other state support for more than a year, give her the option of sterilization or giving kids up to be adopted out.

There.  I'm pretty sure I got caught up and annoyed folks with just two sentences.

-f-

P.S.   if there is a dad involved, same thing for him.  Pay up or we'll enact our own form of "severence"

[tanya]

Ok Then, So because I think she can make the decision whether she needs a husband to be a good parent makes me a socialist, no that makes you a facist!  This is the US not Nazi Germany, adults get to make thier own choices concerning relationships.

"The fact you have the belief that people are Entitled to assistance." I DO MOST DEFINATELY belieive that since we are AT WAR in another country, paying for everything under the sun, OUR CITIZENS should get whatever they NEED.  Facists believe they should tell everybody else in the world how to live and only pay for what profits their end goals, Socialists believe in live and let live and take care of things as best possible. 

"You suggest that that everyone should have medical care, that it should not be for only the rich. Yes, everyone should have medical care, and obviously she has received it. BUT this was an ELECTIVE medical procedure. This was not to help her extend her life by regular checks ups or receive emergency care because she was in need. It was elective."

Oh I thought she paid for the procedure with a settlement and we as taxpayers are paying for the babies care and well being because they are our fellow citizens.  She made a brilliant decision which will set her up for the rest of her life but some peole have a hard time seeing that.  Elective or preventive again should medical care/procedures be afforded to only the rich?  After all everybody pays taxes to develop this technology???  Facists believe elective medical care should only be for the rich, BUT experiments should be done on the poor, that is probably how she managed to finagle the IVF to begin with.  Socialists believe medical care, elective, or preventive, or required is between the patient and med provider.   

"You say all the babies are doing well, they are doing well for being premies does not mean they are over all healthy. Know one knows the long term problems they may. She does already have three other children that have issues"

So?  People with disabled children already should be banned from having additional children?  DEFINATELY FACIST!!!  Socialists believe again taht is a decision for the individuals as parent/parents.

"Your argument that tax payers should pay because they are citizen and they will be paying their taxes soon enough... Well if they model them self after their mother they will not be contributing to the tax pool, but will be drawing off it."

So then ONLY parents who can guarantee their offspring will grow up to pay thier fair share in taxes should procreate? FACIST!!!  Again socialists believe that is a personal choice not govt. business. 

"You think CPS should not be involved because she had taken care of herself during her pregnancy. That not all true and misleading. The tax payers have taken care of here through medical treatment, and assistance her mother has and is taking care of her other children. Everyone has taken care of her because in fact she does not take care of herself or her responsibilities." 

No the taxpayers have not "taken care of her" She is the one who has to be eating/sleeping/and conducting her life in a healthy pregnant way to ensure the babies survival.  Taxpayers pay for a lot of welfare, many moms go on crack while pregnant, a lot of grandmothers take care of grandchildren, it doesn't mean she isn't taking care of them, it means she found them appropriate care. That IS taking care of her responsibilities!!!  FACISTS believe that everyone has to choose the same options or be ostercized, socialists believe that everybody has different ways of doing things based on their situation.

"The finally assumption you made is she will make millions of dollars on the situation she created. Maybe. Seeing the overall reaction she is receiving I would think that maybe she will not have Hollywood beating down her door, and if she did I would hope that the state would garnish any funds received to help make them whole in the funds they have laid out for her choices. She also runs a risk by making a large income having her children disqualified for assistance because her household makes to much money."


OF course the state will recoup any funds spent they do in every case where the parents financial situation inproves to the extent that they are able to pay.  Hollywood, magazines etc.  will be beating down her door. Whether the reaction is good or bad to her choices that doesn't matter to hollywood because they are basically all socialists.  As far as her household becoming ineligible for financial assistance, only a facist with a desire to keep control of or continue to beat up on her would have a problem with that. Socialists say great more money for others in need.   

I HOPE you are not a facisit!!!

[MountainDon]

The finally assumption you made is she will make millions of dollars on the situation she created.....

I doubt anyone will want a movie or a book. There's nothing about the story to be applauded, other than the fact that everyone came out of it alive.

[MountainDon]

OUR CITIZENS should get whatever they NEED. 

Need, yes. She did not need 8 more kids; she wanted 8 more kids.

Too many folks have trouble distinguishing between those two words.

Just like too many people wanted houses they could not afford, and would not settle for something that would fulfill their needs. 

[StinkerBell]

What I am is a responsible individual. Who has rational sense.
You have brought in emotional arguments. For example "War"

I DO MOST DEFINATELY belieive that since we are AT WAR in another country, paying for everything under the sun, OUR CITIZENS should get whatever they NEED

I suggest you understand the difference between need and want. She did not need to have any more babies, she Wanted more.

You brought in other strawman arguments regarding  the poor and medical care.

Facists believe elective medical care should only be for the rich, BUT experiments should be done on the poor, that is probably how she managed to finagle the IVF to begin with.

You keep on using the word Fascist. I think at this point it is fruitless to discuss this with you. Your arguments are not the facts of this case and you are using emotional arguments that have nothing to do with this case in order to make an argument that I am a fascist.

I only suggested that your opinions in this case was socialist, and I didn't need to start every thought/sentence making the suggestion that you are a socialist.

This quote I find the most funniest almost oxymoronic when applied to this situation.

Again socialists believe that is a personal choice not govt. business

I find it funny because you are saying it is not the governments business yet this woman made it the governments business by placing the burden of her personal and selfish choice upon the government.

[MountainDon]

She made a brilliant decision which will set her up for the rest of her life but some people have a hard time seeing that. 

Brilliant?  Heaven help us all if we all made such brilliant life decisions.  

[tanya]

She wanted more children, which she paid for the IVF with her settlement right?  BUT the babies are citizens and they NEED care.  It is beyond her choices now that the babies are born.  

I know there will be a movie, she has the entire world up in arms!!!  

[StinkerBell]

SHe may have paid for her IVF, when she should have paid the state back. I suspect she did not disclose that.
However, the State paid for her health care along with the babies.

[glenn kangiser]

They may not be beating down her door either.  Her first publicist dropped her due to death threats.  

I would say she shouldn't count her money until it is in her hand, but even then the motivation for having a lot of children should not be to make money -- creating children for money is not a sign of a well adjusted woman capable of giving these children a good home.  She had chosen to make many other peoples lives a living hell of staying awake nights and days on end just taking care of all of these poor kids.  Per quotes from her she does not expect to raise them herself.  She expects to burden her family and friends.  They even close down puppy factories for unfit conditions.  How can she even house this many kids?  She can't have considered that.

I know a lady who is just as mad at her own daughter for irresponsibly having one child.  What would she do with this?

[tanya]

Facists believe WAR for corporate gain and medical experiments on the poor are acceptable. BUt if you bring it up in conversation it is bringing in emotional stuff.  HAHAHA that is not a strawman issue it is FACT!!!  She would have had her settlement garnished IF she did in fact owe the state money, and if she failed to disclose it she would be facing jail time.  The news would be having a huge field day too.  NO it is a fact the govt. will pay to go to war and for medical experiments on the poor, (by the way most of our soldiers are from poor families trying to make a living too) aand then the rich reap the rewards while the poor children and disabled struggle.  

[StinkerBell]

The strawman is that it has nothing to do with this woman and this situation.

You argue based on emotional issues not facts pertaining to the case at hand.

[tanya]

"I find it funny because you are saying it is not the governments business yet this woman made it the governments business by placing the burden of her personal and selfish choice upon the government."

Well her choices are her own and I am grateful I live in a country that allows that. Her personal life choices are NOT the govt.s business, she and her children have the same rights as any other family and that includes, med care, schooling, and all sorts of other stuff.   And of course WAR and other Govt. waste is the issue why can we discuss the govt. wasting taxpayer money on some wench and her litter and not war/experimental medicines using the poor.  That is EXACTLY FACIST!!! No doubt about it.  Status baiting, straight out of the NAZI playbook!!!

[tanya]

"I would say she shouldn't count her money until it is in her hand, but even then the motivation for having a lot of children should not be to make money -- creating children for money is not a sign of a well adjusted woman capable of giving these children a good home.  She had chosen to make many other peoples lives a living hell of staying awake nights and days on end just taking care of all of these poor kids.  Per quotes from her she does not expect to raise them herself.  She expects to burden her family and friends.  They even close down puppy factories for unfit conditions.  How can she even house this many kids?  She can't have considered that."

Well I have to say it FACISTS believe they know what the best motivation for having children is...and declare who should be home with the children...and how they should be housed. 

[StinkerBell]

"I find it funny because you are saying it is not the governments business yet this woman made it the governments business by placing the burden of her personal and selfish choice upon the government."

Well her choices are her own and I am grateful I live in a country that allows that. Her personal life choices are NOT the govt.s business, she and her children have the same rights as any other family and that includes, med care, schooling, and all sorts of other stuff.   And of course WAR and other Govt. waste is the issue why can we discuss the govt. wasting taxpayer money on some wench and her litter and not war/experimental medicines using the poor.  That is EXACTLY FACIST!!! No doubt about it.  Status baiting, straight out of the NAZI playbook!!!

Are you on crack? You are the most mean spirited individual I have ever meet. To make a Nazi comparative with me just shows your deficit issues.
Schomiger

[Ernest T. Bass]

This isn't looking pretty... And we have such a nice history of keeping our conversations civil, too..

[tanya]

How am I mean spirited?  I am not!  It is true that the Nazi's involved themselves in the personal lives of every citizen they could manage. Their master plan WAS status/race/gender baiting strategy it is how they controlled their population.   You call me mean spirited but you don't defend your position that I am socialist and your views are not facist.  I am not saying YOU are a facist but those views are!!! AND perhaps I am not the one who has a deficit, after all I am not afraid to examine and defend my views.  I am by no means a socialist but many of my views tend to lean that way.  

[tanya]

And no I am not on Crack are you? 

[glenn kangiser]

Sorry, Ernest.  Women are sometimes very hard to control.  Remember that as you grow up, young man.