Poll | 02/04/2009 12:00 am

The Duggars, Nadya Suleman … When parents have so many children at once, should they be allowed to profit from it?

Read more about: Duggars, Family, Nadya Suleman

123 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Chris, I agree to the fact that a child with any disability or handicap is alot of work and can add to the stresses of child rearing. But, must add that it happens all the time and parents, single or otherwise, find a way to make things work. As for why the Doctor would even consider IVF for this woman is simply because, either the woman was paid to do it or the woman paid to have it done. And again, there is no law that states that either senario was or is against the law. I just think so many people have the uncanny ability to project themselves into the thought process of others and assume that when someone does something we ourselves, would never think to do, we assume that others don’t either and then become disapointed in their choices. Reality doesn’t work this way.Chris, folk’s have been having large families forever. Both of my Aunts each have Twelve children. Although they were spaced yearly they were still no different. as in the end of the day, they were still loved and taken well care of. Basically both Aunts were pregnant for twelve to thirteen years consecutivly and they managed. They did not have these children for any other reason than they wanted them, loved them and provided well for each. Every single one of these children, my cousins, have graduated college and have fantastic positions with various sectors of Government and otherwise and if these families can do it many others are doing the same as well. Many women have 6, 7,8 kids or more and have husbands that decide they want out of the marriage for any number of reasons…Well, how many times have you heard stories such as this. If the mother loves her children, she finds a way to make it work, as she certainly would not abandon them. This woman has been praised by everyone that is comming forward to speak. Everyone of them says she is a fantastic mother. She has even stated her self, an incredible love for children….Children are very adaptable and as long as they know they are loved and cared for, they will all manage to get the appropiate attention within that love and care. So again, we should not hold a judgementive trial in the courts of public opinion and leave this woman to raise her children in peace.

By HA BIBI on 02/05/2009 12:40 pm

e-mail alert

Heard somewhere that she was implanted with 4 embryos but they split. Anyone else hear this? Not that it makes it any better or worse but 4 would still be a lot. There should be a limit on how many embryos can be implanted at one time as one might not make it but even if it is four, that is too many. As MaryPage said, the children are the innocents in all this.

By Judy K. on 02/04/2009 10:42 am

e-mail alert

People have been marketing their children since time began, unfortunately. My own personal memory brings to mind, the Dionne Quintuplets, Patty Duke, Donny Bonaduce., Paul Petersen. All of these people have voiced opinions about parents who market their children. They would be much more qualified than I to comment on this issue, and therefore, I have paid attention to what they have to say on the matter, Are there not laws on the books regarding these activities. Didn’t one child actor sue his parents in the 30’s, because they stole all his money? And, doesn’t a portion of this money, now, have to be put into trust for the child? I have spent my entire life advocating and working with children. When it comes to the welfare of children, we have to be careful to walk a path that takes into account both parental rights to rear their children in the way they deem to be fit, and the child’s right to be protected from idiots. As far as the doctors involved, I have voiced my opinion on this woman’s doctors on another thread and will not repeat myself. Suffice it to say that I do not have a positive opinon of them or their ethics.

By Sally K on 02/04/2009 10:44 am

e-mail alert

The question is whether parents should be able to profit from their large families. My answer is a resounding “no”! When infants and small children are filmed for a movie, there are strict laws governing how much time they can be on-camera, conditions on the set, health regulations. As far as I know, when families such as the Duggars and the Gosselins are “on set” in their homes or out, these regulations do not apply. Children, including newborns, are on camera for hours at a time - in fact multiple camera-people follow them around. I think this is exploitative and that what these children internalize regarding personal boundaries and respect for privacy is something we can’t yet evaluate in these two families. At least one of the Gosselin children shows symptoms of stress. We do know, as Sally K has mentioned, that former child “stars” have spoken out about having been “marketed” by their parents. As for the Duggars being financially able to raise their 18 children - this may be true, but it is my understanding that the home they were ostensibly building by themselves was actually finished, furnished and financed by the network in order to meet filming deadlines. Having reared five children, two of whom are adopted, I would say in the strongest possible terms that it is not likely that 18 children are getting good parenting. The Duggars’ model is to hand off the younger children to the older girls for a great deal of their care. Mrs. Duggar is supposedly home-schooling all the children. I’m a teacher, and I know that you cannot provide quality education to 14 or 15 school-aged children sitting at the same table, especially with toddlers and infants in the house. Profiting from the fact that one’s reproductive organs have managed to survive either multiple or many births seems unethical. However, we all know that the media will continue to provide what the public demands.

By Maurine H on 02/04/2009 11:22 am

e-mail alert

Maurine, Yours is the most ‘coherent’ comment I’ve read on this thread. I was not sure how to express my opinion, yet you have stated much of my thoughts - particularly the context in which you used the term, “exploitative”. Although the Duggars’ and the Gosselins’ situations (circumstances) are different, both should not become yet another category for mainstream media hype from which they will profit. My heart goes out for ALL the children, who will ultimately become the tragic ‘victims’ of their parents self-serving choices.

By Maizie James on 02/04/2009 1:42 pm

e-mail alert

The Duggars are obviously suppporting their many children and their lifestyle with proceeds from their tv show. I don’t care how you define it that is profiting. The other side is that once the children are here they must be taken care of and that is expensive. Right or wrong the children must be cared for. The unmarried Suleman with fourteen children under the age of seven is an unusual case but no one gives potential mothers psychiatric evaluation. Yes, the doctor who assisted her was wrong but the medical community will be on his or her back as soon as they find him. As for the young actors pushed into the weird world of acting there is usually more to the story. Most of them suffered some kind of abuse either emotional or physical or both in order to make money which the parents usually spent on their lifestyle. This has nothing to do with multiple births. We all make wrong choices in our lives at times. We the public will end up supporting these fourteen babies in some way or another.

By katywon LA.. on 02/04/2009 12:17 pm

e-mail alert

There are too many children in the world. For a woman to undergo 4 fertility treatments and end up with 14 children is criminal. Who do you think is going to support those children, pay for their health care (which in the case of the octuplets could be extremely costly) and pay for their food and shelter? You and me - that’s who. This woman needs to agree to be sterilized at this point or have the fertility doctors refuse her any more treatments. Even her own mother wants to move out of the house - can you blame her? If a person wants a large family they need to adopt needy children. Think of all the children in the world who just want a decent place to live, food to eat and (hopefully) someone to love them. ADOPT!

By Holly W on 02/04/2009 12:56 pm

e-mail alert

From those who profit from, to living vicariously through their children- it’s all very damaging behavior to a young impressionable mind. The parents of all of these super-families should really examine their motives and the future implications for bring children before media exploitation. Even something as benign as child modeling should be thoroughly checked out and closely monitored for ethical and professional business practices.

By Lena B on 02/04/2009 1:29 pm

e-mail alert

The Duggars, Nadya Suleman … When parents have so many children at once, should they be allowed to profit from it? Response: IF it were you would you have a different answer?

By OMGIAMGOING NUTS on 02/04/2009 3:35 pm

e-mail alert

OMG…No I dont think many on here would do it any differently, other than not having so many. I have one and a dog and they are enough for me, right now. I think many question the reason why Ms. Suleman had so many at one time, some feel it was done on purpose to be like the Duggars or the Gosselins…She may have done it b/c she loves kids but there is an extreme, dont ya think?

By C Hardy on 02/04/2009 3:58 pm

e-mail alert

Extreme…absolutely. Why she did it? We’ll just have to wait to ‘hear’ her answers for that one. On purpose? I have no clue but you’d think that 8 babies isn’t a slip. Anyway…I just think that it’s her children and she’s getting more than 15 min. of fame. Rightfully so I suppose. I know if it were ME and I had 8 children at once…I’d certainly cash in on it in a heartbeat. Will take lots to raise those babies. Lots.

By OMGIAMGOING NUTS on 02/04/2009 5:50 pm

e-mail alert

Would not be in that spot in the first place.

By Sandbee (FB) 54 on 02/04/2009 5:21 pm

e-mail alert

She had them, she needs to take care of them. If she cannot, then the state should step in. Maybe 14 people can adopt. She shows very poor judgement from what I can see.

By Karen S on 02/04/2009 3:53 pm

e-mail alert

I guess it’s true that children in the public spotlight have been exploited for years, but I wouldn’t compare child actors or family singing groups with something like this. Those kids ended up in the public eye because of some kind of talent that put them there. The difference to me is that since reality t.v., the country has turned into one giant freak show. If there is anything that is not a reality show, there is someone out there who will think of it. It has long since passed beyond reality and is now being manipulated, and it is my belief that this is what this woman is doing. It’s almost frightening to me. How far will it go to keep us “entertained?” We’ve got shows about short people, tall people, ugly people, famous people; a regular dysfunction palooza at the click of our fingertips. I am personally anesthetized to the whole circus and out of the loop when coworkers are discussing the American Idol “bikini girl” or who the Bachelor humiliated this week,etc.,etc. So I don’t care if freaky “baby lady” gets her show or her book, I won’t be watching or reading, and if more people felt that way, this wouldn’t even be an issue.

By Gianna Bracco on 02/04/2009 5:18 pm

e-mail alert

I didn’t realize there were these other programs already on about the big families. Don’t watch much unreality TV. And I won’t watch this one if she gets her show either. To me it doesn’t seem that entertaining. Strange, while I was typing this they were just telling on the news that unlike other multiple-birth mothers - she has not been receiving all of the gifts from all over. She just has not been publicized properly I guess.

By Sandbee (FB) 54 on 02/04/2009 5:27 pm