Children Have Rights - Say No to Repro Tech: Octuplets Mother

February 02, 2009

Octuplets Mother - Single and Obsessed with Babies

As the glitter begins to settle around the supposedly wonderful story of a California mother named Nadya Suleman delivering octuplets, the story behind the story is beginning to emerge.

It turns out that Suleman, at 33 years old, already has 6 children who are under the age of 7. I would congratulate her for that, if she was raising these children responsibly in a marriage with their father. But it also turns out that she is still living at home, unmarried, and she depends on her mother and father to support her and her children.

And now, Suleman's own mother has been interviewed in the media and has revealed that her daughter has never wanted to get married, has always been obsessed with having children, and has had all (now 14) children via IVF using the same sperm donor. What's more, it seems that Suleman may have been paying for the IVF procedures by "donating" her eggs. Now that's a real "Single Mom By Choice"!

I find this story an absolutely appaling example of how we have completely lost our minds in this society. Our culture supports adults in becoming so narcissistic and self-centered that the results are absurd, as in this case.

For Suleman, having children seems to be similar to collecting pets - some people have a houseful of cats or dogs, but she has decided that her hobby is to breed children. And it's easier breeding children than breeding pets! No need to enter into complicated "stud" arrangements with other pet-owning families. There's no need to seek out a father anymore and enter into real human relationships - human sperm is cheap and available online.

Suleman now has 14 children with one man. He is not held responsible for these children in any way simply because he "donated" (read: sold) his sperm away. Suleman also possibly has who knows how many children with other men, the result of her own egg "donations" - and yet she is not held responsible for these other children simply because she sold her own eggs away.

Theoretically, there is no limit to Suleman's ability to have children via sperm donation. If she won the lottery tomorrow, she could hire a harem of surrogates and keep popping out her progeny via sperm donation for as long as she could produce viable eggs. Hey, if some sperm donors are known to have produced hundreds of children, why should single mothers by choice be deprived of that delight? These days, polygamy/polyamory is not required if you want to produce dozens and dozens of your own offspring. (and hey, if you can't support them all, there's always mom and dad - or at least social assistance, which Suleman will very likely be applying for very soon. Society can't wait to pay for these progressive results of unlimited "reproductive choice").

Who's the big loser here, aside from Suleman's mom and dad? Oh yeah - it's those eight cute "bundles of delight" that are currently spending several weeks in the hospital, having been born premature and fatherless - and of course, their six siblings at home.

Unbelievable.
.

5 comments:

Super Duper said...: Hi Veronica

I just found your blog and I think it is fascinating.

Congratulations on your pregnancy : ); February 02, 2009
Val said...: Lucky to have found this fresh new post by you [hope your pregnancy's going well BTW] - however from the small amount of investigation I've been able to do about this sad sad case - it may actually turn out to have been "self-treatment" w/a hyperovulatory med like Clomid; no reputable fertility clinic/doctor would have transferred this many embryos into a young woman w/no problems conceiving...
http://www.alittlepregnant.com/alittlepregnant/2009/01/oh-come-on-you-had-to-know-this-post-was-coming-eventually.html#comments
[hope the hyperlink works]; February 02, 2009
Anonymous said...: I am 41 divorced twice foster parent of my nieces step mom to 3 supported many people children that they were impregnated with their eyes close by their husbands and boyfriends sperm. I have worked since 1981 according to my social security records. Paying taxes and into social security and always did odd jobs even before that, and now disabled. I have disc degenerative disease, but despite that I have always wanted to be a mom. Insurance would never pay for IVF WHICH I needed due to blocked fallopian tubes when I was younger and married, but at age 39 I working part time on SSDI for my main income became eligible for health insurance through my part time job at $550 PER MONTH which I worked and paid for thei insurance And THIS POLICY COVERED IVF. I under went ivf 3 times and had twins at age 41. I live in my own home and take care of them myself. I will not attempt to have more AND was upset about this young woman's choice to keep having kids after 6 and this doctor for transferring 6 as THE MAX i EVER transferred At 40 was 4 and the 3 different programs I cycled AT WOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED MORE. I am responsible for my own children and they will be future tax payers. I am now disappointed in society for judging all single moms by choice under this one umbrella. My children are also part of a program where they can know their donor when they turn 18 if they choose.; February 07, 2009
Anonymous said...: I stumbled onto your blog. While I don't completely agree with IVF, because I feel more people should adopt children rather than forcing themselves to have them, I think your disdainful finger pointing is horrible.

Ms. Suleman knows her sperm donor, he is a friend. I don't agree with what she did or her 14 children but it seems your biggest problem with donor sperm is that the children never know who their father is. In Ms. Suleman's case all 14 will know exactly who fathered them.

I hope you don't push your ideals onto your child. I can't imagine what it would be like to be raised by someone as close minded and crazy as you seem to be.; February 22, 2009
Anonymous said...: Anonymous wrote:
"Ms. Suleman knows her sperm donor, he is a friend."

I think it is terrible that the father of Suleman's children has intentionally side lined himself from responsibility for his children, failing to provide them with a loving supportive dad.

Funny how people think it's no big loss for those children if they just get to know their father's name. How closed/narrow minded are you? (i.e. "anonymous" poster above - yes, I'm directing this towards YOU)

"Anonymous", I find your comments offensive. It is actually you who sounds clueless, opinionated and narrow minded. I hope Veronica DOES share her ideals with her children!!!!!! Actually, I feel sorry for your children if you lead them to believe that ideals such as Veronica's are wrong and should be silenced.

That is indeed "crazy".

Oh, and Veronica, thank you for sharing your ideals. I agree with you completely.; March 04, 2009

Stop the Baby Trade

Yes, it is a baby trade, like the slave trade of old. Babies have become consumer products, accessories to our lifestyles. They are like pets, those cute and cuddly babies. And like pets, they can be made to your liking. Just buy the sperm at your nearest sperm bank, purchase an egg from your local egg dealer, and rent a surrogate womb. And in 9 months, bring home a baby without a pregnancy, without even a dent in your schedule!

There is supply and there is demand. Babies are disposable: their value and worth depend on being "wanted". As embryos they can receive a life or death sentence based on a screening of their genetic traits. They can be frozen indefinitely, donated for research or simply killed. In the womb they can be "selectively reduced". They belong to whomever they were "intended" for.

Apparently, adults have a "right" to a baby. And before they are born, babies have no rights at all. They can be bought and sold, or traded from person to person.

Even after they are born, some of their natural rights are not recognized or respected. They had better not complain about not having their "natural" or biological parents. If they mind, they are ungrateful. After all, we cuddle them and spoil them and shower them with love - just like our pets.

Well, it's time to stop the baby trade. Infertility is tragic. So is being panhandled by your own genetic parents and being raised by biological strangers. So is being created in a laboratory only to be frozen as "surplus" or screened out and left to die because you are "unwanted".

Children have not consented to these things. Their own parents, their supposed protectors, have allowed these things to happen to them. Adults have selfishly allowed their reproductive urges to trample on the fundamental rights and needs of their own children. But now, as many of these children come of age and we hear their cries of pain, it is time to admit that what reproductive technologies have given to parents, they have also taken away from children.

Sometimes doing the right thing requires a lot of sacrifice. This is one of those times. We need to set aside our adult desires in order to protect children's rights. Let's see babies as human beings who are our equals. Let’s admit that we have no right to harm others to get what we want. Let’s stand up for those who don’t have a signature line on the consent forms, yet who will be forever affected by the decisions taken.

We will find that by protecting the weakest, we are also protecting ourselves. The rights of children are tied to the rights of adults. Children have a right to their own parents; and those parents also have a natural right to know and to educate their own biological children. These natural rights cannot be eliminated, only violated.

Let’s stand up for the natural human rights of children: their right to life from the moment of conception, their right to be carried in the womb of their own biological mother, and their right to know and be raised by their own biological parents.