Friday, January 30, 2009

Octuplets! A Southern California Woman Adds Eight to Her Brood of Six; Refuses Selective Reduction of Embryos Upon Discovery of Multiples

Whittier – A mother of six welcomes eight new little ones to her family.  During her pregnancy, doctors counseled her about the risks of carrying so many multiples, but she adamantly refused to kill any of the developing fetuses. 

"What do you suggest she should have done? She refused to have them killed," Suleman [the woman’s mother] told the Times. "That is a very painful thing."

Born nine weeks early and boasting weights anywhere from one pound to three pounds, the six boys and two girls are doing well.  The woman has asked to remain anonymous and the grandfather has warned:

Media may have a tougher time finding the family after the babies are released from the hospital.

"We have a huge house, not here," said the man, who would only identify himself as Ed. "You are never going to know where it is."

Let’s toast to a mother who understands the value of life and a grandfather who refuses to allow his grandchildren to become press pets.  And, let’s toast this OB/GYN who understands his non-decision making role and instead recognizes the importance of educating patients:

“Dr. James Grifo, professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the NYU School of Medicine, added: "I don't think it's our job to tell them how many babies they're allowed to have. I am not a policeman for reproduction in the United States. My role is to educate patients."”

[

*I would like to know, however, where the father is since none of these news releases makes any reference to paternal presence.


Related Links:
Demographic Winter
No Children?  No Problem.  It’s Your Choice.
My Body – My Choice
West Coast Walk For Life 2009….



the pomegranate apple said...

i love this story! wondering about the father too...

Pearl said...

Okay, bad news is that the father and mother are not married. That's a travesty for these kids. But the good news is that she refused to kill her unexpected multiples. (By unexpected I mean that she never thought that many embryos would survive and thrive).

Secular Heretic said...

There is a lot we don't know about this situation. I don't know how she managed to have eight at once but at least she didn't have them killed.

thepomegranateapple said...

sort of a weird situation.

will the dad be involved at all?

thepomegranateapple said...

this is a very weird story. i'm so happy to see someone caring about life before birth, but i'm concerned that she purposefully implanted without a father.

that's weird.

but! i love John and Kate from the TLC show.

they are married, they had twins, then they did more fertility treatments and ended up with six embryos. they didn't abort any of them!

and they are still married, working their butts off for six gorgeous kids. so lovely...maybe i should do a post...

thanks pearl for the article!

Meg said...

Who are these people to condemn her for her choice to keep and raise 14 children? Yes, she lives with her parents. And you know, these children are INCREDIBLY LUCKY to have three generations in their home. It's only a modern trend that you only have 2 generations in the home. It used to be that mother/father/children, and grandparents, and sometimes great-grandparents lived in the same household.

jzepi said...

Like S-H said, there's a lot we don't know about this story, although it does sound kinda sketchy.

The thing I noticed was the tone of the article. I wondered if the newspaper was trying to get back at the family for wanting their privacy by writing a sort of snide article.

Pearl said...

@Pomegranate Apple

I love John and Kate Plus 8, too.


You bring up a good point about living in extended family units. I'm glad she has the support of her parents, but the more I learn about this story, the more I think maybe her refusal to selectively reduce the embryos is the only shining star in this story.

Apparently the mother and father of the children are unwed. The mother has declared bankruptcy, is not a US citizen and has no intention of becoming one, and they are living on public assistance. And then there comes the question of why she did IVF if she already had six children. Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying we should regulate number of children, but it's obvious that she didn't need IVF to get pregnant, so was it to purposefully birth multiples? And to what end? Anyway, these are my new questions. I stand by my applaud for her decision to preserve life, even while I wonder....


First, I welcome you back again! Your comments are great and greatly appreciated. :0) You are right about the tone of the article. I didn't notice it because I was searching for quotes, but upon rereading it, it definitely seems to be a bit negative and harsh.