I was reading an article about the mother of the octuplets that have just been recently born. Because she already had 6 children, she was receiving $490 a month in food stamps and collecting Social Security disability payments for three of the kids. Now, the taxpayers of California are going to have to pay more to help her pay for her 14 kids. She has a website http://thenadyasulemanfamily.com/ now that is made for collecting donations from people that want to donate money towards them. It is now becoming a controversy in California because many taxpayers do not feel that it is they're responsibility to support her 14 children and I agree with them. From one perspective, it was not the people of California who agreed to implant 8 embryos into Nadya Suleman when she already had 6 children, therefore, they should not have to pay child support. From another perspective, regardless of what Nadya Suleman's irresponsibility has created, those babies are going to need to be cared for so they can live healthy lives. They did not ask to be brought into this world so they shouldn't have to suffer the consequences of their mother's idiocracy. So many people are outraged by this that Nadya has received death threats and such from people. In my opinion, the babies should be helped not to help the mother, but help them.
People see Nadya as a kind of lightening rod, and in some ways I see their point. Having so many kids at once - kids she is unable to support - is over the top.
ReplyDeleteWhen you think about it though, there are hundreds of thousands of mothers accepting government assistance. Some of them keep having children because they get more money. What is the difference between these mothers, who have their babies one at a time - and this lady who has an avalanche of kids? Raising children at the taxpayer's expense is raising children at the tax payer's expense.
What do you think of my audiobook idea?