Octuplets' Mom On Welfare, Spokesman Confirms

[KittenKoder]

She was taking fertility drugs. The first time she got pregnant with ONE child, there is no way she could have known that by taking the same drugs again she would get pregnant with 7.

So then that case is different. She didn't do it on purpose and didn't use implanted embryos. That was just nature playing with them. Also, didn't they have a better situation as well?

Well, they were married, Christians, and had lots of help and support from their family and church before the media even found out about them.

Marriage or religious affiliation shows nothing more than their beliefs and has no weight on how good their situation was. The fact is that they didn't do it to get publicity, that just came with the event after the fact. Also they weren't in the spotlight nearly as much. But they did have a strong family unit. The most important part is again ... they didn't do it on purpose.

 

[Againsheila]

So then that case is different. She didn't do it on purpose and didn't use implanted embryos. That was just nature playing with them. Also, didn't they have a better situation as well?

Well, they were married, Christians, and had lots of help and support from their family and church before the media even found out about them.

Marriage or religious affiliation shows nothing more than their beliefs and has no weight on how good their situation was. The fact is that they didn't do it to get publicity, that just came with the event after the fact. Also they weren't in the spotlight nearly as much. But they did have a strong family unit. The most important part is again ... they didn't do it on purpose.

I disagree. Number one, Marriage has a great deal to do with it. Children need two parents, preferably both a father figure and a mother figure.

Secondly, it is their church, their religion, which helps them get through hard times. I realize this is difficult for someone who is not religious to understand but for some religion is a crutch, but for people like the McCaughey's, I think it's more like a foundation.

 

[KittenKoder]

Well, they were married, Christians, and had lots of help and support from their family and church before the media even found out about them.

Marriage or religious affiliation shows nothing more than their beliefs and has no weight on how good their situation was. The fact is that they didn't do it to get publicity, that just came with the event after the fact. Also they weren't in the spotlight nearly as much. But they did have a strong family unit. The most important part is again ... they didn't do it on purpose.

I disagree. Number one, Marriage has a great deal to do with it. Children need two parents, preferably both a father figure and a mother figure.

Secondly, it is their church, their religion, which helps them get through hard times. I realize this is difficult for someone who is not religious to understand but for some religion is a crutch, but for people like the McCaughey's, I think it's more like a foundation.

Won't get into detail but there is evidence that what parents they have only matters in how the parents treat the children, not what gender or parental role they play. Our species started where almost the only parental guidance children had was from the women, all the women raised the kids until they were old enough to start working, then it was a mentor thing for what their positions in life would be as adults. If it had to be two parents with one father and one mother we wouldn't have made it as a species at all because that was impossible with the earliest humans.

As for the church helping, meh, when my family fell on hard times once (so long ago but still fresh in mind) the christians ignored us completely, even our own church, and well, we lived by their rules even better than most of them. So no, what religion you are has little weight on how children are raised. Oddly though I know a few christian churches that help non christians a lot, so from personal experience it makes no difference. My mother was abusive and a devout christian, my father acted like a christian for "our benefit" (the children) but when he found out what my mother was doing he stopped and embraced being atheist with agnostic leanings, and he was by far the better parent.

 

[Againsheila]

Marriage or religious affiliation shows nothing more than their beliefs and has no weight on how good their situation was. The fact is that they didn't do it to get publicity, that just came with the event after the fact. Also they weren't in the spotlight nearly as much. But they did have a strong family unit. The most important part is again ... they didn't do it on purpose.

I disagree. Number one, Marriage has a great deal to do with it. Children need two parents, preferably both a father figure and a mother figure.

Secondly, it is their church, their religion, which helps them get through hard times. I realize this is difficult for someone who is not religious to understand but for some religion is a crutch, but for people like the McCaughey's, I think it's more like a foundation.

Won't get into detail but there is evidence that what parents they have only matters in how the parents treat the children, not what gender or parental role they play. Our species started where almost the only parental guidance children had was from the women, all the women raised the kids until they were old enough to start working, then it was a mentor thing for what their positions in life would be as adults. If it had to be two parents with one father and one mother we wouldn't have made it as a species at all because that was impossible with the earliest humans.

As for the church helping, meh, when my family fell on hard times once (so long ago but still fresh in mind) the christians ignored us completely, even our own church, and well, we lived by their rules even better than most of them. So no, what religion you are has little weight on how children are raised. Oddly though I know a few christian churches that help non christians a lot, so from personal experience it makes no difference. My mother was abusive and a devout christian, my father acted like a christian for "our benefit" (the children) but when he found out what my mother was doing he stopped and embraced being atheist with agnostic leanings, and he was by far the better parent.

You misunderstand me, I said, for the McCaugheys, their church, their religion is a foundation and has been a great help.

I agree, for some religion is a nothing more than a crutch, but for others, it's a foundation that helps them and insures that they will continue to prosper, in more ways than one. I don't even belong to my neighbor's church and they helped us through hard times. For them, also, their church is a foundation, to build upon. They have 8 kids, 2 adopted. Their 3 oldest are married and one of them has adopted a child and is fostering 2 other kids which they will adopt if they ever become available for adoption.

And yes, it takes two parents to raise a child today, preferably both a father figure and a mother figure. "Children raised by two parents do better on every measurable level than children raised in single parent households".

Any woman that decides to have a child on her own is putting herself ahead of her child. When she decides to have 14 on her own, she's sick. Now, I'm not talking about adoption. Any parent is better than no parent, but two parents are always better than one.

I'm sorry your mom was abusive, but that happens much more often in single parent families, when there is no one to support the one parent. Imagine if your father hadn't been there?

When my uncle died, my aunt became abusive to her two youngest children, the rest had grown up and moved out. Her oldest daughter took her to court for custody of the younger children and won. She was forced to go to a facility and get herself detoxed and off booze and she's been a better mother ever since. She needed her husband to be there for her, to take over when things got hard for her.

BTW, even children raised by two gay parents do better than children raised by one parent, at least according to the studies I've read, please feel free to provide some studies that show otherwise. I'm not saying it can't ever be done, I'm saying no one should do that to a child on purpose, especially not to 14 children when her mother is already the primary care giver to her first 6. I hope they build a website for the Grandma, she's the one raising the kids, she's the one that needs the money and if mom hasn't given her a dime for the previous kids, I think it's clear this woman doesn't plan on given out any money for her new brood of 8.

The ONLY way I would donate to this family is if it went in to a trust fund specifically for the children and only grandma had access to it, not mom.

 

[Ravi]

You'd have to set up the trust fund yourself, Sheila. And what makes you think the woman's mother is all there? After all, she enabled all this.

 

[Againsheila]

You'd have to set up the trust fund yourself, Sheila. And what makes you think the woman's mother is all there? After all, she enabled all this.

Well, that is a good point.

Still like her better than the mother though, at least she's actually taking care of all those kids.

 

[KittenKoder]

You misunderstand me, I said, for the McCaugheys, their church, their religion is a foundation and has been a great help.

I agree, for some religion is a nothing more than a crutch, but for others, it's a foundation that helps them and insures that they will continue to prosper, in more ways than one. I don't even belong to my neighbor's church and they helped us through hard times. For them, also, their church is a foundation, to build upon. They have 8 kids, 2 adopted. Their 3 oldest are married and one of them has adopted a child and is fostering 2 other kids which they will adopt if they ever become available for adoption.

And yes, it takes two parents to raise a child today, preferably both a father figure and a mother figure. "Children raised by two parents do better on every measurable level than children raised in single parent households".

Any woman that decides to have a child on her own is putting herself ahead of her child. When she decides to have 14 on her own, she's sick. Now, I'm not talking about adoption. Any parent is better than no parent, but two parents are always better than one.

I'm sorry your mom was abusive, but that happens much more often in single parent families, when there is no one to support the one parent. Imagine if your father hadn't been there?

When my uncle died, my aunt became abusive to her two youngest children, the rest had grown up and moved out. Her oldest daughter took her to court for custody of the younger children and won. She was forced to go to a facility and get herself detoxed and off booze and she's been a better mother ever since. She needed her husband to be there for her, to take over when things got hard for her.

BTW, even children raised by two gay parents do better than children raised by one parent, at least according to the studies I've read, please feel free to provide some studies that show otherwise. I'm not saying it can't ever be done, I'm saying no one should do that to a child on purpose, especially not to 14 children when her mother is already the primary care giver to her first 6. I hope they build a website for the Grandma, she's the one raising the kids, she's the one that needs the money and if mom hasn't given her a dime for the previous kids, I think it's clear this woman doesn't plan on given out any money for her new brood of 8.

The ONLY way I would donate to this family is if it went in to a trust fund specifically for the children and only grandma had access to it, not mom.

Okay, I did misunderstand part of your post. Also you are correct, though I don't know the reasoning you are using so I will just say that the only reason single parent families pose more problems is that the only parent is having to split their time too much between working to support the family and the children, thus the children do not have as much parental guidance as they should have.

 

[bgn]

My name for her is octopussy.