1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi all! No longer will threads be closed after 1000 (ish) messages. We may close if one gets so long to cause an issue and if you would like a thread closed to start a new one after a 1000 posts then just use the "Report Post" function. Enjoy!

Octomom: Who's to blame?

Discussion in 'Off The Beaten Track' started by Beefcake, Oct 18, 2010.

Who is most guilty for Octomom's last 12 implanted embryos ridiculousness?

Poll closed Oct 26, 2010.
  1. Suleman: Hellbent on a litter, and this doctor could not have prevented it

    7 vote(s)
  2. Dr. K: Ignored Suleman's mental issues and his own oath in implanting a dangerous # of embryos

    23 vote(s)
  3. Both: A perfect storm of baby fever and carelessless

    74 vote(s)
  4. Kate Gosselin ;-0

    9 vote(s)
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Beefcake

    Beefcake Guest

    The doctor of Nadya Suleman, better known as Octomom, is in a hearing this week to determine the fate of his medical license. Article

    Suleman has freely admitted that she was mentally "ill" in her extreme pursuit of having babies, and now regrets the situation she's put herself and her children in. (While of course thankful for her children themselves.) An aside: I'm still floored that these children were born without visible birth defects, and to this day appear healthy and normal. Do any of them even have eye glasses? (Common preemie side effect)

    What do you think? Is the doctor more guilty, or is Suleman? Was she mentally ill enough that he, her physician, should have gotten others involved? Or was her obsession such that he had to go through with the implanting of the dozen babies?
  2. Norlite

    Norlite Well-Known Member

    Why is his license in jeopardy?

    It is a legal procedure, isn't it? No physical harm resulted? (although there's a chance of that in any legal medical procedure, but the fact that this one was successful should speak for him)
  3. numbers123

    numbers123 Well-Known Member

    I think there has been ethical issues since the beginning of the saga. And the article states that his peers believe that he should have referred her to mental health prior to implantation of the last 8, if not earlier ones.
    I believe that licenses can be suspended for unethical behavior. And if his peers determine that he was negligent in recognizing mental illness, he could be found as not practicing competent medical care.
  4. genevieve

    genevieve drinky typo pbp, closet hugger Staff Member

    I think it's a complex issue and I don't know enough about the licensing restrictions etc etc to say whether he was negligent in any way. But I don't think that any patient's obsession or mental illness 'forces' a doctor to go through with implanting a litter. To blame this on her from a medical standards point of view is rather absurd. It might be different if she was hitting up different doctors for each pregnancy and was hiding her history, but she kept going back to the same doc, right?
  5. skatemommy

    skatemommy Well-Known Member

    I think the doctor should pay the welfare bill. One or two of the preemies has a cleft palate. I've seen pictures of some of them with glasses
  6. KikiSashaFan

    KikiSashaFan Well-Known Member

    I don't know all the details, I said both, but I would put more on her. She couldn't properly care for the children she already had, so even if her intention was to have only one more child, that was irresponsible.
  7. susan6

    susan6 Well-Known Member

    Implanting large numbers of embryos (as in more than three at a time) is only supposed to be done in extremely rare cases, for women who have had previous failed attempts at IVF. Nadya was the exact opposite....she had had a successful previous pregnancy with a multiple birth from IVF. What the doctor did was way outside the guidelines, AND he was dealing with an obviously mentally ill patient. So....mostly his fault, I would say. He could have just said "no" and referred her to another doctor. But he implanted TWELVE because "it was the weekend" (I agree, :huh: ). She probably was badgering the crap out of him and he caved. But he should have recognized that she already had too many kids to deal with and wasn't in her right mind.
  8. Really

    Really I need a new title

    The good doctor could have said, "No."
  9. Lacey

    Lacey Well-Known Member

    I thought I read that an ethical number would have been two. If so, he should be convicted of something. However, I wouldn't want her to think that because he is guilty, she is not.
  10. danceronice

    danceronice Corgi Wrangler

    Both of them. She shouldn't have asked, and he should have said "no".
  11. Gazpacho

    Gazpacho Well-Known Member

    ITA. The doctor violated medical guidelines, as established by the relevant medical association in which he was a member (the Society for Reproductive Medicine). The guidelines are there for a reason. Implanting that many embryos is dangerous for the mother as well.

    As to how much Nadya is to blame, that's a difficult question. Mental illness can strip away all rationality, reasoning, and impulse control. Was hers that severe? I don't know.

    Overall, I'd put more of the blame on the doctor though.
  12. overedge

    overedge Janny uber

    What does it being the weekend have to do with his decision? Even people who aren't doctors would have a pretty good idea that implanting 12 embryos is probably not a really smart idea, no matter what day of the week it is.
  13. attyfan

    attyfan Well-Known Member

    My instincts blame the doctor much more than the patient. He is supposed to be trained at recognizing problems (both the dangers of implanting 12 and the mental illness).
  14. Prancer

    Prancer Strong and stable Staff Member

    ITA. And I don't find the argument that she would have just found another doctor persuasive. So what? Then THAT doctor would be the one whose license was in jeopardy.
  15. rfisher

    rfisher Will you rise like a phoenix or be a burnt chicken

    I blamed Kate.
    cholla and (deleted member) like this.
  16. GarrAarghHrumph

    GarrAarghHrumph I can kill you with my brain

    The doctor's actions were far outside the norm in his field, and against his field's medical training and guidelines. While the mom may or may not have been mentally ill, the DOCTOR was competent, and yet against the rules of his field of practice, did this. He should absolutely be in trouble re: his license to practice.

    That does not necessarily mean that he has any civil or criminal culpability under the law. He might; he might not. Separate issue. But it does mean that he may at least have his license to practice medicine suspended, and he could have it pulled.
  17. Bev Johnston

    Bev Johnston Well-Known Member

    You know, that's not the craziest thing in the world. ;) "Reality" tv is probably a little to blame in all of this. Didn't Octomom say something about wanting to have a show? Or was that after the births? Or am I imagining the whole thing?

    Anyway.... I think the doctor should not have done it. The request was extreme and he knew it.
    Gazpacho and (deleted member) like this.
  18. PeterG

    PeterG Well-Known Member

    Lots of talk about Nadya, her mental health and her "irresponsibility". But not all of her kids were through in vitro, right? She had a partner who fathered her earlier children?

    So who is the father and is he involved in the lives of those children, both physically as well as financially?

    Or is the female taking all the heat and the male gets off scott free?


    Have you found blame improves people's lives?

    Do you have links to articles about this? Or is it just a personal opinion?

    :confused: Like irresponsibility has never happened before on planet Earth in regards to people bringing a new life into our world?

    Could you provide us with the facts that back up these statements? Or are you gossiping?

    Does anyone know what the legalities are in the health care profession as to when a doctor can decide for the patient in regards to what they want? When can a doctor be sued for refusing treatment? (And when can they NOT be sued?) :confused:

    Again, I'm interested in links to articles that state Nadya is mentally unstable. If this is the case, why were her previous children not taken from her? :confused:

    Or are people playing armchair psychiatrists?
  19. genevieve

    genevieve drinky typo pbp, closet hugger Staff Member

    I was under the impression that all her kids were through in vitro

    ETA: yes, they were all IVF babies. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nadya_Suleman#Children

    So she is taking all the heat because it was all her idea.

    She was married previously, but did not have any children. Wikipedia indicates that the marriage fell apart in part due to her inability to conceive (they divorced in 2006, but had separated in 2000, before her first child was conceived).
  20. susan6

    susan6 Well-Known Member

    Instead of just reading this thread, check the article:


    Shame on the Medical Board of California and Dr. Fujimoto for their gossiping. :rolleyes:
  21. Gazpacho

    Gazpacho Well-Known Member

    He's not accused of criminal behavior. Medical licensing is different from criminal behavior.

    A lot of the information was mentioned in a previous thread about Octomom when she first had the children.

    • She used donor sperm for all her children, so this isn't a case of the mother taking all the blame and the father getting off free. Like you, those cases infuriate me, but this isn't one of them.

    • I mentioned mental illness in the context of Nadya's culpability. If she has a mental illness, which I believe she does, and if that mental illness stripped her of rationality and reasoning, which I'm agnostic about, then she is less culpable IMO.

      Nadya's official psychiatric diagnoses, if she has them, are confidential by law. The point is, her request surely raised some red flags. Hence, the doctor should have referred her for a mental health evaluation before the procedure. If he did and the mental health professional said she's okay, then I blame the doctor a lot less.

    • Even if Nadya had been psychologically sound, the doctor still violated the guidelines of his medical association, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, which has revoked his membership. The guidelines exist to protect not just the potential offspring but also the health of the woman. While those guidelines are not law, licensing boards expect physicians to abide by them or at least not deviate to that extent.

    • What medical professionals may or may not refuse to do is a huge debate, and laws vary by state. The debate has generally centered around abortion, contraceptives, emergency care, etc. An entirely elective, not time-sensitive procedure like this is not in the gray area of any state.

    • As to your question of why her previous children were not taken from her if she were mentally unstable, are you implying that custody be revoked from mentally unstable people? Custody is revoked for abuse or neglect, not just for having a mental illness.
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2010
    LuckyCharm and (deleted member) like this.
  22. Prancer

    Prancer Strong and stable Staff Member

    After the births, she said something to the effect of not wanting to have a show like the Gosselins, although she did want to do a show. I think she wanted to do something more like a series of specials. I think she signed a contract for just that on British television, but it never went anywhere
  23. PeterG

    PeterG Well-Known Member

    Thank you for your post. Good information. :)

    I am wondering how people feel about a woman who always wanted a very large family and had child after child after child. (I think I remember one family who have 19 kids?) Do you feel different about a single woman who knew from a young age that she always wanted a large family? So after giving birth, she goes back to a specialist for another in vitro fertilization. Are both people not valid in their decisions?

    Or is it acceptable for a woman to have (many) children "the natural way", with a husband while it is not acceptable for a single mother to do the same?

    Someone who has a mental illness and someone who is mentally unstable are two different things to me. While I don't like using the term "mental illness" (it makes it sound like something is wrong with people, when really there are lots of varying degrees of difficulty that people experience), I think it's possible the majority of people on our planet have a "mental illness" to some degree.

    "Mentally unstable" to me implies that there is enough problems occuring that children could be in danger. So in these situations, help is needed to address the situation and see where help can be offered and if that's enough to keep things as they are or if the children need to be in a different living situation.

    The article was one person's thoughts about what might be...nothing factual.

    I feel the same after re-reading the article and how you worded yourself as coming across gossipy, rather than you having hard facts/proof of what you inferred.
  24. susan6

    susan6 Well-Known Member

    You don't want to get people started on the Duggars. But to answer your question: yes, I feel different about a married couple who have 19 kids and manage to be financially able to do so, versus a single woman who has several unethical (according to many doctors) IVF treatments and does not appear to be in a financially sound position to raise the resulting children. What is Nadya's job? Who is helping her raise her 14 kids? The father is a sperm donor and is not in the picture. How is she affording all of this? The Duggars are actually employed and their older kids help raise their younger kids (not that that's a particularly great situation for the older kids....check some of the old threads on the Duggars for arguments about that). Show me the facts that indicate Nadya's decision was a good one and she is doing right by her children.
  25. overedge

    overedge Janny uber

    There was the one-off "Octomom: Behind the Scenes" special, or whatever it was called, on Fox. Yes, I admit I watched it. Even though AFAIK she had control over its making, she still didn't come off particularly well in it (barely able to manage the older kids), and I think it tanked in the ratings. Which I'm guessing is why there haven't been any more specials or a series....
  26. PeterG

    PeterG Well-Known Member

    Do people have the right to have children when they are not financially sound? Should we judge them the same as we judge Nadya?

    I can't imagine anyone will argue that the Suleman family is in a good situation. To me, the issue is about who are any of us to judge...and is judging people improving the situation?

    Well, you just have to watch one episode of SuperNanny to see a middle class family with two parents and two unruly kids to see one of many families that are WAY more out of control than the Suleman's.

    I thought Nadya came across saint-like in comparison to what **I** would become in that situation. She remained level-headed for the most part and barely raised her voice. I would SO become an army sargeant and start barking out orders until their was compliance!!! :lol:
  27. Really

    Really I need a new title

    All I said was that the doctor could have said, "No." I haven't read anywhere that any doctor 'must' provide elective services to any patient, even in the US. The doctor was the one making excuses for why he chose to treat her, and it's his practice that's being investigated. He could have avoided the whole thing by just telling her he wouldn't do it. End of story.

    I made no comment on her fitness for parenting.
  28. Prancer

    Prancer Strong and stable Staff Member

    I haven't expressed any particular judgment on her yet, but

    Do they have the right? Sure. Should they do it? No. Or are you trying to argue that it's not really a bad idea to have children when you really can't support them or that it's not a really bad idea to have many babies all at once?

    Are you trying to say that people DON'T judge other parents who have children they can't afford to support? Um, hello? They most certainly do. And their judgment tends to increase with each child the parent has that can't be supported financially, too. Nadya gets hit with a lot of judgment because she has a lot of kids and because the way she had at least some of them was, without question, medically dangerous for both her and the babies.

    Is improving this particular situation the point?

    Why shouldn't people judge her? Are we now supposed to be at the point where no behavior can be assessed in any way?

    At the time of the births, I argued that people should wait until they had all the facts before passing judgment because I think people have a tendency to jump to conclusions. I would do it again if the same circumstances arose.

    But frankly, I don't have any problem with society as a whole condemning someone deliberately having a lot of children she can't afford to support and putting herself AND her children at risk by wanting all those embryos implanted at once. It was foolish by any standard. And if you are now going to say that "Oh, but haven't we all been foolish?" well, read on.

    Oh, dear, Peter, that sounds a lot like a judgment. But even if it is, so what? Does the fact that other people behave badly mean that everyone is off the hook for bad behavior because they are not alone in their behavior, or what?

    Stupid behavior should not be condoned. And yes, by gosh, I think we all have the right to call stupid behavior stupid and then argue about it. I don't see much point in it. I don't think most issues are black and white, and I think too many people think that condemning behavior is a goal unto itself, which makes them overly intent on ripping on others. But still, I don't know of ANYONE who thinks that no behavior at all should be judged. I can even think of examples where you would feel comfortable passing judgment--and have, which strikes me as a natural part of being human and analyzing the world around you. People simply should not do a lot of the things they do--even if a lot of people do them, or in this case, don't.

    No one here has advocated punishing Nadya or her children; I could see objecting to that. But objecting to people thinking that she shouldn't have had all those children the way she did? Can you give us a good reason why she SHOULD have had all those children the way she did?
  29. genevieve

    genevieve drinky typo pbp, closet hugger Staff Member

    To see if the human body could be transformed into a clown car?

    sorry :p
    mag, skatemomaz, Southpaw and 5 others like this.
  30. LordCirque

    LordCirque Well-Known Member

    Wait, so she's pregnant now with 12 babies at once? Or was she given 12 and only 8 took a few years ago?