Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The California Woman (Nadya Suleman) who recently gave birth to octuplets already has six other children. When interviewed, she has blatantly denied that she is relying on public assistance. However, recent reports have confirmed that she is indeed receiving food stamps and other forms of welfare to support her brood. This confirms that not only is she a breeder, but she is also a pathetic liar.
When confronted, she stated that the money she receives from taxpayers isn't defined as welfare.
Quote:
"In Nadya's view, the money that she gets from the food stamp program ... and the resources disabilities payments she gets for her three children are not welfare," he said. "They are part of programs designed to help people with need, and she does not see that as welfare."
This is a perfect example of people who seem to believe that having litters of children is some kind of a right, even if they are unable to afford the costs themselves. Worse yet, the same kind of distorted mentality also has a notion that the public should be responsible for subsidizing others' irresponsible reproductive habits.
This is also a good example of why public assistance should be entirely cut off to those who choose to have children when they cannot afford it. If these government funded programs weren't so easily attainable, there would likely be fewer Nadya Sulemans having multiple births, because they know they would have to pay for their upbringing entirely on their own means ... which is the way it should be. Suleman claimed that she had all these kids out of being "lonely" ... but it's very likely that the easy availability of SSI, food stamps, and other forms of welfare were also motivating factors. Face it: money is a huge motivator in just about everything in life.
Having children is NOT a Constitutional right ... but even if it is, you have to be responsible in exercising your rights to do anything. Furthermore, there is no right to expect handouts from the public just because you're in a reproductive state of mind. If somebody wants children, he/she had better be able to finance the upbringing, health care, education, etc. on their means. Nobody is "entitled" to any special gov't programs, tax credits, etc. for a choice they made. This is a burden to the public, and one reason why the national deficit is in the trillions of dollars. A good share of the federal debt stems from entitlement programs alone. This needs to be put to an abrupt end ... but unfortunately, it won't likely happen anytime soon under the current administration.
Those payments are welfare, plain and simple....just because it doesn't say welfare on the top of the check does not exclude it from the definition. Plus the fact she has her own mother helping with the care of her spawn, the 1.5-3 million Medicaid California is paying the hospital, the student loans she is using to take care of them instead of going to school, and money she expects to beg from her congregation at church to supply their needs.
I hate to punish the kids for her inability to make decent decisions, but I don't want to use the money I pay in taxes used for people who make outrageous and intentionally foolish decisions. I am almost sure she has a mental disorder, but the other people involved should have known better as well and taken a step back to re-evaluate the situation.
this sort of thing is hurting taxpayers, for sure, but more importantly, it is KILLING the planet. Because I desperatly wish to believe in a just universe, I subscribe to a theory of karma that includes cause and effect, beyond the grave. I won't argue for that view, but it helps to keep me calm when considering such situations.
This is also a good example of why public assistance should be entirely cut off to those who choose to have children when they cannot afford it.
I'm more for a maximum allotment. For instance, you can get assistance for up to two children, no more. After that you're on your own. That way, we don't infringe on someone's reproductive rights, but we don't get screwed as the taxpayer either.
What a dilemma! I watched an interview by her attorney discussing her finishing school so she could get a job and pay for raising her own children. Also, how responsible is it for a fertility clinic to plant 8 embryos into a 33 year-old, single parent with six children already, who lives with parents that are $1 million in debt and are claiming bankruptcy? It should add a couple million dollars to the current $1 million hospital bill and attorney fee. She may need 2 jobs. I think the fertility clinic should have recommend her to psychological evaluation, just as people need prior to sex change operations. Something's really wrong here.
Location: Pittsburgh but I'm ready to relocate......
727 posts, read 1,891,755 times
Reputation: 403
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valley Native
The California Woman (Nadya Suleman) who recently gave birth to octuplets already has six other children. When interviewed, she has blatantly denied that she is relying on public assistance. However, recent reports have confirmed that she is indeed receiving food stamps and other forms of welfare to support her brood. This confirms that not only is she a breeder, but she is also a pathetic liar.
When confronted, she stated that the money she receives from taxpayers isn't defined as welfare.
This is a perfect example of people who seem to believe that having litters of children is some kind of a right, even if they are unable to afford the costs themselves. Worse yet, the same kind of distorted mentality also has a notion that the public should be responsible for subsidizing others' irresponsible reproductive habits.
This is also a good example of why public assistance should be entirely cut off to those who choose to have children when they cannot afford it. If these government funded programs weren't so easily attainable, there would likely be fewer Nadya Sulemans having multiple births, because they know they would have to pay for their upbringing entirely on their own means ... which is the way it should be. Suleman claimed that she had all these kids out of being "lonely" ... but it's very likely that the easy availability of SSI, food stamps, and other forms of welfare were also motivating factors. Face it: money is a huge motivator in just about everything in life.
Having children is NOT a Constitutional right ... but even if it is, you have to be responsible in exercising your rights to do anything. Furthermore, there is no right to expect handouts from the public just because you're in a reproductive state of mind. If somebody wants children, he/she had better be able to finance the upbringing, health care, education, etc. on their means. Nobody is "entitled" to any special gov't programs, tax credits, etc. for a choice they made. This is a burden to the public, and one reason why the national deficit is in the trillions of dollars. A good share of the federal debt stems from entitlement programs alone. This needs to be put to an abrupt end ... but unfortunately, it won't likely happen anytime soon under the current administration.
I totally agree!! You don't have children when your not financially stable. But this young lady has 14 children now if I'm not mistaken....No husband nothing. I honestly think welfare should be done away with. What happens is you have a young lady like this who will live her life on welfare and then her kids will be on welfare and then it becomes a cycle. I believe there should be SS if you cant work or Temp SS if you temporarily cant work. These people live off of hard working people and don't think twice.
I agree. I doubt she will still have custody in a few years.
As to the system, I agree with the poster who stated that after an X amout of kids, the benefits don't go up. I realize that may be seen as 'punishing the kids', but for this type of stuff probably calls for the kids to be moved.
And Arnold wonders why California is going broke...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
