john and kate plus 8 tv show - Page 2

Pedigree Database

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

by beetree on 25 February 2009 - 18:02

Can't blame you! She's sick and utterly selfish.

Red Sable

by Red Sable on 25 February 2009 - 22:02

She is on Dr. Phil tonight.  In the past pregnancy's she had six embryo's implanted and only had a single birth, except for one set of twins. 

She in no way thought it possible to have eight develop.  The odds are astronomical.   She never wanted eight, she was hoping for one healthy baby.

She was an only child and wanted her children to have siblings.  Me,  I had seven siblings and would have LOVED to be an only child.  Funny, I guess the grass is always greener on the other side.  I had two children, and felt guilty about not giving them enough love and attention.  I don't know how she is going to do this.

Anyway, I think she needs compassion and help not all the crap she is getting.  The deed is done, can't change it, so for the childrens sake I hope she gets alot of support.  

I wonder is she gave seven up for adoption, if she would be frowned upon too?  


by beetree on 25 February 2009 - 23:02

No, she wants the "village" to bail her out. Send the money to Grandpa, as seen on Oprah. How irresponsible to deny 14 children a father; she is the epitomy of vanity and self-interest. She must have made Guiness Book of Records, and will live on in infamy. She'll get her hand-outs, mostly begrudingly, because face it, now some people will start thinking this is a good idea. They are trying to blame the doctor, not her, but I think it took the both of them.

by LPK on 25 February 2009 - 23:02

Kate does seem like a witch!  I heard a comedian talking about the new show coming soon "John minus 9"

ShelleyR

by ShelleyR on 26 February 2009 - 02:02

John minus 9...
ROTFLMAO!

SS

Baldursmom

by Baldursmom on 26 February 2009 - 03:02

I think Nadya has a major problem, like a pet hoarder, only with kids.  She will need a lot of help, and those kids will need it more.  It does no good to attack her or the "father(s)" now.    If she had reduced the pregnancy to one or two, then the anti-abortionist would be on her case.  She could not win after they all took.  Its amazing that they are all as healthy as they are, though.  Truely amazing.

Best thing to prevent other for the same error in ways now is couseling before IVF and evaluation of the couple/individual requesting it.  Look at it like adoption.  But that will cost money.  Not really worth it for the few women that would do this.

Psycht

by Psycht on 26 February 2009 - 04:02

Does Nadya Suleman deserve all the slack she is getting?  I guess that is debatable.  As far as I am concerned, the doctor involved needs to have his license yanked.  She should never have been permitted to get IVF with her obvious mental instability - let alone 6 times.  Do I feel sympathy for her?  No.  I might have due to her obvious mental instability but the constant pandering to the media and the website asking for money set me over the edge.  The citizens of the state of California are going to be paying for these poor kids.  They are the ones I feel sorry for - the kids. 

wuzzup

by wuzzup on 26 February 2009 - 05:02

Well we can either owe china  for the stimulus package  and pay forever or we can over look Nadya and pay for her American children.  I perfer to keep it American  and support Americans . Nadya is the lesser of two evils ...Yes ??   If not then send your checks to take care of china's children. I SEE   No reason why they Kate can not watch and take care of the kids and the dogs.

CrysBuck25

by CrysBuck25 on 26 February 2009 - 05:02

WIth regard to Nadya, she shouldn't have been allowed to have IVF period...unless she was in a stable relationship and could afford it out of her own pocket, or her own insurance.  In my opinion, having children on public assistance is unacceptable.  If you can't have them naturally, and you can't afford to do it artificially and raise the children yourself, then don't have them.  They deserve far better than that.

On the other hand, your welfare checks are determined by the number of children in your house, so the more you have, the more money you get.  I guess that's not a bad way to go if your pride allows you to raise children off other people's hard work and dedication.  Were it up to me, I'd limit welfare to two years, for everyone who is not physically disabled to the point they cannot work. During that time, to remain on welfare, you must be in training for a job, and you must have a job by the end of that two years, otherwise you get cut from the payroll.  Or, if they don't want to work, they have to be sterilized.  After all, having children shouldn't be a business...Children are far too precious to be a commodity.

I have no sympathy for the woman.  If she had one and no job, she shouldn't have had a second, let alone 13.  Regardless of her situation, you have to be able to take care of yourself before you take on the responsibility of a child. 

Families that have strong religious roots and extended families tend to have far better luck with lots of children than do those who live the public assistance life. 

Crys

by MissMae on 26 February 2009 - 05:02

I personally do not like Kate but I do believe that she is a good mother and with her strong personality, discipline and organization I believe the dogs and the children will be fine. Who knows they very well may turn out to be 2 very healthy, happy well adjusted dogs. She has the resources to ensure it. Give the girl a break.





 


Contact information  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement  Copyright Information  Terms of Service  Cookie policy  ↑ Back to top