Tearjerker of the day
Previous post

Nadya Suleman, the octuplet mom, seriously has NO SHAME.

Nadya Suleman, the octuplet mom, seriously has NO SHAME.

Enough has been said about Nadya Suleman, the mom of fourteen who recently gave birth to octuplets through IVF (despite being jobless and unmarried), that I didn’t feel I really needed to devote an entire post about it.

Apparently I was wrong.

Her interview with Ann Curry just made her look even worse in my opinion. She seems to me to be the worst kind of mother, selfish and cruel, as she’s purposely had fourteen children she no doubt cannot provide for — all because she thought it would fill a void in her life, thanks to an apparently troubled childhood which caused her to want nothing but lots and lots of babies. She’s living on food stamps right now, but claims she won’t live off of taxpayer dollars or accept welfare. Um, what does she think food stamps are? Does she think they grow on little foot stamp trees where little poor people can go and pick them freely?

She says she’ll be able to provide for them once she finishes school and gets her masters degree, but let’s be realistic here. She’s unemployed. She has 14 mouths to feed. How in the world does she plan on finding not only the tuition money to get a masters degree, but also finding the time?? Plus, she’ll have to find some kind of daycare for her 14 children while she’s attending classes! And even if she does get her masters, it doesn’t automatically guarantee a high-paying job. I don’t know if I’ve ever heard a story featuring someone so delusional.

Anyway, as if this story couldn’t get any more pathetic, Nadya Suleman has set up a website to get PayPal donations. I find it interesting that she denies welfare yet still wants free handouts. Isn’t it the same thing? I mean, really… not only does this woman possess not even an ounce of common sense, she also has no shame whatsoever. Proudly plastered all over the website are pictures of her eight babies with pleas for donations. People are encouraged to send money or “items”.

The worst part of the story is that, while Nadya Suleman is undoubtedly a selfish, empty-headed moron, her children don’t deserve to suffer the consequences for that. But suffer they will. These kids are going to live hard lives, and they’ll be lucky if they will reach 18 well-nourished and healthy, let alone without any psychological issues. A single mom with no money, no job, and no plans for the father to take place in the family raising 14 children could possibly scar these poor kids for life. I don’t know if I’d be really opposed to those kids being taken away from her. Aside from not having the money to support these children, she clearly doesn’t have the mental capacity to provide for them, either. But hey, it’s all good, because she’ll parade them around in the media asking for free handouts (all the while denying she wants welfare).

It’s one of the most depressing stories to surface so far this year, isn’t it?

Written by

  • Charity says:

    I don’t disagree with your rant, but I have to comment on this.

    “I find it interesting that she denies welfare yet still wants free handouts. Isn’t it the same thing?”

    No. It is not the same thing at all. Welfare is funded by involuntary tax contributions and given to people at the discretion of the government. What she is doing is asking people to voluntarily give her money, if they think she deserves it.

    One gives all of the power to the government; one gives all the power to the individual.

    I think our mechanism for caring for the poor should be voluntary. I think people should have the right to decide to whom and how much they give.

    You are right that she is still depending on other people to help support her children. In that sense, it is the same thing. But, at least she recognizes at some level that people should have a say in whether or not they do support her. (Of course, tax payers will probably end up supporting her anyway, but that is another matter.)

  • Jeff Stone says:

    Please help me. I am still unable to understand how “A single mom with no money, no job”, et c., was able to get ANYONE to perform the task of IVF.

    The truly sad part is that if she had done the insane thing – pick and choose the bab(y)(ies) to keep and kill the others, as it is in most other IVF’s – we would not be here to call her delusional, ie crazy.

    Is she the new breed of “welfare queen” ? With food stamps and PayPal.

  • Mat says:

    But Cassy, just remember, it takes a village…

    Seriously, I don’t think we have to worry too much about the kids welfare because we’ll all happily pay for it with the Messiah’s halthcare system. Because everyone knows that we Americans are all loaded with dough. Isn’t that great?

    No, I didn’t think so either…

  • Stephen J. says:

    We can still pray for Nadya to learn something from the struggle she has ahead of her. As the old story goes, anything can happen. The king might die. Or the horse might learn to talk.

    Bet on it? No. But I have to admit I’ve always been more of the “better to light a candle rather than curse the darkness” school of thought. What’s done is done. If people find it in themselves to give so that Nadya’s children don’t suffer from her (at absolute best) shortsightedness, surely that is something to be thankful for rather than disgusted with.

  • This entire story is horrific. Not only do these kids need taken away and given to 2 parents families, she needs to be put into a psych ward. She’s on food stamps and is receiving money because 3 of the 1st 6 are disabled. And did you see, she gets her nails manicured! An American manicure, I believe. She is not fit to breath the same air as those poor innocent babies.

  • Mat says:


    This goes back to something I posted on another blog. Why should I, who is being very responsible, have to pay for someone who is not only chronically irresponsible, but consistently so? This woman had six friggin kids before this litter and she obviously couldn’t take care of those.

    This kind of irresponsible shit pisses me off royally, mainly because it’s a fait accompli. It’s already done, so your reasoning goes, so we might as well support her. This happens all the time and the rest of us who are trying to get by in life have to suffer. You really think this woman gives a rat’s ass what happens? She knows there are poor saps who will pitch in, even if they cannot afford it.

    Yeah, I kinda feel sorry for those kids, but it’s not really my problem, since I have my own life to live. Our society has become so idiotic with emotion that we fail to understand what is right or wrong anymore. Where does it end? Does it even have an ending (note: this is entirely rhetorical)? Sorry, but this nonsense clearly belongs in the wrong category. Unfortunately, I’ll have to shell out perfectly good tax money to support this imbecile. But hey, I guess that’s how this country is these days, isn’t it?

  • Having worked both ends of the Federal budget in prior lives with Uncle Sam — Procurement Agent for the Department of Defense, and then Attorney for the IRS — I have seen that when bureaucracies’ budgets grow tight, all of the idealistic aspirations make way for ways to obtain and/or retain more money.

    And in tight budgetary times, creative bureaucrats who find ways to make their bureaucracies’s budgetary numbers look better (appearance is everything) are frequently rewarded with cash, a promotion, and/or some other tangible or intangible valuable perquisite.

    Apparently, implanting 8 embryos was a deviation from some sort of accepted medical practice. The bureaucrat who can document this deviation, and who can tie the deviation in with the concept of having the California state bureaucracy sue the physician who deviated from the accepted practice by implanting 8 embryos in a woman whom he knew or should have known would not be well postured to care for the children, stands to get a few attaboys (or attagirls) for his/her trouble.

    Better still: Wouldn’t it be a good form of poetic justice if Nadya herself sues this physician! Not only would the kids get some sort of support (assuming that Nadya doesn’t squander it on some anti-depressant medication), but it would take a burden off of the taxpayers, and would, in the longer run of things, serve as a deterrent to such irresponsible practice of medicine.

    Ah, but I have always been an idealistic dreamer!

  • Doug Belcastro says:

    I have a master’s degree in psychology, and I made about $35,000 as an un-licenced clinician several years ago. Most states now require a license to counsel, and the requirements usually include about 50 to 100 hours of supervision before the license is acquired. She would have to make over $57,000 just to exceed the federal poverty level for 14 kids, and she would not make nearly that much just after graduation. Many students find out too late that the outlay via student loans and personal finance just cannot be recouped in the social services sector. This woman has too many unresolved issues of her own to even think about helping others. God bless her, and I wouldn’t have any problem with her receiving help, since her kids can’t help that she made poor choices. The doctor that helped her should be confronted about his own ethics, even if this isn’t illegal.

  • DavidL says:

    Nadya Suleman is stunning testiment to the non-judgemental society. Suleman has almost completely purged the concept of right and wrong from her mind. I say almost, because Suleman apparently has enough shame left to deny being on welfare. Suleman has so completley accepted the mantra of non-judgementalism, that she is incapable of even judging her own behavior.

    Suleman’s fourteen children have a father. Where is he?

  • Mark says:

    Once personal responsibility took a nosedive in society, the door was opened to allow nincompoops like this one out. I didn’t watch the show but I heard that she received collagen injections for cosmetic purposes. Hmmmm. That’s a good example of why she doesn’t deserve PayPal accounts.

  • Mark (#9) speaks for me. I hate like the dickens to be recycling a left-wing talking point, but I think in cases like this society needs to step back and take a hard look at the culpability it bears for the scrambling of this girl-woman’s brain.

    I’ve found people like this, who don’t give a ratzass about basic things like keeping outgo equal-to-or-lesser than income, by & large do not have the preconceived notions with which they are often faulted about their standard of living. They’ve got certain “vitals” like flowers or kittens — in her case, obviously it’s the baaaybeeeeeez. But they don’t lust after the options that come with having leftover money. In fact, it chafes at them. They’ll throw money away on stupid crap to liberate themselves from the burden of making decisions. Fifty bucks left in the checking account after the bills have been paid, represent fifty problems.

    To put it simply, she’s a close cousin to about half of us. Those who just want the things they want, and don’t want to be burdened with making decisions or subtracting one number from another. Just like Heath Ledger’s Joker from The Dark Knight, when he put that accountant guy on top of the big pile of money, maybe a billion dollars in cash, and set it all ablaze. He’s the King of Chaos; doesn’t care about money, only looks like he does. That’s the way these people are.

    Somewhat OT, but this is the picture of the people in charge of the “stimulus.” They go through the motions of haggling over nickels and dimes within a twelve- or thirteen-digit incomprehensible number of dollars. But the reality is, they don’t care. They just want a huge rush of money they can claim to have delivered to their real constituents: Advocacy groups. They’d get the same rush out of a quadrillion dollars, and they’d get the same rush out of a couple billion.

    The whole stinkin’ lot of ’em should be sent to some sanitarium where they’re given their three-hots-and-a-cot every day, and don’t need to worry about what anything costs. That’s really their natural environment. This subtractin’ stuff is just for us suckers who work at real jobs, buy groceries, raise kids and pay taxes.

  • Not Nadya says:

    Why so harsh?

    Nadya is a true inspiration.

    I’ll be cloning myself 14 times and going on welfare as an act of solidarity.

    You can’t stop me.


  • Danny says:

    Stupidity, selfishness and irresponsibility at their finest…

  • Cassie,

    She’s already said that she expects to support the kids on STUDENT LOANS when sh goes back to school. It doesn’t matter to her that this isn’t what student loans are for, or that she already owes $50K in earlier loans. And she’s said that when she goes back to school, she’ll use the day-care providers at the school to watch ALL of her kids…again–she just expects that everyone else is going to give her everything and do everything for her and no one is supposed to mind, object or ask her to pay her fair share.

    Hell, we saw this with Kaiser Hospital. She doesn’t have insurance or a doctor there. She admitted in an earlier interview that she picked it because of it’s reputation and then just walked in announced that she was a high-risk pregnancy who was having problems and they were stuck having to care for her for weeks prior to the massively expensive delivery that the hospital will never see a dime for, unless it comes from the taxpayers.

    You just KNOW that this woman was a rabid Obama supporter.

    The state needs to take the kids and put them in good homes, and then find some salt mine for her to work in until she pays the taxpayers back for the massive burden that she’s imposed on everyone.

  • Keith says:

    Cassy: there’s an additional part you can add to your story if you’re asking about the money that’s supporting her. This woman has been dining at the public trough in ways a lot of people don’t yet know.

    After working as a State employee here in California for a grand total of about two years, Suleman filed a Workers’ Compensation claim for a back injury that took place in 1999 – going on ten years ago:






    She received “temporary disability indemnity” amounting to about $168,000, paid for at taxpayer expense, over a period of about six years. The orthopedist in the article who supported this is well-known in the California Workers’ Comp industry as a favorite of claimant lawyers for running up long periods of temporary, large ratings of permanent disability, and excessive medical treatment – treatment which, oddly enough, never seems to result in claimants actually getting well and recovering from their injuries. There seems to be no indication in the public about how much treatment has been rendered in Suleman’s case, or how much more she might receive in permanent disability; however, you have to have questions about an injury that allegedly left Suleman so disabled that she was bedridden and could not attend to her first six children (all of them born after her claimed injury, by the way), yet was able to sport that very impressive baby bump.

    In short, this case showcases just how much the California Workers’ Compensation system continues to need a major overhaul to weed out exaggeration, overtreatment, abuse, and outright fraud. And remember, every dime spent in Suleman’s case came from the taxpayers’ pockets, as she was a State employee. The $168,000 appears to only include the “temporary disability” payments – not counting the medical expenses, litigation costs, and anticipated permanent disability indemnity. If the California public knew the total costs of the case, they should probably be marching on Sacramento with torches and pitchforks.

    The costs of her IVF? Thank the taxpayer again, most probably. As a State employee, I doubt she had to pay much out of pocket for any of the medical care she’s received that wasn’t related to the injury. Unless a charity or a rich relative ponied up for her, all those costs were borne by the taxpaying public. For the record, I thought employer-provided medical insurance was something given to someone in return for working; it doesn’t appear Suleman has worked since 2002.

    And of course, there’s Medicare, Medi-Cal, and all those other taxpayer-financed sources, plus the food stamps, et cetera… I’d DEARLY love to see someone run up a total of how much taxpayer money has gone to supporting this woman and her family over the last twelve years, and then not letting her touch a dime of the money she’ll be getting from the publicity circuit, the book deal, the movie rights, and PayPal, until she’s paid the public back every cent.

    Seems to be Suleman has already gotten her bailout.

  • Tomare Utsu Zo says:

    Just giving a thumps up to what Charity said up there.

  • Robert Arvanitis says:

    There is only one thing sadder than the Suleman story, and that is the risk it becomes the basis for a government power grab.

    OF course she should not have been implanted like that. And of course her folly should not be taxpayer subsidized.

    Far too many of the commentators ignore the peril of a government “fitness” test for parenting. (At the extreme, we take children from unfit parents. But that’s only when the situation is so bad that it is even worse than “child services.”)

    If there is a fitness test for IVF, then there will soon be a fitness test for Medicaid receipients, then those who get tax deductions of any kind…

    Follow the logic, and keep a balance.

  • Ekaterina says:

    DavidL says: “Suleman’s fourteen children have a father. Where is he?”


  • Esmertina says:

    Nadya insisted on having all of her remaining embryos implanted, because she had six left, and she said they are all her children.

    Nadya refused to selectively abort, because again, she refused to murder her babies.

    Nadya is a full-quiver Christian, who believes that God opens the womb for those He believes are worthy of raising his soldiers.

    This story represents the collision of pro-life radicalism which confers personhood status on a bundle of cells, and pro-choice radicalism which contends that a woman’s reproduction should be entirely at her whim and convenience.

    We’re all to blame for this one, folks.

  • Cecilia Black says:

    Let me say this,

    You are a buch of idoits, If you think that you have all of the answers, you don not. Why you people want to pick on Nadya Sulemon. she had babies not cattle. she is a mom , Give her a break.

    Where do you come off telling her what she should do. You people do not have the cut off of how many children one should have. There is no law in nature saying how many babies one can have.

  • sam says:

    she should have to pay back all the government and insurance money she received in disability for her so called BACK INJURY!!!!!!!!!!!! HELLO!!!!!!!, PERHAPS AN INVESTIGATION INTO WORKERS COMP AND INSURANCE FREUD.

  • Petranella says:

    Well, she does not need money. All she needs is love. And she says she already has that. I can tell her that nothing is impossible, as long as she has determination. As a good mother, she should be above accepting any form of charity. She must be independent, that is the human spirit. Anything is possible, with faith in herself. She’s got to have the confidence to do this on her own, otherwise it’s all pointless.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner