Saturday, February 07, 2009

Family, Inc.

My friend K had a girl's night at her house last night - complete with crafting (I mastered my fear of the hot glue gun!), desserts and Sliding Doors.

(And yes, for those of you who are wondering, John Hannah is straight! Married, though...tough luck.)

So one of K's friends, C, is seven months pregnant with her second boy. We all got to talking about the pitfalls of mammalian birth (Pheromone Girl, you have just achieved superhero status, after the rib-spreading stories - I wince at papercuts), and the subject of the California woman who had octuplets - and now has a total of 14 kids - came up. Whew, how's that for a run-on sentence?

"I almost feel like a breeder having a second one," C said. "But 14?! Forget about social responsibility - and having enough resources - how do those kids get enough love and attention?"

I thought that was a really good point.

I don't have children and don't plan to, but I do have a set of younger siblings and I know what a scramble it is for my parents, even with my dad at home most of the time and my brother babysitting.

It's pretty obvious that this woman has some mental health issues. This is a conundrum, though - on the one hand, I wouldn't want the government to be able to tell people whether or not they can breed. On the other hand, though, who is the doctor that kept implanting this woman? Aren't there supposed to be some restrictions? Some psychological testing? Some limitations, because of the huge health risk to both the mother and babies?

And am I a bitch because I can't BELIEVE she likely funded this from her $165,000 in disability payments, and there is no partner to help her raise them? I am not against single parenthood, but 14?!

It's enough people to have a strike!

And what about all of the kids in orphanages around the world that are would love to go home to a family? Wouldn't that be a better option than popping them out like puppies?

What do you think?


Mr. Riot Kitty said...

I think that the government should not regulate breeding but people who does more then make a replacement for themselves should be social outcasts.

Here is my order of social evils:
5- Own a SUV
4- Consume consume CONSUME!
3- My precious snowflake could never...insert felony or warcrime here
2- Cruelty to animals...people are animals too.
1- No job? No education? No healthcare? Your reproductive bits work! Use them all you can! Have 400 babies! You are a human clowncar!

Julie said...

Hello, I got to your blog from links on other blogs and have been lurking for a few days. But I have to comment on this one.

One of my co-workers pointed out that no day care would be licensed with that kind of caretaker-to-child ratio. Just sayin...

Fireblossom said...

LOL @ Mr RK's human clowncar. I love it.

Fireblossom said...

By the way, I've given you a Lemonade Award. :-)

Granny Annie said...

Because of the government bailout we determined to regulate the salaries of the executives in the companies that received bailout funds. The same should apply to recipients of government welfare bailouts -- we, the taxpayers, should be able to demand regulation on the number of children we will support before we insist on some form of mandatory birth control.

Green tea said...

I think the Doctor responsible for the implants of these eggs should lose their license.
What pisses me off is how the Media is scrambling for interviews and we all know this woman will get the big bucks
No Kitty you are not a bitch, If this woman is so concerned about children, yes she should have become a Foster mom..

Scarlet said...

LOL @ Mr. RK's #1. I couldn't have said it better.

Shionge said...

It takes alot of responsibility to care & nurture our kids and it would be sad to treat this as a publicity stunt.

Riot Kitty said...

Shionge: You know what? She has more than one publicist! Isn't that sad?

Shionge said...

So we knew she is out for the 'kill' now we must 'extinguish' the fire and not bother reading about her.

Yes I am sad ultimately for the poor kids.

LL Cool Joe said...

The years and years of hassle, pressure and agro we went through to adopt our two girls. The interviews, the police checks, the home visits etc etc etc, and yet it seems ok for women to drop as many children as they like into this world without any control at all.

JLee said...

I don't think government should regulate that either, but people should have some DAMN SENSE too! lol

Darth Weasel said...

ah, how on earth can I become unbelievably unpopular? Oh, I know...reply to this one :-)

I would argue it goes back to the corrupted society we have now where the definition of "family" is at best malleable.

My Dad was one of 9, which was fewer children than either his mother or father were one of. He never felt neglected, uncared for, etc.

That was with a dad who worked full time in the concrete industry and a mother who stayed at home full time.

The older kids were given responsibilities for caring for the younger and were expected to help. Then again, they were also disciplined when they were disobedient.

When I say disciplined, I don't mean the ridiculous "reason with a 4 year old", either. I mean discipline that many people today errantly call child abuse, which ironically hurts their cause because when there is GENUINE child abuse, too many people only hear the ridiculous, over the top, "we shall control how you discipline your child even though our own children turned out to be miserable hellions without the slightest degree of humanity within them and if you raise yours different than we raised ours, we will call it child abuse and take your kids away."

I have said it before and I will say it again...if anyone from the state EVER tried to mess with how I raise my kids, they are taking their lives in their hands and better come with the big guns because they will be fortunate to have breath in their body.

Not one of my aunts or uncles was abused, nor do they consider it so. But I have heard them state that if not for the spankings they got, they would be in the criminal system now. It was discipline that taught them there were consequences.

Okay, side rant over, back to the main point.

When we apply the label of "nuclear family" and then explain why it isn't necessary, we make possible situations like the one being discussed which yes, I find disgusting, repulsive, irresponsible, and immoral.

At the same time, it is less disgusting, reprehensible, and immoral than a lot of other things going on.

We have such a messed up world that I know of at least 2 cases where kids live with people who are neither there mother nor their father even though their mom and dad live nearby with other kids. But these kids were "transferred" during marriages in one case and shacking up together in the other where the parent left them behind to pursue their next "love of my lifetime".

I find that much, much worse. People look down on mothers who want to be mothers and fathers who want to be fathers...then we get situations like this and everybody gets upset. Well, we did it to ourselves by trying to create a society where "family" is whatever we decide to call it.

I do find it all horrific.