The octuplets' mothers' doctor .......

[Stinky The Clown]

..... first of all, while octuplets could possibly be a natural occurrence, there is no known instance of an eight baby birth before. So it is fair to assume that the pregnancy was the result of some sort of fertility effort.

Next ..... mom lives in a small 2 bedroom house - with her **six** other children. The neighborhood appears to be lower middle class at best. Neighbors interviewed by various noozmedia indicate that some extended family lives there, too. The family is characterized as nice and pretty normal.

But a 2 bedroom house?

It is not possible to have 14 children living in a 2 bedroom house.

Back to the OP title ..... the doctor.

Assuming the doctor was rendering some sort of fertility assistance to the mom, doesn't he have some responsibility to ensure that the (well known) possible outcome would not lead to the children living below the mom's ability to care for all of them?

(This next statement is hyperbolic and is not actually my view) I think her doc, if he fed her fertility drugs, ought to have his medical license yanked.

[hedgehog]

1. Up until the Dionne sisters survived back in the 30's, there was

no surviving set of Quintuplets, either! BTW, their mother had given birth to six children previously.

[Stinky The Clown]

4. Yeah, I know ..... I mentioned that in OP (6 other kids)

[yellowdogintexas]

31. true but that was a case of the 7th child coming out as 5, not deliberate

fertility treatments.

[Midlodemocrat]

76. The mother of the Dionne quints did not seek fertility treatments.

Therein lies the difference.

[hedgehog]

80. True - apparently several reputable sources have now confirmed the use

of fertility treatments.

[johnnie]

2. I have a feeling....

This mother and her children will be well taken care of.

[Donnachaidh]

6. yup -- those kids will be rented out to the highest bidder

You can just SEE Pampers sending lawyers to get those diaper contracts signed. :sarcasm:

[walkaway]

15. that's right, Medicare will pay for eight of the most

expensive babies ever.

I've posted about this before but it should be mentioned that not only did this doctor and mother risk the health of all of these babies letting eight of them come to term (or what passed for their term) but now we have eight children who overshot their insurance limits 2 minutes after they were born.

They will likely need extreme medical care for months and some of them, possibly, years. They will be eligible for in home nursing care and state supplied nanny care for years as well.

This mother has the right to have as many children as she likes but it's a shame to see these resources abused like this.

[uppityperson]

21. Medicaid, not Medicare. Unless they aged really rapidly. What is "state supplied nanny care"? nt

[Donnachaidh]

3. Bet the doctor was thinking about future clients more than the litter she delivered

After all, he stands to gain a LOT financially from desperate people who want to have children.

And yes -- his license should be yanked, and shoved down his throat whole. :grr:

[customerserviceguy]

9. He doesn't have a thing to gain from providing fertility drugs

This is Kaiser, every frivolous expense costs them money. Maybe they ought to set up some sort of policy procedure to deny fertility drugs to anyone with more than two or three children. They've pushed my mother's surgery out to next month, she's been in considerable pain ever since I visited her at Thanksgiving.

[Donnachaidh]

29. oh come on -- are you saying he's chained to working for Kaiser for his life?

Perhaps this was HIS way of getting free publicity in the hopes of opening a PRIVATE office, due to his sudden stardom as a fertility doctor?

So Kaiser gets hit with the costs -- he's a sudden fertility *god* for getting this woman through 32 weeks with 8 live fetuses, just because he's a NICE guy? :eyes:

He walks away with a built in future in a private practice brimming to the ceiling with desperate couples looking for help.

I'll bet he's got his future ALL mapped out for himself. Might even be able to replace Gupta as a medical talking head. :sarcasm:

[Texasgal]

35. Ummm... the head doctor was a Woman.

Just an FYI \.

All babies were delivered vigorous, crying, kicking. Everybody was very excited," said Chief OB/GYN Dr. Karen Maples.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28882556/

[mentalsolstice]

90. The docters that delivered

...were not the doctors involved in the IVF. The woman showed up at KP already pregnant.

[customerserviceguy]

48. Maybe you can answer for me

how this doctor figured there'd be eight babies out of this? Usually, fertility drugs produce two or three at most. This shot at 'fame' had the odds of winning the lottery.

But it had a very good chance of costing Kaiser a LOT of money. No one with SIX fucking kids needs any extra help getting preggers.

[Warpy]

5. She lives with her parents and six kids

in a two bedroom house. They might just be very odd, and they have a right to be so.

However, yes, most fertility docs require prior agreements with patients to terminate more than 2 fetuses, simply because that's the point at which babies will be born with low birth weight and Mom will be severely compromised, too.

It remains to be seen whether this litter will focus unwanted attention by CPS and the medical license review board or if the family will be showered with all sorts of gifts via endorsements.

[Stinky The Clown]

7. Okay ... her parents .....

... I knew there was extended family.

So ..... two bedroom house. Assume she has no husband (is that a safe assumption?) Gramma and Grampa in one room. Her and 8 little ones in another room ..... and six in the living room ...... not a good situation.

And if, as I suspect, they're not gorgeous white people, there probably won't be any showering with lavish gifts.

[RandySF]

13. Ok, this leads to my question

If there is no husband, or even boyfriend, then who is the father? Could it be....

[deadmessengers]

14. There was last time

The last time someone cranked out a litter of eight, there was a house waiting for them. From: http://www.twinstuff.com/houoctup.htm

The Chukwu/Uwobi family moved into a new 5,200 square-foot home in League City, Texas in September, 1999 that was donated to them by the Fannie Mae Mortgage Company. The home has six bedrooms and is located on a cul-de-sac in a quiet neighborhood about 15 minutes from the hospital where the octuplets were born.

And, somehow I don't think Chukwu and Uwobi are likely to be the names of "gorgeous white people".

[ikojo]

17. If I remember correctly the Chukwu and Uwobi

family got those gifts ONLY after people complained that white women who birth litters get gifts and endorsements. I think their litter was born shortly after a high profile birth of the McCaughey litter in Iowa.

[Ilsa]

44. Yes, they had 8 and one died after birth. They didn't get anywhere

near the media attention that the McCaughey family got. I guess the father should have taken up Christianity and started running around having $5,000 a pop speaking engagements like McCaughey.

[uppityperson]

23. I'd not assume that yet.

[Warpy]

26. Well, her daddy told the press to piss off

and that bodes ill for many endorsements.

[RandySF]

8. They will be cared for

They will become cause celebs by the religious reich and every wingnut with cash will promise to help them financially, maybe even establishing scholarships. The price will be that the parent(s) will be required to haul them about to every anti-choice rally in the country.

[marshall]

22. Julianne Moore and Ashley Judd were slobbering over them last night

Going on about how wonderful it is, on and on. It's a Hollywood miracle.

[deadmessengers]

10. Sounds like a slippery slope to me

Denying people fertility treatment based on their living arrangement and the possibility that they might crank out a litter of eight is about a half-step away from basically banning fertility treatments for all but the wealthiest of the wealthy. Also, to place a physician responsible for ensuring the future well being of the children he helps a mother conceive seems like a "tip of the spear" argument that could also be used against abortion rights.

Nope - this was the mother's choice, and the family's problem to deal with.

[customerserviceguy]

11. Insurance companies and HMOs deny people unnecessary shit all the time

Kaiser has a responsibility to its other premium payers, as well as society as a whole to rethink their fertility drug policies.

[NashVegas]

53. When States Are Passing Laws So Pharmacists Don't Have to Hand Over the Pill?

What this doctor has done is unconscionable.

[InvisibleTouch]

12. How is this really any different than animal hoarders?

Cases like this balance on the edge between individuals' rights and a responsibility to the rest of the world, not to mention responsibility to the other lives involved. There's a very good reason why evolution designed large primates to only have one offspring at a time, or at very most two - because it's not physically possible to give one's full attention and resources to more than that. On the other hand, if the parents have the resources to take care of them all (or, more likely, have them cared for), one could say it's their own business if they really want to raise 14 kids. And once you start impinging on rights, you're on a slippery slope. So I'm certainly not calling for that - but I do wonder at the motive. That's where my comparison to animal hoarding comes in. When someone has so many pets that they can't properly care for them all, and yet keep adding more, that's not inspired by a love of animals, but by something else, I can't really guess what. The same surely is true of people who can't stop adding kids to an already overburdened household.

[LostinVA]

59. It isn't, imo

[AZBlue]

73. That's just as sad and wrong and shouldn't be allowed either.

[ikojo]

16. I heard one of the doctors say she was going to

BREAST FEED the babies...she's turned herself into a brood mare! She's only got two. How will she physically be able to do it and maintain adequate nutrition for herself and the babies?

Also, with six kids, was it absolutely necessary that she have another or is she trying to catch up to the Duggars in one move? Oy vey! I know it's not cool on DU to question the breeding habits of anyone but I think 14 kids is way too many. There is no way that each kid can receive the individual nurturing from the parents that babies and kids so desperately need.

I come from a family of seven kids (my mom had seven kids in 10 years). My mom was in no way prepared to raise seven kids alone, which she eventually ended up doing following a divorce. Even when she was married she was overwhelmed with kids. She didn't give us individual attention as infants, heck the one after me was born 18 months after I was.

[colinmom71]

72. Umm, actually "breast-feeding" preemies is not that difficult....

My son was a 24 week preemie and I also pumped breast-milk for his first few months of feeds.

Granted, he only needed about 2-3 ounces of milk per feed (done in the NICU via NG tube), but I was able to provide a good amount of breast milk for him those first months. After about two months of pumping though, my breast milk supply dwindled to only a few ounces per day and he then had to be supplemented with formula. Very shortly after he came home from the NICU four months later, he was exclusively formula fed, which will likely happen with this octuplet mom within the next few weeks...

[TroglodyteScholar]

18. Patients are warned of risks up-front...

...and I'll bet you a dollar the risk of multiples is made PERFECTLY clear. I really don't understand the impulse to put some kind of blame on the doctor. Where is the mother's or father's responsibility in this situation?

Edit: Subject-verb agreement

[Sal Minella]

25. But why would a doctor in his right mind give fertility drugs to a woman who ALREADY had six kids???

[TroglodyteScholar]

28. Maybe she was having trouble getting pregnant with number seven. n/t

[Sal Minella]

32. No woman in her right mind would want more than six children in a two bedroom house.

No doctor in his right mind would aid and abet such a megamultiple pregnancy in a "family" so unsuited to caring for them.

[TroglodyteScholar]

34. So who do you think should tell people when they can or can't have children?

Who's going to be the authority? And do you think the doctor should literally have his state of mind evaluated?

[Sal Minella]

47. Are you aware that she was living with her parents and six children in a two-bedroom house?

Wouldn't you think common sense would be the authority telling her not to have more children?

For the sake of the ones she had, I would expect common sense might have discouraged her from getting pregnant again, and I have no idea what possessed her to go for a litter of eight.

And yes, the doctor should be prosecuted for malpractice at the least, since it's life-threatening to babies and mother to continue with eight fetuses in a womb evolved to carry one or two. imnsho, the doctor who assisted her in this is incompetent, criminal, and/or nuts, whereas the mother is just nuts.

[TroglodyteScholar]

93. You didn't answer either of my questions.

You're clearly outraged, but you still haven't said WHO should have the authority to plan our families for us.

You also just suggested that the doctor, whose sanity you questioned earlier, should be prosecuted. Do you suppose jail is an appropriate situation for housing the mentally ill?

[Sal Minella]

95. Your "authority" hang-up is a "Have you stopped beating your wife" type question --

The debaters and logicians have a word for this sort of nonsense but I don't know what it is and want to take the time to look it up.

I'm sorry you have this "authority" thing going on because it makes discussion impossible.
Rational behavior is not based on "authority."
Sensible life choices are predicated on achieving desirable outcomes over a period of time, not on doing what some "authority" tells you to do or not do.

If the doctor is found insane he should be treated as mentally ill.
(I believe a sane doctor would not put eight embryos into a woman without first checking whether she would undergo selective reduction or not).
If the doctor is found sane, he should be criminally prosecuted.
(Putting nine lives at risk may not be against the law, but his act could easily have been manslaughter x 9)
This is not too difficult, is it?
Either way, based on this one case alone, he should have any and all privileges at all hospitals revoked immediately, and the State board should suspend his license now if not sooner.

[TroglodyteScholar]

98. You are mistaken. It is a legitimate question for you...

The only thing making "discussion impossible" is your inability to defend your ill-conceived, emotionally-charged position. If you believe neither this woman nor her doctor are qualified or capable of planning her family, who do we as a society bestow that responsibility upon? I don't have any suggestions for such an authority because I don't agree with you. But someone arguing from your perspective must have a better answer for this question than "common sense." Why complain if you have no solution to offer?

Either stand behind your argument and assert that "entity x" should choose how many children we have, or admit that you are being irrational. If you don't believe a woman has the right to decide whether she has children, who do you believe has that right? Do you consider yourself to be pro-choice, and if so, how is this any different from the decision to terminate a pregnancy?

[Sal Minella]

100. There is no "entity x" ferpetesake. Get over it.

There's what's good for kids and their mother, and
there's what's NOT good for kids and their mother.

This isn't a frigging calculus problem.

I think what the mother did was sick and/or irresponsible
and what the doc did was sick and/or irresponsible and criminal.
What sort of "Entity X" could have advised them that they'd listen to?

If you must have an entity X, a limiting factor, call it the principle of "Avoiding deliberately doing things that will risk injury or death for people."

[TroglodyteScholar]

104. So you agree, then, that the decision...

...should be made by the woman and her doctor.

Why argue if you agree with me?

[Sal Minella]

106. I made a simple statement, to wit:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4938633&mesg_id=4940166

and you tried really hard, with several insults, to manufacture an argument.
If obsessive picking at non-existent nits is how you choose to entertain yourself, that's fine with me.

[TroglodyteScholar]

108. Kindly point out where I insulted you several times and I'll kiss your ass.

Would you consider it an insult if I called you thin-skinned?

I'm just bothered by the number of people I see taking an anti-choice position in this case--as though it's special somehow because it doesn't involve abortion.

[Midlodemocrat]

79. Leaving finances aside, she doesn't fit the definition of infertile.

The diminished ability or the inability to conceive and have offspring. Infertility is also defined in specific terms as the failure to conceive after a year of regular intercourse without contraception.


And, some areas of the country have a limit on how many people can reside in a certain number of square footage.

[JerseygirlCT]

38. THAT'S not his or her business

That part is entirely up to the family. Not for a dr. to decide how many children you wish to have.

BUT allowing the process to continue when it was obvious that such a higher order multpile birth was likely was irresponsible. That's definitely where the dr.'s decision-making should come in.

[LisaL]

46. The doctor can not force someone to have an abortion.

Even if that someone is carrying multiple fetuses, it's still up to the mother.

[JerseygirlCT]

50. That's not what I'm responding to

I'm responding to those who say "Oh, she's got six already, how can someone help her have more?". THAT is none of the doctor's business. Whether she already had no children, one child or six is no one's business but her own.

Allowing a patient who will not reduce (I would have been in the camp myself) to go forward with a cycle in which too many eggs are stimulated or implanting too many embryos with IVF - THAT the doctor most certainly does have an obligation to do.

[LisaL]

57. Some articles reported she had 8 embryos implanted.

8. Who and why would do such a thing?
Even if a doctor can not decide how many children a woman should have, implanting 8 embryos into someone? Why?

[JerseygirlCT]

68. I know. And the doctor absolutely, positively CAN decide how

many embryos can safely be implanted. But the doctor can't decide how many children IN TOTAL any person can or should have. IOW, basing her/his help on whether the woman has had children in the past and how many.

There's a big difference between 8 at one time (BAD) and "gee that woman already has a lot of kids, and I don't think she should have any more" (not the doctor's business, unless having had previous children will mean an additional pregnancy is dangerous to her).

[NashVegas]

54. Doctors Make That Decision ALL THE TIME

It's called "medical ethics."

[ProfessorGAC]

63. Very Good Point

There is an issue of "do no harm". I'd seriously be concerned about the strain put on this woman's body were i an MD.

So, i think you're correct. There is a strong ethical consideration.
GAC

[JerseygirlCT]

67. Not about previous pregnancies!

We're not talking about how many live births to come from the pregnancy the doctor is helping with. We're talking about helping or not helping someone become pregnant because a doctor decides she has enough children already. That would absolutely not be the doctor's business.

The fact that this woman already had 6 children should have no bearing on whether she wants to have another, and on whether an RE will help her to do that.

[NashVegas]

81. That's Irrelevant

We're talking about helping or not helping someone become pregnant because a doctor decides she has enough children already. That would absolutely not be the doctor's business.

That is absolutely the business of the doctor involved. This isn't the same thing as a case of "reproductive rights" where the doctor and the law could try to prevent someone from getting pregnant, or prevent someone from terminating a pregnancy.

Find me any state in the US where licensed doctors are legally forced to perform abortions against their ethics, and I'll agree with you that it's A-okay for a doctor to be forced to assist in fertility treatments against their ethics - in that state.

[JerseygirlCT]

83. So you're good with doctors who won't treat a lesbian then

because she offends his/her "ethics". This is the same.

You help a patient because that patient needs medical care. And treatment for IF is medical treatment. To refuse treatment without a good medical reason is wrong. What if an RE thinks one child is enough in this world? Should he or she refuse to treat anyone with a child already? Where's the line drawn? 2 kids, 3, 4?

There is nothing unethical about helping a patient who needs treatment. Too many here are looking at a woman with 6 kids already and deciding based on that that she shouldn't have been treated for IF - 6 is enough. Perhaps for that patient 6 is not enough. And so long as having another child would not risk her health or life, the doctor should help her.

Now, implanting 8 embryos is another thing entirely. Doing that is highly unethical, because it absolutely impacts the patient's health and quite possibly life - not to mention the lives of the babies.

[NashVegas]

86. Yeah, I Am

She could always have gone to a different doctor - and she did.

There is nothing unethical about helping a patient who needs treatment.

A woman with 6 children does not need fertility treatment, regardless of whether it's done via hormone/release or implantation.

The mom might be happy, but every single child in that family is at risk for neglect and abuse. The newest 8 are at risk for a variety of health disorders that will last for life.

[JerseygirlCT]

87. A large family is automatically at risk for neglect and abuse?

I think that's a mighty big assumption on your part.

She wouldn't have the newest 8 if the doctor hadn't agreed to implant 8. And I do think ever implanting that many is unethical.

But had 2 been implanted? I know many large families that function far better than many small ones do. That's simply not a judgment that can be made by the numbers - there are far too many other factors at play.

[NashVegas]

89. I'm Guessing You Don't Know Very Many People From Large Families

Furthermore, just because you want to reduce highly-trained and educated medical personnel to having the decision-making ability of a McDonald's hamburger flipper doesn't mean you're going to get your wish.

[JerseygirlCT]

101. I was raised in an Irish Catholic family

attending Catholic schools until college. I definitely know from large families. Our own, with only four kids, was on the small side compared to my peers.

And this has nothing to do with insulting a doctor's intelligence. It's simply not up to a doctor to decide for anyone what size their family should be, barring physical reasons that conceiving again would be dangerous.

The doctor in this case was most likely most unethical - not because he agreed to treat someone with IF, regardless of how many children she already had - but because the decision to implant 8 embryos was almost certainly dangerous to the patient and the babies.

Go ahead an be insulting, but it does nothing to further your argument.

[NashVegas]

103. Just Because You're Insulted Doesn't Change the Fact

That you're basically saying that doctors and other highly skilled medical personnel who offer optional services should have no say or ethical considerations under which circumstances they will offer these optional services.

Good luck with that.

[recoveringrepublican]

92. Thank you, I'm seeing this from a different prespective than most on here, I have 3 kids myself

I'm a late deafened woman. You would not believe how many people make it known to me that I should have "fixed" myself so I wouldn't "inflict" my deafness (it runs in my family) on my children. They seem to think that I must be poor because I'm deaf, and they don't want to take care of my children. They seem to think because I'm deaf I'm somehow endangering my children. This story seems very strange and not the norm, but if we start setting standards on who can have children via fertility methods, where does it stop?

There seem to be way too many assumptions in this discussion.

[NashVegas]

102. Were Any Of Those People Doctors?

[recoveringrepublican]

105. Not doctors, but 3 were nurses. You would be surprised how people with disabilities

are treated by people within the medical field. What does that have to do with anything being discussed here? How many people here saying since she had 6 kids, she should not have been allowed (or that the doctor should have said no because of) to have fertility treatments, are doctors?

[Sal Minella]

64. Do you honestly BELIEVE a doctor would be unethical in advising against another pregnancy for

a woman who already has six children under the age of seven at home in a two-bedroom house with two other adults?

Do you really believe it would be a breach of medical ethics for the doc to advise the woman against another pregnancy until the family's living conditions got better? A good doc would care about living conditions for the whole family, not just the fetuses, imo.

[JerseygirlCT]

84. I don't think any of that is pertinent to the doctor/patient relationship

A friend could certainly counsel someone thus. But the doctor's business is to help the patient with a medical problem. And if she was indeed infertile and wanted to conceive, that's a medical condition needing treatment.

Now, if having had 6 kids already had some deleterious effect on her reproductive health such that another pregnancy would be dangerous, then absolutely the doctor should make his concerns known.

But having X number of children already, or one's income level - none of that is a doctor's business.

[Sal Minella]

94. The overall health of the patient and patient's children (present and future) is very much

the doctor's business.

If a doctor knew such a patient would be taking eight newborns (profoundly premature) home to live in a cardboard box on the sidewalk, would you still think medical ethics require him to implant eight embryos in her just because she asked him to?

The woman's problem is a psychological problem of having no sense regarding her children; her "medical problem" of "infertility" is on a par with the 70 year old geezer who thinks he needs a Rx for Viagra because he can't get it up three times a day like he did at 17.

The doctor's business is to spot a psychological problem threatening the health of his patient and her children, and get her a psych evaluation, imo. He should have been already aware she would not undergo selective reduction, and therefore he had no business implanting eight embryos, which he knew full well she could not carry to term, and he is therefore negligent/criminal himself.

[JerseygirlCT]

37. I think it comes down to how much information they were given,

and how much monitoring the dr. did. And I do think there's a point where the dr's medical knowledge comes into play here - he/she knows that either implanting that many embryos or allowing the procedure to continue if that many eggs were stimulated was playing with his/her patient's life. That's where we start getting into malpractice, IMO. I think, putting his/her patient first, the dr. should have refused to continue at that point if the parents, once informed, were unwilling to stop on their own.

[K Gardner]

19. I had NO idea she had SIX other children, or that she was living with her parents?? WTF?

Sorry, but this is beyond my understanding.

[LisaL]

45. According to abc, neighbors say she is a single mother

with six kids.
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=6764771&page=1

I don't understand why a single mother who has six kids already (if abc article is correct) want fertility treatments? Maybe she just produced the 8 naturally, otherwise I don't get it.

[RandySF]

20. This is giving me the creeps

Who is the father? If there is no husband, or even boyfriend (you would think the media would have found out by now), then who is it? Could it be........? *ugh*

[ikojo]

24. People are saying it was her decision and she

probably knew the risks. My question is this: Would Ashley Judd and Co be gushing if this woman as a LESBIAN who birthed a litter? Somehow I DON'T THINK SO! In some states it would be against the law to artificially inseminate a lesbian but a straight woman with SIX kids, no problem!

[JerseygirlCT]

40. Either way, the number of children someone has isn't for the

doctor to decide.

The problem here is that carrying this many children *at one time* is a severe risk to the mother's health and the babies' health. No ethical dr. would have allowed that cycle to continue under those circumstances.

Most likely this is the result of injectible fertility meds - and the dr. can see how many eggs have been stimulated. If there were that many, then the dr., with concern for the patient's health and even life, should have called off the cycle.

But money does come into it for the patient, unfortunately. So a lot of people push to continue, regardless. That's where the medical personnel have to be firm. And that should have been made clear at the start of the process to the patient(s).

[RB TexLa]

27. A doctor does what you pay them to do.

[Stinky The Clown]

30. Tell that to Dr. Kervorkian

[Sal Minella]

33. What?

[JerseygirlCT]

39. No. Not if he or she is an ethical doctor. nt

[RB TexLa]

41. So if a doctor does something different than what someone pays them to do they are ethical?

How do you come to that conclusion?

What could be unethical about providing fertility drugs to a person healthy enough to have childen?

[JerseygirlCT]

51. We don't know how she had those first children.

And you are aware of secondary infertility, aren't you? It happens quite often. You absolutely cannot assume that someone with children already is not dealing with IF.

It would not be ethical at all, however, to allow a cycle to progress if too many eggs had been stimulated, or in IVF, to implant too many embryos - especially if the mother will not selectively reduce. Knowing that wouldn't be an option (and the dr. needs to ask about that first), the dr. should not implant so many. Doing so risks both the mother's and babies' lives.

[NashVegas]

82. They Have The Choice of Entering Into the Contract or Not

[JerseygirlCT]

36. I don't think it's the doctor's business to decide how many children

she can or cannot handle. (I don't mean at one time, I mean in total).

But it is the doctor's business to insure the best health for both mother and child(ren), and if this was the result of fertility efforts, then he/she screwed up somewhere. If she was using injectibles, then he/she should have called off this round when that many eggs were stimulated.

And I suppose people have lived with that many in 2 bedrooms before. I surely wouldn't want to do it, but many all over the world live like that...

[Barack_America]

42. A woman in England gave birth to octuplets and lost every single one.

Giving birth to that many children at once endangers their lives, which is why fertility doctors are so careful to prevent this sort of thing from happening. So doctors have not only a right, but a duty to "decide" how many children will result from fertility treatments.

[JerseygirlCT]

49. That's not what I'm talking about

I'm talking about using her current children to decide how many more she should have. That's not part of the equation for the doctor.

CERTAINLY, the doctor has the obligation not to participate in implanting too many embryos, or in going along with a cycle that has already seen too many ovaries stimulated.

[Barack_America]

62. I think you'll find that when a woman already has so many children at home...

...most credible fertility doctors would take extra caution to prevent even a twin birth.

[JerseygirlCT]

71. Absolutely

I don't think more than 2 should have been implanted, knowing that history, and knowing the mother wouldn't selectively reduce.

But the doctor cannot say "*I* think six children is quite enough, so you can't have treatment to conceive again". THAT is none of the doc's business.

[LisaL]

43. If the woman has six children already? I don't understand why would she

want/need fertility treatments? Maybe the 8 children were result of a extremely rare but natural occurrence?

[JerseygirlCT]

52. Secondary IF is not uncommon

Having had children already is no guarantee of future fertility.

I heard this morning that the pregnancy was the result of IVF. Which I would guess means at the very least that the dr. implanted 4 embryos and they all split. I think that was less than ethical, knowing the patient would not selectively reduce...

[LisaL]

56. Other articles have reported the woman had 8 embryos

implanted. I don't get this whole situation. The woman is said to have six children already. Why would a doctor implant 8 embryos into her? I think there should be a limit on how many embryos can be implanted into a woman.

[JerseygirlCT]

69. There absolutely should be. And that's what I've been saying

(I feel like I'm hitting my head against a brick wall in this thread!)

The doctor, any doctor, should never implant that many embryos. Especially if the mother is unwilling to selectively reduce. That's totally unethical.

But there are those saying that helping her conceive again when she already has 6 children is unethical. That part? No one's business but the mother's.

[MiniMe]

55. It was in vitro, they implanted 8 embro's and they all took

The woman is unmarried and living at home with Mom and Dad. The father went back to Iraq to work for a contractor to help pay for the addition to the family. That was in an article from the LA Times that another poster linked.

Hate to diagnose, but my feeling that the mother has a problem.

[dcsmart]

58. it is irresponsible to have that many children, especially

if you cannot afford them. even if you can, i think that is too many children in this day and age, (unless you are a farmer.....or own a bunch of resturants...:sarcasm: )

too many kids. bottom line

[old mark]

60. NEws this AM stated mom was taking fertility drugs, has 6 more

"young children", lives at home with her own mom.

???


mark

[recoveringrepublican]

61. While I'm flabbergasted by this entire story, what business is it of the docs?

How is what your suggesting any different than a doctor refusing to give a woman (or man, it does happen) a tubal if she has no children, or is young, or only has a couple of children?

[tnlefty]

66. It is the doctor's business.

The infertility specialist that I saw 20+ years ago wouldn't consider having her as a patient.

There are risks with fertility drugs that were thoroughly explained to me 3 different times and fortunately I didn't have to take them and assume the risk. She's already a mother of 6 and I hope that the risks were thoroughly explained to her, and really why an ethical physician would expose her to that risk when she had so many young children.

The multiples aren't going to be term births and there is risk to them. My first was a single birth born 7 wks. pre-term and he was much heavier than any of these 8 and prematurity and low birth weights do increase risks for the babies. The lower the birth weight the higher the risks of long term difficulties.

There is also a huge risk to her trying to carry a multiple pregnancy, but especially 8. I'm honestly having a difficult time trying to wrap my brain around a physician actually doing this at all.

This entire situation is rather bizarre and more than a little complicated to me, but I think that the risks to this woman, the 8 neo-nates, and the real possibility that the 6 young ones could've lost their Mom makes this much different than having a tubal.

[recoveringrepublican]

77. I agree that the doctor has a choice about how many to implant, but I don't think he/she should

be able to deny care because of her income, marriage status, how many kids she already has, etc. Reasons related to her health and the health of the baby/ies is a different animal.

[JerseygirlCT]

85. Exactly! nt

[NashVegas]

88. As Long As Animal Shelters Have the Right To Deny Pet Adoption

To people they even suspect are unfit, it's a doctor's decision whether or not to assist fertility treatments.

[tnlefty]

97. Well, my physician drew the line at IVF or GIFT and these

procedures with unmarried women because those pregnancies require a lot of support. The first time that I was put on bedrest I was still under his care and not released to the obstetrician yet (my first appt. was in the following week). I had bathroom privileges, but my husband got up in the morning, filled a cooler beside the bed with milk, juice, veggies, fruits, and sandwiches.

He talked with a friend today who is the father of triplets, with help and being told that the odds of the 3 fertilized eggs implanting were about 99% not in their favor. Two girls and a boy, and he even said that the doctor should be hung, or have a license to practice revoked.

Marital status or a partner who is very vested in a pregnancy and will support the mother is a big consideration along with the risks involved for her, especially if she already has children.

I just think that the dr. (quack) who did this acted in a very unethical manner.

[JerseygirlCT]

70. Right. It's not the doctor's business to decide that she already has 6

and that's plenty.

BUT it IS the doctor's responsibility not to implant 8 embryos, knowing the patient won't selectively reduce. That's just nuts, and completely irresponsible. That's when you tell the patient that you are willing to implant 2 at most... Because THAT decision isn't based on minding someone else's business, that decision is based on preserving the health of your patient.

[recoveringrepublican]

75. I agree with you on the subject of how many to implant. I once was looking into be a Gestational

Surrogate. One of the question I would have had to decide was how many I would be willing to implant. Since I didn't want to think about selective reductions, I was going for 2.

[Midlodemocrat]

78. Because this woman doesn't fit the clinical definition of infertile.

The diminished ability or the inability to conceive and have offspring. Infertility is also defined in specific terms as the failure to conceive after a year of regular intercourse without contraception.


It borders on malpractice.

[recoveringrepublican]

91. Well I guess I'll have to give you that, I have no idea, thankfully, who qualifies as being

infertile. I do question any doctors who would chance higher order multiples.

[LisaL]

109. Well, first of all, her mother says she is infertile, and her fallopian

tubes are plugged.
Second of all, the woman herself doesn't have to be infertile. What if her husband is?
Are you saying the doctor shouldn't threat a woman like that?

[xloadiex]

65. Maybe she went to Kate Gosselin's Doc

She wound up with 6 getting IUI after having hyper stimulated ovaries. Of course there are a lot of questions being called on this. There is also a big black market for fertility drugs.

Jon and Kate just moved into a 1.3 million dollar house by exploiting their kids and asking for "love offerings" from church goers. Both are unemployed and have built a pretty lavish lifestyle off the backs of their kids. Google GWOP. Maybe the mom saw this as a way of bettering her life.

[hamsterjill]

74. Who paid for the fertility treatment?

I must've missed that somewhere down the line.

Some friends that I know were doing fertility treatments to try to have ONE baby and it was incredibly, incredibly expensive - not to mention that many times the attempts failed.

Does insurance cover this type of thing? (I know that it didn't in my friends' case).

How can someone who has declared bankruptcy have money to spend on things like this?

And these are serious (not sarcastic) questions.

[rug]

96. I'll worry about this after the $18 billion Wall Street bonuses are returned.

[Stinky The Clown]

99. I wish I were suffiently stultified as to only be able to worry about one thing at a time

[Shakespeare]

107. Local gossip (here in LA) is that she had the fertility treatments done in Mexico.

Which would explain why there's no US doctor identified before she went to Kaiser in Bellflower for care, and would also explain (perhaps) why she was able to get 8 embryos implanted with no follow-up care to discuss reduction, etc.

[bigtree]

110. I see the entire focus as 'hyperbolic'

It's not like there's hundreds or thousands lined up to have a litter of kids. There's this one woman's family who needs support right now. That doesn't seem too hard to do. Instead, there's actually a wave of resentment and recrimination for these folks which belies all of the concern for the humanity that's flying around here.

I think that should be our focus; her family, not recriminations for (broken) water under the bridge.

[Sal Minella]

111. The problem here is, the welfare of humanity AT LARGE is diametrically opposed to the

"welfare" of women who think they have every moral right to have fourteen children on this already overcrowded and over-polluted and over-stressed planet.