Taxpayers May Have to Cover Octuplet Mother’s Costs

The mother of the octuplet babies has been in the news for a few weeks now and the news does not seem to be letting up. The Associate Press has a great story on how taxpayers are more than likely going to cover the costs of raising these children (she had 6 BEFORE the octuplets). The brunt of the taxes are going to come from California taxpayer’s where the mother lives. California is already billions of dollars in the red, so I can imagine how this is going to infuriate some. Here are some highlights of the article (in red) and my opinions (in black):

“Even before the 33-year-old single, unemployed mother gave birth to octuplets last month, she had been caring for her six other children with the help of $490 a month in food stamps, plus  for Social Security disability payments for three of the youngsters.”

OK. I can understand the need for food stamps and disability payments if you really need them. I can imagine that she did at the time too (she was on disability from a job-related accident for several years). However, I do not understand how she could want to bring additional children into this world knowing what she knew.

“Also, the hospital where the octuplets are expected to spend seven to 12 weeks has requested reimbursement from Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid program, for care of the premature babies, according to the Los Angeles Times. The cost has not been disclosed. The Suleman octuplets’ medical costs have not been disclosed, but in 2006, the average cost for a premature baby’s hospital stay in California was $164,273, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Eight times that equals $1.3 million.

That is a big chunk of change for the government of California to be paying. I think I would put her on a nice payment plan. Just kidding!

“In California, a low-income family can receive Social Security payments of up to $793 a month for each disabled child. Three children would amount to $2,379.”

Wow. That is some pretty good assistance from California. No wonder they are in so much debt! I imagine there is a cap on the amount that she can receive but if there wasn’t, she could receive upwards of $11,000 a month! Not to bad for being unemployed!

Now, after seeing all of that, what is your opinion? I know there will be many different views on this, especially since we are in a recession. However, I read somewhere that when other families had multiple babies they received praise and gifts. They received a lifetime supply of diapers, TV shows, shopping sprees, etc. What makes this woman different? I know she shouldn’t have had eight babies, but isn’t that what in vitro fertilization is all about? Don’t you get as many eggs as possible to up the chances? I mean, Jon and Kate (from Jon and Kate Plus Eight) had six babies and they received all kinds of support.

Your opinion? Please keep it clean or I will delete your comment.

One thought on “Taxpayers May Have to Cover Octuplet Mother’s Costs

  1. Yana

    I’m not in an uproar about this woman, and think it really isn’t worth much of my concern. I feel negatively toward in vitro fertilization, and don’t understand people who want lots of kids, but that’s their thing and prerogative – though I don’t know if I think that applies to the in vitro. It’s just sad that so many people can’t get the medical care they need, but others can get luxuries that to me do not even seem desirable.

    This woman’s ways may not get my approval, but people are entitled to the crumbs she is managing to get for herself and her brood. I’m not jealous of people on welfare, though I do have some resentment toward a system that won’t provide necessary medical care to every citizen by default.

    As far as praise and gifts, if someone naturally and unintentionally ended up having multiple babies at once, I would feel very sorry for them, thank God it wasn’t me, and maybe send a gift due to my own gratitude!

Comments are closed.