Skip to main content

View Diary: The right to choose --- Octuplets! (95 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The coverage of this story irritates me (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    slapshoe, kissmygrits

    I'm very pro-choice.  As such, I have no problem with her making the decision to do this.  If she felt the embryos were living and was not willing to destroy them, sobeit...it's HER choice (though I think the fertility clinic probably should have put more weight on the health risks of potentially carrying so many).  For the media to condemn her for her choice, when there are many other families with large families that are congratulated and rewarded (i.e. The Duggars, The Gosslins), I think only makes her situation that much worse.  I think if she were married the story would be much different, whether or not she took gov't assistance. Such is the sexist culture we live in.

    Having had 2 children, I know how hard it is to get through those sleepless nights.  I can't imagine 14.  This woman does not need condemnation....she needs help, regardless of whether she made this choice or not.  Afterall, the ones who will end up suffering without help are her children.

    •  Good points, (0+ / 0-)

      and you would probably find the blog I linked in my comment above interesting, because it specifically addresses the point about how a lot of the outrage is the woman operating out of the structure our culture wants women to reproduce in - i.e. marriage.  Check it.

    •  I have an issue with what she did, (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CJB, lesliet, EthrDemon, PeggyD

      and I am hard pressed to say why.  I am as pro-choice as they come, but something here just rubs me the wrong way.  I have this uneasy voice in my head that keeps saying "she should not have been allowed to do this"...

      No politician ever lost an election by underestimating the intelligence of the American public. PT Barnum, paraphrased...

      by jarhead5536 on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 12:59:49 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  because it's so extreme... (6+ / 0-)

        it should make anyone pause.  Like when you see some one using body modification to turn into a cat.  But we can't make policy based on exteme examples.

        Then they'll raise their hands, Sayin' we'll meet all your demands, But we'll shout from the bow your days are numbered.

        by gooners on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 01:06:03 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Every Constitutional right enjoyed by the (4+ / 0-)

        citizens of the U.S. comes with restrictions; there are no absolute rights.  We have freedom of the press, but libel and slander are illegal, for example.  When it comes to reproductive rights, the thing that makes us feel uneasy is that if you consider these rights absolute, someone is going to abuse their rights in a self-indulgent way that will impose burdens on her neighbors.

        Barack Obama in the Oval Office. There's a black man who knows his place.

        by Greasy Grant on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 01:21:12 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Right (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Greasy Grant, PeggyD

          The way I've heard it phrased (often by Libertarians) is that "My right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins."

          At the heart of the matter, then, is whether excessive reproduction causes harm to the rest of society.  I'd argue that it does, if for no other reason that exponential growth, however slow, leads to dire consequences.

          At what point does the good of society (and especially future society) trump the rights of the individual?

          Bring the WAR home

          Starve the corporate beast, buy local!

          by EthrDemon on Tue Feb 10, 2009 at 01:57:38 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  It is not wrong, but it is a bad idea. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Tonedevil, MaikeH

        Having and pushing to have a large number of children when you are not in a good position to do so is not good for you or the children. So I question her personal judgement (and as I commented elsewhere, the medical ethics of the Dr. she did eventually use for going for 6 when I suspect that was likely to have negitive consequences with a high viability number).

        I'm not fond of the Quiverful movement, but if you have 18 children one at a time, you at least have a smaller incremental cost and can eventually have the older ones help with the younger ones.

      •  For me, it's the selfishness. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        PeggyD

        I can't see it as anything more than that.  She wanted to have a lot of babies. She did what she wanted for herself.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site