Rather say, it's not okay for a doctor to induce a medical problem that is worse than the problem they're solving. Every procedure and drug has side effects. Scar tissue is not as traumatic on the body as carrying a baby to term (not to mention the trauma of caring for a toddler, or a teenager...;))

So if a doctor should do as little harm as possible, and abortion is easier on the mother's body than delivering, then you advocate for doctors to force all women to have abortions for medical reasons?

Yes, that's an extremist view, but I'm trying to nail down the generalized outcome of that thought.

Obviously all patients have the superceding right to refuse treatment. If the patient does wish for intervention, be it for an abortion or chemotherapy, the doctor must then weigh the probability and extent of harm that may come to the patient, and decide ethically whether to comply.

A patient with cancer may certainly choose not to have chemo. But a random person who has no cancer may not receive chemotherapy from a doctor, even if they're willing to pay for it.

Who's asking to have it both ways? You are not comparing like with like. You suggest that the doctor should simply give the advice and then go with the woman's decision, regardless of the advice against implanting large numbers of embryos

You cannot, in my country, simply pay for an abortion without having to justify it. There is a balance to be struck between potential harm and potential benefit. The further into the pregnancy, the higher the risk of complications and the harder it is to justify medically. This is one of the reasons it requires two doctors to sanction an abortion. Personally I feel that is sensible.

I haven't said that I think she should have been refused treatment. I just think, given it would seem an unusually high number of embryos to implant, and given the well-documented concern within the medical community over the increased risk of multiple births that comes with embryo implantation, that this particular medical practitioner made a very bad call. You are right, they do put in more eggs usually than they expect to take. I'd have to dig out the figures, but I think they usually do around 3.

One of the ethical debates around this kind of treatment, is that it costs so much to do each round, and the chances areb;t always high of first time success. So people who can't afford to go around the merry go round too many times, opt for a higher number of embryos to increase the chances of one taking. It has the side effect of also increasing the chances of multiple births. That's why it's a balance. Enough to give a reasonable chance of success -v- not enough to draw dangerous side effects.

If a woman agrees it is acceptable to freeze embryos for future implantation, she is already going against "God's will",

For those of us who think logically - freeze 'em, thaw 'em, clone 'em, whatever!

God is bountiful - adopt 'em from Darfur, they will starve and die otherwise (this might be God's plan, I don't know).

AP is now reporting that the fertility doctor is under investigation by the California Medical Board. Also, the mother has now claimed that six embryos were implanted for every single birth--initially resulting in her four singles and one set of twins, before this sudden jackpot of 8 (two of the embryos actually split in her final pregnancy, leading to more babies than were actually implanted.) If that's true, it mitigates the doctor's position a bit--he did have a good amount of evidence that she would only end up with one or two babies from the procedure.

I think the biggest problem most pro-lifers would have with it is the fact that so many embryos are usually discarded once the desired number of children have been born. This woman decided she wanted to use all of hers up, so I think it would be compatible with many people's views of "God's will" who wouldn't support the process in general.

Some people who are sick and in pain or dying do not really have the ability (mobility or access to drugs, etc.) to "off themselves." I think the laws should be more humane in helping people who really want to die with some dignity.

Crikey! The girl already had 6 kids! SIX!

I completely disagree. Maybe you can pay for the procedure, but what about later? Can you afford to take care of them? What about the ethics of having SO DAMN MANY KIDS when the world is already seriously overpopulated? I think the good/needs of the many outweighs the wants of the one.

It's like extreme body modification meets Munchausen syndrome or something. It's abuse of medical technology.
It's, it's not natural.

Actually Onyx that is why the method of her fertility treatment is so controversial. The people who're having four, quints, sextuplets, ect are on fertility meds, making them release multiple eggs at once, and thats how they end up being pregnant with so many. Her embryos were implanted, 8 (or perhaps a few more) were purposely implanted. That is not normal for this type of fertility treatment. They implant 1-3 embryos at a time. Depending on if the embryos look like they are doing well and are goin to develop.

For he record, They implanted 6 and two split.

That hits the nail on the head. A number if not all of these kids are in NICU. Guess who is paying for thier care? You all.

Free will, you don't get to be involved in that decision. Maybe the government should regulate how many a person can have.

I like Sugar, Merc.
And it makes me feel better about you, knowing you like her even though she has very different views to you.

When my ship comes in, I will come to Savannah. And buy you both dinner. Oh, and your lovely wife of course, although she will make me feel like an old hag in comparison ;)

Sugar is awsome, we have been good friends for a long time, even if we have some polar opposit views.

:D He can be a little infuriating sometimes, but only on the forums. I swear when you see him, you will just want to grab him and love him all over. :p He really is a sweetheart. And his wife is da bomb! She's awesome!

He really just likes to fight with me cause he knows I'll chain him up later and whip his heiney. Hard. :spank:

Dammit Woman, stop giving away my secrets!

You r makin me horny.

Luvs you!

Catch you on the flip side. Now please untie me so I can get off to work. :D

Why do people care about this kind of shit? Jesus fuck. And get all het up about it too. Want to get het up about something, maybe consider oil flares and Shell-funded genocide in Nigeria.

I guess some dumb bitch in California popping out a litter is easier to get outraged about... certainly more Jerry-Springer.

Show me the money. Silence ain't free ya know...:devil:

huimph. I get outraged about those other things too, but when we are facing serious overpopulation, and everything that goes with that, I think this subject is pretty damn important.

Memorandum
To: Dwellars
From: Managenot
Re: Outrage Topics

Please submit all ideas for topics over which to be outraged to office 10-587 by each third Friday of the month. If the 3rd Friday of the month falls on a holiday or a weekend, you must submit all outrage requests to office 10-952 instead, one full month before said outrage is to take place.

All outrage requests must be submitted on Form OR-69 and copied to your immediate supervisor, human resources, and the Department of Appropriate Outrage Topics.

We thank you in advance for your prompt and diligent attention to this matter.

The Managenot

So what? Why does that mean the doctor gets to make her life choices?

It is *not* for the doctor to make that decision for her, is what I've been saying here.

I'm not saying that I agree with this woman's choice, but I *am* saying it was HER CHOICE, not her doctor's, not her mother's not the government's.

If you think abortion is a "Pro-Choice" issue, then you have to believe this is too, or you are a hypocrite. It is the SAME THING. Reproductive Choice.

Because we the taxpayers will be paying for each and everyone of the babies for years to come.

I am prochoice, and I don't see how being against this is being a hypocrite. It should not have ever been a choice, to carry that many babies. It's ludicrious. It's unnatural. And, it's setting a very dangerous precedent. I think we need to start limiting the number of kids a woman can have. Too many damn people on the planet. Overpopulation, NOT a good thing. Just wait.

Are you truly saying you think that a woman's choice regarding her own body and reproduction should be taken away?

...Are you kidding me??

Who are you to tell ANYONE else how many children they can have?

NOfuckingBODY.

If you want something done about the world's population, I have three words for you: You go first.

OC, do you feel that no efforts should be made to reduce growth in human population?

First, overpopulation is a myth. There is plenty of arable land on the planet, it's politics and greed that keep people starving. There has been speculation on overpopulation since the late 1690s. Source

Second, the earth is not more important than people. I'm not saying that people shouldn't responsibly maintain stewardship of the planet's resources and ecosphere, but I *am* saying that people are more important than the earth.

That being said, Forced Reproductive Control is abhorrant!! How can anyone truly believe that every person is entitled to basic human rights and dignity ALSO believe that doesn't include the right to have children?

I honestly do NOT understand that a person can be "pro-choice" when it comes to killing babies, but when it comes to having them, NO CHOICE FOR YOU!!

This is one very teeny tiny step away from Eugenics. Do you believe in that, too?

Wow.

First off, I think that's a vile thing to say. A bitch popping out a litter?

My only problem with it is from a medical ethics point of view. Her choices are her choices, but a doctor who should know better chose to act in a way that risked his patient's health unnecessarily, and which has been widely condemned by his professional peers. I have a similar problem with surgeons agreeing to carry out multiple plastic surgery operations on someone with extreme body dysmorphia.

This young woman may well want a big family. Nothing wrong, or abnormal about that. But it's also possible she is locked into the baby-hood part of mothering; or is fulfilling some great need that can't really be fulfilled. When people go to extremes in their choices, it's sometimes worth asking the question is this more than just normal desire, or has it broadened out into something pathological in nature?

I don't know, but I don't get the impression that this woman was given much counselling. If I was the medical practitioner, I'd have alarm bells ringing in my ears and would want to satisfy my conscience that I was not dealing with someone vulnerable.

Looks like the state medical board is looking into it.

Without identifying the doctor, the Medical Board of California said last week it was looking into the matter to see if there was a "violation of the standard of care" for implanting so many embryos.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...cle=1&catnum=8

But Tiki's right. What peaks our collective attention first is the girl with all the babies. Misfits make for much better rag-fodder than medical malpractice.

I am more concerned with the babies at this point. Medical malpractice, if there was any, is after the fact and can be taken care of through normal channels. On the other hand, who is going to care for all these kids. This afternoon they interviewed the grandmother and had film of the inside of the house from BEFORE these births and the place was an absolute mess {sorry to any of those in my house is a mess thread}, but to have to care for so many kids you really have to be organized. I can't imagine 6 and now more than 6. The mother has claimed bankruptcy, basically has no job, no income, and is supported by her mother. This case begs for someone from the state to come in and snatch these kids away. I bet that will be the end result. And yes folks, you will all be stuck with their bill, well all of you who live in California anyway.

I saw an interview with mommy on tonights news----does anyone else think she's had a nose job and DEFINITELY her lips blown up with fat? She's like a very poor man's Angelina Wanna-Be IMHO.

ETA People Mag says she collected 168,000 in disabililty payments (back injury) and then, as she was leaving a doc appointment FOR said back injury she was rear-ended and sued for worker's comp (saying accident wouldn't have happened to her if she hadn't had to have treatment for original comp injury)

She also has a degree in child psych or similar and is planning on passing herself off as a child-care specialist. Hokay.

:thepain:
I have to agree! The doctor should be questioned! I think that this woman is unstable. Who in their right mind wants 14 children? It's dangerous to the babies and who will pay for the medical attention they will/and/or do need! Oh, I guess the TV sponsors she has been interviewing. She, reportedly, she sold pictures of the babies to the highest bidder! Perhaps she saw that reality show with the sextuplets and figured that it was a good way to make money. Not far off the puppy mill scenario. I could go on and on, but I'll stop here. Shameful. :headshake
Cheers
Ladies
_______________

Yep...lips blown for sure. ;)

Paraphrase from the news: money isn't important...it's just paper. All that matters is the children.

Huh? What are you going to feed them...platitudes?

I'm guessing babies?

If we feed babies babies, won't we get mad baby disease?

I'm with OC on this one. You can't force someone to abort their babies just as you can't force someone to keep them.

It doesn't mean I can't think she's made a bad decision though, but who knows. Maybe there's more corporations she can sue to support her family.

Maybe we get het up about that too. We just would discuss it in a different thread. You could start one, if it's not already under discussion :)

That is probably in the best interest of these children. Very sad.

sar/ Nah, I'm sure there is some money in the stimulus plan for her. /casm

It isn't a question of aborting them, she shouldn't have had them in the first place. She cannot care for them and has no money nor job to support them. This is like an extreme example of welfare fraud.
The working taxpayers will have to support them. Can you imagine
the childcare costs? What job can she get to cover that and then pay her bills and all on top of that?

There are a lot of other women and men out there on welfare with multiple children. Maybe not as extreme as this, but never the less, they're there.

You still can't force someone not to have a child, particularly if they're already pregnant.

What happens once the child is born is up to the parent to decide on. If there are systems in place in her society which will provide for the child then lucky for her. If there aren't, then she'd better get off her arse.

I doubt tax payers are going to have to spend much on this one though. She'll be milking it with the media for all it's worth, right throughout their lives.

I vote for a court ordered tubal ligation.

Unless you're on the jury, I don't think you get a vote. ;)

Lucky for her.

First of all, having that many embryos implanted should not BE a choice. How is that in any way a reproductive right? In addition, the woman already had SIX KIDS. I think she needs psychological help.

Nope.

ftr, I don't have ANY kids. I CHOSE not to have kids. Never wanted them. So OK. Me first.

When it comes to the WORLD POPULATION, and how that effects the quality of life for EVERYONE on this planet, especially in such a consumer-driven society that is fucking up the entire planet, then I have every right to voice my opinion, and in my opinion, it's selfish as HELL to want that many fucking kids. If you want that many kids, have two of your own, and then adopt some. Don't like my opinion, too bad. I'm entitled to it as much as you are entitled to yours.

The fact that there is arable land has nothing to do with the fact that the earth cannot sustain the amount of people that are already here, much less billions more of them.

Great. Without the earth there would BE no people. People are no more important than any other thing/being/plant on the planet. The earth and the ecosystems of the earth are based on a delicate balance. PEOPLE are the only creatures on the planet to mess up that balance.

Having 6 embryos implanted into your uterus is NOT a basic human right. Having 14 kids is NOT a basic human right. No one is saying people should not be able to have ANY kids. But for crying out loud, how is it a BASIC RIGHT to be able to have as many as you want?

I do not think embryos are babies. By your logic, do you take medicine when your sick? OMG! You're killing all those bacteria and viruses! How dare you kill life! :rolleyes:

It's not just people mate. Throughout history there have been events which have really fucked things up for the animals, as well as the people which people have had nothing to do with.

Cows too and all their "gas"

Well I was thinking about ice ages, and meteor showers etc.

Cows and their gas could be directly attributed to humans. There wouldn't be so many if not for us.

HA! California is broke, haven't you heard? They can't give people refunds for overpaying their taxes all year (which makes a GREAT argument for claiming 6 or 7 on your W2, and owing a little bit at the end of the year, instead of waiting for a refund). The state is actually paying clients with IOUs. So, who will end up paying for these kids? Everyone will.

Me 2.

Events, yes. But not other creatures.

There are always fluctuations in the food chain.

People aren't always the reason animals go extinct.

I didn't say that.

My mistake then. I thought that's what you meant when you mentioned the delicate balance of the ecosystem being upset.

It's cool. I know things go extinct all the time without human interference, but I would call that nature correcting itself. Humans still have a HUGE impact on not only animals and ecosystems, but also other resources, like the way we are strip-mining everywhere we can. It's one reason why I am against marble and granite countertops.

I'm with sugarpop on this one. I think even having five kids is way too many... or even two. When people say, "We're just replacing ourselves." I say, "Yes, but you're still here."

So how many kids should people have then HLJ? Do you think we should stop breeding all together? Or just have one? China tried that out of course, and look at the human rights issues that resulted from that.