Mother has 13 children in care and is pregnant with 14th [Archive]

Lace Neil Singer

07-30-2009, 10:54 PM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/family/5935665/Mother-whose-13-children-were-taken-into-care-is-pregnant-again.html

Words fail me. O_O Why oh why aren't we allowed to forcibly sterilise selfish bitches like this woman?! She's obviously not fit to be a mother, and doesn't give a damn about her kids; she just wants to pop kids out til she's allowed to keep one... which, judging by her attitude, will happen when Satan skates to work. :eek:

Flyndaran

07-30-2009, 11:14 PM

Sadly, because eugenics has never been used properly, so most consider it evil by association.

Nyoibo

07-31-2009, 02:06 AM

I believer the response "fuckin' chavs" fits here, we can only hope her womb falls out along with number 14.

Flyndaran

07-31-2009, 02:22 AM

I believer the response "fuckin' chavs" fits here, we can only hope her womb falls out along with number 14.

I think the record for woman giving birth to most babies is a 69. Yeah, quite a few multiple babies at a time, but DAMN!

Greenday

07-31-2009, 02:22 AM

Selfish bitch.

That's all I have to say about that.

RecoveringKinkoid

07-31-2009, 03:19 AM

We had a human baby machine using the daycare my daughter was at back when I was working. She had "only" three and was pregnant with a fourth by the time we all parted ways. She was in her late teens or early twenties, and basically got knocked up as soon as her cycle returned to normal after each subsequent child. She needed to have her knees fixed together with bailing wire or something.

When the two year old in my child's class came to school with a black eye, DSS stepped in. So the two year old and her three year old sister were taken in my their aunt and the baby was taken by the state. Apparently, Cat In Heat girl was more interested in staying with Baby Abuser boyfriend than she was in mothering her babies.

The two year old would run to me and my husband. She actually called me "mama" because I would linger at the school playing with her and holding her and paying attention to her. Evidently, she didn't get that at home. I would have adopted that baby, had that been an option. I mean that 100%.

Then the Aunt moved them to a different daycare that was closer to her home. I came in and they told me the child was gone.

I'm really kind of glad I didn't know she'd be leaving.

I wonder how many babies Cat in Heat girl has had by now? I know this...if I ever see her again, I'm going to break her fucking jaw.

fireheart17

07-31-2009, 05:11 AM

I think the record for woman giving birth to most babies is a 69. Yeah, quite a few multiple babies at a time, but DAMN!

Yep, some Russian lady waaay back. Although am I the only one who's reminded of the "Third World"sketch from Monty Python's Meaning Of Life?

In regards to the OP though, what the heck is wrong with her?!

Savannah

07-31-2009, 06:53 AM

Four had a rare degenerative condition, and one has since died.

I don't care what she says. She obviously doesn't have the welfare of any future kids she might have in mind. (Or else she needs genetics lessons.)

Talon

07-31-2009, 03:23 PM

Le Fuck?!

I would never advocate forced sterilization, but this... creature sorely tempts me.

I'd compare her to this (http://www.solarnavigator.net/films_movies_actors/film_images/Aliens_mother_queen_anguish.jpg) mother, but no. She would die for her young, I doubt this "human" would even work up a decent sweat.

Flyndaran

07-31-2009, 05:00 PM

Having children when still recovering from giving birth dramatically increases the risk for all involved. Or as one comedian put it, "The uterus is not a clown car."

tropicsgoddess

07-31-2009, 06:15 PM

Jesus Christ! That's just beyond ludicrously selfish! Why is it that the selfish idiots like her can pop out babies like no tomorrow but the good ones can't?!!

DesignFox

07-31-2009, 07:25 PM

Can't the doctor who delivers the baby "slip" and cut out her uterus or something???

Jeez.

Selfish doesn't even begin to cover it. This lady needs a good smack with a clue by four. And until she stops popping babies she needs her benefits taken away. Fuck that shit. You don't need to be able to walk to work. If you can't work, you shouldn't be creating more mouths to feed.

Flyndaran

07-31-2009, 08:33 PM

Can't the doctor who delivers the baby "slip" and cut out her uterus or something???
...

Yikes! I hope you aren't really advocating aggravated bodily injury.

BlaqueKatt

07-31-2009, 10:10 PM

Can't the doctor who delivers the baby "slip" and cut out her uterus or something???.

well I've known of a girl who had 3 kids she tried to starve to death because "they reminded her of their fathers that didn't marry her" when she went in to deliver the fourth there was some "horrible complication" that required an immediate hysterectomy-the "horrible complication" was the doctor didn't want her trying to starve any more children*. So yeah she gets the "right" doctor that knows the history something may "go wrong".

*because in my lovely state just because you abused/killed one of your previous children you get to keep any you have after that because "assuming this one won't be taken care of is wrong". Heck babies born drug addicted are sent home with their junkie mothers.

anriana

07-31-2009, 10:36 PM

If that's actually what happened then that doctor should lose their license.

BroomJockey

07-31-2009, 10:41 PM

If that's actually what happened then that doctor should lose their license.

To argue the point, one could say the doctor should get a damned medal for preventing a serial attempted murder from creating more victims.

DesignFox

07-31-2009, 10:48 PM

Yikes! I hope you aren't really advocating aggravated bodily injury.

No, I'm not advocating assault.

well I've known of a girl who had 3 kids she tried to starve to death because "they reminded her of their fathers that didn't marry her" when she went in to deliver the fourth there was some "horrible complication" that required an immediate hysterectomy-the "horrible complication" was the doctor didn't want her trying to starve any more children*. So yeah she gets the "right" doctor that knows the history something may "go wrong".

<snip>

But at the same time, I can't say I have a problem with this...

Tell the patient they have a horrible life threatening problem, and take out the waterworks.

*sigh* I know how horribly wrong that is, but I can't help but think it's justified.

BlaqueKatt

07-31-2009, 11:50 PM

*sigh* I know how horribly wrong that is, but I can't help but think it's justified.

yeah-it's a moral grey area-considering the only thing she was concerned about afterwords was "how was she going to find someone to marry her if she wasn't pregnant"-yes she fully believed you got someone to marry you by getting pregnant-mainly because "that's what happens on soap operas". She was pretty much a sociopath.

She ended up in jail for check fraud-the kids were all adopted by one family-they couldn't really afford the last one-but didn't want to "split up the set" as it were.

anriana

08-01-2009, 01:00 AM

To argue the point, one could say the doctor should get a damned medal for preventing a serial attempted murder from creating more victims.

One could say that, but I bet they wouldn't be a medical board.

BroomJockey

08-01-2009, 02:41 AM

One could say that, but I bet they wouldn't be a medical board.

At the same time, I doubt a medical board would revoke his licence, either.

Flyndaran

08-01-2009, 04:24 AM

At the same time, I doubt a medical board would revoke his licence, either.

If he really did a medically unnecessary organ removal, then he darn well better get his license revoked.

tabbyblack13

08-01-2009, 04:25 AM

I'd compare her to this (http://www.solarnavigator.net/films_movies_actors/film_images/Aliens_mother_queen_anguish.jpg) mother,

Talon, it is a good thing I don't drink around my computer.

She had 13 other children and thinks that Child services will let her keep the 14th one. As much as I don't believe that you should sterilize people unwilling, I am willing to reconsider my point of view on this one. She is also on disabilities because of an accident. Now she has a hard time walking, how can she take care of an active child?

Flyndaran

08-01-2009, 04:27 AM

...Now she has a hard time walking, how can she take care of an active child?

What, you don't think people in wheelchairs should be allowed to keep their children?

anriana

08-01-2009, 04:31 AM

If he really did a medically unnecessary organ removal, then he darn well better get his license revoked.

Thank you.

Doctors aren't there to practice vigilante medicine, no matter how beneficial they deem it to be.

BroomJockey

08-01-2009, 04:50 AM

Doctors aren't there to practice vigilante medicine, no matter how beneficial they deem it to be.

You're right, but in a case like that the important things to keep in mind are these:

1. Doctors are still people.

2. Doctors licences are revoked by other doctors.

3. It takes 2 doctors in most places to be able to sue another doctor for malpractice.

4. Doctors don't like to rat on other doctors. It makes them easier targets as well.

5. In a case like this, a doctor might let his agreement with the morality of stopping an abuser/repeated attempted killer/etc override the specific ethics of the profession.

So, should it be this way? No. Is it this way? Probably at least part of the time.

Flyndaran

08-01-2009, 06:00 AM

You're right, but in a case like that the important things to keep in mind are these:

1. Doctors are still people.

2. Doctors licences are revoked by other doctors.

3. It takes 2 doctors in most places to be able to sue another doctor for malpractice.

4. Doctors don't like to rat on other doctors. It makes them easier targets as well.

5. In a case like this, a doctor might let his agreement with the morality of stopping an abuser/repeated attempted killer/etc override the specific ethics of the profession.

So, should it be this way? No. Is it this way? Probably at least part of the time.

1. No one is arguing against that.

2-3. Not if they are found guilty of a violent criminal act. No sane person would let them keep their licenses.

4. Covering up a crime is criminal itself. I bet a ballsy prosecutor could make them roll.

5. A doctor could do a lot of things incluiding outright murder. That doesn't make them any better than common criminals.

Nyoibo

08-01-2009, 06:15 AM

One could say that, but I bet they wouldn't be a medical board.

Officially no, but I bet that he wouldn't be buying rounds at the bar that night.

Lace Neil Singer

08-01-2009, 10:14 AM

What, you don't think people in wheelchairs should be allowed to keep their children?

Strawman. This woman has been proved, time and time again, by social services to be unfit to take care of her children. Not cuz she's disabled, but cuz she's an unfit mother. Comparing her to a disabled, but loving mother, is monstrous.

Talon

08-01-2009, 03:46 PM

Talon, it is a good thing I don't drink around my computer.

Ooh my first rule#1 violation-inducing post? *Giggles like a schoolgirl* :)

BroomJockey

08-01-2009, 04:05 PM

4. Covering up a crime is criminal itself. I bet a ballsy prosecutor could make them roll.

Right. And the lawyer went to med school... when? If you're prosecuting a doctor for doing something medically unnecessary, you still need a doctor on the stand to actually say that it was. Otherwise, there's no proof, unless you have the doctor on tape saying "I must stop this woman. I'm going to remove her uterus, and make it look necessary!"

Flyndaran

08-01-2009, 04:17 PM

Right. And the lawyer went to med school... when? If you're prosecuting a doctor for doing something medically unnecessary, you still need a doctor on the stand to actually say that it was. Otherwise, there's no proof, unless you have the doctor on tape saying "I must stop this woman. I'm going to remove her uterus, and make it look necessary!"

Lawyers buy expert testimony all the time. That wouldn't be a problem. You seem to be supposing a whole conspiracy, and those rarely stay secret. Not every doctor want's to cover up such horrible assault. Some have little things called consciences.

BroomJockey

08-01-2009, 06:02 PM

You seem to be supposing a whole conspiracy,

Not really. Studied self-interest. Any doctor who gives up another in court will have it reciprocated if he ever fucks up. They all stick together, no one gets dinged.

Flyndaran

08-01-2009, 06:09 PM

Not really. Studied self-interest. Any doctor who gives up another in court will have it reciprocated if he ever fucks up. They all stick together, no one gets dinged.

I doubt they would stick together that much for willful crimes. Mistakes maybe, but crimes? I doubt it. It would take eveyrone involved from doctor down to orderly to keep quiet about it.
I may have a hint more faith in people than you... which is something I never thought I would say.

BlaqueKatt

08-01-2009, 06:47 PM

plus it's not like they keep removed organs around for years-they're incinerated as medical waste(though I really wanted to keep my tonsils)-all he'd have to say is "she was bleeding out the only way to save her life was to remove her uterus*"-how do you disprove that? You can't-women lose a lot of blood during childbirth.

*if the uterus doesn't "firm up" within a certain timeframe after giving birth you can die from the resulting hemorrhaging.

Flyndaran

08-02-2009, 04:07 AM

tabbyblack13

08-04-2009, 02:46 AM

What, you don't think people in wheelchairs should be allowed to keep their children?

I think that if you make an effort the keep up then there isn't any problem. Many times people in wheelchairs also have a support base of friends and family to help out. I have also seen people in wheelchairs move fast when they wanted to.

My concern is that she is disabled and now wants to have child 14 when all previous 13 have been taken away. I also wonder if if she is physically capable of carrying this child full term.

DesignFox

08-04-2009, 03:28 AM

That does make me remember how hysterectomies used be disgustingly common. That particular operation is given much more scrutiny now a days.

Bwah? I never thought hysterectomies were common...I think it's pretty standard for doctors NOT to sterilize young women, even if they want it with all their heart and soul!

In my entire 27 years on this earth, I've only met 1 woman who told me she's had a hysterectomy...and she had some serious issues that led to that. I know other women with terrible reproductive health problems who still don't have their organs removed. They are on birth control, different medications, or seek alternative medicines to help ease their pain/other symptoms.

Couples I know of who wanted to stop having children after a certain point...always the man got snipped. The women didn't get tubes tied or things removed.

I guess anecdote doesn't equal evidence...but still....

AdminAssistant

08-04-2009, 04:03 AM

I guess anecdote doesn't equal evidence...but still....

I never knew of hysterectomies being common. Now, Mom had to have bladder surgery and since she a) had gone through menopause and b) is a breast cancer survivor, and therefore prone to uterine cancer, the surgeon basically did a hysterectomy at the same time. He would've had to move the uterus out of the way anyway, so, with Mom's permission, he just cut it out.

Now, I'm generally not a fan of prophylactic masectomies/hysterectomies. And a doctor 'accidentally' tying a woman's tubes because she is an irresponsible mother is....well, that's very fuzzy moral ground. Frankly, the doctor's not the one to make that decision.

Flyndaran

08-04-2009, 04:18 AM

Hysterectomies were too common in the 70s and 80s. Maybe a bit before most posters' times. That is in relation to how many were really necessary, so common is relative.

anriana

08-04-2009, 02:59 PM

Flyndaran

08-04-2009, 03:31 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization#United_States

Sterilization of some sort was also common in the beginning of the century, although it doesn't say what method was used for females.

That too, but I meant the simple lack of caring that caused doctors to do the simpler thing of total organ removal rather than something that actually took skill and time.

BroomJockey

08-04-2009, 03:47 PM

the simpler thing of total organ removal rather than something that actually took skill and time.

Yeah. I mean, just the other day, I took out my own pancreas. Thing was just slowing me down. Snip and a bit of sewing and I was fine. Dunno what they need all that schoolin' for just to take out an organ. :D :p I keeed, I keeed.

Flyndaran

08-04-2009, 08:51 PM

Yeah. I mean, just the other day, I took out my own pancreas. Thing was just slowing me down. Snip and a bit of sewing and I was fine. Dunno what they need all that schoolin' for just to take out an organ. :D :p I keeed, I keeed.

Ooh, caught me in a hyperbole. That is a bad habit of mine. If I've said it once, I've said it a million... there I go again. :)

But it is much easier to remove cats' uteruses and ovaries than "tying" their tubes.

tabbyblack13

08-05-2009, 02:09 AM

But it is much easier to remove cats' uteruses and ovaries than "tying" their tubes.

If they still have their ovaries they still go into heat.

There was a time that some doctors sterilized poor African-American women after they gave birth without consent from the women. It was rare but it did happen.