O.K. I have to say something...

I often enjoy Bill O'Reilly's show, often agreeing with him, sometimes not. He does have the potential to go off the deep end on occasion. However, I think this time he has gone way too far!!

I am referring to the story surrounding Nadya Suleman and her 14 children. From the very beginning (even without all of the facts) O'Reilly has been railing about how these children would be neglected (I am from a large family, and by his reckoning one might think the Duggar children were neglected as well.) It seems like nearly everyone has missed the point that she didn't expect all of the embryos to implant, so I don't think her plan was to have 14 children. Like Nadya, I'd be unlikely to want to undergo selective reduction (of course, for the same reason I'd be reluctant to consider in vitro, period.)

I do think Nadya will need help. I'm also a firm believer that unless the kids are really and seriously endangered the state should stay out of the family. O'Reilly showed the home and said that based on that the state should step in. It was not neat and tidy and somewhat bare in a lot of ways, but hardly unhealthy looking. I suspect that O'Reilly has never seen photos of homes that have had children taken away due to the environment. I have. We were asked to look at the conditions of those homes in some of my early childhood education classes. There was open trash and waste on the floor, animal feces intermingled with bedding and clothes. Unlike Suleman's place, which had lots of open floor space and looked relatively clean - not spotless, not perfect, but hardly worth state intervention.

I might agree that Nadya is not totally living in reality here, but that alone does not mean her children will be abused. I think there is a right to feel that our taxes shouldn't be supporting this, but the children are here now. I have a hard time believing that the children's grandparents want these children released to the state.

Maybe someone should pay her for her story if they are so blasted worried about paying via taxes. But from what I am seeing now, people are suggesting she shouldn't be able to get financial help from anyone? Make up your mind, people.
Criminals have been paid for their story, is Nadya worse?

I suggest before O'Reilly makes such a radical suggestion, he should do a little research on the children's protective services in California. Why would anyone want to recommend that those children be placed in that system sans any real abuse?
Maybe if one of those 14 gets a bad foster care home, O'Reilly will be willing to take responsibility? Not holding my breath on that one.

I have rarely seen such judgmental hatred of someone as I have of Nadya. She has the children now. I think she needs support and help now more than condemnation.

Everyone of those precious children is a miracle. I hope they do well. Carting them all off to the state, is not a way to ensure that outcome.

--Melanie

P.S. I know there are many wonderful foster homes. However, I also have a friend who's kids were molested in foster care. Her kids were taken out of her home because of a medical condition and she had to fight hard to get them back. IT did permanent damage. You don't take kids away from their parents lightly, period!!