Wednesday, February 04, 2009

Baby Hoarding
Very little of the discussion of the mother of the latest octuplets addresses the obvious underlying psychological/psychiatric pathology at work in this woman. She is hoarding babies. Not the first pathological "gestator" but the first to employ high-tech science. The more I hear, the more I am appalled. And
not, for the most part, for the same objections that I've heard. My grandfather was one of 15 children. My own children have been born under some dubious financial circumstances. So who am I to judge? Let's see...

Children are a gift from God. No one has a right to a child. And if I am appalled, I cannot imagine how this situation must sound to those who are trying to live life "by the rules." The single person who has not yet, nor may never, find a spouse. A couple dealing with primary or secondary infertility. A couple navigating the path of adoption. And the media circus, free offers, book deals - and the babies! - go to someone who went out and took what she wanted. The virtuous life has its consolations and I certainly hope that they are there for those who are getting a bit tired of hearing about the fascinating Ms. Nadya Suleman.

Mothers are reluctant to turn on their children. We may tease, cajole, critique within the bosom of the family. But where the rest of the world is concerned, we're behind them. One hundred percent. OK, plus or minus 5 percentage points, but you know what I mean. Ms. Suleman's mother says that she appears "almost not normal." That says a lot. When your mother calls you "almost not normal" you are probably "absolutely, certifiably crazy."

And, have we, as a society, become so inured to the taking of innocent life that this woman’s one sound decision – to not opt for ‘selective reduction’ – becomes a heroic act? That she did one thing in the midst of a cascade of otherwise bad thinking – though with good effect – does not make her a heroine in my opinion. Based on the facts so far, her decision was more acquisitive than self-sacrificing. At this point, I have more sympathy with those mothers, flawed as their thinking may be, who elect selective reduction in the misguided hopes of optimizing the survival of the remaining fetuses. In my dimmest view, Ms. Suleman was merely rolling the dice in hopes of getting as many little ones as possible. The pro-life results were more or less accidental. So let's not beatify her as a pro-life heroine.

One unhappy columnist also wrote the spate of 'baby shows' into the blame equation, which is more of a stretch than I can make. There are sinister forces at play and unscripted big family reality shows are only most tangentially related.
The Duggars didn't cause this any more than cute kitten calendars cause people to fill their homes with 200 cats.


TS said...

There's no question she was irresponsible and wrongheaded, but it's surreal that the media crucified her (I watched ABC's morning show devote about 10 minutes to her) when you can kill your child and no one will say a word.

TS said...

The MSM's attitude: "better to kill the child than have one you can ill afford".

St. Isidore Foundation

I cannot live under pressures from patrons, let alone paint.
-- Michelangelo, quoted in Vasari's Lives of the Artists

Meet the Family...
Collect the Action Figures

Yes, three jade ribbons. 15 Years!
(not all the same child)
If you need to ask, you may not wish to know.

Site Meter