« | »

Octuplet Mom Got $165K For Disability

Somehow we almost missed this nugget from those keepers of the faith at the Associated Press:

In this Thursday, Jan. 29, 2009 file photo, the home of Nadya Suleman, who gave birth to octuplets is seen in Whittier, Calif.

Octuplet mom got more than $165K in disability

By SHAYA TAYEFE MOHAJER, Associated Press Writer Shaya Tayefe Mohajer, Associated Press Writer – Thu Feb 5

LOS ANGELES – A California agency says it paid the mother of newborn octuplets more than $165,000 in disability payments for an on-the-job back injury. The payments made over six years to Nadya Suleman were disclosed Thursday to The Associated Press following a public records request to the Department of Mental Health. The payments were made between 2002 and 2008, during which time the single mother gave birth to most of her six other children.

Suleman, who gave birth to the octuplets last week, was employed at a state mental health hospital from 1997 until December, when she resigned the position. Records show that for much of that time, however, she was unable to work.

In the Soviet Union they were called “hero mothers.”

But of course they had to work as well.

This article was posted by Steve on Friday, February 6th, 2009. Comments are currently closed.

16 Responses to “Octuplet Mom Got $165K For Disability”

  1. BumBastikk says:

    Yes, because taking care of 8 children during their early stages of development is oh-so easy. Do you even know how much it is going to cost this stupid lady? She needs all the help she can get… statistically, a full set of octuplets does not survive.

    • take_no_prisoners says:

      You’re kidding, right? Unless this lady is independently wealthy, she is a full time mom surviving on aid for dependent children a.k.a. welfare. Her only cost is lost opportunity, which she has gladly traded for a really big family. The real question is how much is this stupid lady going to cost us, the taxpayers. The federal and state AG’s should sue the fertility clinic that irresponsibly enabled this lady’s crazy fantasy, in order to recover the costs of raising this family.

    • Barbie says:

      I’m having a bit of trouble with this story.

      Can any woman have in utero fertilization regardless of her income/job status?
      Can a doctor refuse to do this procedure because the woman is ‘on disability’? I suspect he or she could be sued, is there a law?? I suspect it doesn’t matter as long as she can fork over the bucks – what if a zillionaire went in and had the same procedure done. Yes, the chldren of this woman will be on aid for dependent children – so will zillions of single, unemployed woman who have three or four children. I think she’s really wacko and selfish, but if the state disallowed ‘wacko women’ (and the wacko men who father them) to have children, well… And if a single woman had to be employed to have a bunch of kids…

    • proreason says:

      She is too disabled to work, but not too disabled to bear 8 children in addition to the 7 others she has.

      Give me a break.

      I don’t care whether she’s a mother or not, or whether it’s officially illegal or not.

      She’s a crook, plain and simple.

    • Barbie says:

      proreason, I do not disagree with you. I am not supporting or condoning this woman at all!!! (she has back problems, but she can still carry eight babies in her womb? How is THAT physically possible???). I don’t know how else to say it – people have illegitimate chlldren all the time and the state pays to support them – should not there be similar outrage any time a single, unemployed, woman (and the father) has a kid. I have family members who plan and save money to have their children. I’d like to see that become the ‘norm’ again.

    • proreason says:

      Barbie, I wasn’t going after you at all. You righfully pointed out some of the dilemnas posed by the the mother’s immoral actions. The author of the unqualified “oh-so easy” post is the one with the strange mind-set, in my opinion.

      By the way, I don’t oppose state aid to support the children, and I wish them well. It will take a lot of money and care to help them survive. But that such an incident can occur, and that the mother seems likely to end up wealthy because of her twisted act is a sad commentary on our sick culture.

      And now we can expect the copycats…..what then?

    • Barbie says:

      Thanks, proreason. I love everybody here at this site (group hug to all) :) and respect what ‘y’all have to say,

      I hear this woman being criticized and rightly so in my opinion. But the only thing that kept reproductive boundaries from devolving into total chaos was individual/societal feeling of ‘it’s not okay to have babies without being married’ – that is long since gone and I don’t know where the line will be drawn. You’re right, who’s the next copycat?

      I certainly don’t oppose state aid. I just wish people would take bearing children more seriously.

  2. beautyofreason says:

    I think she needs to consider adopting some of those newborns out. She’s emotionally unstable, unable to pay for them, and a single parent with nobody else to help her raise all 14 children. Her parents went bankrupt to pay for just 6 of them.

  3. Confucius says:

    $165,000 for her back? Chump change compared to what her uterus is going to make.

    I wonder who will play our brave, young, shy and ever-so-fertile heroine in the Lifetime movie “How I Labored My Way To The Top.”

    I’m thinking Whoopi Goldberg . . . .

    • U NO HOO says:


      She had Manuel conception. Or maybe manual. Who knows. Think of it as 8 that did not tunnel under our new border fence.

      She is simply anti-social. Just as the “man” who had a baby.

      Pray for the 8 pre-mature newborns who will have health problems all their lives.

      Bill O’ has it correct, child abuse.

      Picture the auctioneer at Guiness’ Book, i got 8, i got 8, do i hear 9, do i hear 9?

    • Confucius says:

      Thanks U NO HOO.

      I was under the impression Suleman was artificially inseminated at a sperm bank.

      In fact, she was in vitro fertilized after multiple attempts to get pregnant naturally and by artificial insemination.

      My bad.

  4. TwilightZoned says:

    $165K won’t even pay for ONE of those eight babies post-natal medical costs.

  5. caligirl9 says:

    This woman is also no doubt on social security disability, which you may apply for after you’ve been injured for more than one year.
    So, she was likely getting temporary total disability (TTD, worker’s comp disability payment) and social security, which also means a social security check for each kid.
    My best guess is she’s raking in $5K a month; the TTD is tax-free.

    • 1sttofight says:

      True, but 5 K is not going to go far with 14 kids under the age of 8.

      She is a lot like duhbama, she bite off a lot more than she can chew.

  6. caligirl9 says:

    1sttoflight, the $5K doesn’t include the eight new ones. Bet she does double, and she probably gets an SSI check for the autistic kid too.

    And remember she lives with her parents, no mortgage that we know of.

  7. canary says:

    Carrying that many babies, would hurt anyone’s back. Unbelievable.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »