Should you have to be
rich to have kids?
By now you probably know that Nadya Sulman, the 33-year-old California woman who gave birth to octuplets, is single and unemployed. She lives with her parents, and she underwent fertility treatments to get pregnant. In addition to the eight babies she had last week (and plans to breastfeed), she has six other kids ages 2 to 7. But Sulman has big plans.
She hopes to start a career as a television childcare expert. And according to the Times of London, she's already trying to get two million dollars for television interviews (with Oprah and Diane Sawyer) and commercial endorsements. Her publicist says she's getting offers for book deals, reality shows, magazine interviews, and documentaries. Any money Sulman makes would go toward supporting her kids.
Normally, when someone gives birth to multiples, companies shower them with free gifts—diapers, baby food, even SUVs. But so far this mom isn't getting anything (which means neither are her babies). The news that Sulman is a single mom who had fertility treatments after she already had six kids at home seems to be turning people off.
Without money from interviews and free gifts from corporations, Sulman, who was already feeling crunched financially (she filed for bankruptcy in 2007), will feel it even more with eight little babies—unless of course one of those potentially lucrative deals works out. This prompted lilsugar to ask "Should Women Have Babies When They Can't Afford Them?"
What do you think? Should Sulman have had these babies if she couldn't afford them? Is it a good idea to put her kids on TV or in a documentary to make money to support them?
Going to baseball games
Riding bike rides in the nice weather
Playing outside after work/school
Going for walks outside