Octomom Homeless: Should She Lose Her Kids?


Octomom La Habra home

The Suleman home, for now

It's just more sad news from the life of "Octomom" Nadya Suleman, as she and her 14 children slip ever closer to an eviction from their 4-bedroom house on a cul-de-sac in La Habra, which is about 25 miles east of Los Angeles.

Suleman owes Amer Haddadin, the former owner of her home, a $450,000 payment that was actually due back in October. Haddadin agreed to a personal loan to Suleman's father Ed Doud since Nadya could not qualify for a traditional home loan at the time. In the spirit of helping out a fellow Arab in need, Haddadin, a Jordanian, agreed to help Doud, a Palestinian.

Unfortunately, that spirit of do-gooding backfired and has Haddadin hurting for the cash he's owed. Now he's ready to evict Suleman and her family as early as this Friday. But the question is -- is Octomom really broke or not?

Haddadin says, "I think they have money, but they are hiding the money," but I think this might just be wishful thinking on Haddadin's part. After the single Octomom's attention-grabbing birth to the eight kids she opted for through IVF atop the six kids she had already, also through IVF, her failed attempts at money-making fame -- reality shows, books, etc. -- haven't resulted in any cash flow. I don't think Nadya's hiding any money.

Unfortunately for Nadya's dad, however, he's a joint owner on the house, which means he's liable for the past-due payments. But Dad and Mom, now divorced, have already filed for bankruptcy and have their own financial issues. Dad even moved back to his native Iraq to be a translator in order to support Nadya and her kids financially.

So is Dad going to be able to bail Nadya out before it's too late? Or will Dad let the house go into foreclosure? Will Nadya move back in with her mother? Will her mother refuse to let her (cause I would)? Should Nadya's parents be responsible? I mean, they raised her after all. Who is ultimately responsible for this family? If not her family, then who?

If Nadya's family cannot or refuse to bail her out again, what happens when she and her 14 children become homeless? Will they end up in a homeless shelter? Is there a homeless shelter equipped for a 15-person family? Will her kids then go into the foster care system? Should they go into the system? Will they be better off?

These are all really tough questions but reasonable ones, especially in these tough economic times. Families with far less children are having trouble making ends meet. So who is responsible for this family? Should Nadya's parents be responsible? I mean, they raised her after all. They are her family. Shouldn't we take care of our own?

Or is this a catastrophic situation we need to shoulder as a society? After all, didn't we ultimately fail Nadya by allowing her to conceive all these children without the means -- emotional or financial -- to care for them?

Maybe we should send the bill -- welfare or otherwise -- to her IVF doctor Michael Kamrava, the ultimate criminal in this case. What doctor in their right mind would implant so many embryos in a single patient despite her financial situation? It's not for the good of the mother's health or the kids'.

What do you think? What will or should happen to the Suleman clan if they're evicted this week?


Image via Associated Press

celebrity homes, home finances


To add a comment, please log in with

Use Your CafeMom Profile

Join CafeMom or Log in to your CafeMom account. CafeMom members can keep track of their comments.

Join CafeMom or Log in to your CafeMom account. CafeMom members can keep track of their comments.

Comment As a Guest

Guest comments are moderated and will not appear immediately.

jmtmn jmtmn

If she can't afford to put a roof over her children's heads than she should lose them just like other unfit parents. I don't care how much you love and want your children- they are not a right, they are a privledge and if you can't care for them than you should suffer, not them.

nonmember avatar nonmember

Society didn't fail her because society was not asked if it was okay for her, an unemployed woman with obvious mental problems, to get fertility treatments to have 14 children. I sure as hell would have said no to her being allowed to do that. The doctors who, knowing her situation and how many children she already had on welfare, should get to foot the bills. These doctors might think twice if there were actual consequences for their lack of intelligence in cases like this one.

RanaA... RanaAurora

She's no different than anyone else -- she must lay in the bed she made. Those kids need a stable family. She is not it.

mommy... mommy.loves.2

atm my husband and I cant afford to put a roof over our childrens heads.. does that mean we should loss them as well? Obviously you have no idea what it means to be actualy poor.. Im not talking about what most people think is poor (having a few thousand or even hundren sittin in a bank account) im talking about working all week just to pay rent and electric and $20 worth of food to last all week. maybe you should sit back and have some compassion and realize just how POOR people actualy are! yeah.. and there are some of us that dont use government help!

mommy... mommy.loves.2

I was referring to jtmtmn's comment btw. I totaly agree that Suleman is a nut job that shouldnt have been allowed to have so many children! 0_0

nonmember avatar Melanie Gancarz

If you can't afford to provide for children then you make sure you do not have any.

nonmember avatar Pickles

In all the drama that Nadya Suleman loves to create for her own financial benefit, let's not lose sight of the fact that this woman PLANNED all of this as part of a fame and money-making scam. She spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on IVF when she was unemployed and her only source of income was the disability payment she received for a back injury that she claimed was so disabling she could not do any work at all. Yet, she was well enough to put her legs in the stirrups to artificially create 14 children. Who knows where she got the money to fund this nightmare. What we do know is that she did it to get a lucrative reality show and she used 14 helpless human lives to further her own selfish, narcissistic, greedy goals. There is no comparison between the monstrous situation Nadya Suleman created and normal families or real mothers. 1) No, Nadya Suleman should not be given any more "assistance", she should not be allowed to profit from her scam for even one more day and yes, she should lose the human hostages she created and who she continues uses to avoid having to suffer any moral or legal consequences of her actions. 2.) No, normal families who are struggling to support themselves should not lose their children -- those families are entitled to our both our sympathy and our assistance. It isn't hard for the average, sane, responsible, moral person to tell the difference between Nadya Suleman and pretty much EVERYONE else.

nonmember avatar Pickles

P.S. to MommyLoves2: I am also going to assume that you are doing the best you can for the children you love and that you are not squandering your family's financial resources on plastic surgery and cosmetic procedures and designer clothes for yourself instead of meeting the basic needs of your family as Nadya Suleman is.

hotic... hoticedcoffee

I think she should lose those kids to the state.  She took drastic measures to bring children into the world that she couldn't afford without the exploitation money she was hoping to get.  She's bankrupted her parents.  Society didn't fail her, because society didn't help her conceive those kids.  I think the doctor should be fined and his license to practice medicine revoked, but I don't believe he is financially responsible for those kids.   

Like someone already said, if you can't afford your feed and house your children, and your parents/siblings/relatives/friends aren't willing or able to help you out, you ARE unfit to be a custodial parent because you are unable to provide the basics of protection from the elements, and food. 

Fallaya Fallaya

It's hard for some people to believe that she is actually a good mom.  If she was such a bad mother, why haven't her kids been taken away by CPS before?  


I'm sure someone will help her out.  No child deserves to live on the streets.  I'd help her if I could afford it.  People may not like HER, but they shouldn't take it out on the children.  And the children shouldn't be taken from their mom just because she may have to be homeless for a time.  I used to work in shelters, and there were a lot of homeless families there.  

1-10 of 18 comments 12 Last