Last week in California, a woman gave birth in 8 babies. And by gave birth, what we really mean is that she had a c-section because humans are not animals designed to give birth to 8 babies at once.
The woman already had 6 children. She’s a single mother. She conceived all of her babies through in vitro fertilization.
And now America debates: How many children should a woman have?
And once again, America is talking about events that transpire between a woman’s thighs.
If this woman had birthed 14 babies naturally and without fertility help, people may raise a few eyebrows about the fun she must have been having at night but America would not be discussing her reproductive decisions. But her children appeared with the aid of fertility drugs and that’s where this gets messy. Why did she feel the need to be pregnant once again after already having 6 children? She was a single woman, she was pursuing her Master’s degree in counseling, she was living with her parents.
While the whole situation makes me shake my head in disbelief, I still must ask the question: since when is the number of babies a woman has any of your business? The last time I checked, that was an issue between the mother, the family, the doctor and God.
Yes, there is a concern if the state is picking up the cost of the children. Neonatal care for 8 babies does not come cheap. Diapers are not cheap. Formula does not come cheap (let’s face it: she doesn’t have the milk production that would happen if the mom had 8 nipples). Babies are expensive. And yes, there is a concern from the insurance company regarding the cost of hospital care and what they are legally obligated to pay.
But beyond that, why is America concerned? Is it genuine compassion and concern? Or is it, once again, a side effect of our voyeuristic tendencies and our chronic know-it-all behavior?
My belief is the latter.
But here’s the big problem with our behavior in this situation: by sticking our noses in another families business, we make it easier for our own lives to be invaded. Sure, the woman has 14 children. Maybe that does make her an easy target. But what happens further on down the line?
Could I someday be criticized because I want to have four kids? Would that become the government’s business, the community’s business, your business? Would someone outside of my family with no knowledge of my health or my ability to parent be able to make a decision about what was too much?
Or a scarier thought: could it someday be determined that you were not having enough children? Could the government or the insurance company someday inform you that you are expected to have three children when you really want one child or no child? By opening the door, this could go both ways although one way is much harder to comprehend.
Really, this situation has nothing to do with a woman in California who opted to have 14 children. We want to say it is to ease our minds but we’re only fooling ourselves.
If we are really honest, if we really want to think critically about the situation, we have to realize that this has everything to do with reproductive rights. The conversation is taking place in a different package than Roe vs. Wade but the heart of the conversation is the same. We’re okay talking about abortion these days even though it can still get a bit heated at times but we’re okay with it because we know what to expect. Person A is going to talk about how life begins at conception and Person B is going to talk about it is the woman’s body that matters and then Person C is going to say it is not a decision she could make but she will never restrict another woman’s right to make that decision.
So is it anyone’s business if a woman decides to use help to get pregnant by utilizing fertility treatments? And is it anyone’s business if she becomes the mother of a multiple birth? As a society, do we want to create a minimum or maximum number of children a family is expected to have? And does a single woman have a right to be a family with her children? Or is a family just a mother, a father and children? Where does this leave single parent households, grandparents raising their children’s children, gay couples and the polygamists?
Jeff said...
1While I generally agree with most of your comments, the reason it’s our “business” is that when a single mother has such a large number of children, it’s the taxpayer’s money that actually supports them.
Our tax dollars support the welfare system that will likely be the primary financial funding for these large families. Also consider the fact that children raised in this kind of environment are far more likely to be a burden on society, costing us even more money (e.g., prison).
For now, there are plenty of reason’s it’s my business when people make these kinds of decisions. When there’s a way people can make decisions I don’t agree with and it doesn’t have an impact on my freedoms, I will cease to consider it my business.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not anti-welfare altogether. There are plenty of people in this country who, through little or no fault of their own, are in situations where they simply cannot support their own families. These people need, and should receive our help. (Though whether it’s the role of the government or private organizations to care for them is a whole other topic. (Yes, I’m a Libertarian)).
02/1/09 2:17 PM | Comment Link
Dorie said...
2@Jeff – I’m actually fairly firmly located in the anti-welfare camp. And if this is really a conversation about welfare, that’s fine, but I don’t believe it is. If the woman was married, had fertility help and still needed welfare after having 8 babies, would this this topic still be discussed? I’m not so sure it would be. Ty Pennington would show up at their door and Extreme Home Makeover would whisk away their housing problems with a touching story about their struggle.
Do we feel more entitled to discuss this situation because it does not fall into the description of the typical American family?
02/1/09 7:14 PM | Comment Link
Kathrin said...
3This is quite unsettling. It’s a slippery slope debating how many children a woman should have. The next step is outright regulation.
I think we are vilifying a symptom of a greater problem. Family planning took a severe blow during the Bush years. We need to return to educating women on responsible reproductive options and planning (in broad terms).
As a society, we are far too nosy about other peoples’ business. There is a difference between being nosy and having discussions around communal or societal responsibilities.
02/1/09 9:05 PM | Comment Link