Quote:
Originally Posted by TatumsMom  Honestly, I think there are a lot of assumptions going on here. Since she won't give her identity and no interviews have been done yet, how do we know if maybe her family is filthy rich and has plenty of money and resources to take care of all the children?? We don't know. The one little snippet I read was I believe her dad telling reporters that they have a much bigger house somewhere else that no one would be able to find them at. What does that mean? I'm just saying that everyone is jumping to the assumption that taxpayers will be paying for all of this. That still remains to be seen. Now personally, I'm leaning towards that thought too but I hope I'm wrong. |
That is great if they are filthy rich and have all the resources to take care of the babies. But you are saying what I think is trying to be said in this thread, if you cannot take care of the babies, maybe it is too many to have. If someone is going to have babies then "pawn" them off why have them? I get needing help and working and so on, but come on, when you have 6 little ones already, you should know very well that it takes a lot to be a mother to each of them. Why would you want to deny or better yet, limit the time you have to give to each child?