-
sponsorship
Kerry, though married heterosexuals without children seem
to have caused much Canadian ire, octomom Nadya Suleman, back in the
press because of Octomom: The Incredible Unseen Footage, a documentary about her that aired last night,
inspires even more furious levels of vitriol. But in Suleman's case,
the vitriol seems at least somewhat warranted ... (Read the rest of this post, or the whole conversation, in DoubleX.)
-
sponsorship
Holly's eloquent post is a testament to the difficulties that beset legislators and ordinary people when it comes to thinking through the ethics involved in making policy regarding human embryos, stem cells, IVF treatment, and reproductive freedom. Congrats on your twin boys, Holly, and I sympathize with the difficulty of figuring out what to do with those frozen embies. Studies have shown that disposition of embryos is difficult and even agonizing for IVF patients, who at the end of it all want to do the right thing by any leftover embryos, often feel quite attached to them and/or responsible for their welfare, aren't quite sure whether to think of them as tissue, future children, wards, or what, and up to now, at least, have found it often logistically hard to donate them for research, because so few labs could take them. That's why there are about 500,000 frozen IVF embryos in storage around the country. I love the Georgia bill's title, "ethical treatment of human embryos." Given the evolution of that bill, ethical here seems to be a concept that can accept editing.
The bill seems mostly to be part of a periodic conservative effort on the state level to pass some kind of law that will equate embryos with people. I think this particular bill must be the result of two tides washing together. One impetus of course is octo-mom Nadya Suleman, whose eight premature babies are the result of an IVF treatment in which six embryos were transferred. (That eight babies were born is a result of the curious fact that IVF embryos split in two more often than other embryos do.) The other was the Obama administration's loosening of rules on federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research. Talking to people who follow this closely, I gather that in Georgia the Senate tried to put significant restrictions on in vitro fertilization, with some of the limitations that alarmed Holly, most notably a directive that would have essentially done away with embryo freezing, all of which which seems to me a confused attempt at defeating both the Sulemans and stem-cell researchers of the world by forbidding the creation of excess embryos. Infertility patients protested; the bill was modified to direct that (as near as anybody can tell) embryos can only be created with the intent of growing them into children, not using them for research. Meanwhile the Georgia House passed a bill entitling human embryos to the same adoption status children have. The two bills are not identical, and it's not clear they will get resolved. Both endeavor to secure elevated, person-y status for an embryo. I think Holly is right to be confused, because when vague measures are passed equating embryos with children and permitting (but not, I think, compelling) embryo "adoption," it raises a host of questions about the pesky details. MUST embryos be adopted, if they are "children?" CAN embryos be frozen, if they are "children?" If Georgia does pass a law, those details might have to be resolved through litigation.
It should be noted that is yet another bill in Missouri, before the House. It would direct IVF doctors to adhere to the American Society for Reproductive Medicine's guidelines on how many embryos may be transferred. This is a sane proposal. I think infertility patients should have the freedom to freeze embryos and decide what to do with the leftover ones—I also think they should be counseled in advance on how hard it might be—but I don't think they should have the freedom to choose how many are transferred during IVF. Or maybe they could choose within a very narrow range—like, one vs. two—but they shouldn't be able to treat the petri dish like some kind of all-you-can-use buffet.
Holly, your post raises an interesting question. You point out that Suleman is a single mom, but not infertile. This implies that people who aren't infertile but want to use reproductive technology may be in a different ethical category than people who are infertile. Should the non-infertile people be regulated differently? Suleman is a persuasive case if anybody is (though some articles have suggested that her many issues actually include infertility) but this is difficult ethical terrain. What about single women who sense that they are on the verge of infertility and use sperm donation, maybe combined with IVF, to conceive before it's too late? Are they not legitimate patients? Then again, 67-year-old IVF moms (or whatever the world's record is, now) are technically infertile. It's hard to draw the line, which is probably why we've found it so difficult to regulate this arena. Nontraditional patients, who include single women, gay men, and lesbians, sometimes are leery of any government involvement or laws or whatnot, for fear they could be excluded. They probably aren't wrong to worry.
-
sponsorship
TMZ reports the San Fernando Valley-based adult production company Vivid Entertainment has offered Nadya Suleman $1 million to star in an adult movie. Taken at face value, this story is all kinds of wrong. How the story of a freak-mother has twisted itself into a tale of a would-be MILF? OctoMILF? is beyond the scope of my limited brain capacity. Whatever those parties involved or not involved have in mind, I know I do not want to see it. What the story does testify to truly is that the adult movie industry is suffering mightily during this recession if these are the lengths it has to go to to get attention these days. Once upon a time, XXX was outre. After a while, it went mainstream. Now, I guess it's just passe. For some reason, the conflation of OctoMom and pornography brings to my mind the ancient Japanese tradition of tentacle erotica and The Dream of the Fisherman's Wife, in which a woman finds herself in the erotic embrace of an octopus. I suppose these United States really have been pornified, when starring in an adult movie is the punch line to the new American Dream.
-
sponsorship
Bonnie, your continued fascination with octomom Nadya Suleman reminds me of the most recent headline-grabbing baby story: England is all atwitter with news of Alfie Patten, the 13-year-old father of newborn Maisie. Impregnating a fellow teen (the mother is 15-year-old Chantelle Steadman) in middle school isn't necessarily tabloid-ready news, but Alfie clocks in at around 4 feet tall and looks like he's about 8 years old. Alfie's notoriety might have just been another flash in the sordid tabloid pan, but according to the AP, his tween parenthood has reignited the teen pregnancy debate in the United Kingdom. Britain's teen pregnancy rate is among the highest in Europe, though it's still far lower than the United States'.
Alfie's story broke last week, and today the Daily Mail is reporting that the wee teen is demanding a paternity test on the advice of his father. In addition, two other minors have stepped up to claim paternity of Chantelle Steadman's baby girl. One could dismiss both Suleman's and Patten's stories as tabloid trash, but both tales have gained traction in the mainstream media. Richard Lawson at Gawker posits that celebrity baby mania has created a greedy gaping public maw that yearns to be filled with any and all baby news. I guess people need something to distract them from the economy until Brangelina decide to adopt a South American to round out their brood.
-
sponsorship
Although it seems to be having a few technical problems, Nadya Suleman, ad hoc CEO of the octuplets+6 media corporation, recently set up a tasteful portal to capture a revenue stream (accepts credit cards!) during the launch of her new family business. As Dahlia mentioned last week, the newly delivered mother of eight slightly resembles Angelina Jolie. In addition to their age and some physical similarities, both women also seem very comfortable with far more notoriety than a truly rational individual would ever want. (Is it a coincidence that Jolie's 1999 breakthrough performance as a mental institution patient in Girl, Interrupted was the same year as Suleman's injury at her California mental hospital job? The worker compensation settlements provided development capital for her new venture.) Giving a whole new meaning to the notion of sweat equity, to provide manpower for the company, the fecund executive also ovulated enough viable IVF embryos to incubate 14 of them to delivery from six pregnancies.
Speaking of compensation, NBC insists it paid "not a dime" to air the first post-birth Ann Curry interview with "Octomom," nor for any of the access and personal materials used in the network's "special Dateline" featuring her other six children. Nevertheless, I'd love to read the contract between NBC's legal department and Ms. Suleman's business managers, spelling out what everyone did agree to.
Anyway, I applaud the fledgling media dynamo's entrepreneurship and resourcefulness and hope for Suleman that she gets that cable reality show. Who knows? Maybe it will even get network interest from, say, NBC. As for Suleman's 14 fatherless offspring, they will, it seems, be joining the growing ranks of working realty actors that includes ratings magnet and 3-year-old son of the current Bachelor star Jason Mesnick. While the Pitt children, though perhaps too often pressed into service as accessories, are so far still unemployed.
-
sponsorship
Susannah, reading your post about plastic surgery I couldn't help but think of Octomom, who, with each passing revelation, seems to be even more deeply troubled than she first appeared. Though Nadya Suleman has denied adoring Angelina Jolie or having had plastic surgery, rumors contradicting both those statements persist. Most recently, the Daily Mail claimed Suleman sent Jolie some adoring fan letters; various acquaintances keep insisting she had her lips and nose done in order to resemble the world's hottest mama. It's creepy information to add to an already creeptastic situation: Is this a case of childbirth as plastic surgery, i.e., were the babies another medically driven way for Suleman to resmeble her hero? And is Suleman (or, say, the twins who underwent multiple surgeries to look like Brad Pitt on MTV's incredibly upsetting series I Want a Famous Face) inhabiting a triple consciousness, stuck between who she appears to be, who she wants to be, and who she really is?
-
sponsorship
Marjorie, I've been watching and rewatching the clip of a past-her-due date M.I.A. performing at the Grammys, and like Jessica am unable to muster up the same kind of ethical and fashion objections you express. Like Nina, I couldn’t get enough of M.I.A.’s stage strut or the male performers’ reactions to it. (Whether Kanye West’s frightened expression was made out of squeamishness or spotlight envy, one of the biggest egos in hip-hop was decisively outdone that night.)
And beyond the normal satisfaction I feel whenever female rappers, regardless of their crazy getups, are given the chance to showcase themselves, I actually saw M.I.A.’s performance as a feminist triumph. The ability of famous fetuses from Nadya Shuleman's brood to the latest Brangelina offspring to dominate headlines lends credence to the idea that a new mother’s career must re-center around her image as a mom to be a success. It was refreshing to see an expectant celebrity who didn’t fall victim to the tabloid characterization of pregnant women as either reformed sluts or pious earth mothers.
There’s also been plenty of judgment passed recently on mothers who work versus mothers who choose not to work, sacrificing themselves and their hard-won equal opportunities. Considering this, I guess it was inevitable for M.I.A. to take some heat for her choice of outfit and decision to perform but I was happy to see her making the choice to stay in her game.
-
sponsorship
Dahlia, I see the Angelina resemblance (morphed a bit with Janeane Garofolo). Both women have youth, beauty, and more notoriety than a sane person would ever dream of. But Nadya Suleman has 14 kids to support, no job, and no Brad Pitt. Possibly, the publicity machine will take her somewhere ("Tuesday a special Dateline: How are her other six children doing?"), but despite her chances for a cable reality show, I have a bad feeling her steely optimism will not be enough to carry her to a movie-star happy ending.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?