<p>From the Larry King interview w/ Joann Killeen:</p>
<p>King: What about the stories that she’s obsessed with Angelina Jolie – even had work done on her face to look like her more?</p>
<p>Killeen: You know, I asked her about that. And she just laughed. She said remember, with the octuplets, I put on 100 pounds – a hundred pounds of extra body weight for my babies. So of course things are going to look a little different than they did when I first started.</p>
<p>King: She does look like her.</p>
<p>Killeen: Well, I think hair and makeup, you could probably look like anybody you’d want to look like. She has said to me she has not had plastic surgery of any kind. And so I have to believe what my client tells me to be factually correct.</p>
<p>What PR-speak. I wish my lips plumped up instead of my *** when I had my babies…</p>
<p>Yes, Grandma has been taking care of the older 6, and I am sure she is very attached. That doesn’t mean that she isn’t hanging on by her teeth. She may not be able to go on much longer. Just to be able to take the older 6 to the park, something that I could manage with my two, would be next to impossible for a grandma to do. She’d need a vehicle that holds 7, and she’d need to somehow be able to get all the kids into the car, then watch them all at the park (imagine 6 kids running in 6 different directions) and then get them all back into the car. This doesn’t even consider bringing diapers, extra clothes, snacks, drinks, keeping special track of the autistic child and the youngest ones. </p>
<p>And we all agree that kids should be taken to a park on occasion. How would she manage to get them to the doctor, or go to the food store or any of the many places you need to go as a sole caregiver. I am 61 and I can’t imagine doing any but a very small part of what would need to be done for just the older 6. The six need more than just one grandma to take care of them in the way all children deserve.</p>
<p>No, it’s even better than PR-speak. Octomom said she “didn’t have any plastic surgery.” Collagen injections in the lips are not plastic surgery.</p>
<p>It’s the same as when she said she wasn’t receiving any welfare. Oh, just food stamps and SSDI for three of her children. But that’s not technically “welfare.”</p>
<p>zoos-
Have you held to your promise and pushed your mom around when she ws 46? I’d love it if someone pushed me aroudn in a chair, and I passed 46 a long time ago! </p>
<p>My s’s procalmation (to care for us in our old age) was dated 4/96 . Can I start collecting now? I have definitely hit old age!!</p>
<p>And agreed about the PR or Nadya spin. Her lips and nose are not natural. Of course some might feel that having octuplets isnt natural either… All done with the help of a physician’s hand.</p>
<p>According to Entertainment Tonight, Nadya had breast augmentation surgery as a teenager. They also claim she hasnt had sexual relations in 6 years. TMI</p>
<p>I don’t know why her sex life would be anyone’s business. But in any case, she is not gonna have much time for any in the coming years. And besides the time issue, I wonder how or where she will be alone long enough? (EDIT…I mean alone with a significant other!)</p>
<p>I don’t get it…is this psychiatrist someone who has treated Nadya? if so, I get it. If not, I don’t see how she can build a case simply by observation of what is reported.</p>
<p>Also, could you cite where the quote comes from?</p>
<p>The quote is from ETonline. I stumbled across it when I was looking to confirm the “gameplan for the pregnancy” line.
As for the psychiatrist, there are psychologists and psychiatrists (not saying specifically this person, but in general) who do “profiling” or what is referred to as a “psychiatric autopsy”, where they can use historical and public information as well as what data is available (in this case, records from Nadya’s WC evaluations) to indentify personality characteristics, behaviors, disorders, etc. They di it, for example, when trying to create hypotheses to fine serial killers, etc. Again, I am NOT relating this to Nadya, but just saying it isnt that far fetched to generate diagnostic hypotheses based on the information available.</p>
<p>Many posters here have said they hope the California’s DFACS stepped in to look out for the best interests of the babies. This complaint filed just ensures that they will be involved.</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure that the DFACs will be involved in some capacity to look out for the best interests of these children whether or not this psychiatrist who you say is not Nadya’s treating doctor, files a complaint.</p>
<p>I have no idea if she is Nadya’s treating Dr. or not (though gee-- a Beverly Hills psychiatrist-- that would fit the profile ) but if in fact she was her treating Dr and she had reason to believe the kids were being neglected (or the new ones might be), if the laws in CA are similar to other states, she would have an ethical obligation to report this to the DFACS. Thats not a fun thing to have to do, but licensure requires that DFACS be contacted when there is a strong reason to believe children are being abused or neglected.</p>
<p>jym, that’s a different story entirely which is why I asked who this psychiatrist was. The way I read the excerpt you posted (I did not see the entire article), it appeared that this was a pyschiatrist on the outside looking in based on reports and filing a complaint which I don’t see the same as if the complaint is from the treating psychiatrist.</p>
<p>In any case, I still maintain that the DFCS will get involved in at least overseeing that the kids are properly cared for. That doesn’t mean they are abused but clearly there are concerns even an outside observer can see that would need someone to look after the interests of those kids. Even a psychologically fit mom with no spouse/partner and no income would have difficulty caring for 14 kids under age 8, some with special needs, and where 8 are all infants, even preemies. So, she has many issues that would be difficult for anyone in these circumstances, and that is before adding in her fitness psychologically.</p>
<p>I agree… it was certainly probable that DFACS would step in before the kids are discharged (any reasonable discharge planning under such circumstances with multiple kids, many with potential health issues and/or special needs will have social services involved not to mention FCS, especially in a hight profile case.) This psychiatrists complaint just hastens or solidifies the process. That, or merely makes a statement.</p>
<p>“Another media rep is backing away from drama mama Nadya Suleman while the babies’ “overwhelmed” grandmother says a law should prevent excessive in-vitro procedures in the future.
Agent Wes Yoder, who runs the Christian-based talent agency Ambassador Speakers in Tennessee, confirmed his company helped Suleman hammer out licensing agreements for family photographs and even explored the possibility of signing her as a client.
Ultimately, “Ambassador has not executed a representation agreement, nor do we intend to do so,” he said in a statement. “We urge the local churches, people of compassion and the pro-life community to participate in a thoughtful plan to assist the Suleman children.”
Suleman’s original publicity firm Killeen Furtney Group stepped down Saturday after receiving highly detailed death threats.
The octuplets’ grandmother, meanwhile, appeared again on CBS’ “The Early Show” Tuesday and said lawmakers should reconsider their hands-off approach to the number of embryos fertility doctors can implant.
“Maybe there should be a law to forbid a doctor to do this,” Angela Suleman, a retired school teacher, told CBS.”
[Media</a> reps back out of talks with octuplets’ mom Nadya Suleman, grandma calls daughter obsessive](<a href=“http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2009/02/17/2009-02-17_media_reps_back_out_of_talks_with_octupl.html]Media”>http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2009/02/17/2009-02-17_media_reps_back_out_of_talks_with_octupl.html)</p>
<p>From what I remember, the original PR firm dropped out because of the death threats, as well as saying Nadya now had an agent. This agent that has now backed out was the agent for the McCaughey septuplets.</p>
<p>Jym, based on the excerpt you quoted, she is not the treating therapist because if she is/was, she completely violated confidentiality in revealing a diagnosis such as a personality disorder. She’d be opening herself up to a huge and well-deserved lawsuit. It’s one thing to make a report as a mandated reporter, another to talk to the press about someone you are treating. Some years ago, a well-known therapist was disciplined by the California licensing board for alluding to what she knew of Nicole Simpson (as it related to OJ) after she was dead – because confidentiality doesn’t end with death. Anyhow, why would DCS need some outside non-treating therapist to suggest an investigation? I can understand that if this was some under-the-radar situation that no one knows about but the entire country knows about this woman’s situation and the press and public have been clamoring for an investigation by DCS. It just seems to me – and I could be wrong - that this psychiatrist saw a way to have her 15 minutes of fame.</p>
And besides the time issue, I wonder how or where she will be alone long enough? (EDIT…I mean alone with a significant other!)</p>
) but if in fact she was her treating Dr and she had reason to believe the kids were being neglected (or the new ones might be), if the laws in CA are similar to other states, she would have an ethical obligation to report this to the DFACS. Thats not a fun thing to have to do, but licensure requires that DFACS be contacted when there is a strong reason to believe children are being abused or neglected.</p>