<p>I think there is a dropoff in hormonal levels as the mother raises (and weans ) a baby which causes a kind of longing. I remember feeling it myself rather strongly after 3 kids in 4.5 years.</p>
<p>I remember feeling that way. Then I babysat my neighbors baby or a few hours and he screamed the whole time, and my back was killing me from walking around holding him which was the only way to stop the screaming - the feeling wore of surprisingly quickly.</p>
<p>"LOS ANGELES (AP) — Long before she gave birth to her octuplets, Nadya Suleman delivered for her fertility specialist.
Like clockwork, she had babies every year but one between 2001 and 2006. The six children she had during that period accounted for a big share of the success stories at Dr. Michael Kamrava’s clinic. And Kamrava touted his feats with Suleman on the local news.
But that track record — together with the birth of the octuplets on Jan. 26 — has raised eyebrows among doctors and ethicists who wonder whether Kamrava disregarded professional standards and used Suleman to boost his stats and improve his standing in the highly competitive and lucrative field.
“A motivation would be improving his rate of live births,” said Alex Capron, a professor and bioethicist at the University of Southern California. “If she was already a huge percentage of them, he may have felt ‘Implant six, get three. That’s three more in my plus column.’
“And for him, that would be a noticeable percentage. That would help to explain his behavior.””</p>
<p>[The</a> Associated Press: Octuplet mom and doctor benefited from alliance](<a href=“http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ilIx-PXnXPpwF1a_nlRYF00fzBIQD96G3QM00]The”>http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ilIx-PXnXPpwF1a_nlRYF00fzBIQD96G3QM00)</p>
<p>" A man who may be the biological father of Nadya Suleman’s octuplets says he is willing to help the single mother of 14, even though he is not certain it was his donated sperm that she used to become pregnant.</p>
<p>In an exclusive interview airing this Monday on “Good Morning America,” the possible father said Suleman brought him to the clinic at which she received in vitro fertilization to donate sperm, and that he made donations on two other occasions. He now believes Suleman was married at the time.</p>
<p>Suleman has denied that the man is the father, but he said his multiple sperm donations are cause for a paternity test.</p>
<p>The donor said he was “shocked [and] surprised” when he first learned that Suleman, who he said he dated from 1997 to 1999, had delivered octuplets on Jan. 23…</p>
<p>Regardless of the children’s paternity, the man said he is willing to help Suleman raise the children because he does not believe she can handle it on her own…</p>
<p>The man said that at the time she first approached him about donating sperm, Suleman told him that she had cancer and was unable to conceive without the help of a doctor…</p>
<p>Though he said they dated for three years, the man now believes Suleman was married at the time.
<a href=“Man Gave Sperm 3 Times, Believes He May Be Octuplets' Dad - ABC News”>http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/WomensHealth/story?id=6928821&page=1</a></p>
<p>Cancer? Cancer? That’s a new twist. She told Ann Curry on The Today Show that she had had two ectopic pregancies and fibroids.</p>
<p>Edit: Hmmmmm. So a woman who had had cancer decides to have 14 children and no husband? Gives new meaning to the word irresponsible.</p>
<p>Of course, I suspect her story to the sperm donor was less than completely true.</p>
<p>Its possible the sperm donor guy misunderstood Nadya’s fibroids. I am guessing perhaps she used the word “tumor” when she described her fibroids to him and he took that to mean “cancer”. Who knows.</p>
<p>It’s also possible she just lies a lot.</p>
<p>^^^ no disagreement with you there, fordiscussion! Just positing that the sperm donor may be confused or perhaps may not the sharpest tool in the shed. These poor children–seems they likely have not been swimming in a very good gene pool.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t care what her angle is, if she can take this disaster off the hands of CA taxpayers, I’m all for it. Think how many families could be helped with the money that would have to go to this one woman. And imagine how she would use any money she gets from the state. Just look at her already, out shopping for a $1 million dollar house with a pool. </p>
<p>At least with Allred’s offer, the children would be guaranteed to be taken care of.</p>
<p>"Nearly a month after she gave birth to octuplets, the story of Nadya Suleman continues to take on soap opera-like twists.</p>
<p>The latest chapter came today on “Good Morning America,” in which a man who says he “might” be the father of the octuplets said he donated sperm to Suleman a decade ago when they were dating. He now wants a DNA test to see if he is the father.</p>
<p>Denis Beaudoin told ABC News he had a three-year relationship with Suleman and found it “out of the ordinary” when she asked him to donate sperm.</p>
<p>“But I cared about her so much. And I mean, we were, we were in love. I mean, I loved Nadya very much,” he said. “She really had a really infectious laugh. You know, just her laugh would, it would make you crack up. It’s kind of like she had a real high-pitch, squeaky cartoon voice. And, you know, she was a lot of fun to be around. Just her whole bubbly outward personality was really, really cool.”"
[Man</a> wants DNA test to see if he is octuplets’ father | L.A. Now | Los Angeles Times](<a href=“http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/02/man-wants-dna-t.html]Man”>Archive blogs)</p>
<p>I don’t trust anyone’s motives in this - some people may be sniffing what they think is a gravy train.</p>
<p>That poor, poor sap…:(</p>
<p>Well maybe the sap… oh… nevermind… :o</p>
<p>post 903
fascinating. thanks for the link!</p>
<p>If the donor has DNA testing done and it is determined that he is the father, since the donation was done casually and probably doesn’t have legal agreements, could he be on the hook for child support?</p>
<p>I don’t know the law in California, but the general default rule is that you’re financially liable for your genetic children no matter what the circumstances of their conception. Whether there was a signed agreement shouldn’t matter. Paternity is achieved casually all the time. :)</p>
<p>Hanna, I’m not a lawyer, but don’t you think that if that was the law, there wouldn’t be any sperm donors?</p>
<p>I bet the law is different for men who donate sperm through a sperm bank and men who donate sperm directly to friends.</p>
<p>No, BunsenBurner, a signed agreement (like anonymous sperm donors and recipients sign) can alter the status quo. But the status quo in the absence of any such agreement is for liability for both natural parents. Someone upthread suggested that this was a casual donation, and if that’s the case, the status quo would apply.</p>
<p>To clarify my previous post where I said the signed agreement shouldn’t matter: the agreement is not necessary to have liability kick in. It’s necessary if you want to avoid liability.</p>
<p>I watched the video interview, and it does sound as if it was a casual donation. Apparently the guy didn’t even “donate” at the clinic! Nadya dropped by to pick up the sample. </p>
<p>I felt sorry for him. He apparently has a custody issue with a child, and he became very emotional talking about it. He does not seem like the kind of man who would be able to disconnect from biological children, even if he did not know about them until now. He even said that he would help out if they were not his.</p>