Should the government limit the amount of children a family can have?

Nicole Heinzinger Hornet Editor-in-Chief

It is no surprise that many women grow up having the fantasy of a large family and a white picket fence with security and a worry-free environment, after all that is what we are taught throughout childhood.

Nadya Suleman is no exception.

Due to the recent birth of her octuplets, and the six children already at home, Suleman has become subject to questions about her motives, her income, or lack there of, and her capability to be not only the mother of her children, but also the provider.

In an interview on the "Today" show, Suleman said she believed people were doubting her because the children were brought into a family that involved a single mother, not a couple.

"I'm providing myself to my children...how many other parents do that?" Suleman said, stating that although she may not have a steady income at the time being, once she finishes her master's degree in counseling she will be financially able to provide for her children.

Although the family structure of the Suleman's is not the ideal image taught to us in fairy tales, it's the reality of today.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 26 percent of children are living in single-parent homes and the number of children living below the poverty level is approximately 39 percent.

Suleman has never been on welfare, nor does she plan on using tax-payer dollars to provide for her children. For the time being, Suleman is relying on the aide of her family, friends and church, like any other single mother.

When John and Kate Gosselin had their sextuplets, after already having twins at home, the media did not try bullying the couple, nor did they judge the family because of their lack of employment.

In fact, the Gosselin family has become a household name, making money of people's curiosity with their hit TV show, "John & Kate Plus Eight."

Instead of criticizing Suleman for wanting to have a large family, we should be using her as an example. Here is a well-educated, independent woman, who is planning on raising her children to be the same.

The government may have the authority to dictate everything else we do in this country, but as far as limiting the amount of children one bears goes, they need to remain a neutral party.

The choice to have many, or no, children is exactly that. It is a choice for the parent, or parents, to make. We don't come down on those who are wealthy and childless, so why are we so quick to slam the opposite?

Nathan Percy Hornet Sports Editor

People across the United States have had long discussions over whether or not this country is becoming overpopulated.

The reason for all these discussions: Nadya Suleman, a single mother, who decided six children wasn't enough and went back for another in vitro fertilization, which resulted in not one, but eight babies.

According to CNN, Suleman, who has no job, receives nearly $500 a month in food stamps, and almost $800 for every child that has a mental or physical disability. Three of the first six children have such problems.

After this big news, the government should step in and make the choice to place a limit on how many children a single person, or a couple, can have based on how many children they can afford.

Suleman will not be able to pay for the medical expenses and the month-to-month cost of raising 14 children without the help of taxpayer dollars. We will be the ones who end up paying for some of the expenses.

The government should create a system that uses a couple's salaries to determine how many kids they can afford to raise. Of course, there will be margin for error. As in Suleman's case, a couple may have twins, or more.

The government should also require any family that wants to exceed their limit to adopt a child instead of having another one of their own.

Adopting children will help the potential problem of overpopulating the country, as well as give these kids a deserved chance at a normal life.

In Suleman's case, she now has 14 kids to raise, no job, $50,000 in student loans and hundreds of thousands more in medical costs. She doesn't have a home of her own; she's living with her parents. With the way things are playing out, Suleman may have bitten off more than she can chew.

She's repeatedly said that all she wanted was a big family. Seeing as how she divorced her husband and is now on her own, adoption would have been the better option, but then, she wouldn't be able to use those children to make her money.