Nadya Suleman Accepts Offer Of Help From Angels In Waiting; But Just Who Is More In Need Of It?
News on Octomom:
After first saying "no thanks", Nadya Suleman has finally accepted the offer from Angels In Waiting for 24-hour nursing care for her octuplets when they come home, plus help with her other six children (three of which have special needs). Not only that, but none other than Dr. Phil (tellingly enough, the only person who's been able to get through to her, further making me believe that many people really do believe what they see on TV is real) has thrown her a baby shower of sorts. Also, she's finally pulling up stakes and moving into a new home...don't ask me how she can afford a $500,000+ home when the one she is already living in is in foreclosure, because I don't know.
The house is undergoing extensive renovation as we speak:
Don't expect the Octo-Babies to be coming home this week. In a big setback for Nadya Suleman, social workers from Kaiser Permanente hospital just inspected the Octo-Mom's new 2,500 square foot house in La Habra and they were not thrilled with what they saw. A social worker liaison tells RadarOnline.com exclusively that Nadya's new house needs the following work before her babies come home: *All lighting moved up onto the ceiling. No lamps or cords on the floor. *Fireplace needs safety guards *Stairs need to be re-built. *Upstairs banister on stairs raised to enclose entire 2nd floor. *Hypo-allergenic air filters installed *Bunk beds can not be next to window in upstairs bedrooms. *Blinds need to be cordless *Storage cabinets installed The social workers were very surprised and disappointed Nadya didn't show up for the inspection. She did give RadarOnline.com a tour of her new place last night. They have demanded Nadya show up Thursday for another inspection at the new house. In short, the social workers say a lot of work needs to be done. The inspectors say the home is big enough but they tell RadarOnline.com exclusively they are concerned about the functionality and safety of the new home. Workers are currently inside the house tearing up the carpet, taking appliances out, ripping up plumbing, measuring, adding storage and organizing... basically putting an entire new face on the new crib.And just how much help will be needed once those babies come home?
Well, if you remember right, I suggested that someone outside the family oversee any financial donations to the octuplets. Great minds and all that. But let's take a look at this phrase: "Angels in Waiting estimates caring for the octuplets will cost approximately $135,000 per month and needs public donations." Wow. $135,000 a month? A charity which takes care of these sort of medically at-risk infants should have at least some money in its coffers to give it a good start, right? After all, you wouldn't offer to help innocent little babies unless you already had your funding in place, right? You would at least know the bills would be met every month, right? Well, not so fast. First, when she made the offer Gloria Allred said that the help for Nadya would come at no cost to the public:Civil rights attorney Gloria Allred, founder of Angels in Waiting Linda West Conforti and Dr. Phil have entered into an agreement of care with Nadya for her octuplets. The agreement is formalized in a Declaration of Principles document with eight points. Angels in Waiting estimates caring for the octuplets will cost approximately $135,000 per month and needs public donations. Aware of criticism of Nadya, the group released this statement about the babies: "These are innocents, born into the situation. We need help and we need help now." Conforti confirmed it will take 11 nannies a day to make the situation work. Allred told RadarOnline.com: "A retired judge, Dan Weinstein, will oversee the fund and ensure that all donated money will be used for the care of the children, and not one cent will go to Nadya or her family."
"She did not accept our offer," Gloria Allred told co-anchor Harry Smith on The Early Show Friday. " ... There would have been no burden on the taxpayers. Instead now, it may be that the taxpayers are going to have to foot the bill for all of this."However, she does admit that AIW would rely on public donations:
Allred acknowledged that "Angels in Waiting's care can only continue if it is supported by donations from the public."So it would seem to me that whether or not the California taxpayers are ponying up dough from their taxes or their own pockets of their own free will, somebody is going to end up paying one way or another. I guess if the money isn't donated and the bills can't be paid, they will pull out and leave those children alone with Nadya? And that is helpful how, again? But here's some news: A blogger has uncovered some interesting information about AIW, and it isn't all that encouraging. When she called AIW herself, she got some rather intriguing comments:
Not believing my eyes at this exorbitant amount [$135,000] I put in a call to Angels in Waiting and spoke to the founder's husband, James M. Comforti. I informed him immediately that I thought the Pasadena Star News must have misprinted the amount of money needed. To this he replied, "Well what amount do you think this is going to take?" I responded, "I have no idea, I'm not a professional in these matters and it is your organization who is stating this" As our conversation ensued he named the items that would be needed, nursing care for the fragile preemies, therapists, occupational therapists (more than likely cp in the preemies) therapists for the three other disabled children (autistic, ADD, signs of autism), diapers, doctors visits and several other items. Then came my question, "Does your organization have the budget to cover this massive undertaking" "No, not at this time, but we are hoping to get donations and volunteers." [emphasis mine] Other statements: 1. It is my wife who thinks this needs to be done in order to keep them out of foster care so they can stay with their mother. This is all about the CHILDREN, don't you agree? Of COURSE I agree. 2. We are a 5013c foundation set up to do this sort of thing. 3. Do you have this funding in place now? "NO, but we are hoping". 4. I'm trying to figure out exactly what it is you are offering to do here. Are you offering to coordinate this effort? Answer: "Don't try to put words in my mouth", Response, "I'm not, but what is it exactly that you are doing?" "Look my wife thinks this is important because this is ONLY for the children and we think they need to be kept out of foster care." So, I got off the phone scratching my head. This organization Angels in Waiting, a charity according to Gloria Allred, wants to help but it's going to take (per his words) "an undertaking like they've never done before"(There's also some info on there questioning AIW's status as a charity, but it's a bit dodgy to me and I don't understand it all, so I'll let you go there and make up your own mind.) So. To get back to the point (and I do have one), just how much actual green money does AIW have socked away to help these babies?
The charity graciously offered care for the octuplets that they estimated will cost $135K per month, but an RRF-1 form obtained by "Extra" reveals that Angels in Waiting doesn't have anywhere that kind of dough. According to the form from California's Office of the Attorney General, the charity didn't have any assets or revenue at all in 2006. In 2007, their revenue hit $100, but they still had zero assets. In 2008, the charity was up to $5,000 in revenue and only $600 in assets. The form was filed on February 26, 2009.And tell me again just exactly how offering to help someone without the proper funding already in place is riding to the rescue of these children? That's like sponsoring a little malnourished child from a TV ad, and then sending the child a letter saying you can't afford the seventy-five cents a day. Or telling someone desperately in need of a transplant that you'll pay for the whole thing and then backing out when they are already on the operating table, citing financial problems.
I'm not disparaging children's charities or those who help at-risk infants and children. People who help with these sorts of issues and problems are truly special people and the world needs more of them. My own daughter benefited from specialized nursing when she spent time in the NICU and pediatric ward as an infant. However, to truly help these children (and remember, it is the children who are most important here, not their crazy mother), it would seem to me that one must have a concrete plan in place and the proper funding ready to implement that plan.
Social workers are already on the case here. From what I know of anything involving social workers, they don't take good intentions as a solution; you've got to come up with a specific plan and then you've got to show that you are actively taking steps to put that plan in motion.
Good intentions just are not good enough; while AIW might have the best interests of the children at heart, that won't get the job done. Nadya had "good intentions", and look where they got her.
Follow Technorati