Foreclosure set to go forward on Octomom: Should she lose her children?
|
|
|||||
|
10 votes
|
|
36% | |||
|
6 votes
|
|
21% | |||
|
12 votes
|
|
43% | |||
A judge threw out "Octomom" Nadya Suleman's bankruptcy claim Tuesday
after she failed to file the proper paperwork to show she can't pay as
much as $1 million in debt.
That means creditors can move to collect what they say they're owed, and
a pending foreclosure can go ahead against the La Habra, Calif., house
Suleman lives in with her 14 children, according to The Orange County
Register ( http://bit.ly/KMFV8L ).
Suleman's case was thrown out because she didn't file a dozen financial
documents and statements required to prove bankruptcy. In her initial
filing April 30, Suleman estimated that she owed as much as $1 million
that she is unable to pay.
Suleman had sought protection from her debts under Chapter 7 bankruptcy,
which means a court-appointed trustee would have liquidated her assets
to pay off creditors before she is discharged from most of her debts.
According to the filing, she owed money to more than 20 parties,
including utility companies, her father and a Christian school.
A representative for Suleman did not immediately provide comment.
Suleman is an unemployed single mother who became famous after giving
birth to octuplets in 2009. Her octuplets are the world's longest living
set.
Read More: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/octomom-bankrup...
Top Opinion
-
AM 2012/05/16 14:53:19She should lose her children.+6Based just on the simple fact this woman s not stable mentally nor financially.Certainly no asset to those children.It's one thing to make a mess of your own life,but to put these children through it is unconscionable ,reckless and I believe dangerous





















Filing bankruptcy isn't always the best strategy. Sometimes a
debt consolidation company can offer a better alternative, but if there is no hope of every repaying, then a chapter 7 liquidation plan may be the only alternative.
But from what I have heard that is the least of her issues and the rest of the rumors if true are haircurling. IF the things I have seen are true then YES she should lose her kids.
She had them in order to trap a man who didn't get trapped anyway. Strange duck for sure.
What kind of lawyer drops the ball and doesn't file the correct paperwork? Seems fishy.
its an awful thing to do to children but maybe their better off with someone else
...person in the right frame of mind would want more children when you're already poorly managing 6 others?
...what doctor in there right frame of mind would prescribe fertility drugs?
I do however, feel for her kids being caught in the middle.