Thursday, March 26, 2009

Octuplets: Dr Phil, Part 1: Nadya: *Angels in Waiting* firing

March 25, 2009

Updated list of octuplet posts (3-24)
(3-26) Octuplets: Dr Phil Part 1: Nadya; *Angels in Waiting* firing
(3-26) Octuplets: Dr Phil Part 2: Jeff Czech: “Hogging the media”
(3-26) Octuplets: Dr Phil Part 3: No more Nadya for him

Dr Phil is stepping in for the last time as mediator. He wants nothing more to do with Nadya and her drama and uses this show to make that perfectly clear. Angels in Waiting's ainda West-Conforti and Jackie Peebles and AIW's lawyer, Gloria Allred were present along with Nadya's lawyer/spokeman, Jeff Czech. Out of his words come the most honest I've heard as an assessment from Nadya's camp.

This is from his website. I add some dialogue that was missing.

DR PHIL INTRO:

There is breaking, and frankly, disturbing news from the Nadya Suleman octuplets camp, and it runs deeper than the chaos surrounding the homecoming of the first two babies. To be very candid, I didn’t want or expect to do another show dealing with this story, because my only interest in this has been to inspire a solid chance for the children to be handled well. Once Angles in Waiting USA and Nadya made an arrangement, I was pretty much done. But after a turbulent couple of weeks working together, the arrangement has broken down. I am disappointed that the two parties could not find common ground to work together.

My support of trying to first keep these children with their biological mother was based on two conditions: One, qualified care, and two, complete and total ongoing transparency.

Dr. Phil reiterates that he didn’t like Nadya’s choices [as in having even one more child] but the children are here, and he is not in support of putting Nadya’s children in foster care.

Taking children away from a biological parent is a very difficult task. There has been no documented basis to remove the children, so the only option has been to protect them within the home. That’s where Angels in Waiting USA came in.

Four of the babies are home now, but the first test failed miserably, in my opinion, when the first two babies came home.

News footage shows a media frenzy surrounding Nadya’s vehicle as she comes home with the first two babies. Paparazzi pound on her car, and some even hang from the vehicle’s roof, to get a photo of the babies. The crowd surrounding Nadya’s home isn’t just media or paparazzi. Some of them include locals and tourists who just want to catch a glimpse of the octuplets’ mom. Nadya called the police to restore order.

[Nadya wants America to believe that she thought there would be only a couple of reporters there - after she told them exactly when she was going to bring them home and after she drove away with that many there. She heard and saw the helicopter circling before she even got to her cul-de-sac. She could have driven to the police station, waited there until the police handled it, and then went home. Not only did she not do that - she drove right through them with no concern for her preemies - they very easily could have broken the glass, overturned the vehicle or she could have runs somebody over.]

Dr. Phil sits down with Nadya’s attorney, Jeff Czech, and attorney Gloria Allred, who represents Angels in Waiting USA. Nadya joins the show via telephone.

DR PHIL to NADYA:

I just have a few things I want to talk to you about because I know there are some things you want to be very clear about. I guess the first thing we’re really interested in is why the breakdown in the agreement with Angels in Waiting USA?

NADYA VIA PHONE:

First and foremost, I must thank them, because I’m genuinely appreciative of how they facilitated me in getting on the right track, and getting organized and really beginning the process of taking care of all these babies .However, once we were situated, Kaiser [Permanente] really started to step up and implement all of the necessary training for my nannies, which I secured independently, in addition to home help visits daily for up to an hour with every baby. They were constantly assessing and monitoring the situation, and my entire support network then became Kaiser, and I felt that Angels in Waiting’s services were no longer needed. They were no longer necessary. Particularly into taking into consideration that they even disclosed they are worried themselves about lack of funding.

[Bottom line is always money. Her pronouns tell who she is concerned about. I, me, my, my own. And she refers to her infants as commodities - they, those, these.]

DR PHIL:

Did this turn to be an acrimonious or adversarial situation? Because you had said that you had felt that the Angels' nurses were like spies.

NADYA:

Well, I don't want to say anything derogatory. I felt extremely uncomfortable in my own home. I did feel like a stranger in my own home, I felt ostracized, and I felt excluded. In addition to that, there were such poor communication patterns. There was a lack of a healthy environment in regard to the energy that they presented. There was just incessant negative energy, which will be validated by the nurses and social workers from Kaiser when they came in.

That was the only thing that was presented, this negativity. I feel as though I want to surround my family, my children with positive energy, and that is how my nannies I do have are providing. They’re provided that, and I am. The Kaiser nurses were instrumental in training all of my nannies, and they came to my home. Fifteen, 16 nannies were there, and they were training for hours.

Angels in Waiting, they did not train anybody.

[More greed. She justifies her decision with the money situation. She goes back to the original offer that she refused and then she wonders why it wasn't followed through. Complains she wasn't getting the money and then in the next says she doesn't want to rely on others.]

NADYA: What they presented in the beginning of the situation — the plan — was never followed through. They presented that there was going to be 24/7 wrap-around care, it was all going to be provided for with the funding and donations —

First of all, I don’t want to rely on people’s donations. I feel it’s wrong. Second, they didn’t have that. They could have resorted on the fallback would be billing Medi-Cal. I didn’t want to do that either. My goal right now - I’m in the process of getting my children off of Medi-Cal. And that is an ultimate goal of mine right now. And most importantly, I did provide all the nannies, and I am responsible for covering the costs of all my nannies by myself.

This is an accomplishment? She purposely had those babies. At this point, she is almost screaming. It was a free services so why the anger? She is angry because AIW made reports to DCFS. Still referring to her octuplets as commodities.

Nadya: The primary issue was not just about the funding - the primary issue was my nannies and I felt extremely uncomfortable. I personally felt like a stranger in my own home. The goal was to empower me as a mother. Help me, train me. I’m open to that. I want that. I want to do the very best for these babies. They’re premature babies, and I wanted them to use their knowledge and training to guide me. I felt that was never accomplished.

Whose job is it? And it's her fault she didn't get what she wanted. The nurses already know - and it was up to her to ask- she didn't..

NADYA: I felt as though every time I would hold the baby, feed the baby, they were observing, waiting for me to make a mistake. All of the nannies felt the same. One nanny, I quote her, she said, ‘I was so happy when they finally let me hold the baby.’ And they had blatantly, overtly stated that nobody was allowed in the nursery without their permission, and we all felt very uncomfortable. This is my home. I must be empowered, not handicapped. The nurses, the social workers at Kaiser, they are empowering me as a mother. They are my support network.

DR PHIL: You said that someone from the Angels organization called and made a report complaint against you with Child Protective Services.

NADYA: Sure, yes, she did.

She then goes on to explain that she wasn't expecting the paprazzi reaction that first night, even though they were camping out when she left to go to the hospital. Again her judgment was impaired. The preemies went from a controlled indoor environment to home at 10:30 at noght only to be greeted by a screaming mob.

[A mother would have had police on standby or at least would have hired some security].

Nadya explains that making a report was the right thing to do:...As registered nurses, they are mandated reporters who have to make those calls when they believe children are in danger.

Nadya says she had no idea she would be swarmed by paparazzi at her house.

I was oblivious to it I was wrongly informed that there would be one person.

How many were there when she left? Who did she expect was going tio get rid of them? Whose job is it to be informed?

NADYA: I did not plan on that, nor do I feel that was appropriate. I acknowledged and corrected it.

She doesn't seem to understand that she as a mother of 14 children has to always have a plan. No one in their right mind could possibly believe that there would only be one reporter - all those people were out there.

DR PHIL: Nadya, you recognize that a mandated reporter, seeing what took place inside that house was required to report that this was an unhealthy situation, in terms of crowding, exposure, noise, infection control, just a variety of things, true?

NADYA: Absolutely. I would have done the same.

Nadya harbors no ill will about that phone call, and explains that the Kaiser Permanente nurses have called CPS as well in support of her, acknowledging that her mistakes will be corrected.

NADYA: They are my support team. Child Protective Services, I embrace them. I actually welcome them to come over and to show them how I’ve implemented an extraordinary change. I don’t want to say anything against Angels in Waiting. I do still believe their intentions are in the right place, and I have tremendous respect for Gloria.

DR PHIL: You understand that on that first night, anybody who was there was going to step up and start pushing back, right?

NADYA: Oh, no, that has nothing to do with that first night. They were great that first night. I’m talking about days later, as time progressed, they were really kind of taking over, and it’s not really that. It was the environment. I don't know how much detail I should discuss. The lack of communication was significant. Rather than coming to me with any concern, Angels in Waiting would discuss me and the situation without me being present. I don’t feel that’s a healthy environment,” Nadya says.

DR PHIL: So, you wanted more communication and collaboration.

NADYA: Of course.

Nadya says the nurses, social workers and neonatologists all observed that Angels in Waiting were handicapping her as a mother, rather than empowering her.

NADYA: They were doing an intervention with me. They were expalining what was happening with AIW.

DR PHIL: You had said that one of your nannies had heard Linda say that she wanted to take one of the babies, and that they were so small, that she could easily put it in her purse, and you said you were afraid you were going to come home, and somebody would’ve stolen one of your babies. Were you seriously concerned about that?

[She does not follow the same story as she said last night where she kept repeating the abduction story. She thinks it's unethical to verbalize something like that. Unethical to point out to a clueless mother, who thought there would only be one reporter, that anyone could come in that flimssy front door and put a kid in a purse and walk out?]

NADYA: Being the mother of so many kids, being, unfortunately, in the public eye, [that she does nothing to prevent] having threats, and this and that regarding the kids, I’m almost paranoid that anything will happen to these kids. How can any mother take that lightly? Maybe she was joking in her mind, but that was so unprofessional and unethical to actually verbalize something like that.

Unethical and unprofessional? Note how toned down the whole abduction scenario is compared to her radaronline explanation - see link above]

Before Nadya hangs up, she wants to thank the people who helped get her house ready for the babies arrival.

NADYA: I am so genuinely appreciative of Shalena and Stan for all the work they've done, and everyone else who have participated and contributed their time and energy into this. They are genuine blessings, and I thank them with all of my heart.

No full names - no listing of companies.

Dr. Phil says goodbye to Nadya and expresses relief to hear that Kaiser Permanente Bellflower Hospital is involved with the replacement care Nadya has hired. Kaiser said that AIW had nothing to do with the octuplets going home.

Thing is until they were involved no one was offering Nadya anything. She gets AIW on board, goes on Dr Phil, everyone feels like she is going to have a good support system and transparency - which she agreed to - and voila free stuff. Now the poor folks who donated their time and money?

No comments: