TVCH FORUMS HOME . JOIN . FAN CLUBS . DONATE . CONTACT . CHAT  
                  Quick Links   TOPICS . TREE-VIEW . SEARCH . HELP! . NEWS . PROFILE
Archive through August 12, 2009

Reality TVClubHouse Discussions: Other Reality Shows ARCHIVES: Archives for 2010 - 1: Nadya Suleman blog/potential reality show discussion: ARCHIVES: Archive through August 12, 2009 users admin

Author Message
Supergranny
Member

02-03-2005

Sunday, July 26, 2009 - 11:23 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Supergranny a private message Print Post    
I just sent my complaint in!!

Tntitanfan
Member

08-03-2001

Monday, July 27, 2009 - 6:11 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Tntitanfan a private message Print Post    
OG - At current interest rates the principal would increase by an average of $1000 each five years, so we are looking at under $22,000 per kid.

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Monday, July 27, 2009 - 11:11 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
Not to mention that the older kids will become 18 (or emancipated and I could see a couple of them going that route just to get away) much sooner than the babies, so their accounts will have less time for accumulation.

Escapee
Member

06-15-2004

Monday, July 27, 2009 - 11:16 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Escapee a private message Print Post    
I'll watch, just to see which Sponsor's products I won't be using. I don't care if it's every brand of tampon and actual oxygen sponsoring this show.

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Monday, July 27, 2009 - 3:50 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
I wrote to Eyeworks and said I would hate to have to boycott Biggest Loser, but...

Rather try to not get to the point of sponsors.

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Tuesday, July 28, 2009 - 1:13 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
Local (LA) ABC news reported that the superior court judge in Orange (city and county) appointed a guardian for the octuplets to oversee their estate. Nadya was reportedly pissed and plans to appeal.

Tntitanfan
Member

08-03-2001

Tuesday, July 28, 2009 - 4:57 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Tntitanfan a private message Print Post    
I'll just BET she was!

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Tuesday, July 28, 2009 - 12:13 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
I keep thinking.. these are still INFANTS, not to mention that 3 of her other kids have disabilities along the autism spectrum.

She claims that Paul Peterson and his attorney, Gloria Allred just want publicity and that NO ONE can possibly know HER children better than she can, thus no one else should be a guardian or make decisions.

Yeah, like she's made such good decisions in the past.

Mamabatsy
Member

08-05-2005

Tuesday, July 28, 2009 - 12:29 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Mamabatsy a private message Print Post    
Paul Peterson has done a lot for child actors. He was one and ended up with nothing to show for it even under the Coogan law. He only has the best interest of the children in mind. There are so many ways parents can screw their children out of money while staying within legal boundaries that someone has to watch out for those kids even as they are underpaid for the work they will be doing.

I not only won't watch this show and not use any advertised products, I will disown any of my real life friends who watch it.

Supergranny
Member

02-03-2005

Tuesday, July 28, 2009 - 8:45 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Supergranny a private message Print Post    
LOL Mamabatsy!! Frankly I wonder if anyone would admit to watching that delusional mess.

I am so thankful that there was a judge who did not fall for all her doubletalk and actually made a judgement for her children. I keep thinking about Dr Phil who actually believed her lies. I lost so much respect for him over that fiasco. I never watch his show any more.

Seamonkey can you find out the name of the judge and a little info about him/her?

Pamy
Member

01-02-2002

Tuesday, July 28, 2009 - 9:56 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Pamy a private message Print Post    
I heard a commentary say we should be all for this show, since she would be getting paid and would not qualify for many of the state programs. If us county and state workers have to take days off without pay I will be happy she has this show. Less money state has to spend on her irresponsible ass

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Tuesday, July 28, 2009 - 9:57 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
Not sure about info but right here on the front page of the OC Register it says..

Octuplets get court guardian

Judge rules against Nadya Suleman picks lawyer to oversee financial issues.

by Rachanee Srisavadi and Eugene W. Fields

For a video of Suleman leaving court go to www.ocregister.com/video

An Orange County judge appointed a guardian Monday to investigate the finances of Nadya Suleman's octuplets and set another hearing on August 31.

"I do believe it is appropriate and justified to appoint a guardian ad litum," said Orange County Superior Court judge Gerald Johnston. "I do not view this as an invasion of privacy or a violation of parental rights."

He appointed lawyer Norbert Bunt as the guardian, who will report to the court by the August hearing.

Suleman, the mother of 14 children including her octuplets, was sued in May by children's rights activist and former child star Paul Petersen, who wanted a guardian appointed to protect the octuplets' financial interests.

Petersen, who is represnted by high-profile attorney Gloria Allred, alleges Suleman has exploited her children for financial gain - including selling video of her newborns to radaronline.com and agreeing for her kids to star in a reality television show.

On Monday, the cordoned area for media and the convoy of news vans drew onlookers outside the courthouse in Orange.

One woman walking into court asked a passer-by who the news crews were waiting for. When told they were waiting for. When told they were expecting Suleman, the woman shook her head and exclaimed, "Oh my God!"

Suleman arrived at 3:03 p.m. in a white BMW sedan. As she entered the courthouse, a reporter asked Suleman if she felt her children needed a guardian.

Suleman turned and mouthed the word "No."

In the courtroom, Suleman sat in the front row, while her attorney, Jeffrey Czech, called an appointment of a guardian "completely inappropriate."

"They don't have legal standing in the case," he continued. "I don't think it is appropriate that they can invade the family like this."

The judge, though, ruled against Suleman by appointeing Bunt, a Santa Ana attorney tasked with independently investigating the financial issues involving the children.

Bunt was admitted to the State Bar of California in 1969 after attending law schol at the University of San Diego, according to the bar's Web site. His area of expertise includes trusts and estates, according to the bar. He could not be reached for comment Monday.

Arthur Lacilento, another attorney for Suleman, asked the judge to recuse himself after the decision, saying he was influenced by the media. Johnston denied the request.

Suleman also is trying to get the lawsuit thrown out entirely, arguing that both Peterson and Allred are using the lawsuit to promote themselves.

A hearing on that motion to dismiss is scheduled for Aug. 20.

Outside the courthouse, Allred said they wanted a guardian appointed to be sure a professional agent will be hired for the octuplets - different from the mother's agents - to ensure Suleman herself will not benefit from these opportunities.

She also questioned why Suleman would oppose a guardian being appointed to investigate her children's finances.

"I have to ask myself, 'What are they trying to hide?' " Allred said/

As Suleman got into her car to leave the courthouse, a reporter said: "Nadya, what happened?"

Suleman replied: "I'm indifferent. I have no clue. I could care less."

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Tuesday, July 28, 2009 - 10:06 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
Another article from the whittier Daily News ( I think Nadya lives or lived in Whittier.

By Bethania Palma Markus and Raul Roa, Staff Writers

ORANGE - An Orange County judge assigned an independent guardian on Monday to watch over the financial assets of Octomom Nadya Suleman's world-famous octuplets.

Former child actor Paul Petersen and attorneys Gloria Allred and John Deily filed a lawsuit against Suleman in May, demanding a guardian be assigned to oversee the finances of Suleman's now 6-month-old babies.

"We are very, very happy that the court did decide to appoint a guardian ad litem," Allred said. A guardian ad litem is a person appointed by a court to oversee the interests of another person.

Suleman said she feels she is being unfairly judged.

"You're guilty until being proven innocent, and that's a sad commentary on society," she said

at her Madonna Lane home in La Habra.
Suleman's attorneys lashed out at Orange County Superior Court Judge Gerald Johnston's appointment of attorney Norbert Bunt to oversee the children's finances, calling it an inappropriate invasion of privacy.

Suleman's attorneys even demanded the judge recuse himself from future hearings, claiming he had been influenced in his decision by media reports.

"It is not appropriate for the court to do this," said Jeff Czech, Suleman's attorney. "This is ludicrous. These people (Petersen, Allred and Deily) have no right to bring this petition."

Johnston denied the request.

"The interests of the children are paramount to this court," he said, adding assigning a guardian ad litem is the least intrusive way to oversee the children's finances.

Bunt will report his findings to the court, Johnston said.

Allred said she only had the interest of the children at heart and wanted to make sure the longest surviving set of octuplets in history was able to benefit when they become adults from any money they generate.

"What do they (Suleman and her attorneys) have to hide?" she asked. "Why wouldn't they want to have everything out in the open?"

Labor abuses have been at issue with the octuplets in recent months. Four citations were brought against Web site RadarOnline by state regulators for the videotaping of the first two octuplets to go home from the hospital on March 17.

The California Division of Labor Standards and Enforcement said RadarOnline's secret deal to chronicle the mother of 14 and her newest babies over a seven-week period failed to get the required state permits and taped the infants too late at night and for too long.

It's unknown exactly how much Suleman has amassed through her dealings. RadarOnline has posted more than 100 items about her and her brood, some of them diary-style videos of Suleman. Photo spreads in tabloids show her cradling

her babies in softly lit images - the same types of spreads known to earn movie stars millions.
An unknown sum of donations has been collected for the care of her children.

In March, Suleman moved into a new home that listed for nearly $500,000.

Suleman has said that she's lived off student loans, her children's disability payments and, before December, disability checks she received for a 1999 back injury sustained while working in a state mental hospital.

A documentary is slated to start filming Suleman and her 14 children, all under age 8, on Sept. 1.

The children's contracts were filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on Friday, and await a judge's approval.

Collectively, the children stand to earn nearly $250,000 over a three-year period of filming in the contract with European production company Eyeworks.

Suleman appeared angry when Deily or Allred spoke to the judge, muttering to herself, and at one point leaning over on the arm of her seat.

The media swarmed Orange County Superior Court's Lamoreaux Justice Center as Suleman, dressed in a beige pantsuit, made her way in and out of the courtroom.

Authorities designated an area for news cameras and reporters to gather, but many crowded into Department L-73 to listen to the hearing.

At her home, Suleman said she is looking forward to learning from the court-appointed attorney about how to look after her children's finances.

"They (the court) have to do this for their own liability, they have to appoint someone neutral," she said, adding she is not afraid to have her children's financial records reviewed.

"They have to realize the truth, that everything is fine," she said. "My children are and always will be my No. 1 priority."

Suleman's attorneys filed a petition to dismiss the case brought by Petersen, Allred and Deily, which will be heard on Aug. 20.

Petersen was not in court Monday because he had to attend a convention in Florida , Allred said.

The Associated Press contributed to this story.

bethania.palma@sgvn.com, raul.roa@sgvn.com

LINK

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Tuesday, July 28, 2009 - 10:07 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
Googling the judge's name just comes up with a list of judges and lots of links to the same story.

Supergranny
Member

02-03-2005

Wednesday, July 29, 2009 - 1:48 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Supergranny a private message Print Post    
Thanks Seamonkey...I was wondering if the judge was a man or woman. I think that's interesting that Octomom's lawyer wanted the judge to remove himself because he was influenced by the media!

Erniesgirl
Member

06-26-2006

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 - 9:24 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Erniesgirl a private message Print Post    
Aug 19th on Fox at 8pm
there will be a special on Nadya

see a clip here:

http://omg.yahoo.com/videos/nadya-suleman-what-was-i-thinking/8356

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 - 11:25 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
I've seen a couple of previews.. looks chaotic. I think Jane Velez Mitchell (she has one of those tabloid type shows on CNN headline news about Nadya or the show and I think I recorded it upstairs.

Also they did get a court ruling to review whether a guardian ad litum will be appointed or not.

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 - 11:30 am   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
Clip is disturbing.

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 - 5:07 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
Apparently, Nadya checked into a hospital for a couple of days. No reason give.

The bit on Jane's show was pretty short but they did state that this two hour special will air the 19th and that Nadya got no right to edit, it is all from months of filming inside her home.

And it was stated that so far the European production company trying to shop around her reality show wasn't getting much interest in the US but it might air in the UK.

Of course if they get ratings from the special, who knows?

Supergranny
Member

02-03-2005

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 - 7:37 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Supergranny a private message Print Post    
I'm not watching it! I was hoping she would just go away..

Twinkie
Member

09-24-2002

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 - 7:47 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Twinkie a private message Print Post    
Ditto. I will not give her 5 minutes of my time.

Seamonkey
Moderator

09-07-2000

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 - 9:13 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Seamonkey a private message Print Post    
I wonder if there is a way to find out ahead of time who bought ad time.. who are the sponsers??

Babyruth
Member

07-19-2001

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 - 9:43 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Babyruth a private message Print Post    
pampers, enfamil, gerber, etc, no doubt

Irismi
Member

02-22-2008

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 - 9:51 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Irismi a private message Print Post    
Not going to watch...ever!

Beth4freedom
Member

10-24-2003

Wednesday, August 12, 2009 - 10:31 pm   Edit Post Move Post Delete Post View Post Send Beth4freedom a private message Print Post    
Yes, if anyone has it, I would like a list of the names and addresses of sponsors to write to let them know that I will not use their products.

It left a really bad taste in my mouth that Access Hollywood, which in the midst of the original hullyaballoo, announced a ban on covering Nadia, this week lifted the ban--not only to announce her upcoming show (which was an allowed exception under their original ban), BUT followup coverage today which made me sick. So I have to write Access Hollywood too.