Suleman Loses Court Battle

An Orange County judge ruled Friday that an advocacy group for child actors can move forward with its bid to get a guardian appointed to oversee the financial interests of Nadya Suleman’s children.

Superior Court Judge Gerald Johnston denied Suleman’s motion to dismiss the guardian petition submitted by former child actor Paul Petersen, president of A Minor Consideration.

Johnston did not comment on the merits of Petersen’s petition, but wrote that California law does not require someone to be an “interested person” or “enjoy any type of relationship with the minor or minors named in the petition.”

Johnston’s ruling states: “As the paramount concern in guardianships is the best interests of children, the Legislature has not restricted the class of individuals who may petition seeking to protect those interests.”

Full Article and Source:
Suleman Loses in Financial Guardian Ruling

More information:
Judge rules against “Octo-Mom” on child finances

See also:
Suleman’s Hearing

10 Responses to “Suleman Loses Court Battle”

  1. AntiShyster Says:

    But who will watch the guardians?

  2. Anonymous Says:

    Bad news all around…

  3. Anonymous Says:

    The paramount concern of guardianships of children is supposed to be the children, but in this case, does anyone think concern about the children is the goal here? Or is it profit for the guardian?

  4. Anonymous Says:

    I think there's something wrong with Octomom and those poor kids need to be protected from her.

    Somebody's got to watch out for them. Obviously, her thinking is way off.

    Can she even balance a checkbook? She certainly couldn't support the too many children she had before these and yet went ahead and brought 8 more mouths to feed into the world — nuts, it's nuts.

    Yes, as much as I hate guardianship, those kids need it.

  5. Anonymous Says:

    Oboy, oboy, oboy!
    How many kids?

    Gimme, gimme, gimme!

  6. Anonymous Says:

    Here's the thing, Anonomous 3, Octomom has to do something wrong before the state should be charging in to "protect".

    All of this protection is prior to her doing anything wrong. And that's wrong.

  7. Anonymous Says:

    This tug of war will occur throughout the entire lives of these children. Everyone will be wanting to profit from them.

  8. Anonymous Says:

    Who says we have freedoms in the USA? I think this loss of freedom issue needs to be revisited and restated to reflect reality.

  9. Anonymous Says:

    I wonder who is paying Suleman's fees to fight this take over?

  10. wisernow Says:

    Land of the FREE? I don't think so, nothing is free in this country, fighting for your own rights is costly. Who profits? Follow the $$$$$, therein lies your answers who is controlling whom.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: