This clown of a Dr. should have his license pulled...
Linkage
Linkage
The Beverly Hills doctor whose fertility treatment led to the birth of Nadya Suleman’s octuplets — and her six previous children — has one of the worst success rates of any fertility clinic in the country, according to federal records reviewed by the Los Angeles Times.
Taxpayers are already footing part of the bill for a situation he helped create. Suleman receives $490 a month in food stamps, and three of her first six children are disabled and receiving federal benefits. Moreover, Kaiser Permanente Hospital in suburban Bellflower has asked California’s health plan for the poor to cover the cost for the eight premature infants in its care, according to multiple sources familiar with the case.
Suleman’s publicist, Michael Furtney, confirmed the information about the food stamps and federal supplemental security income after two sources informed the Times of the benefits. Three sources told the Times that Kaiser has requested Medi-Cal reimbursement for care of the octuplets, which is estimated to run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Furtney declined to confirm the Medi-Cal coverage and referred the question to Kaiser, which also declined comment.
The disclosures came as information emerged about the doctor who provided Suleman, a 33-year-old single mother, with the in vitro fertilizations that led to all 14 of her children. In an interview on NBC, she identified the clinic as West Coast IVF Clinic, which is run by Michael Kamrava.
According to federal records reviewed by the Times, of the 61 procedures Kamrava conducted in 2006 — the most recent data available — only five resulted in pregnancies and only two of those resulted in births. One of those births was Suleman’s twins.
“These are the worst numbers I’ve ever seen. This is absurdly low,” said Dr. Mark Surrey, another fertility specialist in Beverly Hills.
But in Suleman, Kamrava found a patient who got pregnant and gave birth every time. For seven years, Suleman attempted to get pregnant through artificial insemination and fertility drugs. When she finally tried in vitro fertilization at Kamrava’s clinic, it worked the first time — and each time after that.
Kamrava, 57, has been a proponent of placing newly created embryos in a capsule and cultivating them inside the vagina for a few days before transferring them to the uterus in hopes of achieving a pregnancy. More recently, he has promoted a little-used technique employing a camera to help place embryos in the lining of the uterus. In 2006, he and Suleman appeared in a local television news segment about how the technique could boost the chances that embryos would take.
And on his Web site, he touts his “breakthrough technology that has revolutionized IVF.”
In fact, Kamrava’s clinic has a much lower rate of pregnancies and births than the vast majority of fertility clinics. Suleman’s five previous pregnancies — which resulted in four single births and a set of twins — represents a sizable portion of his success over the past several years.
His history of poor results comes despite Kamrava placing more embryos per procedure than all but 10 of the nation’s 426 fertility clinics for patients under 35. In 2006, he averaged 3.5 embryos per in vitro fertilization treatment, compared with the national average of 2.3.
Other fertility specialists said that placing high numbers of embryos is a common way that poorly performing clinics try to boost their pregnancy rates. But that increases the risk of multiple births, which pose a danger to the woman and her babies.
Dr. Philip McNamee, a fertility specialist in Honolulu, said Kamrava might have figured he had little to worry about when he transferred six embryos to Suleman last year since his success rates were so low and her embryos had been frozen and thawed. Frozen embryos lead to pregnancy less often than fresh ones.
“That is one logical explanation of why he thought in his mind he could do it,” McNamee said.
Still, he and other doctors strongly condemned the decision, especially because Suleman had a history of successful pregnancies.
In her NBC interview, Suleman defended her doctor. She called her treatment “very appropriate,” particularly because of her history of miscarriages and scarred fallopian tubes.
“The most I would have ever anticipated would have been twins,” Suleman said. “It wasn’t twins times four.”
Kamrava declined comment Monday.
This is not the first time he has faced controversy. At least two former employees have sued him, including Shirin Afshar, an office administrator who alleged that Kamrava engaged in insurance and tax fraud. She also said he routinely asked her to participate in medical procedures even though she was not licensed to do so.
The suit said Kamrava required patients to pay their bills in cash, which was then put in an envelope and given to Kamrava’s wife, who “never entered the payment into the computer and never deposited the payment in the bank” so that Kamrava could avoid paying income tax on the money. The clinic kept two sets of books, one for insurance payments and one for cash payments, the lawsuit alleged.
Afshar also claimed that Kamrava’s office defrauded insurance companies by double billing for procedures and by billing companies for unnecessary medication that Kamrava kept and then re-sold to other patients. In addition, the suit claims that Kamrava’s office billed insurance companies for one procedure and then performed another.
The suit appeared to have settled in 1999, shortly before it went to trial.
In another case, Shantal Rajah, an embryologist from England, was awarded more than $300,000 in back pay, attorneys fees and damages after working for Kamrava for less than a month. Court papers show that Rajah and Kamrava did not get along and at one point got into a fight over the proper heating of embryos.
Suleman’s case has evoked both fascination and fury by the public and medical community, with many wondering how she will care for 14 children.
Suleman, who lives with her mother in a three-bedroom home, acknowledged in the NBC interview that she was struggling to support her six children before the birth of her octuplets. But she said she knows she will be able to pay their bills, especially after she earns her master’s degree in counseling.
She denied that she was on welfare — a comment her publicist later clarified.
“In Nadya’s view, the money that she gets from the food stamp program ... and the resources disabilities payments she gets for her three children are not welfare,” Furtney said. “They are part of programs designed to help people with need, and she does not see that as welfare.”
Linkage
The California woman who gave birth to octuplets has no income and intends to use student loans to care for them and her other six children at home, all under the age of 8.
“Do you have any income at all?” TODAY’s Ann Curry asked Nadya Suleman during her exclusive interview with the 33-year-old mother of 14 children.
“At the moment, no,” Suleman replied, adding that she intended to use student loans “temporarily” to pay for her family’s care.
“Right now, you don’t have an income to provide for your children?” Curry repeated.
“Probably just with the student loans,” Suleman said. “I am providing for my children. I am. And that will probably run out by the time I go back to school. So I have my own way. It’s an alternative way, but it works.”
Public backlash
Curry told TODAY’s Matt Lauer and Meredith Vieira that while many people view the birth of octuplets as a miracle, “there has been an intense public backlash,” particularly from people who see the cost of raising the children ultimately being borne by taxpayers.
“I’m responsible. I am not on welfare,” Suleman told Curry. “I don’t want to disparage or seem like I’m disparaging any individual who uses welfare as a form of a resource. It can be a valuable resource. I’ve chosen never to go on welfare. I feel that it is my responsibility to do what I can to provide for my children.”
But published reports say that Suleman is receiving at least two forms of public assistance.
All of Suleman’s children are under the age of 8, and she now has 10 children under the age of 2. According to The Los Angeles Times, three of her older children have disabilities and receive Supplemental Security Income. In addition, Suleman reportedly receives $490 a month in food stamps from the state of California.
NBC chief medical editor Dr. Nancy Snyderman has estimated that the cost of delivering the octuplets and keeping them in neonatal intensive care until they are ready to leave the hospital will be $1.5 million to $3 million. The Los Angeles Times has reported that Kaiser Permanente Medical Center, where the babies will remain for several weeks, has asked California’s medical insurance program, Medi-Cal, to pay the tab.
‘Not welfare’
Michael Furtney, a publicist for Suleman, told The Associated Press that Suleman does not think of the public funds she does receive as welfare.
“In Nadya's view, the money that she gets from the food stamp program ... and the resources disabilities payments she gets for her three children are not welfare,” he said. “They are part of programs designed to help people with need, and she does not see that as welfare.”
From 1997 to 2006, Suleman was employed by a state mental hospital. She was disabled in a riot in 1999 and received disability payments totaling about $165,000 until those payments stopped during her pregnancy.
Suleman said she intends to go back to college in the fall to get a degree in counseling. She told Curry that while she was still able to work, she saved as much money as she could as she lived with her mother, Angela.
“I was able to work double shifts — constantly working double shifts. I was hoarding my money — nonstop working. I really didn’t have much of a social life,” Suleman said. “My friends would go, ‘Are you saving for a house, a car?’
“ ‘No, I’m saving for babies.’ ”
After trying for seven years to get pregnant, Suleman turned to in vitro fertilization, paying for “several” of the procedures she has undergone with the money she saved.
Slideshow
8 amazing babies
The story of controversial mom Nadya Suleman and her remarkable octuplets
Curry asked how much money she spent on in vitro procedures.
“I don’t know. I would say close to 100,” Suleman replied.
“A hundred thousand dollars?” Curry asked.
“Probably,” Suleman said. “Yeah, definitely.”
Linkage
