Reproductive rights?

The birth of octuplets to Nadya Suleman, a woman who already has six children and lives with her mother, raises serious questions about government oversight of fertility treatments. Suleman has set up a website asking for donations and today CNN reported that she is accepting government assistance. Is it right at this point for the government to step in and say, 'you may not have any more children'? I think it would be right. It would also set a dangerous precedent for government oversight of reproduction. I say dangerous not because I believe any government oversight of reproductive rights is unacceptable, but because it has the potential for abuse.
In this situation, Suleman has shown herself unfit to raise children. Her eight new babies are still in the hospital, hooked up to monitors and machines to sustain their artificially created lives. And in these diffucult economic times, when so many are struggling and ned help, the government now has eight new children to look after. I see this as a compelling argument for the governemnt to begin issuing reproductive liscenses to allow people to have children. Requirements for such liscenses should not be very stringent, just proof of the ability to support offspring. Setting up such a system does establish a new level of oversight for the government, but government services are a collective good all taxpayers buy into. As a taxpayer, I would like there to be some barriers to prevent abuses of the system, such as an unemployed single mother with fourteen mouths for the government to feed.