Ms Louise Woodward has denied that an affiliate of the agency that paid for her murder defence asked for the rights to her story, a story she said would be "distasteful and inappropriate" to sell.
She said that members of her family have had informal discussions with the agency about her "moral obligation" to repay the cost of her defence to the best of her abilities.
Responding to a newspaper report, Ms Woodward issued a statement saying she has not sought to profit from her notoriety stemming from the death of the eight-month-old baby in her care.
"We have turned down lucrative six-figure offers for interviews, because we have found the whole subject to be distasteful and inappropriate," she said. "I have no intention of exploiting this tragedy."
The Boston Globe reported that an affiliate of EF Au Pair had urged Louise to sign over future book and film rights in order to recover the $750,000 (£507,000) it spent defending her.
The request occurred while she was in jail, the newspaper said. The sources of the story were a Texas lawyer and a Catholic priest who said they were told of the offer by Ms Woodward's mother during a meeting with her in England.
According to the Globe, Ms Woodward (19) angrily rejected the offer presented by Ms Eileen Agnes, an attorney appointed by the court to ensure that her interests were being protected.
But Ms Woodward and her attorneys said the story was false.
"Ms Agnes has at no time pressured me to sign any agreement, just as EF Au Pair expended large sums of money in my defence without any promise of repayment," she said.
"We are assured by the Woodward family that the events and statements attributed to them are either entirely in error or taken completely out of context," her attorneys said in a separate statement.
However, Ms Woodward said she recognised she had a "moral obligation" to repay EF Au Pair as best she could.
Ms Woodward had faced a mandatory life sentence with no chance at parole for 15 years after a jury convicted her of second-degree murder following the death in February of Matthew Eappen.
But Judge Hiller Zobel reduced the conviction to manslaughter and deemed the 279 days she had spent in jail punishment enough. Prosecutors have appealed the decision.
Dick Hogan adds from Cork:
A leading Boston lawyer and a former member of the Massachusetts senate, Mr Paul Harold, has said that, in his view , the defence representing Ms Woodward did not act in her best interests.
Mr Harold, a visiting lecturer at UCC, said the defence took a gamble in asking the jury to consider first or second degree murder, effectively precluding it from considering a charge of manslaughter.
He added that the defence was more concerned about the agency which placed Ms Woodward as a nanny in Boston - and the subsequent civil case which is due to follow - than it was about her best interests.