Act Acting » Hollywood Acting » The judicial system just has no concept.

The judicial system just has no concept.

Question:

But most people have no experience whatsoever. They don’t expect to have thier wife kill their own kids!

If their wife has a history of mental illness, they sure as hell do have some experience.  At some point in the relationship, there had to be more than one occasion where they saw how they can be when unmedicated and untreated.  And people who have been together as long as both couples have cannot look me in the eye and tell me that they were not concerned about what wifey was doing when they weren’t home.   The notion that a mother would never hurt her child is a fantasy fabricated by Hollywood, and is a notion that is driven home constantly.  Yet more and more mothers are hurting their children (or at least it is making the news more). People need to get their heads out of the sand and face reality. We know there can be incidentily in some cases the possibility or danger that an excess like that happens. But whne they go off to work, I don’t think they realize this.

But the warning signs were there.  She wasn’t taking her medication.  Sooner or later she’d start acting and talking irrationally.  If she wasn’t that way in front of him, I know she was with the kids and they would be asking Dad about things that Mom said. My husband starts counting pills when I am not "myself", even if it is just from a bad day at work.  Anything that is not what he feels is "normal" for me, and he starts asking me about things and making sure I’m taking my pills and will even call the pdoc to make sure everything is okay.  During my last med switch, he did not leave me alone with my son at all, and would call me often to make sure I am okay.  There have also been several times when his family would call, I do or say something off the wall, and his father asks about any of these "new fangled mental illnesses" he "hears so much about in the news lately". My point is, there were warning signs that these women were becoming unstable and irrational as well as erratic.  And the husbands allowed the children to be left alone with these women with no way to know what will happen.  Sure, we hear about the horror stories and the worst that could happen.  But that many deaths of children are too many IMHO.

Response:

Why do you react this way? I understand that having kids clouds judgement. Your protecion mechanisms kick in. I mean, only trying to imagine how your own child would die like this….that is how jury trials work.

Because whether you want to admit it or not, this *IS* an emotionally charged issue. I am not cold or frigid. But I tend to look at things from a distance. as you would need to do. Nothing happened to your kids. And that mother killed her own kid. try imagine what that does to a mother?

At a distance, not emotionally attached, no matter how out of it she was, the woman had the presence of mind to revive the child, only to kill him a few minutes after he came back around. No, nothing has happened to my child.  And imagining what it does to a mother?  I am a mother and I am horrified as to what happened.  This mother yelled that the jury were liars (among other things).  Susan Smith showed no remorse (and has continued not to show any).  At least Andrea Yates was sorry and said so in a way that sounded like the meant it. No, I am not cold. I think it is tragic that someone sits in jail for 50 years. What a waste of life.

She’s damn lucky she didn’t get life in prison or even worse get the death penalty. You call me cold but you don’t feel anything for the mother and what she must live with?

I would have felt sorry for her if she didn’t revive the boy only to finish him off. If she was only 20 she will be 70 when she comes out.

You obviously don’t know diddly squat about the US justice system.  She is older than that, I think late 30s or early 40s.  And when she goes to prison for the 50 years, it does not mean she will serve the entire 50 years.  After 5 years, she will be eligible for parole.  She may or may get out then.  If not, then every so often, probably either every year or every other year, she will be up for parole again.  The maximum amount of time she will spend in prison is 50 years.  The minimum is much less than that. But alas! Society has its revenge. the feelings of the bloodthirsty masses and mothers are fulfilled. My thoughts are with that mother. The kid…if you like, is in heaven. The mother…is in hell.

A hell of her own making.  Trust me, if we were as bloodthirsty as you say we are, then she would be on death row waiting for the big needle.

Response:

By the time your children come around we will have all the answers and your children will be grand and beautiful and intelligent and sane. Never say Never. I didn’t want two kids but God wanted me to and I am so glad I did. Val in Boise

Response:

And you accept this? You have MD right? i never heard of MD people being violent off medication, unless perhaps when they have a psychosis and that is something many people can have with or without MD.

I am bipolar, yes.  And you obviously have not spent much time here in the US because I can promise you, there are several bipolars who also have another diagnosis (usually schizoaffective) and are violent.  I should know, I have seen several people attack others and the bus driver in the morning. Since there is almost no funding for anything in the state, they pretty much shut down the state mental hospital and decided to house the mentally ill in communities and have them attend intensive day treatment programs at the county clincs.  They helped the woman next door get her apartment (and which my tax dollars pays for even though she is perfectly able to work since she prostitutes herself out of her apartment–yes, I know for sure that is what she is doing) and built an apartment complex next door that houses the mentally ill.   I ride public transportation in the morning to get to work.  They pick me up and then they pick up the patients in the complex next to mine, and then they drop the patients off at the county clinic before taking me to work.  It has been almost daily that someone has gotten out of control to the point where the 7′4" bus driver (who is a real sweetheart) has to pull over and then proceed to break up the ruckus and put up with a lot of crap himself…reminding him a lot of the days when he was a bouncer. Speaking of the woman next door…she is unmedicated and does not go to the day treatment, which is part of her probation.  And yes, she does know right from wrong.  How do I know?  She stole three checks out of someone else’s mailbox and cashed them.  She forged someone else’s name on them and got $1200.  When the police came to talk to her, she hid in her apartment, had her Mexican boyfriend say that she wasn’t home, and when the landlord gave consent to go inside to look for her, she emerged from the bathroom and wondered what the fuss was since she was taking a shower (she was fully dressed and bone dry).  It’s not the first time she’s been arrested, nor will it be the last. If I treated my gf like your husband treats you… She will think i don’t trust her. She is not in denial of her MD but she knows damn well tyhat she can work and live as if she had diabetes. she takes her meds every day and that is as far as it goes. she can do anything anyone can do. Her MD is not who she is. of course, mileage varies.

I am not in denial because of the bipolar disorder.  I made peace with it a long time ago.  My husband does trust me; however, being a rapid cycling type 1 bipolar disorder, I tend to slide really quickly into old habits and behaviors that is dangerous to me.  I work and I live a normal and healthy life, even though I am also a diabetic.  I do take my medication daily, I exercise, I eat right, and I take care of myself.  There is no limit to what I can do, and I have learned to do a lot of things.  No, my bipolar disorder is not who I am, I just happen to be a person who has it. The meds don’t always work, and sometimes, there are signs of things that I don’t see that my husband or those I work with do see.  And as you can see with me trying to help Paul, we don’t always see what everyone else does.  I trust my husband, he and I have known each other for almost 10 years, we’ve been married for three.  We were best friends first, and he knew me both before and after the diagnosis (and saved my butt more than once when I was manic).  Usually if I’m having some real difficulty, it is because I have forgotten to take a pill, and yes, it literally does affect me that way. The issue is probably wider. That husband cannot afford to not go to work because bills, medical bills and pills need to be paid for.

The husband can get her pills donated and there are several pharmaceutical companies who have commercials advertising their low cost programs for people to sign up.  There are also local clinics who work on a sliding scale and will work with someone in order for them to continue getting their medications. health insurance in the USA is a human drama in most cases, where it can actually ‘run out’. LOL! I am scheduled for an operation to correcta  snoring problem I have but I dount I will ever see a bill by the specialist or for anything else. Here medicare doesn’t run out.

Goody for you.  Unfortunately, the US isn’t run like your country, and there is no national health care system (I’ll spare you the rant on how the insurance industry is a racket here) and managed health care is a joke.  Here in the US you do the best with what you can and there is always an organization or a program where you can get assistance. So, if a husband needs to be home to protect the kids…he cannot. So he must force her to take medication or stay home…if he knows that she can commit such crimes. And in a  marriage that is very hard. So, you take your meds or I leave with the kids. One wonders if there would be a trial over that too. he took my kids away and that is a no no. by by marriage.

The kids were 3 and 5.  The 5 year old should have been in kindergarten and the 3 year old could have gone to Head Start, a free program for 3-4 year olds to help them get ahead in education.  The husband could have worked days while the kids were in school and/or gotten a relative to help keep an eye on things when he was at work (although it isn’t fool proof as in the Andrea Yates case).  The husband gives her an ultimatum: you take your medication or you will have to leave.  And stick to it.  If you are unmedicated, you can quickly become a danger to yourself and/or others.  And in this case, an unmedicated mom was dangerous to one child. Who knows what choices we would make in such circumstances?

I know that if I was a danger, I would not want to be left alone with my child. And I know damn well my husband would see to it that I was not left in a situation where I could harm my child.  But then again, if I stopped taking my medication, my husband has the documentation in place to do what is necessary to ensure the safety of my son…something that was *MY* idea and something that *I* alone set up long before my husband and I were involved. Question is, what choices would YOU make?

Response:

Well said.  My husband always reminds me to take my meds.  I’m good at taking them, but sometimes I take them later at night than I should, and it effects my sleep.  I’ve been relatively stable since we were married, but he still has seen enough to know when to suggest to me to make an appointment with my pdoc.  I don’t see how anyone could live with someone who was seriously mentally ill and not have any idea that they could behave irrationally. Diane M.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – But most people have no experience whatsoever. They don’t expect to have thier wife kill their own kids! If their wife has a history of mental illness, they sure as hell do have some experience.  At some point in the relationship, there had to be more than one occasion where they saw how they can be when unmedicated and untreated. And people who have been together as long as both couples have cannot look me in the eye and tell me that they were not concerned about what wifey was doing when they weren’t home. The notion that a mother would never hurt her child is a fantasy fabricated by Hollywood, and is a notion that is driven home constantly.  Yet more and more mothers are hurting their children (or at least it is making the news more). People need to get their heads out of the sand and face reality. We know there can be incidentily in some cases the possibility or danger that an excess like that happens. But whne they go off to work, I don’t think they realize this. But the warning signs were there.  She wasn’t taking her medication. Sooner or later she’d start acting and talking irrationally.  If she wasn’t that way in front of him, I know she was with the kids and they would be asking Dad about things that Mom said. My husband starts counting pills when I am not "myself", even if it is just from a bad day at work.  Anything that is not what he feels is "normal" for me, and he starts asking me about things and making sure I’m taking my pills and will even call the pdoc to make sure everything is okay.  During my last med switch, he did not leave me alone with my son at all, and would call me often to make sure I am okay.  There have also been several times when his family would call, I do or say something off the wall, and his father asks about any of these "new fangled mental illnesses" he "hears so much about in the news lately". My point is, there were warning signs that these women were becoming unstable and irrational as well as erratic.  And the husbands allowed the children to be left alone with these women with no way to know what will happen.  Sure, we hear about the horror stories and the worst that could happen.  But that many deaths of children are too many IMHO.

Response:

That is certainly what the jury thought after the ‘facts’ were brough before them ever so wrapped in nice ready to swallow packages. I guess someone was present and saw everything? I doubt it.

This is where you are wrong.  The oldest child watched Mom start to down the younger child, revive him, and when she started drowning him again, he went to his room and watched a movie. Abroad that is how many people look at american jury trials. The facts are unimportant to a case. it is about convincing a jury.

Don’t forget, it is also a manner of how much money you have. Anyway, aside from that, you would look upon this woman with more regard if she had fallen on her knees and crie dout forgivre me?

No.  Because she revived her son only to attempt to drown him again, being successful the second time.  If she had only tried once, I would not have been so quick to say she is guilty.  But because she had the presence of mind to revive him only to kill him a few minutes later tells me she knew right from wrong. So Andrea Yates was ’sorry’ and she said in a way she meant it. And between that and the puritanic dress she probably wore with ruches in the collaryou are satisfied she showed remorse.

Actually, Susan Smith was more puritanic in dress.  But what made me believe in Andrea Yates’ sincerity is the fact that shortly after her arrest, she was still unmedicated but realized the enormity of what she had done.  And she was sorry. Even after she was medicated in prison, she still is sorry and her story has never changed. Id that woman yelled ina  courtroom they were liars I have no doubt that she was unfot for trial. Well, perhaps not.

Three different experts for the state and for the defense (for a total of six experts) declared this woman competent for trial.  There would not have been a trial if they felt she was unfit for trial. Death  is worse?

Actually, you can’t execute the mentally ill or the mentally retarded. I am pretty sure she will rather die than rot in jail for 50 years so that you and the masses can feel good about yourself that a crazy irresponsible woman will never have a life again…as if she can be blamed for being schizofrenic, as if she asked to be. Living with MD must be a piece of cake compared to her problems.

Living with bipolar disorder is not a piece of cake.  And to be honest, I think it’s good for her to have a long sentence.  That way she can’t hurt her other child.  SHe can’t be blamed for being schizophrenic but she can be blamed for refusing to take her medication or work with her doctors to find one that does work or that she can live with. I am against death penalty. If a society needs to resort to death penalties something is definately wrong with that society. It is a sad thing that state killings are needed to deter the bad people…and it does not even deter them. I think it is barbaric. Those people like Smith should be helped more so that these things do not happen.

Good for you.  I am not against the death penalty, I believe that there are some people that deserve death because of the horrible crimes.  However, I do not believe that this is a case for the death penalty.  Ted Bundy deserved it, this woman does not.  Susan Smith got off lucky in a way.  But her behavior since she’s been behind bars tells me nothing has changed.  And she’s not sorry. It goes even further. Not only are kids trialed as adults which is against international law, they want to forcefully administer drugs to mentally ill patients so they are clear headed and cured enough to be able to be put to death!!!! I cannot express enough my loathing of such a society.

SO what do you suggest we do with those hard core kids who are violent and can’t be rehabilitated?  How many other people have to die before the children become adults and able to be prosecuted as adults? And, um, they don’t put the mentally ill to death anymore.  The supreme court cracked down on that recently when they ruled on executing the mentally retarded. I seen that on tv.

If you had been watching TV, you would be aware of a program called the Innocence Project, run by Barry Sheck and Peter Levinson (yes, the two DNA legal experts on OJ Simpson’s dream team).  It is non profit, and prisoners apply to have DNA from their cases tested, and that if the results prove that the prisoner is innocent, the courts are petitioned and they are released.  The only hitch is that the prisoners must pay for the DNA tests themselves, and many of them have managed to raised the money. yes, this public case will be ion the news in 5 years for sure. And all these good mothers and people will rally support to infleunce the parole people involved. Bloodthirst will be revived. And she will never get out of jail. The public outcry will be too big because all these church going people wit ruches in their collars have so much power.

Actually, you don’t know much about the parole system, do you?  Parole hearings are NOT public, and the prisoners, prosecutors, victims, survivors and family members can be present.  The results may or may not be public, depending on the state.  The inmate’s records may or may not be available to the public, depending on the state.  BUt this is for sure, she will get out, it just depends on her behavior while she is in prison and the fact that she asks for treatment. I know MUCH about the US justice system. There are so many reports on it, documentaries. Why don’t you check out Amnesty International’s report on the USA. It is a nice read.

You watch too much damn TV.  I am well aware of Amnesty International.  I regard them as much as I do PETA.  They do some good work elsewhere in the world.  I just would love to see how some of them feel when their families are torn apart by violence and see how generous and forgiving they are then. Same here. And most countries have this system. But here it is not up to some biased group of parole officers to determine if they are ready to go out.

How do you know the parole officers are biased?  They look at the offender’s record while in prison…look at the opportunites the inmate has taken, looked at their conduct while in prison, anything the inmate does to improve their situation when they get out of prison.  The inmate has the opportunity to plead their case, as does the victim and prosecutor.  And not everyone is released, but many are.  Could you sleep at night knowing you freed a murderer to possibly murder someone again? Would that fulfill you inside? Would it make your neighborhood safer?

What would make my neighborhood safe is the woman next door being medicated.  Her little stunt with the blow gun last weekend was the last straw.

Response:

I don’t know why you are obsessed with violence toward others.  My husband is rightfully concerned that I have the best quality of life possible, and that if I start to act irrationally, I get help.  I have explained to him that if I start to get manic, I may not recognize the symptoms.  This is characteristic of the disorder.  I don’t have to be violent toward others to be a danger to myself.  Heck, I don’t even need to be feeling suicidal to do harm to myself.  I can be driving recklessly, or not paying the bills, or ignoring important tasks at work. The reality is that bipolar people can function like normal people much of the time, but we can also slip into mania/hypomania/depression and do things that will harm ourselves or others financially, emotionally, or physically. We can act irresponsibly.  In a fairly mild example, I am responsible for putting drops in one of our dogs eyes 4 times a day.  This last week I was a bit down, and I forgot to do it for 2 days.  I just plain forgot, because when I’m down I have trouble handling details.  This caused the dog to feel discomfort and set back her healing.  She’ll be okay – but what if this were a child I was caring for an I forgot to give her important medication because I was depressed?  Or what if I were taking care of a child and I had a mood episode?  While I was focused on coping, anything could happen to the child.  Kids can get burned, drown, wander into the street, or get into medicine cabinets quite easily if a parent isn’t paying attention. I stand by my assertion that anyone who leaves a child with a parent who is seriously mentally ill (and not in a state of control) is irresponsible. Regardless of whether that person *knows* that the sick person is violent or not. Diane

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Not all mentally ill people have a violent tendancy Diana. My gf has MD. If that is a serious mental illness I am not worried. instead of hurting people, she helps people. First as a nurse and after being stigmatised at the hospital after an episode and being scapegoated for trouble at the department, she, as she had done before alongside the work in the hospital, gives footreflex therapy and energetic therapy and is now starting her own business.

Response:

I agree. She needs TREATMENT, not prison.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You say that child died in a "horrible way". That tells me that you speak from your heart, not your mind. to me it is irrelevant how the child dies. Now I can put my finger on it.  You don’t have kids, do you?  I promise you, if you had children, you wouldn’t be so cold.  Even better, I don’t think you are human because you are way too detached and frigid.  Makes me wonder if you even have a heart. I think it’s time for us to quit arguing with this guy.  He’s just seeking attention and to him, we will always be wrong and he will always be right. Why do you react this way? I understand that having kids clouds judgement. Your protecion mechanisms kick in. I mean, only trying to imagine how your own child would die like this….that is how jury trials work. I am not cold or frigid. But I tend to look at things from a distance. as you would need to do. Nothing happened to your kids. And that mother killed her own kid. try imagine what that does to a mother? No, I am not cold. I think it is tragic that someone sits in jail for 50 years. What a waste of life. You call me cold but you don’t feel anything for the mother and what she must live with? If she was only 20 she will be 70 when she comes out. if she doesn’t suicide first because of what she did. At 70, what kind of life will she live is she doesn’t get cancer at 60? What a ridiculous amount of time. But alas! Society has its revenge. the feelings of the bloodthirsty masses and mothers are fulfilled. My thoughts are with that mother. The kid…if you like, is in heaven. The mother…is in hell.

Response:

Thank god you were able to be there for him!  What a luxury for him to come to this understanding at the age of 20.  

THanks.  I’ve tried to explain all this to him, and finally when I could use his pending fatherhood as an example, he finally understood.  He so desperately wants to be a dad, and wants to be the greatest dad that it just clicked for him. Perhaps a discussion of denial is in order here.  My definiton:  Secrets so bad that we can’t even acknowledge them ourselves. This is a big problem in dealing with these types of problems, but I agree with you, someone needed to be monitoring this!

I grew up with the Queen of the biggest barge going up and down the river Denial, and that barge is still chugging strong.  I have sat back and watched the warnings rear their ugly heads only to have fallen on deaf ears.  And I have little to no tolerance for those who flat out refuse to see things as they really are and just consistently stick their head in the sand.  But that’s just me and my issue with it.

Response:

I think that you make a mistake in judgement. If someone stops using medication they may indeed do so because the side effects are troubling and at that time unendurable. This woman did not expect to go into this excessive mode. It was not her intention to kill anyone. I don’t believe that she can be even partially blamed.

Oh, but I think you also made a mistake in judgement.  I have a nephew who is bipolar, rapid cycling at that.  And he was on some powerful meds.  He was feeling better, and being 18 he felt that he didn’t need to take his medication anymore, so he stopped.  He never had any side effects or any problems with the meds, he just felt like he didn’t need them anymore since he was "cured".  I never could get him to understand that he needed to keep taking his medicine. Over two years and three suicide attempts later, he finally understands.  He got depressed, was suicidal, and called me for help.  I got him back in the county clinic, got him medicated once again, and he now understand that this is something he has to manage for the rest of his life, this is something that he can’t just stop because he was feeling better.  He’s now 20 and has a lot to live for, including the birth of his first child next month. She knew the risks of going off her medication, and her husband knew them better than she did.  And the idiot still left his unmedicated wife alone with the kids. So even if she voluntarily stopped her medications, at the time of the killing she didn’t know what she did and THAT should always be the point where a jury decides whether or not someone is mentally impaired.

Even the expert hired by the defense said that she knew right from wrong if she revived the child only to drown him again to keep him from telling on her.  It was also proven by the experts in the Andrea Yates trial that she also knew what was right and what was wrong, even when she was totally out of it. Stopping your meds does not mean an automatic murder. If you take meds that make your head clear(er), you do so from being an individual with the right to do what you want. You have rights. You have the right to stop because by law at that point in time you have the right of self determination. You are truly free.

What about the rights of her children to live?  What about the rights of citizens in her neighborhood to live?  What about everyone else’s rights who are around this woman who is unmedicated and could snap at any moment and do heaven knows what.  No, nobody could be killed, but people still could be seriously hurt. What about my rights?  I have the right to not worry about the schizophrenic lady next door going off her medication and doing something to harm me or my family. One person going off their medication is playing Russian Roulette, only it’s not just your head the gun is pointing at. Do you consider yourself seriosuly mentally ill?

No, because I am medicated. So does the man get any sentence for leaving the kids? That is also a mentally impairment. or lack of sounds judgement.

I think the sentence is being served right now, and he and his son are paying the price.  He will always live with the regret of leaving his wife home alone with those two children, unmedicated, and not "alright".  She gave ample warning that something was wrong and he chose to overlook it or see to it that she was not a danger to those children. As you can see, no one expects that anyone goes out killing kids. Those things can never be prevented.

I’ll remember that if it ever happens to you.

Response:

You say that child died in a "horrible way". That tells me that you speak from your heart, not your mind. to me it is irrelevant how the child dies.

Now I can put my finger on it.  You don’t have kids, do you?  I promise you, if you had children, you wouldn’t be so cold.  Even better, I don’t think you are human because you are way too detached and frigid.  Makes me wonder if you even have a heart. I think it’s time for us to quit arguing with this guy.  He’s just seeking attention and to him, we will always be wrong and he will always be right.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – More persecution: "TROY, N.Y. – A mother diagnosed as paranoid schizophrenic was sentenced to the maximum 50 years to life in prison Wednesday for drowning her 4-year-old son in a bathtub last year and attempting to kill her other son. …..Kenneth Wilhelm was working a night shift as a nurse at Albany Medical Center 30 miles away at the time. He testified his wife had stopped taking medication for her illness and her mental condition had deteriorated. " She got the MAX. The judicial system just has no concept. Amazing for people who consider themselves educated and intelligent.

Not a flame, not meaning to be overly provacative, but… Having read this thread, I wonder if some of the responses would be the same if a MAN had done the same thing… suffering from a similar kind of illness, discontinuing the same medications… It’s not all that uncommon, unfortunately. The main difference is that it seems that men tend to use guns to kill their families, and that they kill their wives as well as their children. The sad fact is that the prison system IS the biggest mental health provider in this country, warehousing hundreds of thousands of those who suffer from various forms of mental illness, and who have commited various crimes… from public urination to murder. Hospitals for the "criminally insane" are packed to the rafters, provide little in the way of real treatment and rehabilitation, and are mistakenly (but not always unintentionally) thought of as "country clubs". Prosecutors are loathe to seek any penalties other than prison time, and most juries get no choice. Cases like this one and Andrea Yates’ are simply emblematic of the problems involved in sentencing the mentally ill. They’re pretty easy to call… yes, they are seriously mentally ill. Yes, they need to be treated for their mental illness. But where and how.. and for how long? In a way, seems like prison might be a more humane option than hospitals for the criminally insane, which basically provide solitary confinement and forced medication. Prison can possibly offer more (limited) freedom and opportunity for rehabilitation than hospitals for the criminally insane (unless you’re talking about supermaxes like Pelican Bay). Some of the arguments regarding sentencing and/or treatment fall apart when contronting other cases of the mentally who commit horrible crimes. Jeffrey Dahmer and John Wayne Gacy- sociopaths who may have suffered from "attachment disorder"; a serial pedophile like Father Geoghan; pure-D sociopaths like Ted Bundy and Henry Lee Lucas. As far as I’m concerned, these people are all classically DSM-IV "mentally ill"… and none of them deserved anything but hard prison time or the death penalty. You can’t treat some people, and you can never release them back into the population (Serial pedophiles are notorious for recidivism). Just some thoughts. Jim M.

Response:

She got the MAX. The judicial system just has no concept. Amazing for people who consider themselves educated and intelligent.

I’ve gotta tel ya, stories like this horrify me.  My perception is heavily biased due to having been severely abused by my untreated Manic Depressive mother. The idea occurs that this incident probably didn’t occur just out of the blue. There were probably signs that the mother was having difficulty coping and perhaps having difficulty bonding with the child.  I could be wrong. I agree that the husband and others should have noticed and should have gotten help for the family before it came to this. Of course, i don’t know all the particulars.  Again, this is what should have been done in my family.. Beyond scary. Maggie

Response:

he now understand that this is something he has to manage for the rest of his life, this is something that he can’t just stop because he was feeling better.  He’s now 20 and has a lot to live for, including the birth of his first child next month.

Heather, Thank god you were able to be there for him!  What a luxury for him to come to this understanding at the age of 20.   In the last few months I have come to the shocking realization that booze and codine are downers and not suitable for a severe depressive like myself.  Light bulb moment, heeded with good results.   She knew the risks of going off her medication, and her husband knew them better than she did.  And the idiot still left his unmedicated wife alone with the kids.

Perhaps a discussion of denial is in order here.  My definiton:  Secrets so bad that we can’t even acknowledge them ourselves. This is a big problem in dealing with these types of problems, but I agree with you, someone needed to be monitoring this! Maggie

Response:

More persecution: "TROY, N.Y. – A mother diagnosed as paranoid schizophrenic was sentenced to the maximum 50 years to life in prison Wednesday for drowning her 4-year-old son in a bathtub last year and attempting to kill her other son. …Kenneth Wilhelm was working a night shift as a nurse at Albany Medical Center 30 miles away at the time. He testified his wife had stopped taking medication for her illness and her mental condition had deteriorated. " She got the MAX. The judicial system just has no concept. Amazing for people who consider themselves educated and intelligent.

Response:

She got the MAX. The judicial system just has no concept. Amazing for people who consider themselves educated and intelligent.

It’s a reflex reaction.  The fact that she stopped what she was doing, revived the child, and then started drowning him again (and succeeding the second time) led all the experts who testified that she knew the consequences of what she was doing.  It’s the same thing that happened during the Andrea Yates trial. (I’ll spare you the diatribe about how I think Rusty had a hand in things and he should have gotten a vasectomy.) Unfortunately, you can’t forcibly medicate in every state, and even if you can, it’s under extreme circumstances.

Response:

Diane, I agree with you completely.  Well said. — c website  http://www.plazaearth.com/philo

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I think that you make a mistake in judgement. If someone stops using medication they may indeed do so because the side effects are troubling and at that time unendurable. This woman did not expect to go into this excessive mode. It was not her intention to kill anyone. I don’t believe that she can be even partially blamed. I guess it’s a matter of opinion.  In my opinion, if a person knows that they have a disorder which makes them unstable or a danger to others, and they choose to not be medicated for that disorder, then they are at least in part responsible for the consequences, whatever those consequences are. If they do not know they have a disorder, or they are taking care of it as best they can, then they can’t be held responsible.  She knew she had a disease that effected her judgement, but rather than experiment with different treatment options, she chose to stop treatment, knowing that she had the responsibility of taking care of two small children.  She may not have known what she was doing when she killed her son, but she knew what she was doing when she stopped taking her meds.  It’s sort of like an alcoholic who kills someone when they are drunk.  They may not know they are going to kill someone when they take their first drink. They may not be able to control how much they drink.  They may not be able to control their actions when they are drunk, but they had the ability to choose to take their first drink, however difficult it would have been to not do so, so they are held responsible for their actions when they are drunk. besides that, she killed the boy while mentally impaired, she had obviously no control over herself at that time. her actions are clear to me. The jury thought she panicked and revived the kid. Then killed him again to cover herself. But to me that seems she didn’t know what she was doing because she killed him again. She was acting out some fantasy. If the boy had seemed to have died and she stopped, and the boy would have coughed up water, she would have killed him again, and again, and again. So even if she voluntarily stopped her medications, at the time of the killing she didn’t know what she did and THAT should always be the point where a jury decides whether or not someone is mentally impaired. And again even besides these 2 points, stopping meds is voluntarily. Stopping your meds does not mean an automatic murder. If you take meds that make your head clear(er), you do so from being an individual with the right to do what you want. You have rights. You have the right to stop because by law at that point in time you have the right of self determination. You are truly free. You’re right, stopping meds is not murder – but a lot of things could have happened to those children when she was irresponsible, and her son would be just as dead.  She should have known that stopping her meds would decrease her ability to care for them, and could lead to behaviour which could harm them.  The does not, IMO, justify the sentence she received.  I think it was unduly harsh.  What she did was not premeditated murder.  It was more like reckless disregard or maybe manslaughter at the worst.  If she really couldn’t stand taking her meds, then she should have made accomodations to ensure the welfare of her children before she stopped, when she was still rational.  By the way, the case in texas where the woman killed all her children is different, imo, because she was told by a medical professional that she could stop taking her meds. She did what she thought was right. The responsibility for those children’s death’s should lie at the feet of the professional who stopped her meds and didn’t bother to follow up on her condition. Now the jury says in fact that she was not free because she stopped her meds and that lead to the death of the boy. But how can you blame a person who has the freedom by law to either take a drug or not? At that time her drugs were not forced upon her I assume. So what the jury did was in retrospect find her mentally impaired to the point she should have been forced to take medication because if she would not, it would lead to murder. This sounds a lot like the film with Tom Cruise where he gets blamed for a murder he has not committed yet. (Minority Report) The jury blames her for stopping medication AS IF she knew she would commit murder. I would not even call it murder. I would downgrade it to whatever US law allows. something like unvoluntary attaempt to inflict bodily harm. Do you consider yourself seriosuly mentally ill? So does the man get any sentence for leaving the kids? That is also a mentally impairment. or lack of sounds judgement. As you can see, no one expects that anyone goes out killing kids. Those things can never be prevented. I do consider myself seriously mentally ill, although bipolarity is not the same as schizophrenia (although I understand that BPI’s can exhibit similar symptoms at their extremes).  I have a disease with as high a mortality rate as breast cancer.  How much more "serious" can you get?   I have never had a hallucination, and my delusions  are more like unreasonable expectations. But I have set up checks in my life so that if I start becomeing manic, I have people who can warn me so that I can take action.  If I were responsible for small children, and I chose to go off my meds, I would arrange for someone to monitor my behaviour so that if I became irresponsible the children would be protected.  These things can be prevented.  If she had not gone off her meds, then she probably wouldn’t have killed her son.  Would he have left them with her if she had been ill with a fever so high that she couldn’t get out of bed to care for them? But that is the thing with mental illness. You cannot compare it that easily with a fever. These are matters of the mind and by definiton much more hard to assess. Which is why we have to be even more careful that we are rational.   I guess this stems from my own feelings about being bipolar.  Before I knew what was wrong, I did some things I’m not proud of, but I dismiss them because I really didn’t know I was being irrational.  But once I was diagnosed and medicated and able to think clearly, controlling the disorder to the best of my ability became my responsibility.  If I go off my meds now without a reasonable alternative, then whatever I do is my responsibility.   I have the right to stop taking my meds.  But rights come with responsibilities, and if I choose to stop my meds, I am responsible for the results. Knowing I have a disease, I am responsible for controlling it to the best of my ability, and minimizing it’s impacts on those around me. Diane

Response:

—I have often wondered what the court might rule if I ran up Credit card debts,all the rest….would they consider me "incompotent?"stop,stop ,stop—–    in this age where therapies like "Reality Therapy" and CBT rule,what do ya thin?R

Response:

I think that is a good thing. Look at what happened now. A person who is ill, and I am not even wanting to say mentally ill, just someone who by the default of her illness has to be impaired in judgement, is sentenced to 50 years in jail.

What scares me more about this case and about the Andrea Yates case is that both husbands KNEW that the women were not taking their meds and both husbands WILLINGLY left their children in the care of these mentally ill women they knew to be unstable when medicated.  Sure, Andrea had her mother in law there with her for a little while, but see what happened? Unfortunately, in the US, mental health is at the bottom of the list, and for many, it’s easier to just lock up someone forever, with no hope of treatment.  It is a stigma that has just become worse over time because you always hear the horror stories, you never hear anything good.  You’d be amazed at how many times I’ve heard someone run their mouth about being mentally ill and my co workers turn to look at me because they know I’ll say something.  And the looks on the idiots’ faces when I tell them that I am "mentally ill" and that they never knew it are priceless.  Most of them think I’m full of it and don’t take me seriously. But there are a few who are even more shocked when I start telling them who else is famous for being "mentally ill". Therefore I am sceptic to what might happen if they would have even more freedom to force you to take medications against your will. To me that is the utmost disrespect for an individuals’ life and it will not prevent these kinds of accidents. instead the authorities will, in good american tradition, abuse this regulation to the fullest extent.

Well, I once felt like there are some people who truly need to be forcibly medicated.  I don’t know for sure now, I want to do more checking around first. But I can tell you that no matter what, SOMEONE will find SOME WAY to abuse the law in the US, just has it has always been by someone in some form or fashion. And not just here, it could be anywhere. But who am I. Perhaps I am just a paranoid schizofrenic, right?

LOL My husband says I’m a little too paranoid for my own good.

Response:

I think that you make a mistake in judgement. If someone stops using medication they may indeed do so because the side effects are troubling and at that time unendurable. This woman did not expect to go into this excessive mode. It was not her intention to kill anyone. I don’t believe that she can be even partially blamed.

I guess it’s a matter of opinion.  In my opinion, if a person knows that they have a disorder which makes them unstable or a danger to others, and they choose to not be medicated for that disorder, then they are at least in part responsible for the consequences, whatever those consequences are.  If they do not know they have a disorder, or they are taking care of it as best they can, then they can’t be held responsible.  She knew she had a disease that effected her judgement, but rather than experiment with different treatment options, she chose to stop treatment, knowing that she had the responsibility of taking care of two small children.  She may not have known what she was doing when she killed her son, but she knew what she was doing when she stopped taking her meds.  It’s sort of like an alcoholic who kills someone when they are drunk.  They may not know they are going to kill someone when they take their first drink. They may not be able to control how much they drink.  They may not be able to control their actions when they are drunk, but they had the ability to choose to take their first drink, however difficult it would have been to not do so, so they are held responsible for their actions when they are drunk. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – besides that, she killed the boy while mentally impaired, she had obviously no control over herself at that time. her actions are clear to me. The jury thought she panicked and revived the kid. Then killed him again to cover herself. But to me that seems she didn’t know what she was doing because she killed him again. She was acting out some fantasy. If the boy had seemed to have died and she stopped, and the boy would have coughed up water, she would have killed him again, and again, and again. So even if she voluntarily stopped her medications, at the time of the killing she didn’t know what she did and THAT should always be the point where a jury decides whether or not someone is mentally impaired. And again even besides these 2 points, stopping meds is voluntarily. Stopping your meds does not mean an automatic murder. If you take meds that make your head clear(er), you do so from being an individual with the right to do what you want. You have rights. You have the right to stop because by law at that point in time you have the right of self determination. You are truly free.

You’re right, stopping meds is not murder – but a lot of things could have happened to those children when she was irresponsible, and her son would be just as dead.  She should have known that stopping her meds would decrease her ability to care for them, and could lead to behaviour which could harm them.  The does not, IMO, justify the sentence she received.  I think it was unduly harsh.  What she did was not premeditated murder.  It was more like reckless disregard or maybe manslaughter at the worst.  If she really couldn’t stand taking her meds, then she should have made accomodations to ensure the welfare of her children before she stopped, when she was still rational.  By the way, the case in texas where the woman killed all her children is different, imo, because she was told by a medical professional that she could stop taking her meds. She did what she thought was right. The responsibility for those children’s death’s should lie at the feet of the professional who stopped her meds and didn’t bother to follow up on her condition. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Now the jury says in fact that she was not free because she stopped her meds and that lead to the death of the boy. But how can you blame a person who has the freedom by law to either take a drug or not? At that time her drugs were not forced upon her I assume. So what the jury did was in retrospect find her mentally impaired to the point she should have been forced to take medication because if she would not, it would lead to murder. This sounds a lot like the film with Tom Cruise where he gets blamed for a murder he has not committed yet. (Minority Report) The jury blames her for stopping medication AS IF she knew she would commit murder. I would not even call it murder. I would downgrade it to whatever US law allows. something like unvoluntary attaempt to inflict bodily harm. Do you consider yourself seriosuly mentally ill? So does the man get any sentence for leaving the kids? That is also a mentally impairment. or lack of sounds judgement. As you can see, no one expects that anyone goes out killing kids. Those things can never be prevented.

I do consider myself seriously mentally ill, although bipolarity is not the same as schizophrenia (although I understand that BPI’s can exhibit similar symptoms at their extremes).  I have a disease with as high a mortality rate as breast cancer.  How much more "serious" can you get?   I have never had a hallucination, and my delusions  are more like unreasonable expectations. But I have set up checks in my life so that if I start becomeing manic, I have people who can warn me so that I can take action.  If I were responsible for small children, and I chose to go off my meds, I would arrange for someone to monitor my behaviour so that if I became irresponsible the children would be protected.  These things can be prevented.  If she had not gone off her meds, then she probably wouldn’t have killed her son.  Would he have left them with her if she had been ill with a fever so high that she couldn’t get out of bed to care for them? But that is the thing with mental illness. You cannot compare it that easily with a fever. These are matters of the mind and by definiton much more hard to assess.

Which is why we have to be even more careful that we are rational.   I guess this stems from my own feelings about being bipolar.  Before I knew what was wrong, I did some things I’m not proud of, but I dismiss them because I really didn’t know I was being irrational.  But once I was diagnosed and medicated and able to think clearly, controlling the disorder to the best of my ability became my responsibility.  If I go off my meds now without a reasonable alternative, then whatever I do is my responsibility.   I have the right to stop taking my meds.  But rights come with responsibilities, and if I choose to stop my meds, I am responsible for the results.  Knowing I have a disease, I am responsible for controlling it to the best of my ability, and minimizing it’s impacts on those around me. Diane

Response:

I don’t think she should get off. In Norway, we’ve got a special kind of sentence where you have to be treated in a prison-like mental institution until the doctors feel you are well. This means that you might never get out – but you get treatment. When you kill a child in such a horrible way, it is obvious that you are sick, no matter your diagnosis. You should get therapy and medical help – but you should not be released, considering the damage you could do. I’ve been crazy. Way psychotic. If I did something wrong during these periods, it is still my responsibility. I can’t hide behind "I didn’t know what I was doing". But perhaps that is just me. Regards, Haakon – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – More persecution: "TROY, N.Y. – A mother diagnosed as paranoid schizophrenic was sentenced to the maximum 50 years to life in prison Wednesday for drowning her 4-year-old son in a bathtub last year and attempting to kill her other son. …..Kenneth Wilhelm was working a night shift as a nurse at Albany Medical Center 30 miles away at the time. He testified his wife had stopped taking medication for her illness and her mental condition had deteriorated. " She got the MAX. The judicial system just has no concept. Amazing for people who consider themselves educated and intelligent.

Response:

I have seriously mixed feelings.  I don’t think that she should be punished so heavily for something she had no control over. But I have to believe that she made a choice when she stopped taking her meds, and that choice led to her son’s death, so she is at least partly responsible.  On the other hand, one of my meds is seroquel, and I don’t know if I could stand being as foggy as it makes me all the time, so I can empathize with her stopping her meds. On the other hand, if she is this dangerous, she shouldn’t be out on the streets.  I’m glad I wasn’t on the jury. What I don’t understand is how a man who knew that his wife was seriously mentally ill, and who had stopped taking her medications, could leave his children with her.  I know it’s inconvenient to deal with child care – but how could anyone leave their children with a seriously ill person?  Would he have left them with her if she had been ill with a fever so high that she couldn’t get out of bed to care for them?  I doubt it.  Until "mental" illness is recognized as "real" in our society, these cases will keep happening.  I pray for the day when we have effective treatments for all "mental" diseases that don’t have horrible side effects, and when these treatments are available to all people. Diane – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – More persecution: "TROY, N.Y. – A mother diagnosed as paranoid schizophrenic was sentenced to the maximum 50 years to life in prison Wednesday for drowning her 4-year-old son in a bathtub last year and attempting to kill her other son. ….Kenneth Wilhelm was working a night shift as a nurse at Albany Medical Center 30 miles away at the time. He testified his wife had stopped taking medication for her illness and her mental condition had deteriorated. " She got the MAX. The judicial system just has no concept. Amazing for people who consider themselves educated and intelligent.

Response:

Related Posts

Leave a Reply