<p>From the other article: The sister-killer heard voices in her head telling her to kill. Was this the first occurrence of hearing voices? Somehow I doubt that, since the killer was 50 and these sorts of things usually develop earlier than middle age. If the other sister knew that her sister was hearing voices and didn’t tell the Krim family, I certainly wouldn’t want someone like that in my employ. Neither article says what the lie told to the Krim’s was. </p>
<p>I would think that police investigators and prosecutors thoroughly questioned the defendant’s relatives and friends etc. at the time of the crime. Her case has not yet come to trial. I’m sure we’ll read more about the defendant’s history and the sister’s possible knowledge of defendant’s mental problems at trial.</p>
<p>From this article, it looks like the nanny was in disguise to pick up kids at regular time. Perhaps a doctor’s appointment or kid needed to go to an extracurricular activity and needed earlier pick up or who knows what led her to be there as same time as family. </p>
<p>It may not be insensitivity but something more to this story. </p>
<p>Also, i remember hearing that the NY Post is not always exactly the most reliable newspaper in the area in terms of factual reporting. Not sure - maybe story blown up out of proportion? </p>
<p>NY Post = National Enquirer with a city name attached.</p>
<p>It is sad that this is even in the newspaper. Why is it in the newspaper?</p>
<p>But on the surface, you cannot control the comings and goings of another person. I agree that what if the other family’s daughter has an appointment somewhere, or has to be picked up early otherwise? What grade is the other daughter in? Will she be in a school play or concert with the couple’s daughter? How can you force behavior on someone, in the US anyway?</p>
<p>The whole thing goes from a tragic coincidence to ridiculousness.</p>
<p>Here’s an article with some more background information: <a href=“Yoselyn Ortega, Nanny Accused Of Killing Children, Had Money Problems And Was Stressed About Son | HuffPost New York”>HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost;
For example, it appears that the Krims’ nanny had worked for them for two years before the crime. To me, this cuts against blaming the sister for whatever she may have told them when she was hired. On the other hand, it does appear that the woman was having mental problems that her family (including her sister) knew about. Whether they knew that she could be dangerous I don’t know.</p>
<p>Personally I’m not blaming the sister for the woman snapping - but as a parent I would not be able to prevent myself from worrying about someone with that family history being in charge of my kids. So, still amazed that she’s still a nanny.</p>
<p>One of the reasons why mental illness is such a stigma is that it forces people to keep it hidden. Even families of those afflicted are caught up in it, and many are in denial. Others have no idea how to help their family members. I do not have enough background to know how much the one sister might have known about her sister’s mental state. She might have thought her sister was “better”. </p>
<p>The reality is also that people have to earn a living. Both the family members, as well as those with past history of mental illness. </p>
<p>On a sidenote, we should all be a little afraid of the new DSM-IV codes. Everyone has some sort of mental illness pathology based on this new system. </p>
<p>Evil nanny’s actions do not necessarily mean her sister nanny is a threat or will ever suffer from mental illness. </p>
<p>Is it a risk you’d be willing to expose your kid to?</p>
<p><a href=“Bipolar Disorder: Symptoms, Causes, Diagnosis, Treatment”>Bipolar Disorder: Symptoms, Causes, Diagnosis, Treatment;
<p>So if I had a family member with that, would you think everyone in family is at risk for it? That is ridiculous. </p>
<p>Studies say there is a genetic link, so, actually you are at a higher risk.
Mental illness is illness, right? Just as I am at a higher risk for heart disease because both my parents and all my siblings have it. Why be in denial?</p>
<p>And what I mean by that is, preventing Susie the chance from being a teacher because her sister Jenny has it? It leads to all kinds of science fiction Minority Report type craziness, pardon the pun. Predicting one person’s behavior based on another’s is not realistic. </p>
<p>Where would you draw the line? Such a slippery slope. </p>
<p>Heart disease is not equal to mental illness. Not the same stigma. </p>
<p>If Susie is hired as a teacher after her sister gutted two little kids, one would hope the school required Susie to have mental evaluations and counselling as conditions of employment.</p>
<p>I believe that is actually against the law. An HR department could expect a person who has had mental illness to go through additional evaluations, but not a family member with no known illness. </p>
<p>I don’t think the school could require a sibling of a killer to have a mental evaluation; however, if you had a sibling who was a crazed killer, it might be a good idea to get a mental evaluation that you could volunteer if you were looking for a job.</p>
<p>So we are now guilty for our relatives’ actions? I don’t think so. </p>
<p>It would have been very nice if the family who has the sister as their nanny could come to an agreement that the nanny stay away from the school, but I don’t think that is 100% doable with a concerted effort that could go awry with any emergency that might arise. The whole purpose of hiring a nanny is to take care of the children so that parents can do whatever during those hours. It’s sad for the Krims, I agree. Not just sad but heart breaking, but the nanny they hired has a number of family members so working in the area, and there are also a number of Dominion women who look like the nanny who killed their children Those reminders are going to be around all over the place. </p>
<p>Also, believe it or not, Manhattan is a small place, and the Krim child as well as the parent willl be running into those nannies in many venues because like aged kid in like situations go to the same parties, outings, activities. So this is going to be an on going situation. For a long time , as the Krims have had another baby, and these nannies make their money doing what they do where they are doing it. Even transferring the child to a private school or moving, unless it’s quite the distance, and certainly just within NYC isn’t going to do, as they have found, is not going to get away from this issue. IF it’s a no deal issue for them, they need to move, out of state, far out of the area. Those nannies are not as able to move around as the Krims are. </p>
<p>I suggest the Krims get counseling in dealing with the situation for themselves and their child. This is not an issue the school, the other family or the sister of the killer needs to accommodate, though it would be nice of them to do so, especially for a year or so. But seriously, the Krims will likely be seeing this nanny all over the place as they are simply in the same stomping grounds with the same stompers as she has. </p>
<p>The sister is ‘guilty’ for not fulling informing the Krims of killer-sisters mental illness. I’m assuming this is the ‘misrepresentation’, of course, it’s material information that would have likely stopped the Krims from hiring the killer.</p>
<p>Are you suggesting that there is a standard of liability by which anyone who is aware that a family member is suffering from a mental illness - even if it’s just garden-variety anxiety or depression, much less psychosis – is obliged to inform employers and /or the authorities?</p>
<p>I’m very sorry for the situation, but we don’t “punish” people for the actions of their siblings or relatives in civilized countries. </p>