<p>This happened in a neighboring town last year. My brother knows the boy who was killed by his mother. Apparently she was trying to “save him” from a epileptic future, and she is an intelligent, well-educated, almost snobbish woman. Now she is not guilty, and will get mental health treatment for years from the State.</p>
<p>The awful thing I read is that her plan was to take her own life, but she was unsuccessful, in that she was discovered before she bled to death. I cannot imagine having to live with the guilt. She is in her 40s but looks aged in the photo.</p>
This confuses me. If she is not criminally responsible because she was insane and did not realize what she was doing, then why did she leave a note asking for forgiveness? </p>
<p>Berurah
Havent you had to make a decision that was difficult but it was the right thing to do?
I think we all have had to make tough choices particulary around parenting.
I can see someone feeling that what she was doing was right, and the only choice available, but still be painful.
She could have felt that it was the “best/only” choice for herself and her son, but still been able to recognize that it would be painful to those around her.</p>
<p>Mental illness except in rare cases, is not 100% 24/7 “wacko”, to use a descriptive term
Depending on the illness and environment you have periods of lucidity, which is perhaps why some people feel those with mental illness should just “get over it”, or “really aren’t that bad”.</p>
<p>“If any lesson can be learned from this tragedy, it is that people should not hesitate to seek professional advice and treatment for mental health concerns,” the statement reads."</p>
<p>OK so why didn’t she do the same for herself prior to killing her son? She can’t just declare a death sentence for her son because she couldn’t deal with it.</p>
<p>Killing one’s child is not a “parenting choice.” It is a criminal offense. Declaring her insane does not make it the right thing to do, it just means that she supposedly is mentally ill (or had a lawyer that got her out of a prison term.)</p>
If she were able to “recognize that it would be painful to those around her” then she is sane enough to be aware of the consequences of her actions.</p>
<p>
I’m sorry, EK, but in THIS particular context, this statement of yours gives me a feeling of nausea. Of course in the most GENERAL parenting context, I would be 100% in agreement with you.</p>
<p>I am, however, fully admitting that I was not at that trial and have no knowledge of this case other than what I read in that article. This woman <em>may</em> be “criminally insane”…or she may not be. I really couldn’t say.</p>
<p>~berurah
p.s. I did feel that Andrea Yates was criminally insane at the time of her crime.</p>
<p>This is particulary timely- as my father died by his own hand 32 years ago tomorrow, and there is still difficulty to getting help, from a patients family, from the medical profession/ins companies, and from media/society.</p>
<p>I don’t know why those around her didn’t get her help, but it is possible they were contributing to the demands placed on her, as when my mother had a psychotic break when my sister and Bil were staying with her during the year that they were building their first house ( they saw her as “battling with the devil”).
When you are mentally ill, you can’t just "go get help " for yourself, because you are not thinking rationally, like you can get help for a broken leg.</p>
<p>Supposedly the epilepsy had been very newly diagnosed, and for some reason, the mother was not able to process this information/deal with it. Neighbors say that she became obsessed with reading on the internet, and came to the conclusion that there was no hope for her very bright son. She decided that his life was not going to be a quality one, and then tried to kill herself afterwards, as her own punishment, (or maybe as an escape from having to live with it). Poor little 12-year-old boy. Epilepsy is very treatable from what little I know.</p>
<p>She was going to eliminate 50% of her family, what about the other 50% left behind?</p>
<p>OK, this is what I don’t get. This woman gets to walk after killing her son because she is crazy. Another woman goes to prison and an entire family is destroyed because she gave alcohol to some teens. So if the second woman says, “Oh, I was not in control, I was depressed, I was not thinking sanely” shouldn’t she be able to walk too?</p>
<p>There is another case- 4 people shot to death outside Chicago that were from this area, reportedly the mother killed the children then herself, according to her husband, but of course there should and will be a full investigation I assume.</p>
<p>I don’t own a gun or have access to guns or perhaps my life would have turned out differently.
about 17 years ago and continued for several years, I was under so much stress that I seriously considered killing myself and my children almost every day. My husband was alcoholic and abusive ( emotionally & physically), I had no where to go, and was exhausted, because my youngest child didn’t sleep for more than an hour or two for years and screamed the rest of the time.
My husband was also not physically available, since he worked swing shift and didnt get home till after midnight.
I was mentally, physically and emotionally exhausted and only knew that I could not go on- & I didn’t have anywhere to get help.
I couldn’t get help, because that would have taken effort that I couldn’t muster up.
I didn’t have an access to weapons, but I obsessed about driving off the bridge, with my children in the car.
I was the only one caring for them, I was able to think about what would happen to them if I died-and I really thought we would be better off
If anyone else would have stepped in, why didn’t they do so to help me?</p>
<p>Another reason why I think the criminally insane decision may be questionable in this case is because this woman had enough cognitive dissonance regarding her actions to attempt to take her own life. So, again, she was either 1.) aware of the pain that she was causing OTHERS, or 2.) had enough sane feelings (what the vast majority of people would feel if they took the life of their own child) to feel that amount of guilt around her act.</p>
<p>The definition of criminal insanity is pretty rigid. I know a lot (hand-waving here) of states use the M’Naughton rule, which includes a strict requirement that the insane person not be able to tell that what they are doing is wrong. Given only the facts as presented in the press, it does not seem clear that she lacked this ability. Does New Jersey (that is the right jurisdiction, isn’t it?) not use M’Naughton?</p>
<p>This woman gets to walk after killing her son because she is crazy. Another woman goes to prison and an entire family is destroyed because she gave alcohol to some teens.</p>
<p>obviously two different judges.
Im not a judge but I can make water cooler worthy remarks about that one too.
That does seem that that the punishment doesn’t fit the crime- I would agree that judges and juries make decisions all the time that make me uneasy.
A couple years ago, two teens were convicted & sentenced as adults for the killing of a playmate that occurred when both of them were less than 12.5 years old.
That one bothers me a lot especially since one of them has below normal intelligence and severe learning disabilties.
But this is the justice system we have-
we try and change it- and sometimes cases are reevaluated- with new evidence or a new judge.
But our court systems are so clogged that , that is a rarity.</p>
<p>It does seem that even if under emotional/physical duress someone felt compelled to commit a crime- they could still know the difference between right/wrong and be found guilty.
I think in most cases people are found guilty whether by judge or jury, and the cases I have read about, like Diane Downs, I would reach the same conclusion.</p>
<p>“Gets to walk” is not an apt description of the outcome of this case. I can’t speak for New Jersey, but here in California the distinction between prison and the facilities for the criminally insane is a fine one. Another oddity is that, once declared criminally insane, they can be held indefinitely - even long after the prison sentence for their crime would have ended. </p>
<p>As to the decision in the case: I didn’t see the evidence, didn’t read the doctors’ reports and opinions, and would refrain from criticizing the judge’s decision without more information.</p>
</p>