TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Andrea Yates to get new trial
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Andrea Yates to get new trial - Page 2

post #31 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obi
Also, I do think that the husband should be charged. There is plenty of evidence that he knew she was a danger, but did nothing. As someone else said, if she was molesting the kids and he knew but did nothing, he'd be charged. So why not here? He is at least guilty of neglect.
I wonder what exactly you feel he should be charged with? Wasn't she seeing doctors for her depression? Where does his obligation begin and end?
Is he suppossed to automatically second guess the doctors diagnosis and recommendations? Is he a mind reader? Was he supposed to know she would do this? Was he giving her the benefit of the doubt that she would not commit these crimes? Did it even cross his mind that she would?

When do we stop blaming everyone around this family and start just putting the blame right where it belongs?
post #32 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kai Bengals
All of the medical psycho-babble is irrelevant to me, as is her indoctrination into her religion. It's all just more excuses and unfounded reasons for being lenient with her and criminals in general. She should consider herself lucky that I am not determining her fate.
I'm sure my position sounds harsh, but I'm really tired of criminals being coddled by the judicial system because some psychiatrist has come up with a mental disorder to explain away every defendants wrong doings.
Wow, I am thrilled to have you here, Great post.

The day people in this country start standing up and taking responsibility for their OWN actions and NOT blaming others I am sure I will have a heart attack and not live to see much of it anyway.
This country always has SOMEONE to blame, I find it disgusting.
post #33 of 56
I wonder why men are blamed in situations like this. I find it insulting to women that because of her gender she is victimised, she killed her children for crying out loud, she is being portrayed as a pathetic little girl who could not help herself. Women are not victims we are just as strong as men are.
post #34 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharky
I heard she is in a prison for the mentally ill, so my dumb question is sshe is in a protected enviornment why a new trial.??

I think that is the place for a mentally ill person who is a danger to others..
She is getting a new trial because the "expert witness" (Park Deitz, who is a renown expert in criminal psychology) provided false testimony that she had seen a Law & Order where a woman had drown her children then "gotten away with it" with the insanity defense. There was no such episode. That testimony, as a plausible pre-meditation, was part of the reason she was found guilty, instead of not guilty be reason of mental defect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KaiBengals
When do we stop blaming everyone around this family and start just putting the blame right where it belongs?
No one is NOT blaming her! No one is saying that she didn't do it, that is wasn't horrible, or that she should be free to breed again. So far all I've seen in this thread is that she should be treated for her mental illness for the rest of her life instead of being in general population prison for the rest of her life.

It's debates like these that make me understand why people like Barbara (MomofFranz) and Vespacat are so very defensive when it comes to mental illness. There obviously are a lot of people who don't understand it, think it's a bunch of hooey used to "get away" with something. It is an illness, it happens to affect the brain in a way that can't be controlled. People with serious mental illness cannot control their brains like those without illness. It's truly that simple - no psychobabble.
post #35 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb
So far all I've seen in this thread is that she should be treated for her mental illness for the rest of her life instead of being in general population prison for the rest of her life.

Really? Well you need to keep reading then, because I've seen numerous calls in this thread for the husband to be put on trial along with the doctors. You yourself were one of them. I've also seen calls for the husband to be castrated.
post #36 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kai Bengals
Really? Well you need to keep reading then, because I've seen numerous calls in this thread for the husband to be put on trial along with the doctors. You yourself were one of them. I've also seen calls for the husband to be castrated.
I was referring specifically to Andrea Yates herself, since you seem to be saying that we all just want to let her off the hook and place no blame on her. I do think her husband should be held responsible too, not necessarily for murder but criminal negligence sure seems to fit in my book. It won't happen, realistically. Do you really think he's totally innocent in all this?
post #37 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb
So far all I've seen in this thread is that she should be treated for her mental illness for the rest of her life instead of being in general population prison for the rest of her life.
Shes not in general population prison. New trial or not to "clear her name" along the lines of mental illness, it is my belief that this woman should never ever ever be allowed to venture into society again. She wont be "cured". A facility for the criminally insane imo, is where she belongs forever. I disagree that the Doctors or Father should share legal responsibility, and honestly, I believe if they had thought she was this insane, they would have locked her away before she killed her children. If she had a "snapping" episode and then did it, you cant blame doctors/father for not psychically being aware that this one time, of allll the other times she had been with her children, would be this grave. Daddy imo has been punished enough: his children were systematically slaughtered, and living with that for the rest of his life is enough for him.
post #38 of 56
I have heard a LOT of critisism of the father, not just here, but I really haven't read anything that tells me he knew just how psychotic his wife could get. Does anyone have specific information about what he was told? Some people have a hard time believing or understanding what mental illness really is. Is it possible that the husband didn't "get it"?

I am becoming more sympathetic with the mentally ill. I used to kind of blow it off (as an excuse). I have learned differently and now understand that some people do actually have times they are insane. Because of this, I agree with most of you that she should remain somewhere for life where her illness can be treated, but not in prison.
post #39 of 56
This is a hard one. Here children won't ever get a second chance. They are dead. So does she deserve another chance? I really have to say no. She methodically went through the house and one by one and drowned her children . The older ones fighting her to get away to live. Then picked up the phone and told on herself.! She must of had a inkling of what she had just done was wrong.
Also she was able to hold herself together long enough for her husband to go off to work.Before she killed the children. She must of had some thoughts going on at this point as to right or wrong. As she knew if her husband was home he would stop her.
I do think that yes she probably was having some sort of mental problems. And yes her husband must of been aware of this. But murder is murder and those poor boys did not deserve to die at there mothers hands. She needs to be held accountable for her actions.
If any new ruling is reached. She should at least be kept institutionilized in a maxium security institution . And never ever be allowed to roam free again.
post #40 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sims2fan
I wonder why men are blamed in situations like this. I find it insulting to women that because of her gender she is victimised, she killed her children for crying out loud, she is being portrayed as a pathetic little girl who could not help herself. Women are not victims we are just as strong as men are.


She is not a pathetic little girl...she is a SICK woman!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now, I don't really get the whole second trial thing, but here's a thought:

Why does it matter if they shove her in a prison or a psychiatric facility? All of you crying for "justice" would have it...she would be removed from society, and essentially her chances of a typical life would be over (which they should be, IMO). Why does she have to be officially guilty, and called a calculating monster? I think those of us who are pushing for "willful responsiblity" for this crime on the part of Ms. Yates only need to read up on mental illnes AND mental health, and what the differences are.

Also, looking at the SYSTEM that facilitated these terrible murders is not a bad thing...they look at that all the time in other cases, and often accessories are named and charged.

PLEASE STOP EQUATING MENTAL ILLNESS WITH CRIMINAL INTENT OR EVIL!!!!!!!!!!This mindset has caused a lot of stigma and pain for many many people. Ms. yates is still responsible for what she did, no question, so let's please stop arguing about it - no one is saying she isn't.

Oh, and throwing her in prison and calling her a wretched person isn't gonna bring those kids back. It may make you feel better, but it isn't solving anything. You can either choose to be cruel and ignorant in this case, or you can take a closer look at what might be going on.
post #41 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueberrybeth
She is not a pathetic little girl...she is a SICK woman!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now, I don't really get the whole second trial thing, but here's a thought:
I don't get it either, she admitted it, she was convicted, sentenced and is doing her time. Case closed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blueberrybeth
Why does it matter if they shove her in a prison or a psychiatric facility? All of you crying for "justice" would have it...she would be removed from society, and essentially her chances of a typical life would be over (which they should be, IMO). Why does she have to be officially guilty, and called a calculating monster? I think those of us who are pushing for "willful responsiblity" for this crime on the part of Ms. Yates only need to read up on mental illnes AND mental health, and what the differences are.
We already have justice, but people are trying to un-do justice by having a new trial. She's officially guilty because she admitted it and then was convicted. I still don't believe she was/is mentally ill enough to not realize what she was doing. Afterall as someone else has pointed out, she was clear headed enough to call the police afterward to announce her children were all dead. If she was really mentally ill and irrational, maybe she would have called Domino's Pizza to announce the death of her kids.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blueberrybeth
Also, looking at the SYSTEM that facilitated these terrible murders is not a bad thing...they look at that all the time in other cases, and often accessories are named and charged.
I still don't get this "system" that needs looking into. The only things that I see facilitated the murders were the tub and the water. It still boils down to her doing this and no one expected her to do something like this. What exactly is the "system" supposed to do? Had they taken her children from her, there would have been a whole new group of people jumping up and down crying about how unjust that would have been. It never ends......

Quote:
Originally Posted by blueberrybeth
PLEASE STOP EQUATING MENTAL ILLNESS WITH CRIMINAL INTENT OR EVIL!!!!!!!!!!This mindset has caused a lot of stigma and pain for many many people. Ms. yates is still responsible for what she did, no question, so let's please stop arguing about it - no one is saying she isn't.
There is such a thing as being criminally insane. Look at Manson.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blueberrybeth
Oh, and throwing her in prison and calling her a wretched person isn't gonna bring those kids back. It may make you feel better, but it isn't solving anything. You can either choose to be cruel and ignorant in this case, or you can take a closer look at what might be going on.
I think a close look was taken, during her trial and she was convicted and sent to prison. If everyone agrees she's responsible, let's just leave her where she is. It's not cruel or ignorant to uphold justice.

I'm going to bow out of this thread now. I respect the views and opinions of you that disagree with me, but the impasse has been reached. We're all lucky to live in countries where these sort of things can be debated and where we are allowed to reveal our differences of opinion without fear of retaliation or government censor.
post #42 of 56
For all the people thinking this new trial is to "un-do justice" or don't understand why there will be a second trial, let me explain it one more time.

The one expert witness, Park Dietz who is a well known and respected criminal psychologist (ask any of us True Crime buffs - we know who he is) who said that she had a clear mind when she killed her children LIED on the stand. He said that since she watches Law & Order regularly she must have seen a specific episode that he assisted with pertaining to a woman who drowns her children and then gets away with it by pleading insanity. Problem is the Prosecution didn't do their research before he made this claim, because there was never an episode with that storyline that aired. Since he was the ONLY expert who said that she was in her right mind, and the jury agreed with him, the Texas Supreme Court (who isn't known to side with criminals often) ruled that because of the false testimony the verdict had to be overturned. Thus the need for a second trial. It isn't because someone just wants her to get away with it.

This is the way our justice system works. This isn't too difficult. If it was anyone else who was convicted with false testimony would there be such an outcry for them getting a new trial? She gets a new trial because the Prosecution messed up, and messed up big time.
post #43 of 56
Valanhb - Thank you for clarifying! You are excellent at explaining. I am sorry that I didn't come into that part with the facts (bad girl...bad girl...)

It truly is great that we can debate this in the US, and on this site. Ultimately, the jury will decide Ms. Yate's fate. But I have enjoyed all the different opinions we've discussed!

We probably won't ever know what was going through her head at the time she committed these acts. God bless the ones who will judge her in this new trial (imagine jury duty for this one!).
post #44 of 56
I'm puzzled...

I've seen posts mentioning how lots of criminals are getting away with using mental illness as an excuse for commiting crimes, instead of being held responsible for their behavior. Can you list specific examples, please?

During trial coverage in Texas, the media here said that in spite of the public's common perception that the insanity plea is a common one (most likely gained from TV and movie dramas or radio talk shows), a verdict of "not guilty by reason of insanity" is nearly impossible to obtain in real life.

As has been pointed out before, in the rare instance when a person succeeds with the insanity plea, it does not mean that the individual didn't commit the crime, it means that she was insane and therefore not capable of controlling her actions. It doesn't mean she'll be let go, it means she'll spend the rest of her life secured in a mental hospital. So it's not a plea that would be used to "get away with murder" - the person who wins an insanity plea isn't getting away with anything: he's still going to be locked up, most likely for life.

For those who say Mrs. Yates should have been in control of her actions despite mental illness: Why is it that you perceive people suffering from mental illness as somehow being in control of their actions? Are people who are physically ill responsible for their illnesses? Should people losing control of bodily functions be punished for not controlling them? Or should they be treated?

Why is it so hard to understand the concept that things can go very, very wrong with the brain, just as they can with any other body part?

The whole thing is truly a tragedy, and it's terrible that her family and doctors didn't keep her psychosis under control. (I wouldn't consider her responsible for keeping her own psychosis under control, because it was a psychosis.) Now five little children are dead, and their mother will never be free again (which I feel is the right outcome, because she is clearly dangerous). Perhaps if everyone involved had taken her very dangerous mental illness as seriously as they would have taken a physical illness that made her incapable of caring for her children, this wouldn't have happened. I don't know Just something to think about.

Does anyone know if Park Deitz is going to be tried for perjury? At the very least, he ought to lose his ability to take the stand as "expert witness".
post #45 of 56
[quote=blueberrybeth]She is not a pathetic little girl...she is a SICK woman!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now, I don't really get the whole second trial thing, but here's a thought:

Wow! Look its called IMO and it is just my opinion you don't have to get so mad at me. We don't know the facts of the case just what the media is saying. I was commenting on the victimisation of women in general and how I find it distrubing. She may be a "sick" woman but put a man in her place and everyone would be condemning the fact that he got a new trial and calling for his head. I do believe in mental illness vut I am not sure whether she is mentally ill or not.

This is just my opinion please don't take it so personally.
post #46 of 56
Quote:
For those who say Mrs. Yates should have been in control of her actions despite mental illness: Why is it that you perceive people suffering from mental illness as somehow being in control of their actions? Are people who are physically ill responsible for their illnesses? Should people losing control of bodily functions be punished for not controlling them? Or should they be treated?
Oh no, they shouldn't be treated. Not at all. All the meds in the world are simple sugar pills, just placebo effective. They shouldn't be helped.

Hey, I know. Why not lock them down cellar and pretend they don't exist?

In case anyone was wondering, that was sarcasm.

Look. The brain works with chemicals, neurons, and cells, just like all the rest of the body. The fact is when a diabetic is diagnosed, his illness is clear and treatment is prescribed. He's not ever told that "well, suck it up, cupcake," or "it's all in your mind...". No, the simple fact is that he now needs to adjust his lifestyle and inject medicine into his body so he can function properly. His pancreas, and the Isles of Langerhorn (I think...) have stopped producing insulin, so he replaces it via a shot once or several times during the day. Furthermore, special identification bands are worn (and if anyone can tell me the history of why there are special id bands, you get ten brownie points...). That helps in case - oh horrors of horrors - the diabetic has an episode which his sugars go bonkers and he exhibits strange, violent, or inappropriate behavior.

When the brain chemistry goes wonky - and it does, just like a diabetic's pancreas can- the thought process gets wonky, too. Depending upon circumstances, sometimes people can tell, and sometimes they can't, that a person is brain ill. The difference between brain and body illnesses is a) body illnesses are more understood and accepted than brain illnesses, and b) body illnesses don't interrupt the thought processes and rational thinking which is what the brain does (among other things).

In brain illnesses, there is NOT an ability to do like others do; the thoughts are, literally, different and often bizarre.

A quick example from my life: when I am unstable (thankfully, not often anymore; I use those placebo pills [wink]), I often forget to pay the bills. The lights are the most often interrupted utility, and when I'm unstable, getting my lights turned off is a reason to suicide. When I'm stable, getting the lights turned off (which has happened once; low funds and I played them out incorrectly...) became an exercise in earthquake preparedness and an ice cream dinner.

For those who think that they can't be affected by mental illness, realize this: it is real. It is powerful. It is destructive. And it can be treated.

As to Andrea Yates, it was beyond plain that she had significant mental imbalances; she had several diagnoses, but did not follow the Drs orders regarding the meds. Why? BEcause there is an enormous stigma attached to someone who uses medications to be normal. For those who don't know, run a search for a post I made called "In My Dreams." That will give you a real, personal glimpse of what depression can do. And I'm lucky; while I have significant depression, it is not one of the more deadly ones (despite the suicidal tendancies...). My illness might kill me...it is unlikely that I'll take others out with me. But PPD/P (Post Partum Depression with Psychotic Episodes,) PPP (Post Partum Psychosis), and schitzophrenia can, and often does, kill other people.

I wish there was an ability for our society (global, not necessarily local), to understand that the brain can misfunction, just like anything else in our body. And that there needs to be an acceptance of those of us who are ill and manage our illness just like the diabetic manages his...

Does any of that excuse murder? No...but I guarantee you, the stigma some people are promulgating can kill some of us just as fast. Should I accuse you of murder, as well?

Best-
Michele
post #47 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv
Maybe this time they could try her hubby right along with her. He is at fault also IMO

I agree...He knew she had problems and also knew that she was
not a fit Mother,yet he did nothing to help her or the kids
post #48 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueberrybeth
I think spending the rest of her life is a mental institution or under close watch is punishment enough, as she is truly mentally ill. She still did what she did, but she did not do it with a sound mind. And her husband is a monster, because if he had really cared he would have stopped fathering children with her and gotten her some help. My guess is that she had not been healthy for a long time before this offense (post partum psychosis occurs most often when the woman is already mentally ill), and her husband would not address it. She probably was not able to address it on her own.

Some say we are blaming the crime on others when we include doctors and the husband. I say that we are ignoring the root issues, such as the stigma aobut mental illness and spousal abuse, by blaming only Ms. Yates. If she was psychopathic or sociopathic, she would bear the burden of guilt. Because she was not, she shares it with all involved parties.
Beth, you're awesome. That's exactly what I wanted to say .

As far as their religion goes....I SPIT on ANY religion that insists that the woman be subservient to the man and be treated as his sex/baby machine. That encourages control, abuse, and RAPE. Plain and simple. Yes, I said it.

Andrea Yates must have postpartum psychosis because no sane person (NO sane person) would do that to their 5 children. I believe she had no control over herself. That IS a symptom of that psychosis. I also wouldn't be surprised if she additionally suffers from Battered Women's Syndrome.

If it were up to me, HIS butt would be charged with rape and domestic violence and rotting in jail for the rest of his life. SHE deserves treatment for her psychosis.
post #49 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by noni
Oh no, they shouldn't be treated. Not at all. All the meds in the world are simple sugar pills, just placebo effective. They shouldn't be helped.

Hey, I know. Why not lock them down cellar and pretend they don't exist?

In case anyone was wondering, that was sarcasm.

Look. The brain works with chemicals, neurons, and cells, just like all the rest of the body. The fact is when a diabetic is diagnosed, his illness is clear and treatment is prescribed. He's not ever told that "well, suck it up, cupcake," or "it's all in your mind...". No, the simple fact is that he now needs to adjust his lifestyle and inject medicine into his body so he can function properly. His pancreas, and the Isles of Langerhorn (I think...) have stopped producing insulin, so he replaces it via a shot once or several times during the day. Furthermore, special identification bands are worn (and if anyone can tell me the history of why there are special id bands, you get ten brownie points...). That helps in case - oh horrors of horrors - the diabetic has an episode which his sugars go bonkers and he exhibits strange, violent, or inappropriate behavior.

When the brain chemistry goes wonky - and it does, just like a diabetic's pancreas can- the thought process gets wonky, too. Depending upon circumstances, sometimes people can tell, and sometimes they can't, that a person is brain ill. The difference between brain and body illnesses is a) body illnesses are more understood and accepted than brain illnesses, and b) body illnesses don't interrupt the thought processes and rational thinking which is what the brain does (among other things).

In brain illnesses, there is NOT an ability to do like others do; the thoughts are, literally, different and often bizarre.

A quick example from my life: when I am unstable (thankfully, not often anymore; I use those placebo pills [wink]), I often forget to pay the bills. The lights are the most often interrupted utility, and when I'm unstable, getting my lights turned off is a reason to suicide. When I'm stable, getting the lights turned off (which has happened once; low funds and I played them out incorrectly...) became an exercise in earthquake preparedness and an ice cream dinner.

For those who think that they can't be affected by mental illness, realize this: it is real. It is powerful. It is destructive. And it can be treated.

As to Andrea Yates, it was beyond plain that she had significant mental imbalances; she had several diagnoses, but did not follow the Drs orders regarding the meds. Why? BEcause there is an enormous stigma attached to someone who uses medications to be normal. For those who don't know, run a search for a post I made called "In My Dreams." That will give you a real, personal glimpse of what depression can do. And I'm lucky; while I have significant depression, it is not one of the more deadly ones (despite the suicidal tendancies...). My illness might kill me...it is unlikely that I'll take others out with me. But PPD/P (Post Partum Depression with Psychotic Episodes,) PPP (Post Partum Psychosis), and schitzophrenia can, and often does, kill other people.

I wish there was an ability for our society (global, not necessarily local), to understand that the brain can misfunction, just like anything else in our body. And that there needs to be an acceptance of those of us who are ill and manage our illness just like the diabetic manages his...

Does any of that excuse murder? No...but I guarantee you, the stigma some people are promulgating can kill some of us just as fast. Should I accuse you of murder, as well?

Best-
Michele

My fiancè is a Type 1 (often referred to as a "brittle") diabetic. So, I do take offense to your sarcastic statement "That helps in case - oh horrors of horrors - the diabetic has an episode which his sugars go bonkers and he exhibits strange, violent, or inappropriate behavior." That is not something that should be treated with sarcasm. I have witnessed him with extremely low blood sugar (20) and extremely high blood sugar (over 500). In both instances, his mood shifts (he's never violent, but he can understandably be very irritable) and he feels sick as a dog. He almost went to the hospital last Thurs. because his high blood sugars caused ketones to appear in his urine. So please treat diabetes with a bit more respect.

Back on-topic. Regarding what you said, there ARE exceptions to everything. You surmise that diabetes is controllable. That is not 100% the case. I diabetic can do EVERYTHING they're supposed to (follow a proper diet, get plenty of sleep, make sure their bolus rate is concurrent with the amount of carbs ingested, exercise, etc.) and STILL have problems with spikes and dips in blood sugar, especially the "brittle" diabetics. Likewise, people with mental illness can be told all day long by doctors to take their medicine, but their psychosis can have such a strong hold on them that they think that they do not need the meds. That's the psychosis talking, not them.

Also, another thing regarding Andrea Yates: her husband was abusive. Who's to say he didn't confiscate her meds b/c he did not want her taking them "for religious purposes"? Control can be VERY extreme.
post #50 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by ugaimes

My fiancè is a Type 1 (often referred to as a "brittle") diabetic. So, I do take offense to your sarcastic statement "That helps in case - oh horrors of horrors - the diabetic has an episode which his sugars go bonkers and he exhibits strange, violent, or inappropriate behavior." That is not something that should be treated with sarcasm. I have witnessed him with extremely low blood sugar (20) and extremely high blood sugar (over 500). In both instances, his mood shifts (he's never violent, but he can understandably be very irritable) and he feels sick as a dog. He almost went to the hospital last Thurs. because his high blood sugars caused ketones to appear in his urine. So please treat diabetes with a bit more respect.

Back on-topic. Regarding what you said, there ARE exceptions to everything. You surmise that diabetes is controllable. That is not 100% the case. I diabetic can do EVERYTHING they're supposed to (follow a proper diet, get plenty of sleep, make sure their bolus rate is concurrent with the amount of carbs ingested, exercise, etc.) and STILL have problems with spikes and dips in blood sugar, especially the "brittle" diabetics. Likewise, people with mental illness can be told all day long by doctors to take their medicine, but their psychosis can have such a strong hold on them that they think that they do not need the meds. That's the psychosis talking, not them.

Also, another thing regarding Andrea Yates: her husband was abusive. Who's to say he didn't confiscate her meds b/c he did not want her taking them "for religious purposes"? Control can be VERY extreme.
I think you misunderstood. When I read that post I got from it that she was saying that we understand how problematic treating diabetes is, and we understand that it can make you behave oddly, so why is it that we can't give the same kind of understanding to illnesses whose source is the brain instead of the body?
post #51 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obi
I think you misunderstood. When I read that post I got from it that she was saying that we understand how problematic treating diabetes is, and we understand that it can make you behave oddly, so why is it that we can't give the same kind of understanding to illnesses whose source is the brain instead of the body?
I think so too, Aim.
She was being sarcastic to prove a point for Mental wellness...
Yeah, What Obi said
post #52 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obi
I think you misunderstood. When I read that post I got from it that she was saying that we understand how problematic treating diabetes is, and we understand that it can make you behave oddly, so why is it that we can't give the same kind of understanding to illnesses whose source is the brain instead of the body?
That's precisely how I understood Michele's post.
post #53 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obi
I think you misunderstood. When I read that post I got from it that she was saying that we understand how problematic treating diabetes is, and we understand that it can make you behave oddly, so why is it that we can't give the same kind of understanding to illnesses whose source is the brain instead of the body?
...
My bad- sorry Michelle. I'm a bit sensitive when it comes to diabetes.
post #54 of 56
No need to apologize, Amy. I do understand how you feel; and your comparison is also very appropos to mental illness; you can do everything right, and still be out of control...except, with diabetes, it is accepted, understood, and treated. Whereas with mental illness, it is not; rather, it is negated, ignored, and pretended to not be real but rather a character defect.

I know this. My best friend and room mate suffers from the same illness I do; she has not responded to medication the way I have, has undergone electro-convulsive treatment, have had meds added/switched/removed/changed, and still, last night, she tried to kill herself. She is now in hospital...for as long as they think she needs to be there.

Amy, I am sorry that my post gave you any cause for upset; 'twas not my intention. As the others stated, I was using diabetes as an example. I find that it tends to be a comparision that most people can understand, because of the number of people that are diabetic, most people know at least one and can wrap their minds around depression and other mental illnesses using that as a point of comparison.

And for those who provided Amy (and others) with their understanding of my post, I thank you muchly. Considering I was in a brutal physical altercation last night (she didn't want to go into the hospital and got a tad more violent than ever before...but I'm a blackbelt; no-one was hurt...), and then spent the rest of the evening sitting with her while she fought and cried and begged and pleaded...it was a very upsetting event, and I didn't get home until 5 am...and have been on the phone with Drs and family since I woke at 10...thank you all for stepping in and clarifying on my behalf.

hugs to all, and be good to each other. (I am extremely emotional right about now...)

M
post #55 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by noni
Amy, I am sorry that my post gave you any cause for upset; 'twas not my intention.
post #56 of 56
Michele, I'm so sorry that your friend hasn't responded to the treatments. She's very lucky to have somebody who has such insight into her illness and is willing to try to help her, especially for such a long period of time. Her story illustrates that it isn't a matter of "pulling yourself together", i.e., being responsible for your actions under all circumstances.

Andrea Yates was out of control, period. I wonder how many people who are upset about her getting a new trial and possibly being found "not guilty by reason of insanity" would accept a "guilty, but insane" verdict. That exists in some countries (a local man with a long history of schizophrenia who murdered his parents and brother received it just recently), and results in commitment to a mental institution, generally in a ward for the "criminally insane".
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Andrea Yates to get new trial