Andrea Yates found not guilty

Estee2

Wed, Jul 26 2006, 7:56 pm

She should be hospitalized for MANY years !

Her husband is definately responsible for what she did.
He left her alone every day with them and knew she had
PostPartum Depression from the baby before.

From what I've read about her case, it gets worse with each pregnancy
and in combination with getting no sleep and whatever
wierd religious issues they had, he is why she went nuts...

P.S. Anyone else hear (or have you felt) that PPD
is worse after girls than after having boys ?

↑ cindy324 ↓

Wed, Jul 26 2006, 11:48 pm

Quote:

Now if she did it in a fit of irrational anger one kid in the bath is one thing Shocked but to methodically do 5 one at a time I mean I think she still deserves to serve time and more.
And yes her husband is to blame though not sure what yet Exclamation
_________________

but see that's the thing. if she had only killed one of them in a fit of rage, that would show that she wasn't insane she just couldn't control her anger, for which she def. should be locked up in a max securiy prison for life!

but because she methodically killed all 5, shows she thought she was doing the right thing, and then she called her husband and told him to come home. shock

I mean those are the actions of madness.

↑ amother ↓

Thu, Jul 27 2006, 12:50 am

only1 wrote:

She's insane. So if she is let out and goes to a bar and meets a guy and gets pregnant should she be allowed to keep the child?

This just makes me so sad Crying

As a mother who has suffered from PPD. First of all what this poor woman had is the most extreme form called PPP (postpartum psychosis). This is most definitely a form of TEMPORARY insanity. The reason the above quote makes me sad is that nowhere in it, or in any of the other replys, did it aknowledge the fact that the insanity is temporary. I agree with those who said that any mother who deliberately sets out to kill her children had to be insane at the time. But if the woman was suffering from PPP at the time, can it not be that she will recover and be sane again?

it is all just too sad to think about. But I hope that if Andrea Yates ever does recover, that she will be given another chance. Not condemed for ever because she once suffored from an illness.

Crayon210 ↓

Thu, Jul 27 2006, 1:44 am

amother wrote:

The reason the above quote makes me sad is that nowhere in it, or in any of the other replys, did it aknowledge the fact that the insanity is temporary.

But couldn't it recur temporarily if she were to have more children?

Quote:

But if the woman was suffering from PPP at the time, can it not be that she will recover and be sane again?

Yes, but can't it be that she'll then relapse if she has another child?

Quote:

But I hope that if Andrea Yates ever does recover, that she will be given another chance. Not condemed for ever because she once suffored from an illness.

Who should give her another chance? A man should want to be married to her and have children and risk her going crazy and killing them again? Or killing him? Or killing the neighbor, the mailman, or anyone else?

It's a nice idea, but I don't see how someone would be able to take on such a huge responsibility, with such huge risks.

↑ healthymama ↓

Thu, Jul 27 2006, 2:32 am

People with such severe PPD are probably advised to not have anymore children. Crayon, all the scenarios that you describe are easily avoided by permanent birth control.

Chani, another very interesting legal/ethical issue is that of death row inmates and medications. A person who is insane or mentally disturbed is not supposed to be given the death penalty as far as I understand. But what happens if those pple are given medications which stabilize them and make them functional ?

↑ Crayon210 ↓

Thu, Jul 27 2006, 2:39 am

healthymama wrote:

People with such severe PPD are probably advised to not have anymore children. Crayon, all the scenarios that you describe are easily avoided by permanent birth control.

That's not necessarily such a simple thing.

Also: how much do we understand about these illnesses? Could something other than childbirth cause these types of mental conditions? If so (or if we don't know), aren't we taking a chance with the safety of others by letting dangerous people back on the street? Confused

↑ healthymama ↓

Thu, Jul 27 2006, 2:54 am

Quote:

Also: how much do we understand about these illnesses? Could something other than childbirth cause these types of mental conditions? If so (or if we don't know), aren't we taking a chance with the safety of others by letting dangerous people back on the street

post partum psychosis is caused by the extreme hormone fluctuations that happen after delivery and I think this is well documented.

As for your argument about safety- we are all taking a chance always. Anytime anyone who committs a crime or is just violent, there is always a risk of that person doing it again. What about people who have temper problems and husbands who abuse wives and parents who abuse kids ? And people who break into houses and steal cars ? You can't keep everyone in jail forever. You do what you can to stabilize the person and prevent relapse.

↑ Crayon210 ↓

Thu, Jul 27 2006, 2:55 am

Of course.

I'm just questioning the amother who wants Andrea Yates to be given another "chance" if she recovers from her illness. I think that's a lot to expect of a man, to be married to a woman who killed her kids, and very well might kill future children based on her condition. Sad

↑ healthymama ↓

Thu, Jul 27 2006, 3:06 am

forget about the prospective husband, I personally think it is a lot to expect from Andrea Yates- to expect anyone who has gone through that to be able to have a normal relationship with someone at the level of marriage. It must be incredibly traumatic for her when she is lucid and aware of what she has done.

↑ mimsy7420 ↓

Thu, Jul 27 2006, 10:32 am

I'm not talking about her getting married, having more children and living happily ever after. PPD or not, there is obviously something else going on inside her head, because why don't the other millions of women in America with PPD drown their children. There is obviously something else messing her up.
I'm talking about a hypothetical scenerio (a more likely scenerio then her getting married and living happily ever after I might add) of her going to a bar, picking up a guy, getting pregnant. Should she be allowed to keep the baby?

↑ cindy324 ↓

Thu, Jul 27 2006, 12:08 pm

if any of you has a tv, tonight on primetime live, they're showing never before seen footage of andrea yates being interviewed by her psychiatrist. I'm curious to see what she says.

↑ healthymama

Thu, Jul 27 2006, 12:19 pm

regarding the unplanned pregnancy scenario- her medications and mental stability would have to be very well monitored and micromanaged before I would agree that she could keep her child. But it's possible, hypothetically.

↑ Chani ↓

Thu, Jul 27 2006, 1:19 pm

As a practical matter, she's already in her 40s and I can't imagine any circumstances under which she would be let out, even for a visit with her parents, until well after menopause. And, even assuming that she were let out, social services would be all over her the moment it was discovered she was pregnant. She'd never be able to keep a child.

↑ mumsy23 ↓

Thu, Jul 27 2006, 1:33 pm

Chani, I think only1 was asking a hypothetical question meaning, lets say she is let out and is able to have children.

I think the answer to that is what I said before. Whoever decides if she is let out is probably going to take the possibility of her having children into account. I think it would be irresponsible to let her out and then once she is pregnant, decide if she is allowed to keep the children.

If she isn't sane enough to keep her children, then she is not sane enough to be let out. If she is let out, then how can anybody take her child away? By letting her out you are saying "you are sane enough to live your like like a normal person" and that includes keeping her own children if the situation arrises.

If they don't want to take such a risk, they shouldn't be letting her out in the first place!!! Forget about her own children, what about everyone else she will be around?!

↑ Crayon210 ↓

Thu, Jul 27 2006, 1:37 pm

mumsy23 wrote:

If they don't want to take such a risk, they shouldn't be letting her out in the first place!!! Forget about her own children, what about everyone else she will be around?!

I agree. She is dangerous to society, not just her own children.

avigayil ↓

Thu, Jul 27 2006, 1:56 pm

Let's put it this way ladies...
Would any of you want Andrea Yates babysitting your kids, even for an hour while you weren't there?

I do agree the husband is somewhat responsible for this too. I have no clue how he got away without being charged with anything.

This woman did something horrible, 5 TIMES IN A ROW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I know she was probably very depressed and yes, had a history of mental illness. She still kept doing this action though and by the 4'th or 5'th screaming kid, don't you think she realized what she did was wrong? I think so.
The think the jury's decision was stupid beyond words.

Rochel Leah

Thu, Jul 27 2006, 5:01 pm

cindy324 wrote:

if any of you has a tv, tonight on primetime live, they're showing never before seen footage of andrea yates being interviewed by her psychiatrist. I'm curious to see what she says.

sounds intresting..but I don't have a tv. I could ask my grandmother to tape it for me.

↑ Crayon210 ↓

Thu, Jul 27 2006, 5:07 pm

avigayil wrote:

Let's put it this way ladies...
Would any of you want Andrea Yates babysitting your kids, even for an hour while you weren't there?

Good point.

Quote:

I do agree the husband is somewhat responsible for this too. I have no clue how he got away without being charged with anything.

He didn't commit a crime. That's why he wasn't charged with anything.

Quote:

This woman did something horrible, 5 TIMES IN A ROW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I know she was probably very depressed and yes, had a history of mental illness. She still kept doing this action though and by the 4'th or 5'th screaming kid, don't you think she realized what she did was wrong? I think so.
The think the jury's decision was stupid beyond words.

Do you understand the ins and outs of post-partum depression/psychosis, and how it all relates to the legal definition of insanity? I don't, so I'm not jumping to conclusions about judging the jury's decision.

↑ mumsy23 ↓

Thu, Jul 27 2006, 5:36 pm

Quote:

Quote:
This woman did something horrible, 5 TIMES IN A ROW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I know she was probably very depressed and yes, had a history of mental illness. She still kept doing this action though and by the 4'th or 5'th screaming kid, don't you think she realized what she did was wrong? I think so.
The think the jury's decision was stupid beyond words.

Do you understand the ins and outs of post-partum depression/psychosis, and how it all relates to the legal definition of insanity? I don't, so I'm not jumping to conclusions about judging the jury's decision.

smart.