Today is 10 years since Andrea Yates drowned her children

[Nestof3]

I assumed that people who knew the Yates and perhaps the dad himself identified them as homeschoolers. I don't believe the media had the intentions you imagine at all.

 

If they weren't of school age, why would the media mention schooling at all?

 

And for what it's worth, I've never met a family who follows extremist parenting like the Pearls, who is quiverfull and under the sort of teaching this family was under who didn't homeschool.

 

I do agree that the media overemphasizes the fact that a family homeschools, and I do think that many people think still think homeschoolers are homeschooling so they can get away with their horrible parenting. I am not denying this.

 

 

Either way, it's fatuous for the media to mention in every report that the Yates children were homeschooled, as if not going to school until mandatory school age is somehow a bizarre and risky endeavor.

[Mrs Mungo]

I think whether or not to label them homeschoolers is a completely moot point. She was being left alone with kids who were in imminent danger from being left alone with her.

 

Again, I am going to say it: Her husband did not care or love her and her children. If he had he would have stepped up and gotten her the help she needed. I would be dead now without the help of my husband. She was then and is now a very, very sick woman who unfortunately will never get much better and she will now have to suffer with the deaths of her own children on her hands. Her husband got away with it in my mind. He ought to be rotting in jail just like she is; and yes I am a Christian and I do believe in forgiveness but i also believe in justice. Andrea has only to allow the Lord's vengeance to judge Rusty and His vengeance is not going to be pretty.

 

I agree that he's partially responsible. However, I think saying he didn't love her or his children is unfair. I don't know how things went down. But, I *do* know how capable some very sick people can *appear* to be. They can hide it. They can manipulate. I'm glad your husband was proactive and that he understood the score. But, not everyone *does* understand.

[Violet Crown]

I assumed that people who knew the Yates and perhaps the dad himself identified them as homeschoolers. I don't believe the media had the intentions you imagine at all.

Quite possibly. I think the "homeschooling" angle was juicy, and as with the white supremacist family, the media was more than happy to take the parents' word for things without doing the research themselves. But I do think the media wouldn't mention it in every report if they didn't think it had some connection with the case.

 

If they weren't of school age, why would the media mention schooling at all?

:confused: I don't understand the "if" in this sentence. They weren't of school age in Texas. That's not a matter of my opinion.

 

And for what it's worth, I've never met a family who follows extremist parenting like the Pearls, who is quiverfull and under the sort of teaching this family was under who didn't homeschool.

I'm happy to agree that they most likely would have gone on to homeschool. But they were not yet homeschoolers. Their children were not of school age. By the same reasoning, we could call a couple in the quiverfull movement who did not yet have children "homeschoolers."

 

I do agree that the media overemphasizes the fact that a family homeschools, and I do think that many people think still think homeschoolers are homeschooling so they can get away with their horrible parenting. I am not denying this.

Sure. I think you and I are pretty much on the same page. All I'm saying is that, given that Kindergarten isn't mandatory in Texas, and that plenty of parents don't put their children in school until the mandatory first grade, I find it bizarre that a family having only preschoolers is repeatedly described, in the press (which is supposed to care about accuracy), without caveat, as "homeschoolers."

[Violet Crown]

 

I think whether or not to label them homeschoolers is a completely moot point. She was being left alone with kids who were in imminent danger from being left alone with her.

It's relevant when they are repeatedly identified as homeschoolers, particularly when the name "Andrea Yates" pops up in the first ten seconds of a conversation about why homeschoolers should be monitored by the state.

[fairfarmhand]

((general response, not just to astrid))

 

 

I think a big factor in this tragic situation is the tremendous religious guilt many people feel at limiting family size. People are often told that their concerns about physical or mental health, finances, etc, show a lack of faith in God. If you believe that God and God alone "opens and closes the womb," and that God will provide for your needs if you have faith, then you likely believe that God would not let you get pregnant if the result was going to be homicidal psychosis.

 

Do I think it was stupid and irresponsible of them to have another baby? Yes, I do. I also think it's stupid and irresponsible for religious leaders to urge people to ignore their fears and concerns about having more children.

 

once again, the fallacy of "one size fits all" philosophy. It is fabulous that the Duggars can manage their large family. Not all people are Duggars. Not all people have the same coping abilities.

 

When do we wake up and quit comparing ourselves to one another?

 

I am in full agreement with Joanne, Aelwydd, and Asta. I would also like to say that Mrs. Mungo is 100% on target.

 

This nation has failed miserably in both the public and private sector on behalf of families and mental illness. We waste lives and the pain is unimaginable. The church, as a general rule but certainly there are exceptions in individual churches, has not done anything to educate men as to their responsibilities, and I hate to say it, many older women do not take the admonishment to "train the younger" women seriously or worse, those that do belong to some crazy cult like the one the Yate's belong to so they do harm of untold magnitude.

 

 

Faith

:iagree: It seems like nowadays, in the Church, of ALL places, young women are subjected to a load of crappy advice and criticism (you're not doing it right!) instead of support and love. My fil has a policy. (he's a pastor) Unless a person actually asks for his advice, he NEVER offers an opinion.

 

Thankfully, I've found a church where it is better than many I have been a part of.

[Carol in Cal.]

I am reading about it on the link provided. The first thought that pops in my head why did she kill the kids if she is a bad mother? Why not just kill herself? I hate selfish, nasty people like that.

 

Yes, the husband needed to be charged also!

 

I think that in a very delusional way she was playing out the result of her church's lack of belief in infant baptism. I remember reading at the time that the oldest was almost 8, and that that is the 'age of accountability' in their church, so that would imply that until then they were considered innocent, but after that they would be able to go to hell. So if she killed them, since she had messed them up so badly, they would at least be saved from that fate. But she knew that it was wrong to kill, so that's why she said that the devil was making her do it--because that's clearly against a commandment, and by definition the devil is behind that.

 

I'll say again what I said before. It was, at a minimum, criminally negligent of her husband to leave the children with her and no other adult. She was clearly and plainly not in her right mind. 5 kids, 7 and under! Quite a responsibility for any of us, but utterly and completely wrong for her.

[silliness7]

I am in full agreement with Joanne, Aelwydd, and Asta. I would also like to say that Mrs. Mungo is 100% on target.

 

This nation has failed miserably in both the public and private sector on behalf of families and mental illness. We waste lives and the pain is unimaginable. The church, as a general rule but certainly there are exceptions in individual churches, has not done anything to educate men as to their responsibilities, and I hate to say it, many older women do not take the admonishment to "train the younger" women seriously or worse, those that do belong to some crazy cult like the one the Yate's belong to so they do harm of untold magnitude.

 

 

 

These are the kinds of comments that I'm talking about. Did she kill her children because she was part of some "crazy cult" or did she kill her children because she was mentally ill? Not everyone in a crazy cult kills their children. Would she have killed her children anyway if she were not part of a crazy cult? Maybe she would not have. However, the problem, first and foremost was that she was mentally ill. She was stressed out about life and went postal on her kids. It happens to other people who don't have 5 kids and don't belong to a crazy cult and they get out their guns and they go to malls and college campuses and start shooting the place up.

 

I agree that we need to take mental illness much more seriously. But the musings of armchair psychologists tend to villify those who aren't villains and focus unneccesarily on triggers or stressors. All of us have stress. Most of us figure out how to cope with it without killing someone.

 

It seems that Andrea was misdiagnosed and mistreated for some time. I don't think this was her husband's fault. I don't think it was the church ladies' fault.

[Nestof3]

I meant if they were not homeschooling -- if this isn't something people knew about them -- and being that the children were under mandatory schooling age, the media would not have said anything.

 

I am certain when I started homeschooling in VA, the mandatory age was 6 by September (it's now 5 as idiotic as I think that is). I know many moms who were formally homeschooling their younger children prior to mandatory schooling age.

 

Quite possibly. I think the "homeschooling" angle was juicy, and as with the white supremacist family, the media was more than happy to take the parents' word for things without doing the research themselves. But I do think the media wouldn't mention it in every report if they didn't think it had some connection with the case.

 

:confused: I don't understand the "if" in this sentence. They weren't of school age in Texas. That's not a matter of my opinion.

 

I'm happy to agree that they most likely would have gone on to homeschool. But they were not yet homeschoolers. Their children were not of school age. By the same reasoning, we could call a couple in the quiverfull movement who did not yet have children "homeschoolers."

 

Sure. I think you and I are pretty much on the same page. All I'm saying is that, given that Kindergarten isn't mandatory in Texas, and that plenty of parents don't put their children in school until the mandatory first grade, I find it bizarre that a family having only preschoolers is repeatedly described, in the press (which is supposed to care about accuracy), without caveat, as "homeschoolers."

[Aelwydd]

DD is a paramedic and she's picked up suicidal schizophrenics...they have a very hard time "getting the plan" right so to speak. The hallucinations are just mind-boggling...the hardest one for them is when the person believes that the police officers, fire fighters, medics, etc. are demons...they literally, physically see them as demons...fire coming from their eyes, unearthly bodies, etc. so they are terrified of the very people there to help them.

 

This brings back unpleasant memories. My sister was dx'd schiz. with the onset of PP psychosis. She thought all of us (her family, dh, and friends) were all demons, masking as loved ones, and that she herself, had already died and was in hell. She recovered over the period of multiple medications, psych visits, and many months of time. Very shortly after her recovery, she became pregnant again, despite her and dh using bc. That pregnancy and baby were touch and go, but now, with 2 dc, her dh elected to get snipped a few years ago. He won't risk getting her pregnant again, because her health would be endangered.

 

FTR, she home schools both her 6 yo and her 4 yo, and she lives in TX. She is doing well now, and is a good mom and teacher.

[dirty ethel rackham]

 

Prosecutors will weigh a number of factors that may lead them to prosecute Andrea Yates' husband Russell for either child endangerment or negligent homicide, ABCNEWS has learned.

No decision has been made, but it is being seriously considered, sources said. Prosecutors would charge Russell Yates if and when the evidence warrants, but do not have the evidence now, sources said.

 

I guess evidence never warranted it. *Wondering* if someone is guilty and checking into it in no way, whatsoever, implies guilt. Does it? I'm not a lawyer. I just watch them on T.V. :001_smile:

 

 

Just because they didn't have enough evidence to charge him doesn't mean he wasn't culpable. Prosecutors many times know someone is guilty but will not go forward and charge someone if they don't think they can win. Look at all those rape cases that never get prosecuted. It doesn't mean those rapes didn't happen or that the rapist didn't do it. It just means that the evidence was not enough to make a prosecutor feel like its a slam dunk. They already had a warm body to prosecute ... Andrea.

 

 

 

Yates has come in for criticism for not doing more for his wife. She home-schooled all their children, and had little time to herself, and one friend testified in the trial that she tried to get Russell to do more, but he didn't.

 

This is the kind of carp that really frosts my cookies. I homeschool all of my children. I have little time to myself. I try to get my dh to do more but he doesn't. So what? This does not drive a woman to kill her children. Run off and get a divorce. Maybe. She was very sick. I hate fingers pointing at the homeschooling lots of kids thing. She was just sick. And I can't help but think how much more guilt this piles on him. Like if he would have just picked up his SOCKS the kids would still be here.:confused:

 

True - you wouldn't. But you aren't suffering from post-partum psychosis. It wasn't about picking up socks. It was about being more present for those children that he insisted had to be created. It was more about protecting his family when all the evidence pointed to a woman who was teetering on the edge. Thank your heavenly stars you have never been on that edge. I thank God every day that, despite the emotional and mental health challenges I have faced, I have never been on the edge of that particular cliff.

[foxbridgeacademy]

I believe that we alone are responsible for our actions. He could not have known that she would do such a horrible thing. I don't think he should have been charged with murder or even manslaughter. His actions were of willful neglect and he should have been prosucuted for that. I find it appaling that he got off scott free. The only good reason to rehash this is so that we know what signs to look for in our family and friends who may be suffering similarly to Ms. Yates. Otherwise I say let it go.

[Aelwydd]

Quite possibly.

 

:confused: I don't understand the "if" in this sentence. They weren't of school age in Texas. That's not a matter of my opinion.

 

 

 

The age of compulsory age of attendance applies to Texas public schooling only. Under Texas state law, hs'ing is defined as a "private school," and thus not subject to the age requirement. Here is the relevant regulation in question.

 

Therefore, by your logic, all Texan hs'ers are actually not really hs'ing, because their children are not subject to the same code as public schoolers.

 

Let's drop this disingenuous argument here, please. She had children up to age 7. She had desks and a classroom area for them, as well as materials and curricula present. She and dh identified as hs'ers.

 

All evidence indicates she was hs'ing her older children, in some shape or form.

Edited June 21, 2011 by Aelwydd

[FaithManor]

These are the kinds of comments that I'm talking about. Did she kill her children because she was part of some "crazy cult" or did she kill her children because she was mentally ill? Not everyone in a crazy cult kills their children. Would she have killed her children anyway if she were not part of a crazy cult? Maybe she would not have. However, the problem, first and foremost was that she was mentally ill.

 

I understand what you are saying, but the cult made it worse. My sister's 300 + pages of testimony/records that her entire class had to read and discuss, shows that even the pastor and his wife admonished him to NOT get her help, to NOT let her take medication, etc. They told him and her (as well as documented in the letters) that she was a demon, an evil witch, etc. and that it was outside the will of God for her to receive psychiatric help or take medication for the problem. The letter written to her by the pastor's wife are so evil that it is gut-wrenching. My sister said that further testimony and affidavits showed that Rusty Yates received this "she is Eve's witch, there is no such thing as mental illness, you are outside God's will, she is a bad mother and needs to stop sinning, if you continue to get her psychiatric help our window of opportunity to minster to you is dwindling/shrinking, etc."... the letters were part of the defense's case and so not released prior to or during the trial. Andrea Yates was absolutely hammered with this stuff. The worst of it is so bad my sister will not even discuss it with me. After the class was done studying it, the professor made himself plus other counselors available for therapy. He knew it would be very, very traumatic for his class and he also knew he needed to adequately prepare them for what they will deal with as mental health professionals. Many of them did come to cry, talk, cry, get it off their chest, begin sleeping again at night.

 

I'm sorry if this is an unpopular position, but the cult itself or the leadership thereof, absolutely exacerbated her condition - the evidence in this regard is overwhelming although in order to read it all, you'd probably have to get into a psychology class that is studying the case. I'm not exactly certain how the general public would get the court file otherwise unless one can order it through your sheriff's office or something.

 

I have not read the entire file. I have not felt the need to torture myself with the whole thing. I have read a lot more than most have and I suspect that Joanne, in the course of her class studies, has read as much more more of it than I have. So, I do stand by her opinion.

 

Honestly, it is amazing to me the strength that many have. Police officers and first responders witness this stuff, see it everyday, testify about it, have to recall the inimate details of it so they can't bury it in the recesses of their minds.

 

Additionally, Joanne, my sister, and other like her plus psychologists, psychiatrists, doctors, nurses in the ER's etc. deal with it too. Their ability to internalize and move beyond is to me, extraordinary and I don't think I would be capable of doing that. Even my own dd, who has had to make statements to police, prosecutors, etc. of the things she's seen on the job, the tragedies she has been called to, the 13 year old she and her medic instructor were unable to save...These people are my heroes! I know that is rather hugely off topic. But, I just needed to say it because the reality to me of this whole, grotesque case, is that there were police, and paramedics, and EMT's who had to deal with the outcome. There were psychitrists and counselors and nurses, etc. who dealt with her at one point, heard the news, had to be involved in the legal process, and then had to move beyond it and continue to try to help people. I only read about it and that is by choice. I don't deal with it.

 

I am ever so thankful for the people who do this work.

 

Sigh, as to the original topic. None of us will ever fully understand it. But, after reading nearly 100 pages of testimony, medical stuff, Rusty's own statements, the MIL's statements, the cult statement's, you name it...I don't want to read more and I will always be convinced of his guilt and a layer of culpability to the leadership in the cult and members of the cult. The cult culpability may not have been criminal by Texas law, it was absolutely, positively amoral and dangerous.

 

Faith

[KidsHappen]

.

Edited June 22, 2011 by KidsHappen

[asta]

I believe that we alone are responsible for our actions. He could not have known that she would do such a horrible thing. I don't think he should have been charged with murder or even manslaughter. His actions were of willful neglect and he should have been prosucuted for that. I find it appaling that he got off scott free. The only good reason to rehash this is so that we know what signs to look for in our family and friends who may be suffering similarly to Ms. Yates. Otherwise I say let it go.

 

This is a valid point.

 

Unfortunately, most people are content to read sensationalistic news reports about mental illness rather than fact based data (such as the link I provided).

 

If you feel like wrapping your brain around some statistics regarding who commits more violent crimes (hint: it isn't the crazy people), read this brain twister.

 

 

a

[silliness7]

This brings back unpleasant memories. My sister was dx'd schiz. with the onset of PP psychosis. She thought all of us (her family, dh, and friends) were all demons, masking as loved ones, and that she herself, had already died and was in hell. She recovered over the period of multiple medications, psych visits, and many months of time. Very shortly after her recovery, she became pregnant again, despite her and dh using bc. That pregnancy and baby were touch and go, but now, with 2 dc, her dh elected to get snipped a few years ago. He won't risk getting her pregnant again, because her health would be endangered.

 

FTR, she home schools both her 6 yo and her 4 yo, and she lives in TX. She is doing well now, and is a good mom and teacher.

 

I'm sorry about your sister. I'm glad she is doing better. She had a hard time of it after just ONE baby and got pregnant against doctor's orders. It's nice that she has compassionate people in her life to help her and not judge her.

 

Andrea's husband did not know she was sick until baby #4. From the article I read, he WAS trying to help her and was getting some run-around from the medical community. They had ONE more baby after that. MAYBE it was an accident. Maybe they were using bc but he didn't want that publicized in the media because trying to straddle his religious convictions and the world of public opinion he was darned if he did and darned if he didn't. I don't KNOW what went on with them. But I CHOOSE to give people in this horrible, hellish situation the benefit of the doubt that they did they BEST they could.

 

Have you noticed that your choice of language for your sister's predicament is totally different than your choice of language for Andrea Yates? You said Andrea's husband knocked her up...impregnated her. Those are inflammatory, loaded words and show your negative bias towards those who have lots of children and your assumptions that the women are being oppressed and would not want this or choose this lifestyle but are forced into it by oppressive religious teachings and oppressive husbands. And I see that bias frequently and that is what I am trying to argue against. But I see I'm not being very successful.

 

 

That is all. Going to hang-out in the curriculum threads for a few days. :tongue_smilie:

[Aelwydd]

I am bi-polar (which was her original diagnosis). I have had hallucinations. I have six children. I homeschool. I lived in TX at the time and most importantly, I was not medicated at the time. I don't know that I was ever as bad off as she was and I was incredibly lucky to have excellent family support even though we did not know exactly what we were dealing with at the time. This case had a major influenence on my decision to seek help and begin medication. However, it cuts very close to the bone and it is still viserally painful to read about. I truly feel that that I can say, "But for the grace of God . . ." Please keep in mind as you discuss this that I may not be the only one of the board to feel this way.

 

You were most fortunate then. I'm so glad you didn't fall into outright psychosis.

 

I do realize others may have had similar experiences. It's why I consider Andrea (and her dc) to be a most unfortunate victim of her disease. That is why I am so critical of her dh and those "church" leaders, who not only denied her a "life vest" by discouraging her from adequate treatment, but did the equivalent of pouring buckets of water over her head while she drowned.

[WishboneDawn]

I am reading about it on the link provided. The first thought that pops in my head why did she kill the kids if she is a bad mother? Why not just kill herself? I hate selfish, nasty people like that.

 

 

I don't think you know if she's really "like that". You're assuming there's some sort of reason in operation with a person in her position. There's none. It doesn't work that way.

 

I took a friend to a movie once. She was having a hard time with depression but I didn't realize just how deep it was. About three quarters of the way she asked to leave. She saying some very strange things and was completely "flat" personality wise. Turns out she was in the middle of a psychotic episode and I spent the next couple of hours in the car talking to her and trying to help her work her way out of it. We managed, I took her home, we talked with her husband and she got treatment. Today we're still good friends and she's doing infinitely better.

 

It was very surreal and I felt like I'd been dropped down a rabbit hole and I was only experiencing it all second-hand. I can't imagine how she must have felt. Some of things she mentioned very well might have seemed selfish and nasty out of that context but in the moment, not at all. And there's not a selfish or nasty bone in this woman's body.

 

To me, it only shows a lack of knowledge about mental illness and psychosis in particular to start making judgments about a person's core personality based on what they do or think in the middle of a psychotic episode. The whole point (if there ever is one) of one of those episodes is that you are not yourself. You are utterly and completely lost.

[FiveOaksAcademy]

.

Edited June 21, 2011 by FiveOaksAcademy

[Aelwydd]

I'm sorry about your sister. I'm glad she is doing better. She had a hard time of it after just ONE baby and got pregnant against doctor's orders. It's nice that she has compassionate people in her life to help her and not judge her.

 

Andrea's husband did not know she was sick until baby #4. From the article I read, he WAS trying to help her and was getting some run-around from the medical community. They had ONE more baby after that. MAYBE it was an accident. Maybe they were using bc but he didn't want that publicized in the media because trying to straddle his religious convictions and the world of public opinion he was darned if he did and darned if he didn't. I don't KNOW what went on with them. But I CHOOSE to give people in this horrible, hellish situation the benefit of the doubt that they did they BEST they could.

 

Have you noticed that your choice of language for your sister's predicament is totally different than your choice of language for Andrea Yates? You said Andrea's husband knocked her up...impregnated her. Those are inflammatory, loaded words and show your negative bias towards those who have lots of children and your assumptions that the women are being oppressed and would not want this or choose this lifestyle but are forced into it by oppressive religious teachings and oppressive husbands. And I see that bias frequently and that is what I am trying to argue against. But I see I'm not being very successful.

 

 

That is all. Going to hang-out in the curriculum threads for a few days. :tongue_smilie:

 

Yes, I chose my language deliberately. Because Rusty based his "family size choices" on information he received from cult leaders. My sister's dh and her were actively trying to prevent the second, and then he got snipped.

 

Did you read any of the posts since mine? There are several which point out that Andrea's mental illness was present long before the fourth child. She apparently considered stabbing her first child. Her disease only manifested clearly after the fourth. It was the repeated pregnancies, along with other factors, that contributed to her complete break down.

 

So, did you base your decision to have several children on the advice of clearly dangerous, cult personalities? Did your dh ignore repeated and increasingly serious indications that your health was failing, while engaging in attempts to impregnate you? Were you pressured to have children in quick succession by bullyish church leaders? Did your dh choose to leave you alone with your kids after multiple suicide attempts?

 

If the answer is "no," to those questions, then you can rest safely assured that I don't put your family in the same category as the Yates, no matter if you had 20 children. It is your bias that insists that any criticism of the fact that Andrea Yates could not cope with the stresses that came with her 5 children, plus hs'ing, plus serious mental illness, must mean that I think all large families are problematic.

 

Again, you are projecting your situation onto the Yates'. We are not discussing a case where a woman willingly, with full possession of her wits, chose to have several children with her loving husband. We are talking about a woman who was very sick, partnered with an irresponsible husband, who was bullied spiritually and emotionally by some whack jobs, who fed into her illness by telling her she was evil and the devil. Then, had 5 children fathered on her in quick succession.

 

Yes, I do use language that identifies Rusty as the aggressor and the party mainly responsible for the pregnancies, because Andrea was not in a position, emotionally or mentally, to make cognizant choices about how and when to reproduce. Anymore than a woman who is drugged is able to "consent" to sexual relations with her partner.

[Lady Florida.]

I can't remember any mother anywhere defending Rusty Yates 10 years ago.

 

 

 

This. My son was not quite 3 when it happened, and I remember following the case. There was much water cooler discussion about him not getting her proper care.

 

 

Honestly, it is amazing to me the strength that many have. Police officers and first responders witness this stuff, see it everyday, testify about it, have to recall the inimate details of it so they can't bury it in the recesses of their minds. <snip>

 

 

 

My stepson is a firefighter/paramedic and my daughter-in-law is an ER nurse. The things they deal with on a daily basis would overwhelm me. I am constantly amazed at their strength. Maybe that's why they're such a good match. Being in similar fields probably helps them empathize with one another over a tough day on shift.

[Mosaicmind]

I think whether or not to label them homeschoolers is a completely moot point. She was being left alone with kids who were in imminent danger from being left alone with her.

 

 

 

I agree that he's partially responsible. However, I think saying he didn't love her or his children is unfair. I don't know how things went down. But, I *do* know how capable some very sick people can *appear* to be. They can hide it. They can manipulate. I'm glad your husband was proactive and that he understood the score. But, not everyone *does* understand.

 

Good point. I "hid" my mental illness for 34yrs and then boom things started faltering and I was getting triggered. After that there was no hiding it. I guess I question his competency if he couldn't even see or hear what was going on. I am correct in saying that he was told and yet ignored what he was being told. I guess maybe he loved her/them and didn't care. Would that be a better description?

[Dirtroad]

As for her being left alone... I thought family members (specifically MIL) was coming daily to help her b/c husband had to work. She wasn't alone with her children all day and only had a small window of time to murder her children. She planned and waited to attack in that small window of time... like a spider in a web.

 

He bought a home to give her more space and perhaps more stability. He had help come each day. Many people are suspicious of the mental health industry for that, I do not think he is abnormal in that regard. Many people believe in the power of prayer - perhaps to an extreme for most of us. Many people are zealots. That doesn't make them murders.

 

I remember reading that she always wanted children and many. I am sure the family got many mixed signals from her. I amsure part of her illness.... but still mixed signals. Confusion. It is also easy to look back & see patterns that you missed during the day to day living. It is also easy to look in the windows and make decisions... without walking in their shoes. Trials can't reproduce it all and words get greatly manipulated by media and lawyers. We will never really know.

 

He may not be likeable - may have been selfish - may have not understood it all or doubted doctors. But he was not a murderer... She managed that horrific act all by herself. One baby at a time.:crying: Heartbreaking.

[Dirtroad]

Most often, children are killed by mother's boyfriend or new husband (not child's real father). We are saddened but not shocked. Sadly, may not even notice it in headlines. But when a mother kills, we are devastated.

 

Mothers are protectors and the nurturers. We bring for this sweet life - this tiny, vulnerable, dependant little life. It pierces are hearts in a way that words can't express when the mother takes a life - on purpose. It is a double question that troubles are minds and pierces our hearts - why kill the small, vulnerable child..... and what mother would do it?

 

Susan Smith, Casey Anthony, Andrea.... I will never understand any official "reason". I will never understand a Mother killing her children. I just weep.

 

It is so devastating.

[amey311]

I attended a talk on PPD/PPP a couple of years ago at a La Leche League conference. While I've never been in contact with a mom with PPP (several with PPD), I am forever grateful for the simple warning sign we got from the speaker (Kathleen Kendall-Tackett, PhD, not just "some mom with experience"). If a mother called and said she hadn't slept in days, that mother needs to call her doctor RIGHT NOW, and probably needs someone with her to argue the point (aka "no, it's not that the baby just needs to nurse a lot, she has been AWAKE, cleaning the house, without sleeping, for 2 days. she needs help NOW.")

 

Sleep deprivation can lead to psychosis: http://www.world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/sleep-deprivation.html

 

Editing to add: psychosis, and the things people think while psychotic will never make sense to anyone who is "neuro typical" - it defies logic and order. It is, by definition, irrational.

Edited June 21, 2011 by amey311

[asta]

Sleep deprivation can lead to psychosis: http://www.world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/sleep-deprivation.html

 

And mania can lead to psychosis. And both can lead to not sleeping.

 

 

asta

[YLVD]

I am reading about it on the link provided. The first thought that pops in my head why did she kill the kids if she is a bad mother? Why not just kill herself? I hate selfish, nasty people like that.

 

Yes, the husband needed to be charged also!

 

This pretty much sums up society's lack of understanding regarding mental illness. If we could control our illnesses, we would.

[Retired]

I am bi-polar (which was her original diagnosis). I have had hallucinations. I have six children. I homeschool. I lived in TX at the time and most importantly, I was not medicated at the time. I don't know that I was ever as bad off as she was and I was incredibly lucky to have excellent family support even though we did not know exactly what we were dealing with at the time. This case had a major influenence on my decision to seek help and begin medication. However, it cuts very close to the bone and it is still viserally painful to read about. I truly feel that that I can say, "But for the grace of God . . ." Please keep in mind as you discuss this that I may not be the only one of the board to feel this way.

 

:grouphug: I only imagine the emotion the case brings to you.

 

I decided not to reread or go back to that case. I can only tell you as a E/R nurse kids are hurt by their parents all the time. They just happen to survive or die one at a time. This case was news because all the kids died at once.

 

In a totally morbid way as only someone who works with this stuff, she could of tortured them but in her on "mental breakdown" probably thought she was killing them "gently"

 

Sorry I have seen a kid with clothes iron burns all over his body inflicted by his mentally ill mother that one still stick in my mind and it was over 13 years ago. I still have moments years and years later when some of my worse patients images will never leave me.

 

Sorry for the rambling. I also want to add the E/R we usually only see the mentally ill when they haven't had their medications. I know that medication and treatments make all the difference.

Edited June 21, 2011 by Cafelattee
edit

[Wendi]

I am reading about it on the link provided. The first thought that pops in my head why did she kill the kids if she is a bad mother? Why not just kill herself? I hate selfish, nasty people like that.

 

Yes, the husband needed to be charged also!

 

Apparently she believed (and it seems the "teaching" they were receiving agreed) that the children were already showing signs they were not turning out right. She believed if she killed them they would go to heaven, but if they continued the way they were headed (in her mind, of course), they would end up in hell. So in her mind, it was the right thing to do. She was delusional, of course, but that's what she thought, and apparently had heard voices telling her these things.

 

Heartbreaking.

 

As to the husband, I do agree it seems outrageous he would leave her alone with them even for a minute. She was described as "catatonic". Would you leave your kids alone with a catatonic woman who has tried to kill herself twice in recent months? His reaction when she called seems to me to indicate he worried something like this would happen.

 

Wendi

[Violet Crown]

The age of compulsory age of attendance applies to Texas public schooling only. Under Texas state law, hs'ing is defined as a "private school," and thus not subject to the age requirement. Here is the relevant regulation in question.

 

Therefore, by your logic, all Texan hs'ers are actually not really hs'ing, because their children are not subject to the same code as public schoolers.

 

Let's drop this disingenuous argument here, please. She had children up to age 7. She had desks and a classroom area for them, as well as materials and curricula present. She and dh identified as hs'ers.

 

All evidence indicates she was hs'ing her older children, in some shape or form.

I'm willing to drop the argument; not because I find the arguments that preschool children were homeschooled to be convincing, but because the tone of your reply to me convinces me that somehow I have offended you. I think it best then to drop this side discussion.

[Mrs Mungo]

:confused: I don't understand the "if" in this sentence. They weren't of school age in Texas. That's not a matter of my opinion.

 

I started homeschooling my eldest in Germany. We had a 7 year old compulsory school-age too. However, I considered myself officially a "homeschooler" from the day I did not take her to kindergarten and sent a letter of intent to the school for their records. I would hazard a guess that most people here feel the same.

 

You seem to be making an argument that calling her a homeschooler makes us look bad, so we shouldn't do it. I really don't believe in denying the truth just because I might have to counter an argument against homeschooling because of it. My eldest is finishing ninth grade. We've homeschooled all along.

 

It's relevant when they are repeatedly identified as homeschoolers, particularly when the name "Andrea Yates" pops up in the first ten seconds of a conversation about why homeschoolers should be monitored by the state.

 

I've never had someone do that to me. If they did I would counter with "Columbine." There are all sorts of exceptions to the fact that *generally* children are pretty safe in both environments. Public schools probably have more black eyes in that regard and they are heavily monitored.

 

Unfortunately, most people are content to read sensationalistic news reports about mental illness rather than fact based data (such as the link I provided).

 

I think people are trying to rationalize her actions and the truth is, you can't. They weren't rational.

 

Good point. I "hid" my mental illness for 34yrs and then boom things started faltering and I was getting triggered. After that there was no hiding it. I guess I question his competency if he couldn't even see or hear what was going on. I am correct in saying that he was told and yet ignored what he was being told. I guess maybe he loved her/them and didn't care. Would that be a better description?

 

I don't want to misrepresent what I'm saying here. So, let me reiterate that I *do* believe he is partially responsible. I *do* believe he didn't fight hard enough for her and those kids. I *do* believe there is a serious weakness in his character. *But*, not all people are cut out to fight and advocate and know what to do. I cannot believe he did not care. I don't think he had the right information to really *believe* how serious it was. Being told and *believing it* are different things. Does that make more sense?

 

I attended a talk on PPD/PPP a couple of years ago at a La Leche League conference. While I've never been in contact with a mom with PPP (several with PPD), I am forever grateful for the simple warning sign we got from the speaker (Kathleen Kendall-Tackett, PhD, not just "some mom with experience"). If a mother called and said she hadn't slept in days, that mother needs to call her doctor RIGHT NOW, and probably needs someone with her to argue the point (aka "no, it's not that the baby just needs to nurse a lot, she has been AWAKE, cleaning the house, without sleeping, for 2 days. she needs help NOW.")

 

Sleep deprivation can lead to psychosis: http://www.world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/sleep-deprivation.html

 

Editing to add: psychosis, and the things people think while psychotic will never make sense to anyone who is "neuro typical" - it defies logic and order. It is, by definition, irrational.

 

I will say this, because I hope it might help someone out there. I was a LLLLeader for a long time. I did encounter moms with PPD and outside of my LLL experience I've encountered one woman with PPP. If you think your baby hates you? That's PPD, get some help. If you think you're a terrible mom and your baby is only a few days old? That's PPD, get some help. If you are hearing voices or imagining things? Get some help immediately.

 

The other problem that I have seen? Is that women often get caught between extremes. I believe in breastfeeding. But, if you need lithium to keep you mentally stable, your mental health is more important than breastfeeding. I don't believe in crying it out. But, if your baby is fed and changed? If you need to put baby in a safe place and go take a shower or a nap, then *do it*. Moms need to know that it's okay to be human. It's okay to ask for help. It's okay.

Edited June 21, 2011 by Mrs Mungo

[melissel]

The other problem that I have seen? Is that women often get caught between extremes. I believe in breastfeeding. But, if you need lithium to keep you mentally stable, your mental health if more important than breastfeeding. I don't believe in crying it out. But, if your baby is fed and changed? If you need to put baby in a safe place and go take a shower or a nap, then *do it*. Moms need to know that it's okay to be human. It's okay to ask for help. It's okay.

 

Mrs. M, your contributions here, and Aelwydd's, are making me want to stand on my chair and cheer. I've been following the thread but not reading the links, because I was not a mama at the time. I remember the case but it was barely on my radar, and I do NOT want to go back there now. It will cost me sleep for days :(

[Mosaicmind]

 

 

 

I don't want to misrepresent what I'm saying here. So, let me reiterate that I *do* believe he is partially responsible. I *do* believe he didn't fight hard enough for her and those kids. I *do* believe there is a serious weakness in his character. *But*, not all people are cut out to fight and advocate and know what to do. I cannot believe he did not care. I don't think he had the right information to really *believe* how serious it was. Being told and *believing it* are different things. Does that make more sense?

 

Yes it does. My husband had to be told by several different doctors, psychiatrists, and counselors that I had dissociative identity disorder and that it was an actual disorder and not the stuff made up by the media and in movies. So, hearing and believing are two different things---that I get.

[JVA]

This may seem completely off-topic but I thought I'd bring this to the discussion:

 

There was a story line in the new Glades show last Sunday night that relates. A mom (with an 18 mth-old) was suffering PPD. The nurse in the story was persistent in helping her see that she was a good mom, loved her son and would continue to. She helped her get help and showed her how well she was coping with the difficulties she had-as a single mom, no support, working full time, etc......

 

I thought it was sensitively handled and hopefully the public can be educated through this manner....I know- fiction, but it might be a start.

[KidsHappen]

And mania can lead to psychosis. And both can lead to not sleeping.

 

 

asta

 

:iagree: Thanks for mentioning this.

[WishboneDawn]

Most often, children are killed by mother's boyfriend or new husband (not child's real father). We are saddened but not shocked. Sadly, may not even notice it in headlines. But when a mother kills, we are devastated.

 

Mothers are protectors and the nurturers. We bring for this sweet life - this tiny, vulnerable, dependant little life. It pierces are hearts in a way that words can't express when the mother takes a life - on purpose. It is a double question that troubles are minds and pierces our hearts - why kill the small, vulnerable child..... and what mother would do it?

 

Susan Smith, Casey Anthony, Andrea.... I will never understand any official "reason". I will never understand a Mother killing her children. I just weep.

 

It is so devastating.

 

Mothers are people. Sometimes, like other people, they do bad things. Sometimes, like other people, they are not nice. Sometimes, like other people, they are mentally ill.

[Violet Crown]

You seem to be making an argument that calling her a homeschooler makes us look bad, so we shouldn't do it.

No, I was quite honestly making the argument that calling her a homeschooler was inaccurate, on the grounds that none of the children were yet of compulsory school age. I didn't mind others having counter-arguments; I expect that. But as I said above, I think it's time I let the argument rest, as I have unintentionally but clearly given offense.

 

I am sorry that my stance on this has caused others to find me to be disingenuous and/or to be arguing in bad faith.

[Scarlett]

Perfect post

 

I started homeschooling my eldest in Germany. We had a 7 year old compulsory school-age too. However, I considered myself officially a "homeschooler" from the day I did not take her to kindergarten and sent a letter of intent to the school for their records. I would hazard a guess that most people here feel the same.

 

You seem to be making an argument that calling her a homeschooler makes us look bad, so we shouldn't do it. I really don't believe in denying the truth just because I might have to counter an argument against homeschooling because of it. My eldest is finishing ninth grade. We've homeschooled all along.

 

 

 

I've never had someone do that to me. If they did I would counter with "Columbine." There are all sorts of exceptions to the fact that *generally* children are pretty safe in both environments. Public schools probably have more black eyes in that regard and they are heavily monitored.

 

 

 

I think people are trying to rationalize her actions and the truth is, you can't. They weren't rational.

 

 

 

I don't want to misrepresent what I'm saying here. So, let me reiterate that I *do* believe he is partially responsible. I *do* believe he didn't fight hard enough for her and those kids. I *do* believe there is a serious weakness in his character. *But*, not all people are cut out to fight and advocate and know what to do. I cannot believe he did not care. I don't think he had the right information to really *believe* how serious it was. Being told and *believing it* are different things. Does that make more sense?

 

 

 

I will say this, because I hope it might help someone out there. I was a LLLLeader for a long time. I did encounter moms with PPD and outside of my LLL experience I've encountered one woman with PPP. If you think your baby hates you? That's PPD, get some help. If you think you're a terrible mom and your baby is only a few days old? That's PPD, get some help. If you are hearing voices or imagining things? Get some help immediately.

 

The other problem that I have seen? Is that women often get caught between extremes. I believe in breastfeeding. But, if you need lithium to keep you mentally stable, your mental health is more important than breastfeeding. I don't believe in crying it out. But, if your baby is fed and changed? If you need to put baby in a safe place and go take a shower or a nap, then *do it*. Moms need to know that it's okay to be human. It's okay to ask for help. It's okay.

[Mrs Mungo]

Sharon, for me that piece of the discussion wasn't really relevant anyway. But, I'm going to start a poll because I'm interested in how the homeschoolers here see it in a general way, not a specific one.

[sassyscrapperinid]

I also think it's stupid and irresponsible for religious leaders to urge people to ignore their fears and concerns about having more children.

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

[fairfarmhand]

 

The other problem that I have seen? Is that women often get caught between extremes. I believe in breastfeeding. But, if you need lithium to keep you mentally stable, your mental health is more important than breastfeeding. I don't believe in crying it out. But, if your baby is fed and changed? If you need to put baby in a safe place and go take a shower or a nap, then *do it*. Moms need to know that it's okay to be human. It's okay to ask for help. It's okay.

:iagree:

 

this is awesome.

 

Moms need to know that when they are at the end of the rope, it is ok to set a crying baby down for a breather...even if nobody is there to pick up the slack. Twenty minutes to keep you in control will make you a better mother.

[TracieT]

I attended a talk on PPD/PPP a couple of years ago at a La Leche League conference. While I've never been in contact with a mom with PPP (several with PPD), I am forever grateful for the simple warning sign we got from the speaker (Kathleen Kendall-Tackett, PhD, not just "some mom with experience"). If a mother called and said she hadn't slept in days, that mother needs to call her doctor RIGHT NOW, and probably needs someone with her to argue the point (aka "no, it's not that the baby just needs to nurse a lot, she has been AWAKE, cleaning the house, without sleeping, for 2 days. she needs help NOW.")

 

Sleep deprivation can lead to psychosis: http://www.world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/sleep-deprivation.html

 

Editing to add: psychosis, and the things people think while psychotic will never make sense to anyone who is "neuro typical" - it defies logic and order. It is, by definition, irrational.

 

I can't absolutely see how sleep deprivation could trigger something in someone with a mental illness. I don't have a mental illness, but I remember what sleep deprivation did to me. My oldest didn't sleep more than 2 hours at a time until 5 months, so 5 months solid of no sleep. I couldn't find the right words (I remember trying so hard to remember what a toothpick was called and couldn't), and irrational things seemed so rational (I could just leave the baby here and run to the store....there's nothing wrong with that. I NEVER did it, but it crossed my mind!) Then my second was born before my first turned a year....I don't even remember my second son's first year. And I had EASY babies!!! I can only imagine what that would do to someone will mental illness.

[bbsweetpea]

Yes and no. I have known quiet a few people who have killed themselves. I am by no means proud of this, but if someone really wants to do this (kill themselves) they do it.

 

I am sorry but I really don't care if she was sick or not, it was wrong. She should be dead also. Same for the husband he knew better and still did nothing. He should be locked up for life for doing nothing.

 

I have known of a mentally ill (bipolar) family member that has attempted and failed multiple times. These were not minor attempts but MAJOR attempts. One slit both arms up from wrist to elbow and almost bled out before being found (lots of blood was given to save him). His second attempt was taking over 300 pain meds. He was in a coma and came out of it. Just because you try does not mean it will happen.

 

I don't think anyone is saying what she did was not wrong. They are just saying that she was SICK and her husband knew. He should be in jail as well.

[bbsweetpea]

I attended a talk on PPD/PPP a couple of years ago at a La Leche League conference. While I've never been in contact with a mom with PPP (several with PPD), I am forever grateful for the simple warning sign we got from the speaker (Kathleen Kendall-Tackett, PhD, not just "some mom with experience"). If a mother called and said she hadn't slept in days, that mother needs to call her doctor RIGHT NOW, and probably needs someone with her to argue the point (aka "no, it's not that the baby just needs to nurse a lot, she has been AWAKE, cleaning the house, without sleeping, for 2 days. she needs help NOW.")

 

Sleep deprivation can lead to psychosis: http://www.world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/sleep-deprivation.html

 

Editing to add: psychosis, and the things people think while psychotic will never make sense to anyone who is "neuro typical" - it defies logic and order. It is, by definition, irrational.

 

This was me. With my first I did not sleep. I wouuld stay up cleaning, nursing, holding the baby but not sleeping. I was paranoid that something would happen to my child if I slept. She had stopped breathing on me when we went home the first day and I went nuts. PPD set in after a week of ICU and sleeplessness. What ended up happening though is that I would get so tired and CRAZY that I would think ... if my child was no longer there then I could sleep. It is not logical but I was tired and suffering from PPD. I was put on drugs, moved in with my parents (with baby) and was not left alone for months.

 

I can look back and remember some of my thoughts. It was a DARK time. That is how I described it at the time. I did not know how sick I was.

 

I remember thinking later how sad I felt for Andrea Yates. Yes she should be in jail for what she did. However I feel sad for the loss that she has to feel for the rest of her life. The punishment of the death of a child and the fact that YOU killed them is more than being put to death. Being put to death would be much easier.

 

Just my thoughts on the subject.

[Mommy22alyns]

 

The other problem that I have seen? Is that women often get caught between extremes. I believe in breastfeeding. But, if you need lithium to keep you mentally stable, your mental health is more important than breastfeeding. I don't believe in crying it out. But, if your baby is fed and changed? If you need to put baby in a safe place and go take a shower or a nap, then *do it*. Moms need to know that it's okay to be human. It's okay to ask for help. It's okay.

 

 

Thank you SO much for this. Thank you.

 

I didn't pay very much attention to the case when it happened because I wasn't a mom yet. I went and read the 18-page article linked, though. I had to hug my girls extra tight. :crying:

[cindergretta]

Wow, just lots of different directions!

 

My oldest was 7 when this happened and I couldn't sleep for ages.

 

I am kind of confused about some of the disagreements about large families, homeschooling, mental illness, cults, etc.

 

Homeschooling didn't kill the children.

 

Being a large family didn't kill the children.

 

The cult didn't kill the children.

 

Rusty Yates didn't kill the children.

 

A woman with severe mental illness who was under the influence of people with "cultish" tendencies killed her children. She was the mother of 5 (large family) who was a homeschooler. (Really, regardless of "compulsory" age in any given state, once a child is 5 - kindergarten - people give a school status to them - public, private, home.)

 

All of these descriptors are relevant in describing Andrea Yates' life. They all describe a lifestyle to which she and Rusty subscribed. I do *not* get how people are making the leap that anyone is bashing large families or saying homeschooling caused her mental illness. I haven't read, heard, or understood anything to that affect at all.

 

And certainly, *no one* in this thread is saying that homeschoolers will freak out and kill their dc. *No one* is saying mothers with more than 2.5 dc will freak out and kill their dc.

 

I think if we let go of our *own* bias rather than point out the supposed bias of others, we can more readily understand what is actually being said rather than what we *think* is being implied. ;)

 

It was a truly tragic situation. And IMO, Rusty has some degree of culpability. OTOH, I know my dh was *ever* more vigilant after each baby that I was Ok. I suffer from PPD and he ensures plenty of help, sleep, meds, and so forth. So let's take some degree of comfort in the fact that *many* men "woke up" after that tragedy and started looking and listening and actually seeing how their wives were coping.

[myfunnybunch]

He could not have known that she would do such a horrible thing.

 

I'm always a little puzzled by this argument. (Not just by you. I've heard and read this several times.)

 

Andrea Yates told her husband the children weren't safe with her. The doctors told him the children weren't safe with her. He may not have *believed* that she was capable of such a horrible thing...who wants to believe something like that?...but he did have information that indicated that she was a danger to the children. He *knew* she shouldn't be left alone. Of course no one imagined something this horrifying, but he had to have known that there had been times when she heard voices telling her to kill her children.

 

I wouldn't hand a drunk driver the car keys, even if he could walk a straight line and recite the alphabet forward-backward-sideways, even if I believed that he could probably get home just fine. Drunk drivers usually do get home just fine, but the risk is too great and the cost too high when they don't. If I did, and someone was killed as a result, I could (and should) be held liable.

 

I cannot imagine leaving my children with anyone who was battling a mental illness that could endanger them in any way, even if it was most likely that they would be all right. I think Rusty Yates probably thought to himself, "Half an hour <until his mother arrived> will be just fine," believing that the risk was small. But he was in his right mind, and he did know that there was a risk, and he took that chance. He is culpable.

 

I'd be willing to bet, though, that every single day of his life he regrets walking out that door.

 

Cat

[Mrs Mungo]

I'm always a little puzzled by this argument. (Not just by you. I've heard and read this several times.)

 

Andrea Yates told her husband the children weren't safe with her. The doctors told him the children weren't safe with her. He may not have *believed* that she was capable of such a horrible thing...who wants to believe something like that?...but he did have information that indicated that she was a danger to the children. He *knew* she shouldn't be left alone. Of course no one imagined something this horrifying, but he had to have known that there had been times when she heard voices telling her to kill her children.

 

I wouldn't hand a drunk driver the car keys, even if he could walk a straight line and recite the alphabet forward-backward-sideways, even if I believed that he could probably get home just fine. Drunk drivers usually do get home just fine, but the risk is too great and the cost too high when they don't. If I did, and someone was killed as a result, I could (and should) be held liable.

 

I cannot imagine leaving my children with anyone who was battling a mental illness that could endanger them in any way, even if it was most likely that they would be all right. I think Rusty Yates probably thought to himself, "Half an hour <until his mother arrived> will be just fine," believing that the risk was small. But he was in his right mind, and he did know that there was a risk, and he took that chance. He is culpable.

 

I'd be willing to bet, though, that every single day of his life he regrets walking out that door.

 

Cat

 

I agree.

[WishboneDawn]

I'm always a little puzzled by this argument. (Not just by you. I've heard and read this several times.)

 

Andrea Yates told her husband the children weren't safe with her. The doctors told him the children weren't safe with her. He may not have *believed* that she was capable of such a horrible thing...who wants to believe something like that?...but he did have information that indicated that she was a danger to the children. He *knew* she shouldn't be left alone. Of course no one imagined something this horrifying, but he had to have known that there had been times when she heard voices telling her to kill her children.

 

I wouldn't hand a drunk driver the car keys, even if he could walk a straight line and recite the alphabet forward-backward-sideways, even if I believed that he could probably get home just fine. Drunk drivers usually do get home just fine, but the risk is too great and the cost too high when they don't. If I did, and someone was killed as a result, I could (and should) be held liable.

 

I cannot imagine leaving my children with anyone who was battling a mental illness that could endanger them in any way, even if it was most likely that they would be all right. I think Rusty Yates probably thought to himself, "Half an hour <until his mother arrived> will be just fine," believing that the risk was small. But he was in his right mind, and he did know that there was a risk, and he took that chance. He is culpable.

 

I'd be willing to bet, though, that every single day of his life he regrets walking out that door.

 

Cat

:iagree:

[5knights3maidens]

I agree with the op.