Andrea Yates found not guilty by reason of insanity...- Page 2

[Dollypop]

Posted: 7/26/06 at 10:47pm

What kind of "moral code" were these people following? They are nonsectarian Christians. As far as I'm concerned, that means they make it up as they go.

This story has always creeped me out. Rusty always impressed me as too mild and detached. I recall early film clips of him looking at the makeshift memorial the town had made for his children and he seemed almost happy to see their pictures. Where was his grief? No matter what your religion may dictate, there has to be a strong sense of loss. I never got that from him.

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 7/26/06 at 10:49pm

DP, he gave me the creeps from the first night.

I am surprised that there are 12 reasonable people in Texas.

[Rose_MacShane]

Posted: 7/26/06 at 10:52pm

And therein lies the problem. Everyone grieves differently. For all we know, he had his breakdowns strictly in private. There is no set standard for grief. Just because someone doesn't grieve the way you do doesn't make it wrong.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 7/26/06 at 10:58pm

Dollypop, I hope you will never know anything like the grief and regret Rusty Yates has experienced in his life.

[Dollypop]

Posted: 7/26/06 at 11:04pm

I'm not saying that Rusty Yates is a bad person. I'm saying that his actions and reactions at the time of the tragedy didn't sit well with me--or with many others.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 7/26/06 at 11:17pm

You asked where his grief was. His grief was profound. You wonder why he didn't display it more visibly. Under more ordinary circumstances of death--not that any death is ever ordinary--many people are unable to display emotion. After the loss of his five children, the arrest of his wife, the remorse he felt at not having prevented it, not to mention that glare of the media spotlight, what you saw was someone numbed and in shock.

People project onto Rusty their horror at what happened. The smile on his face when he saw the pictures of his children was not happiness they were dead. Of course not. It was probably a momentary smile of recognition that was followed by a unending hollow pain most of us will never know.

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 7/27/06 at 9:29am

PJ, I saw Rusty on the Today Show this morning. He is smart and compassionate and seems to be a great supporter of Andrea. I enjoyed his criticism of the State for pursuing the death penalty in the first trial which he believed tainted the jury.

I have always believed that it is unfair to knock off jurors in capital cases that do not believe in the death penalty.
Updated On: 7/27/06 at 09:29 AM

[TxTwoStep]

Posted: 7/27/06 at 11:34am

it's human nature to project our own motivations or rationalizations on such extreme circumstances. It's harder to find charity in ourselves for all involved, and still serve our internal senses of justice. That is a never ending human paradox. Let's hope that moving forward, families in similar situations and their care-providers and support systems will take such matters more seriously in terms of prevention, and future tragedies can be avoided. That is the only greater good that I can see salvaged from a horrible incident. Whatever greater power you believe in will dole out the aftermath.

[Anakela]

Posted: 7/27/06 at 11:52am

There was a similar case in Hawaii many years ago (1965)- woman drowned the five youngest of her seven children. Unlike Yates, this woman was found unfit to stand trial, and was committed to a state hospital instead. Six months later she killed herself- "Then-hospital administrator Audrey Mertz said at the time that Young had just started responding to her treatment and was beginning to grasp the enormity of what she had done."- and I always think about that case when I wonder what is going to happen to Yates. It sounds cruel or something when I think it in my head, but maybe it would be better for Yates to not get 'better.'
Link to Hawaii story

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 7/27/06 at 1:17pm

I am only going to respond to this thread once, because it is very painful for me to read all of this.

Dollypop and brdlwyr, it's the use of phrases like "gives me the creeps" that are tossed out as the result of a lack of knowledge about whom or what the comment is being made.

I encourage you to do some serious reading on mental illness before making any further judgments. From the dawn of time into today, people with mental illness have suffered from a stigma (violent, "crazy", unemployable, need to be put away and kept from "normal" society) that, like any stigma (e.g. homosexuals = pedophiles, Jews = cheap, overweight = lazy, useless), grew out of a lack of knowledge.

Because people don't bother to look a little deeper at a certain aspect of the human condition -- it's a lot easier to label someone and walk away in disgust -- people have suffered and continue to suffer. Do you know how many women out there are in pain -- and yet their loved ones just say it will pass, that they should cheer up, they're just having a bad day -- and as a result, these women don't seek treatment?

Don't judge a book by its cover. Don't make judgments based on something you see on television about someone you have never met; someone who may be suffering from a condition that you know nothing about.

It surprises most people these days when they find out there was something so vital that they knew nothing about. Everyone thinks they know everything there is to know and any area that seems blurry can just be filled in with a label and pushed aside.

Until we can get over ourselves and start to see every human being as just that: HUMAN -- rich with complexities, unique experience, joy, diverse suffering -- we will always be fighting with one another, at war, when all it takes is for people to open their minds, talk to someone they don't know and learn something new.

At the center of so much disagreement is ignorance, misunderstanding, lack of knowledge. Don't make misinformed judgments. You don't know everything.

[bdwaygirl]

Posted: 7/27/06 at 1:29pm

WBAF, great post. Thanks.

[NYadgal]

Posted: 7/27/06 at 1:42pm

I add my praise for your post, Foster.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 7/27/06 at 1:48pm

"Do you know how many women out there are in pain -- and yet their loved ones just say it will pass, that they should cheer up, they're just having a bad day -- and as a result, these women don't seek treatment?"

Beautifully said and heartfelt. And that is the only lesson to be learned from this tragedy.

[brdlwyr]

Posted: 7/27/06 at 2:17pm

Foster,

I do appreciate your post. But, inherent in your post is a "judgment" of me!

I did not judge Rusty. I stated how he made me feel. Are my feelings to be discounted because I have not read a book on grief?

Do you think I am some ignorant twit? Like Andrea and Rusty, I know the joys and sorrows of parenthood. I also have personal experience with various post partum issues. And, I am certainly aware of the complexity of the human condition.

Updated On: 7/27/06 at 02:17 PM

[bwayboi4life42]

Posted: 7/27/06 at 11:59pm

Is it just me, or does anyone else think that the media is really sick and twisted? I mean, showing the tapes about her talking about drowning her children? It's disgusting, and a violation of her privacy. I didn't watch Prime Time tonight, but the adds were just sickening. No one needs to see that.

[nemo42783]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 12:53am

I'm pretty much confused about Andrea Yates. I mean, she wanted to kill her children while they were still pure so they would be accepted into heaven, but then she said she says the devil made her kill her children? Also they said that she suffered from depression and that she had suicidal thoughts. If she thought she was such a horrible mother, why didn't she kill herself? I'm not saying that she should have.

Also I wouldn't call her "poor thing" after she killed her children. Which is wrong wheter if you're sane or insane.

Also I do partly blame the husband. I mean, he married a woman who he knew was ill, but yet they go and have kids anyways?


Just expressing some of my thoughts on the situation.

[DG]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 1:07am

Nemo - her illness is Post-Partem Psychoses - which, by definition, is not detectable nor diagnosable until after childbirth. Her husband did not marry someone he thought was ill.

And be careful of attempting to assign rational logic to a situation defined be illness. They are not coming at things from the same place.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 2:09am

I think you'd have to be insane to kill your kids!

I don't disagree that she needs mental help. IMO I think she knew what she was doing. She took precautions to make sure the other kids didn't see her killing their brothers and sister. She knew what she was doing was wrong.

I just watched Primetime, and they showed a clip of this guy in a satan mask telling her that she had control over her kids going to heaven or hell. That if she wanted them to go to heaven it was in her hands.

As for her Ex husband who told her he wanted more kids after they were STRONGLY advised against it. I bet he feels terrible for wanting her to have the other three kids! I dont know if he should be held somewhat accoutable for contributing to her severe depression, or what but I think he also wasnt thinking right when he wanted more kinds with her.

I dont know, this just makes me horribly sad. A mother taken off her medication that was keeping her semi sane, only to have her killing her kids.

I understand she is/was sick, and I do hope someday she will come to terms with this and find peace. I also wish that for her Ex-husband.

-EM
Updated On: 7/28/06 at 02:09 AM

[bwayboi4life42]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 10:36am

"I just watched Primetime, and they showed a clip of this guy in a satan mask telling her that she had control over her kids going to heaven or hell. That if she wanted them to go to heaven it was in her hands."


That's really disturbing.

[sweetestsiren]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 11:00am

I'm pretty much confused about Andrea Yates. I mean, she wanted to kill her children while they were still pure so they would be accepted into heaven, but then she said she says the devil made her kill her children? Also they said that she suffered from depression and that she had suicidal thoughts. If she thought she was such a horrible mother, why didn't she kill herself? I'm not saying that she should have.

Also I wouldn't call her "poor thing" after she killed her children. Which is wrong wheter if you're sane or insane.

Doesn't "psychosis" by definition imply irrationality? I don't think that it's possible to analyze her actions in terms of, "well, she says that this was her motive and then she changed her mind." Beyond that, I think that this post is terribly insensitive and judgemental. Yes, she killed her children, and yes, that is wrong. However, in accordance with our justice system one has to be mentally competent in order to be found guilty of a crime, and judging by this verdict, the jurors (and, I'd say most of the American public) saw that she wasn't. I believe that people are saying "poor thing" in reference to the fact that she was clearly sick and not getting the help she needed that could have prevented this. The woman is clearly in need of mental care, and prison would absolutely have been the worst thing for her. This is the right verdict, in my opinion.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 7/28/06 at 11:07am

EM in OR says: "As for her Ex husband who told her he wanted more kids after they were STRONGLY advised against it. "

Again, incorrect. Together, advised by Pastor Michael Woronniecki, Andrea and Rusty wanted to have "as many children as Goid sent their way, whether that number was zero or 10."

According to Woroniecki's view of the bible, a woman was created to be a "helper, not a wife, a servant, whether single or married."