another mother killer

wrote in

. I simply stated that until we know the conditions of her life and what
spurred her actions it is unfair to condemn her

You can play with words all you want, a child is dead!

wrote in message
oups.com...
Actually I am a womanist not a feminist. I admonish a man not to
comment about post-partum simply because he can never experience it. I
also do not believe in sitting in judgement of someone without knowing
all of the facts. I never claimed the womans actions to be correct. I
simply stated that until we know the conditions of her life and what
spurred her actions it is unfair to condemn her
===
Then I presume we should also not condemn a man who kills his child(ren)
until "we know the conditions of [his]
life and what spurred [his] action?"
===
===

wrote in message
oups.com...
Actually I am a womanist not a feminist. I admonish a man not to
comment about post-partum simply because he can never experience it. I
also do not believe in sitting in judgement of someone without knowing
all of the facts. I never claimed the womans actions to be correct. I
simply stated that until we know the conditions of her life and what
spurred her actions it is unfair to condemn her

Translation: Let's wait until the court says she was depressed and not
responsible for her actions. Then we can ALL feel sorry for her!

wrote:
Actually I am a womanist not a feminist. I admonish a man not to
comment about post-partum simply because he can never experience it.
I also do not believe in sitting in judgement of someone without
knowing all of the facts. I never claimed the womans actions to be
correct. I simply stated that until we know the conditions of her
life and what spurred her actions it is unfair to condemn her

Ok, so lets say she was all alone, husband gone due to navy, no family in
town, and she was deep deep in post partum depression. Been struggling with
depression for years. Lets make her poor too so she can't afford the zoloft
or whatever. Or maybe just poor enough to not be able to afford it, but not
qualify for medicaid.
Make her a minority too, what the hell. and she was abused when she was a
kid. sexually abused, by a step father, yeah, lay that out there too.
So, is that about all the possible bad things I can lay on her? maybe a
crack addict too? nah, sounds like a cliche'
So, all that being said, yeah, she STILL ALLOWED HER CHILD TO DIE!!!!!

Jon wrote:
wrote:
Actually I am a womanist not a feminist. I admonish a man not to
comment about post-partum simply because he can never experience it.
I also do not believe in sitting in judgement of someone without
knowing all of the facts. I never claimed the womans actions to be
correct. I simply stated that until we know the conditions of her
life and what spurred her actions it is unfair to condemn her

Ok, so lets say she was all alone, husband gone due to navy, no family in
town, and she was deep deep in post partum depression. Been struggling with
depression for years. Lets make her poor too so she can't afford the zoloft
or whatever. Or maybe just poor enough to not be able to afford it, but not
qualify for medicaid.
Make her a minority too, what the hell. and she was abused when she was a
kid. sexually abused, by a step father, yeah, lay that out there too.
So, is that about all the possible bad things I can lay on her? maybe a
crack addict too? nah, sounds like a cliche'
So, all that being said, yeah, she STILL ALLOWED HER CHILD TO DIE!!!!!\]

I agree Jon. The bottom line in this entire story is that no matter
the reason, except for self defence, should a life be taken by someone
else. And unless you can prove that a child is a threat to his/her
mother... well I don't care the reason.

All the stories in the world don't make a difference... She came
from an Abusive Home. as Jon said was a drug addict.. whatever.. thats
no excuse.

Now even more disturbing is what this thread was specifically about.
If a guy had done the same thing. Finding reason would not be the top
priority on the publics list. And it would be up to the guy to fashion
some kind of story.. and convince the public at large that he truely
not a bad person.

But when a woman commits such an act, the public goes looking for
reasons for why they did it.. and don't just assume the woman is evil.
Because women are not capable of being evil... God Forbid anyone ever
have such a thought. They are not in control of their own actions when
commiting such crime. There must be some reason for it.

SpiderHam77

"Jon" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Actually I am a womanist not a feminist. I admonish a man not to
comment about post-partum simply because he can never experience it.
I also do not believe in sitting in judgement of someone without
knowing all of the facts. I never claimed the womans actions to be
correct. I simply stated that until we know the conditions of her
life and what spurred her actions it is unfair to condemn her

Ok, so lets say she was all alone, husband gone due to navy, no family in
town, and she was deep deep in post partum depression. Been struggling
with
depression for years. Lets make her poor too so she can't afford the
zoloft
or whatever. Or maybe just poor enough to not be able to afford it, but
not
qualify for medicaid.
Make her a minority too, what the hell. and she was abused when she was a
kid. sexually abused, by a step father, yeah, lay that out there too.
So, is that about all the possible bad things I can lay on her? maybe a
crack addict too? nah, sounds like a cliche'
So, all that being said, yeah, she STILL ALLOWED HER CHILD TO DIE!!!!!

You left out the excuse that was the point of the OP. Her husband knew she
was depressed, so he is responsible for what happened ala the Andrea Yates
crowd blaming her husband for the death of her children. And if the husband
doesn't divorce the whacked out mother and take their son away from her, he
will be held accounted for anything that happens to the other child too.

Some of us got the point there are double standards about how these
tragedies are viewed. The whole twisted process revolves around a "pity the
woman" and "blame the man" type of mindset.

She is responsible for the kid's death; but the husband is just as
responsible. When you're a parent (mom or dad), you are responsible for
your child's welfare in all aspects. If there is a perceived danger
from the parent due to mental illness, then get help for the situation.
You can't just go off to work and leave a helpless child with an
unstable person. Do these people walk around with their heads up their
asses? Are they so self-involved that they don't notice their spouse is
acting a bit funky?

Let's change the situation. Dad is a drunk but Mom doesn't do anything
when he takes baby out for a drive while obviously intoxicated. Car
wreck happens. Baby's dead. Who's responsible? Both equally share the
blame.

As for the Yates' case, her husband was very much responsible for what
happened. From the get go, he knew she had mental problems. People
don't take Haldol for the fun of it. His facade of "I didn't know" and
"she needs help not prison" makes me want to vomit. His tour of the
talk shows and web site dedicated to Andrea and the kids are just too
much.

wrote in message
ups.com...
She is responsible for the kid's death; but the husband is just as
responsible. When you're a parent (mom or dad), you are responsible for
your child's welfare in all aspects. If there is a perceived danger
from the parent due to mental illness, then get help for the situation.
You can't just go off to work and leave a helpless child with an
unstable person. Do these people walk around with their heads up their
asses? Are they so self-involved that they don't notice their spouse is
acting a bit funky?

Let's change the situation. Dad is a drunk but Mom doesn't do anything
when he takes baby out for a drive while obviously intoxicated. Car
wreck happens. Baby's dead. Who's responsible? Both equally share the
blame.

As for the Yates' case, her husband was very much responsible for what
happened. From the get go, he knew she had mental problems. People
don't take Haldol for the fun of it. His facade of "I didn't know" and
"she needs help not prison" makes me want to vomit. His tour of the
talk shows and web site dedicated to Andrea and the kids are just too
much.

Why does marriage create the presumed liability for criminal involvement by
a second person? Wouldn't it make just as much sense to say living together
creates criminal liability too? What about a mother who's son murders
someone? Should she have criminal liability if she knew her sons was into
"funky" things? If a single mother kills her new born child should her
parents be prosecuted because they knew she was pregnant?

My point is there is a slippery slope when the argument of secondary
criminal liability is alleged. The Yates case tries to limit criminal
liability under very narrow definitions, i.e. children are killed and their
is a husband. At what point did secondary liability for criminal behavior
pass from Yates parents to her husband?

I dont' care if two people are married or living together. If you're in
a committed relationship and there are children in the mix, then yes,
you are 100% responsible for the other person's actions.

How many times do i see in the news women who let their
husbands/boyfriends beat the kids? Do I hold those women responsible
for their guys' actions? You bet I do. How can you even claim yourself
to be a parent and love your child when you turn a blind eye and
knowingly put them at risk? I don't care if he's the father of your
children. Your child comes first.

If a teenager is preggers and kills the baby, her parents, if she lives
with them, should be held accountable. Seriously, how can you not
notice that your daughter is pregnant? You must really be blind to not
figure that one out.

Parents should be held accountable for their minor children's actions.
These days parents just want to give them gaming consoles and a desktop
with Internet so the kids can be shut off in a room somewhere doing God
knows what. Then the parents wonder why their kids are acting so
freaking weird and anti-social. I call it the "I didn't know cause I'm
too busy with my head in my ass" response.

wrote in message
oups.com...
I dont' care if two people are married or living together. If you're in
a committed relationship and there are children in the mix, then yes,
you are 100% responsible for the other person's actions.
===
Some quick questions if you don't mind: How many kids do you have?
Whom do you hold responsible when mom beats the kid?
===