Fiery Eyes...
Repent? For being psychotic?
__Let's consider Yates. Yates drowned her children- but not as a malicious act. She hallucinated that Satan spoke in her mind, telling her- gloating- that her children would inevitably be his, as living in this immoral world would corrupt them. In her psychosis, that is how Yates understood the world and its effects on people. That was her complete knowledge and comprehension of reality.
__Yates believed her children were still pure. She "knew" they would go to Heaven as murder victims, while she would go to hell as their murderor. She "knew" this was the only way, the best she could do.
__Psychotics DON'T have recourse to rethinking their delusions, or adopting another perspective on them. They're completely swallowed up inside them. It's like the movie, the "Matrix," if that helps you to understand.
__It seems, Fiery Eyes, that you equate evil and psychosis? That thinking is right out of the Middle Ages. I hope that's not the case.
__The mentally ill are human beings, and although some MAY "live" in an alternate reality and behave in accordance with the content/nature of their reality, their actions are not necessarily malicious. They may even be motivated by love as they kill.
__We don't know the content of this woman's delusions or even if she was delusional, but her actions suggest it. If there is any logic in cutting off a baby's arms, it is the logic of a different reality. Who knows- possibly, she believed it was not her baby but rather an impostor, something malign. Or she may have "realized" that the baby's arms were cancerous or mutated or for some reason had to be removed, and it made perfect sense to her that she should do this, at once.
Sorry i've not been able to get online this week.
Line: to your comment, I'm honestly not sure about that.
fever red: we have no idea to even know if she was psychotic, or if she was a christain, you still have not ever given the site to where you read she was a christain.
I do think there is no just cause to her doing that though, I also believe alot of people Plea insanity cuase it's the only way to TRY to get them off.
Here's another article I found on this, it still does NOT state she was a christain, but heres the article.
Now this is truly sad..
Article on CNN
Mom admits cutting off baby's arms
Alleged murder similar to other Texas cases
Tuesday, November 23, 2004 Posted: 8:36 PM EST (0136 GMT)
Dena Schlosser, 35, was charged with capital murder.
DALLAS (AP) -- When a mother admitted killing her baby daughter by severing the child's arms this week, she joined a high-profile list of Texas women with histories of mental illness who have killed their children in gruesome fashion.
The state has had at least four similar cases in recent years. Andrea Yates drowned her five children in the family's Houston bathtub in 2001. (Full story)
Deanna Laney bashed her three sons' skulls with rocks last year, killing two and maiming a toddler. She said God told her to do it. (Full story)
A mother from suburban Dallas drowned her daughters last fall, and a woman in Brownsville is accused of helping her common-law husband behead her three children.
In all the cases, the women had some sort of mental illness in their past.
The killings have been brutal, but legal and psychiatric experts say such cases are no more common here than in other states.
They note that several factors have caused Texas to get more attention on the issue, including intense media coverage following the Yates case that may have created an illusion that Texas has more mothers killing children.
"Texas seems to be a lightning rod," said George Parnham, the Houston attorney who defended Yates. "I don't necessarily go with the idea that we're wackos down here."
Dena Schlosser, 35, was charged with capital murder Monday after calmly telling a 911 operator that she had cut off the arms of 11-month-old Margaret. Police found Schlosser sitting in her living room, covered in blood, a church hymn playing in the background.
Schlosser's husband, John, told an official with Texas' Family and Protective Services that his wife had referenced a Bible scripture the night before the killing and said she wanted to "give her children to God," according to an affidavit that led a judge to award the agency temporary custody of the couple's two older children.
Schlosser had a history of postpartum depression, a disorder that can occur in women after they give birth.
Her mental history and her 911 confession are similar to Yates. And the method Schlosser used shared the bizarre, brutal nature of Laney's rocks and Yates' systematic drowning.
"To actually sever the arms suggests something special was going on," said psychiatrist Phillip Resnick, who testified in the trials of Laney and Yates. "It suggests on its face that there was some specialized psychotic thinking, but you just don't know."
Yates, who had a history of schizophrenia and postpartum depression and said the devil prompted her to kill her children, was convicted of capital murder and is serving a life sentence. Laney was acquitted of capital murder by reason of insanity after psychiatrists agreed psychotic delusions kept her from knowing right from wrong.
Authorities discovered a grisly scene at the Schlossers' apartment.
An officer had to remove a knife from Schlosser's hand, according to a search warrant affidavit released Tuesday. The baby was found in her crib, both arms severed at the shoulder, and died at a hospital a short time later.
Authorities said the two older daughters in the family, ages 6 and 9, were at school when police arrived, and that their father was at work.
Schlosser had been investigated on child-neglect allegations this year, but Texas Child Protective Services had recently closed a seven-month investigation, concluding that Schlosser did not pose a risk to her children.
The Schlosser case will certainly add to the media attention on the issue. But DePaul University law professor Michelle Oberman, who has written extensively on mothers who kill their children, said Texas may be bringing some of the attention on itself with the way it prosecutes such cases.
"It gears up the criminal justice system for a death penalty prosecution, rather than approaching the cases as instances of profound mental illness," Oberman said.
Fiery Eyes, IF she was psychotic during this act, you still would feel she was responsible for her actions?
__Have you ever known someone who had psychotic episodes? Have you ever been around them during one? I'm wondering if you have encountered this, BECAUSE, if you have not, I can completely understand why you would not be convinced that it can obliterate a person's understanding of right and wrong. When you see it, it's...hell, I haven't got words. You quickly realize you can't communicate with them by using just any normal reference points. They can get so out there, you have to really speak kind of exploratively and hope to connect.
__The article I read was in my local paper. I won't be posting it. I couldn't find it on-line. Today, I don't even recall exactly what it had to say about religion- but I think it made reference to the hymn, the bible scripture, much like the above article. It may also have referred to the church of which she was a member. However, I don't think you care that she may have felt she was Christian- this is more about your definition, right? My only point regarding Christianity is that it would be nice if people could accept that the mentally ill can be Christian, and that Christians can be mentally ill. There's a fair amount here to indicate that she probably would identify herself as Christian.
__We have to be OPEN to the possibility of a person not knowing right from wrong. It definitely occurs, and it would be horribly wrong to hold such a person responsible for their actions. The final statement in the article is a VERY good point. If there's any "problem" that has to do with Texas in particular, it's their prosecutorial approach to mental illness.
FeverRed, No, i have never been around someone that was psychotic. About a psychotic being a christain, that is hard for me to see that, not saying it isn't possible, but to me I don't see that it's possible, but doesn't mean it's not possible. Yes, I do believe someone can be out of their mind and then couldn't be held accountable for their actions, but shld be put into a mental hospital and get help. I have only read about the scripture and the song, I have never seen in any article that the family attended church anywhere or that they were christians. So, if you have plzz post it here, i'd like to read it, i'm curious.
From the sounds of all the articles I have read, the Dad knew something wasn't right w/her, he shld have NEVER left her alone w/the kids.
He shouldn't have left her alone, period. She needed help for herself, as well, if she's psychotic, she could behave in ways that endanger her own life. It's sad.
__The thing is, psychosis is a STATE of mind. It is a STAGE of an illness. It is not the entire person or their entire life; far from it. A person who suffers certain forms of mental illness may ENTER a psychotic state, as well as LEAVE it. So, these human beings would be mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, Christians, atheists, artists, accountants...we have to recognize mental illness exists, sometimes in such severe forms that the person is separated from our reality. We have to treat it, care for the people who develop it. When it is the cause of tragedies such as this, we shouldn't scapegoat the ill person. We should accept our responsibility as a community. Not only the father, but the current cultural climate and lack of healthcare options/access, is implicated if this woman was psychotic.
Even if she does not know right from wrong?
__LOTS of perfectly sane folks do worse to their kids. THAT'S evil. I've met evil. I've met insane. Yes, I've met both in one. Don't assume by her actions that you can say, she's not one of "us." We don't have to take any responsibility for her, she's "other" than we are; she's willfully not part of our social contract. She may be a good person AND f~cking nuts, in lay terms.
__She may be sane and evil, but it's unlikely. This was a wierd, wierd way for a sane heartess b!tch to dispose of a child. Not too sensible. Not too pragmatic.
__Have you read the whole thread?