Andrea Yates hubby to remarry--what a low life

[ducklite]

In Pennsylvania, any adult can have another adult including spouses, involuntarilly commited with just cause, this commitment is only for 5 days, after 5 days of observation the person can then be committed for a longer period of time if the drs feel it is neccessary to prevent the person from harming themselves or others..

And that's exactly the point. She was under a doctors care, and the doctor failed to see her as a danger to herself or others. I suspect that even if she had a five day sommittement, she would have done the same thing on release.

Anne

 

[MICKEY88]

The difference is the ability to interpret consequences of actions, and to deliberately and without psychosis take a life. Susan Smith murdered for opportunity. Andrea Yates murdered because the voices told her to. Susan Smith knew darn well what she as doing and did so in a caluculated manner. Andrea Yates was not mentally able to distinguish right from wrong, and visioned no benefit, perceived or otherwise, from her actions.

Anne

I understand the difference, but I still must respectfully disagree. I don't see how anyone who is 100% mentally healthy can take the life of a child..

Susan Smith may have murdered for opportunity, but she still had to justify it to herself, that it was an OK thing to do... a rational healthy mind could not possibly make that justification...

 

[ducklite]

Well after reading Jenny's post I think Rusty was doing as much as he could. I am more upset that any doctor would suddenly stop a anti-depreesant. I was on Effexor and you have to wean down, or it can cause a psychotic break.

Exactly! I think the missing peice in this case is the obviously ineffective medical treatment from a physician with questionable comptetence. I'm just not sure how much more her husband realistically could have done for her.

Anne

 

[ducklite]

I understand the difference, but I still must respectfully disagree. I don't see how anyone who is 100% mentally healthy can take the life of a child..

Susan Smith may have murdered for opportunity, but she still had to justify it to herself, that it was an OK thing to do... a rational healthy mind could not possibly make that justification...

Using that train of thought, every gangbanger in jail for murder is mentally ill.

Anne

 

[MICKEY88]

And that's exactly the point. She was under a doctors care, and the doctor failed to see her as a danger to herself or others. I suspect that even if she had a five day sommittement, she would have done the same thing on release.

Anne

I understand that as well, I wasn't applyng that to this case..

I was replying to this statement...


Originally Posted by ducklite
A lay person can not have someone committed to a mental hospital. but never is a spouse allowed to involuntarily committ someone.

Anne

 

[ducklite]

I understand that as well, I wasn't applyng that to this case..

I was replying to this statement...


Originally Posted by ducklite
A lay person can not have someone committed to a mental hospital. but never is a spouse allowed to involuntarily committ someone.

Anne

Agreed, I should have qualified that statement better.

Anne

 

[MICKEY88]

Using that train of thought, every gangbanger in jail for murder is mentally ill.

Anne

,,that is why I don't believe in the plea, not guilty by reason of insanity,

there is a difference between not being mentally healthy, and insanity


no one who kills an innocent person, is thinking with a healthy rational mind...

 

[ducklite]

,,that is why I don't believe in the plea, not guilty by reason of insanity,

there is a difference between not being mentally healthy, and insanity


no one who kills an innocent person, is thinking with a healthy rational mind...

Would you agree that there is a difference between murdering and not being able to understand the consequences of your actions, and murdering and just not caring about the consequences of your actions?

Anne

 

[Maleficent13]

Exactly! I think the missing peice in this case is the obviously ineffective medical treatment from a physician with questionable comptetence. I'm just not sure how much more her husband realistically could have done for her.

Anne

What about how much more he could have done for the children? Like stay home until his mother arrived? Put them in school? Not leave them in a home with an unstable mother?

Even if he only thought she was a danger to herself, what about if she had hurt/killed herself while home alone with the children? Still not very responsible.

I'm not looking to crucify the guy...but I do think he could have done something to help save those kids.

 

[LoraJ]

If she was so unstable that she needed a "babysitter" then I believe he used very poor judgement in leaving her home alone. Of course he is not fully to blame, but I believe he did play a role.

 

[MICKEY88]

Would you agree that there is a difference between murdering and not being able to understand the consequences of your actions, and murdering and just not caring about the consequences of your actions?

Anne

most definitely..

an eight year old, who finds a gun in the house and shoots a friend, thinking it's not final like in the movies.....is way different from an 18 year old gang member who shoots someone just to be tough

 

[BeckyEsq]

I only partial agree with this


More importantly, this is the kind of response I like to read on controversial threads.Intelligent dialogue and comments. The poster states their comment in a respectful manner, not with nasty comments, name calling and condescending attitude. You don't have to agree, with others, but just be respectful to each other

Awwww, shucks . . . Thanks, I try.

 

[Skywalker]

I think he is just as responsible as she was. She was the one that was mentally ill and he should have done something about it. Instead he continued to have more children with her. If anyone should be in jail it should be him.

Yikes, that is scary.

God forbid if anyone close to you in your life commits a crime...you'll share the blame and do jail time will you?

I think it is clear that he tried very hard to get help for her. Short of leaving her, I doubt there is anything else he could have done. I am sure he was trying to live his life convincing himself that things were going to be all right, none of us expects our life to erupt into a nightmare of that sort of magnitude. I can't imagine the stress he must have been under, with five young children and a mentally ill wife.

 

[ducklite]

most definitely..

an eight year old, who finds a gun in the house and shoots a friend, thinking it's not final like in the movies.....is way different from an 18 year old gang member who shoots someone just to be tough

Would you agree that Andrea Yates' mental capacity to distinguish causal effect and consequence was equivalent to that eight year old, and Susan Smith was more like the gang banger who understood fully and just didn't care?

Anne

 

[Michelle2]

Ok, while I have not read the entirety of this thread, the thing that bugged me when I read the subject of this thread about Andrea's husband remarrying is this:
I remember watching the John Walsh show or something to that effect, a few years ago, and they had both Susan Smith's husband and Andrea Yates husband on, and they were talking about the differences between the two muders. Susan Smith's husband was very adimant that his wife was calculating and that it was in cold blood. He was very grieving and very angry, and rightly so. BUT Andrea's husband was very supportive of Andrea, and did not really blame her because of the mental illness. Sure he was hurt and grieving, but there was a HUGE difference between the 2 husbands.

My point is, and this is what bugs me, he said he was going to stick through this with her, that he was not going to divorce her, and was going to support her...I guess things have changed now? Why was he so willing to support her then, and not now? I guess time wears on anyone....but I guess I get mad when someone offers support and loyalty, and then withdraws it because it just got too long. But of course I am not in his shoes, so who knows.

 

[sgtdisney]

So let me see if I understand this. Rusty got Andrea help, taking her to the doctor and trying to get her help. Over and over again. She was under a doctor's care at the time of the murders. What an insensitve jerk.

Up until the trial they had no indication (well Rusty didn't anyway) that she had had thoughts of murdering her children. And yet, because Rusty made a judgement call, and left Andrea home for a brief time before his mother came over, it is all his fault. He is the one who should be in prison because it is all his fault. It is his fault he and his wife made love and had babies that a doctor told them they shouldn't. Was it a wise choice? Perhaps not in hindsight, perhaps it wouldn't have made a difference other than she would have only killed 3 children and not 5. We will never know. We will never know the state of her mind when they conceived those babies.

I am sure, as a dad, that Rusty will always have to live with his ill advised decision to leave Andrea home for a few minutes with the children. And yet, that isn't enough for some. He should rot in jail for loving his wife. The wife who brutally murdered their kids.

 

[ducklite]

If she was so unstable that she needed a "babysitter" then I believe he used very poor judgement in leaving her home alone. Of course he is not fully to blame, but I believe he did play a role.

We also do'nt know what else was going on. Had he been told that if he came in late of left early again to deal with his wife that he'd be subject to termination? It's quite possible, considering the time he had obviously already taken in seeking treatment for her. So left with the choice of leaving her for a short time (and at that time she was eating cereal and didn't seem to be at risk for harming herself or the children) or potentially being let go and not being able to provide for him, he made a fateful choice.

This man was between a rock and a hard place. I've been in that same palce. It's an impossible place to be. So you make a decision based on what you think is best. Sometimes it works out, others it doesn't. He'll carry a lifetime of guilt for making what he thought was a responsible choice in an overwhelming situation.

It seems to me that a lack of continuity of care (which likely could have been caused by a health insurance mandate) and a doctor with sloppy records and questionable capabilities who missed several red flags are more to blame than an overwhelmed husband.

Anne

 

[Freyja]

wow, what a double standard...I've never once heard anyone blame a woman if the father flips out and kills the kids, the mother is always portrayed as a helpless victim..


how do we know what the husband was aware of , why is he guilty of anything..


knowing that someone is ill, doesn't mean knowing they are capable of homicide...

why shouldn't he move on....that's what women are always told to do...move on with your life and find a decent partner..

I agree!

 

[sgtdisney]

I only partial agree with this
More importantly, this is the kind of response I like to read on controversial threads.Intelligent dialogue and comments. The poster states their comment in a respectful manner, not with nasty comments, name calling and condescending attitude. You don't have to agree, with others, but just be respectful to each other

That's kind of funny, considering in your original post you call a man a lowlife because he divorced a mentally unstable woman, who drowned the life out his children, and is moving on with his life.

 

[MICKEY88]

Ok, while I have not read the entirety of this thread, the thing that bugged me when I read the subject of this thread about Andrea's husband remarrying is this:
I remember watching the John Walsh show or something to that effect, a few years ago, and they had both Susan Smith's husband and Andrea Yates husband on, and they were talking about the differences between the two muders. Susan Smith's husband was very adimant that his wife was calculating and that it was in cold blood. He was very grieving and very angry, and rightly so. BUT Andrea's husband was very supportive of Andrea, and did not really blame her because of the mental illness. Sure he was hurt and grieving, but there was a HUGE difference between the 2 husbands.

My point is, and this is what bugs me, he said he was going to stick through this with her, that he was not going to divorce her, and was going to support her...I guess things have changed now? Why was he so willing to support her then, and not now? I guess time wears on anyone....but I guess I get mad when someone offers support and loyalty, and then withdraws it because it just got too long. But of course I am not in his shoes, so who knows.

perhaps now that the shock has warn off and reality has set in he sees things differently..