Woman kills 3 week old baby, eats it

[Sasha]

So cancer in my brain couldn't potentially affect my behavior?

And I'm still waiting to hear what the benefit of life imprisonment is when compared to execution.

I can't speak for the benefit because I have personally never experienced it, but it is not your place to decide if life imprisonment is "worth it".Thank God.

A brain tumor could affect your behavior, but then you would be mentally ill. A brain tumor by itself does not constitute mental illness as it can just sit in the brain benign and not affect behavior.

 

[EMTinNEPA]

Because they are human.

Same argument can be applied to medicare and medicaid vegetables. Why? Why all the money spent keeping them alive??

Because they are HUMAN and because it is not your decision to make. Thankfully many understand that mental illness is not the fault of the sufferer and they should not be held responsible for it.

Are they human? Or have they lost what made them human and just become pieces of meat that their families keep alive because they aren't ready to say goodbye?

And I am NOT proposing holding them responsible for their mental illness. I want to hold them responsible for taking an innocent life!

 

[gradygirl]

I am not arguing one way or another, but here is the US Supreme Court's rationale.

In June 2002, the US Supreme Court ruled in Atkins v. Virginia that the death penalty should no longer be used against offenders with mental retardation. It concluded that the penological goals of retribution or deterrence are not furthered by such use of the death penalty. On deterrence, the six Justices in the majority wrote:

"The theory of deterrence in capital sentencing is predicated upon the notion that the increased severity of the punishment will inhibit criminal actors from carrying out murderous conduct. Yet it is the same cognitive and behavioral impairments that make these defendants less morally culpable -- for example, the diminished ability to understand and process information, to learn from experience, to engage in logical reasoning, or to control impulses -- that also make it less likely that they can process the information of the possibility of execution as a penalty and, as a result, control their conduct based upon that information. Nor will exempting the mentally retarded from execution lessen the deterrent effect of the death penalty with respect to offenders who are not mentally retarded. Such individuals are unprotected by the exemption and will continue to face the threat of execution. Thus, executing the mentally retarded will not measurably further the goal of deterrence."

On the question of the retributive goal of the death penalty, the Atkins majority continued: "With respect to retribution -- the interest in seeing that the offender gets his just deserts -- the severity of the appropriate punishment necessarily depends on the culpability of the offender". The death penalty assumes absolute, 100 per cent culpability, on the part of the condemned. If there is any diminished culpability, then the retributive goal fails, as the punishment becomes disproportionate. In Roper v. Simmons in March 2005, the Court found the same in the case of children under 18 years old at the time of the crime: "Once the diminished culpability of juveniles is recognized, it is evidence that the penological justifications for the death penalty apply to them with lesser force than to adults". So, too, with the seriously mentally ill.

 

[Sasha]

Are they human? Or have they lost what made them human and just become pieces of meat that their families keep alive because they aren't ready to say goodbye?

And I am NOT proposing holding them responsible for their mental illness. I want to hold them responsible for taking an innocent life!

Which would not have happened had they not been mentally ill, so you ARE penalizing them for their mental illness.

This thread has the potential to turn into a good discussion about PPD if people could put aside their closeminded views for 10 seoncds.

I found this to be a good read on the subject, especially this tidbit.

Postpartum Depression
Full Article: http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/271662-overview

Postpartum psychosis is the most severe form of postpartum psychiatric illness.

The condition is rare and occurs in approximately 1-2 per 1000 women after childbirth.

At highest risk are women with a personal history of bipolar disorder or a previous episode of postpartum psychosis.

Postpartum psychosis has a dramatic onset, emerging as early as the first 48-72 hours after delivery. In most women, symptoms develop within the first 2 postpartum weeks.

The condition resembles a rapidly evolving manic or mixed episode with symptoms such as restlessness and insomnia, irritability, rapidly shifting depressed or elated mood, and disorganized behavior.

The mother may have delusional beliefs that relate to the infant (eg, baby is defective or dying, infant is Satan or God), or she may have auditory hallucinations that instruct her to harm herself or her infant.

Risks for infanticide and suicide are high among women with untreated postpartum psychosis.

I have to wonder, if someone had recognized trouble brewing and gotten her help, would this have been prevented? Should she have gotten prophylactic help with her history of schizophrenia?

 

[EMTinNEPA]

I can't speak for the benefit because I have personally never experienced it, but it is not your place to decide if life imprisonment is "worth it".Thank God.

No, it isn't my place. Nor is it yours. Which is why we have to elect representatives who will use LOGIC and REASON to determine the best course of action. Life imprisonment is a waste of valuable resources on a person who will never be a productive member of society again.

A brain tumor could affect your behavior, but then you would be mentally ill. A brain tumor by itself does not constitute mental illness as it can just sit in the brain benign and not affect behavior.

So it is possible to have something wrong with your head, but give no outer appearance of any problem? If this is the case, we also have to accept the possibility that somebody could have NOTHING wrong with their head and give the outer appearance of severe insanity. And of course, there are no definitive tests, so if somebody acts cuckoo for cocoa puffs, we have no choice but to accept their insanity because we can't debunk it.

Ergo, pleading insanity becomes a way to commit a murder and score free room and board for life. If you give murderers who are genuinely mentally ill a break, then murderers who are not genuinely mentally ill will seek the same break simply because the insanity they claim to be afflicted with can't be disproven. We can prove somebody doesn't have cancer. We can prove somebody doesn't have lupus. We can prove somebody doesn't have an allergy. The same cannot be said for a mental illness.

 

[EMTinNEPA]

Which would not have happened had they not been mentally ill, so you ARE penalizing them for their mental illness.

Ah, the transitive property of penalization. I wouldn't have killed that man if I hadn't been taking a walk that night. You can't put me to death because you can't penalize me for taking a walk.

 

[Hockey]

Guys I'm going to bed. Don't make this discussion too lengthy since I hate having to go through 10 pages

 

[gradygirl]

Ok everyone, before we start picking stuff up and throwing it at each other, please consider the following:

a) an insanity plea must be accepted by both the defense and the prosecution;
b) insanity pleas are only used in 1% of cases;
c) insanity pleas are incredibly hard to win.

And before anyone keeps arguing, please read this, it gives a TON of insight into the truth of insanity pleas.

The Insanity Defense: Bad, Mad, or Both?

As this article says, insanity pleas are stigmatized relentlessly by the media, so let's do our research before we further stigmatize this misunderstood information.

 

[reaper]

I am just wondering how any of this is "EMS News" related?

But, boy it is fun to see the ignorance shine through!

 

[Hockey]

I am just wondering how any of this is "EMS News" related?

But, boy it is fun to see the ignorance shine through!

I wish they changed the name of this section. Make it Current Events

 

[Sasha]

Ah, the transitive property of penalization. I wouldn't have killed that man if I hadn't been taking a walk that night. You can't put me to death because you can't penalize me for taking a walk.

That is a ridiculous analogy... because there is a huge difference between taking a walk and being schizophrenic, which is not the fault of the patient.

 

[el Murpharino]

Why? What purpose will keeping them alive possibly serve? All they'll do is take up a cell, spend my tax dollars, futily attempt "rehab" (which will be pointless since they will never be back in society again to function normally), and keep living with the possibility of one day escaping and killing again.

It actually costs more to put someone through the many, many court proceedings they are allowed, among other "benefits", before being sentenced to death...unless the defendant denies those appeals.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

http://www.walletpop.com/blog/2009/03/09/death-penalty-costs-more-than-life-in-prison/

 

[Sasha]

I wish they changed the name of this section. Make it Current Events

Why? This i an EMS forum, you want current events go to a general forum somewhere else.

 

[Medic744]

This woman comitted a horrible crime and she is still liable for her actions but she does have a mental defect that went untreated by either lack of knowledge or just ignoring it by both her family and the healthcare and judicial system. In the articles on this incident you will read that the father of the child is also schizophrenic and the mother had a history of mental illness. The father wants the death penalty for her but as far as I am concerned the death penalty should be reservered for those that have no remorse. No matter how horrible we think what she did is once she recieves the necessary treatment and is in the right mentality again there is no sentence that a jury can give her that will be worse than the one she gives herself. To wake up every morning knowing what you have done and having that memory and having to live with it is far more punishment than anyone else can hand down. This woman would not have been treated any different in the back of my unit than anyone else. Anybody that takes a life by choice has some mental defect but there is a difference in each case. Proving mental defect/illness in a court of law takes a lot of proof. Andrea Yates, this woman, and the woman in Dallas that cut off her babies arms are all examples of being failed by the systems and their families. Im not saying that she is not at fault but I am saying that she has a good chance at rehabilition. Also Andrea Yates set a precedence in Texas for mothers with PPD and if this woman does plead out she most likely will end up in a mental hospital to recieve treatment as opposed to any jail time.

 

[Sail195]

I am really disturbed by this one.... I am speechless and let me tell you that does not happen often!

 

[Burlyskink]

I think she should be executed, as far as i'm concerned that would be doing her a favor. If you think about it, there may be times where she is stable and then she will think of what she did.

 

[Shishkabob]

It actually costs more to put someone through the many, many court proceedings they are allowed, among other "benefits", before being sentenced to death..

And that, like many other things, needs to be fixed.

 

[MendoEMT]

It actually costs more to put someone through the many, many court proceedings they are allowed, among other "benefits", before being sentenced to death...unless the defendant denies those appeals.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

http://www.walletpop.com/blog/2009/03/09/death-penalty-costs-more-than-life-in-prison/

Very true. The sheer cost of the process involved in execution is mind boggling. Instead, I say that you take those sickos out of protective solitary and throw them in with the general prison population, much more efficient!!

 

[DrankTheKoolaid]

re

Quite the discussion here. My opinion is this. If her DOA turns up negative then sure PPD go for life without parole. If her drug screen turns up positive fry her arse

 

[WannaBeFlight]

Never did I say she doesn't deserve punishment. Death penalty? No. Life imprisonment? Yes.

What good is Life Imprisonment going to do? She will not recieve medications that will help Psychosis with fixed illusions and auditory hallucinations. There is no drug out there that can fix those. I work on a Psych ward, and we see that all of the time.

Oh yeah, and one more worthless person to live off of my hard earned money. Yay Taxes and Jails!(sarcasm) <_<