Yet another mother of the year....

Post by **Martrae** » Thu Nov 30, 2006 4:51 pm

Perhaps she should have checked with her mommy before being "left alone", you mean?

araby · Post by **araby** » Thu Nov 30, 2006 7:20 pm

maybe she thought the baby wasn't done enough?

Xaiveir · Post by **Xaiveir** » Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:04 pm

What's red, bubbly, and scratches at the window every 5 seconds before exploding?

A baby in a carosel microwave.

Im sorry i just couldnt resist.

Iccarra · Post by **Iccarra** » Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:12 pm

Martrae wrote:Perhaps she should have checked with her mommy before being "left alone", you mean?

Not exactly...however, if I personally had a known history of blacking out without the use of certain medication I wouldn't trust myself to be the sole caretaker of an infant if I were not taking it.

Post by **Martrae** » Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:30 pm

Trusting yourself is one thing....expecting some nameless agency to be watching over her to make sure she's doing the proper thing sounds too much like Big Brother and we have enough of that going on.

Dylan · Post by **Dylan** » Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:43 pm

Because child care agencies have knives, microwaves, and other dangerous items all over the place

Iccarra · Post by **Iccarra** » Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:55 pm

I don't think I inferred that there should have been some agency looking over her shoulder at all. I am curious to know whether she had family or friends that could have been on hand until she was able to begin taking her medication once again...if the reason being was only as Lue suggested, that she could not take it if she was breastfeeding the baby. The safety & welfare of the child is more important than anything else...and I know from experience that any help with taking care of an infant is a blessing no matter what the reason.

leah · Post by **leah** » Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:05 pm

Xaiveir wrote:What's red, bubbly, and scratches at the window every 5 seconds before exploding?

A baby in a carosel microwave.

Im sorry i just couldnt resist.

i used to laugh when people told dead baby jokes

until one was told in the company of someone who had lost a baby

never again :\

Harrison · Post by **Harrison** » Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:12 pm

Fuck you Leah, now I can't laugh at dead baby jokes

leah · Post by **leah** » Thu Nov 30, 2006 9:16 pm

it's for the better, believe me

Jay · Post by **Jay** » Thu Nov 30, 2006 10:20 pm

What's the difference between a truckload of bowling balls and a truckload of babies?

The truckload of bowling balls can't be unloaded with a pitchfork.

brinstar · Post by **brinstar** » Thu Nov 30, 2006 11:21 pm

fuck those jokes, tasteless and unfunny and huge potential to backfire

i also try to avoid "your mom" quips, one of my best friends lost a mom to cancer when he was 16

Yamori · Post by **Yamori** » Thu Nov 30, 2006 11:50 pm

Lueyen wrote:
Yamori wrote:Huh, I was under the impression that people struck with epileptic seizures just sort of convulsed for awhile. I really don't know all that much about epilepsy, but being able to go through the complex motor tasks of popping a baby in the zapper, closing the door, and turning it on while going through an epileptic fit sounds kind of wacky.

You are thinking of a tonic-clonic seizure or Grand mal seizure, there are somewhere around 40 different types and degrees. There are seizures that are mainly mentally incapacitating where the victim does not lose consciousness or suffer extreme loss of motor control.

Oh i see. :D

-

Try new LEAN POCKETS ham, baby, and cheese. Ready in just 3 minutes!

Darcler · Post by **Darcler** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 7:14 am

Sometimes, always having two people around isnt an option.

Post by **Lueyen** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 7:48 am

Darcler wrote:Sometimes, always having two people around isnt an option.

Sometimes having one around isn't an option either, what do parents do when they both have to be somewhere without children? Sure it may not be easy, but honestly it should be doable.

I also view it as she put herself in the situation, although perhaps I'm missing something there. Anyone know of any other reason she might not have been taking her medication after birth beyond breast feeding? Further still, while I understand that breast milk for a newborn is optimal is there any reason a newborn would absolutely have to be breast fed?

Insanityfair · Post by **Insanityfair** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 8:23 am

Lueyen wrote:
Darcler wrote:Sometimes, always having two people around isnt an option.

Sometimes having one around isn't an option either, what do parents do when they both have to be somewhere without children? Sure it may not be easy, but honestly it should be doable.

I also view it as she put herself in the situation, although perhaps I'm missing something there. Anyone know of any other reason she might not have been taking her medication after birth beyond breast feeding? Further still, while I understand that breast milk for a newborn is optimal is there any reason a newborn would absolutely have to be breast fed?

Thing is that some people just choose not to take their medication. Take Andrea Yates for example. She chose not to, and look what happened. Different illnesses, granted, same end result. If they knowingly chose not to take their meds, one prone to depression etc. one prone to blackouts, imo both are at fault.

I personally can't think of a reason offhand they would absolutely have to be breast fed, while it's supposed to be better for the immune system I think, I don't know that it's a must in many, if any cases, and the article certainly didn't say it was that I saw.

Post by **Arlos** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 9:43 am

I have heard that some infants are allergic to the various formulas used to feed infants instead of breast feeding. For some of those, I understand there's a soy-based formula that is less prone to allergic reactions, but even there, some infants still can't abide by it, and MUST be breast-fed.

Also, as I understand it anyway, I thought epilepsy medication was by no means a sure thing when it came to stopping episodes of the disease. They cut the incidence rate way down, sure, but they still can get them, medication or no. At least that was the case with the medications they had back in the late 70s, when I actually had a friend who had epilepsy. (the medications also stained his teeth hardcore yellow. Think a smoker who never brushed, but worse.) My friend was on medication, but made sure everyone who was around him knew what to do in case he had a fit, as he could still get them, regardless of the fact he was taking it.

-Arlos

Post by **Martrae** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 10:04 am

Yeah, the medicine is not fool-proof and adding in the hormones from having a baby would be cause enough for a medicine that used to work to suddenly stop.

Darcler · Post by **Darcler** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 12:24 pm

Maybe she has a BreastNazi in the hospital. I had one when I had my daughter. I HAAAAD to breastfeed. I was planning on it, but after a couple tries, I didnt like it at all and wanted to stop and formula feed. BreastNazi gave me hell and made me cry. And I continued doing it for 2 months, against my will.
Or, I didnt read anything more on the case, maybe she had a premie. It is highly recommended that you BF premies, as it will boost their insanely low immune system.
Or as arlos said, maybe her baby had reactions to all formula and needed to BF out of lack of choices.

Then, as to why she couldnt leave her baby with an agency, maybe she just plain couldnt afford it.
Maybe her parent/partner/friend had to go to the store shortly and since she hadnt had an episode in awhile, thought it safe to leave her alone long enough to pick up a couple things.

There just arent enough facts present to clearly pass judgement. Either way it goes, it is a truely horrible incident. If it wasnt a blackout, I would go ahead and venture a guess and say that she had severe PPDepression. If either, the blackout or PPD were the case, she has to live with what she did long after her 5 year sentence is over.

Gaazy · Post by **Gaazy** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 4:39 pm

Damn she really is one ugly bitch though. She looks like shed be a fun person to beat the crap out of :wink:

Post by **Lueyen** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 8:01 pm

Good points with the exception fo Gaazy :P. There are a lot of possibilities, but there is an awful lot of giving her the benefit of doubt if you will. I'm not saying it's a bad thing... it's actually apparently quite common. Prosecutors have said that cases against parents in regards to the deaths of their own children are some of the most difficult cases to get a guilty verdict on because most jurors have trouble fathoming a parent actually killing their own child and there is a huge want/need to give them the benefit of doubt. Nothing wrong with that, just the way it is.

Darcler · Post by **Darcler** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 10:02 pm

Especially with this, unless there were cameras or she says "yes, i knowingly and willingly put my baby on the popcorn setting" they cant really truely convict. Too many factors that could put doubt in jurors heads, especially female jurors.

Post by **Lueyen** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 10:49 pm

Darcler wrote:especially female jurors.

Why do you say that? genuine curiosity on how women would see it all in a different light, not trying to insinuate a sexist statement.

Darcler · Post by **Darcler** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 11:04 pm

Women have the motherly instinct. They can sympathize with the depression (if they played that card in a trial) and they can sympathize with what I said earlier, how she will live with this for the rest of her life.

Men, on the other hand are more logical thinkers. Not as emotional as women. They pull the depression card, they wont get it as much as women, they will take what the lawyers say at face value.