Woman kills her 8 month old

[Omega Glory]

By bashing her head on concrete steps, and people talk about what a great mother she was.

http://www.wkbw.com/morenews/morenews.asp#24
This story is covered about four times on this page. Scroll down to find them all.

Okay, I don't know what kind of mental illness this woman suffered from, but there had to be signs that something was wrong. I guess it's natural to want to place the blame somewhere, but people knew that she was unstable. The police had even checked up on her just before the incident took place, so people clearly thought that she might be dangerous/need outside help in the immediate future.

At 7 o'clock Friday morning, witnesses say they spotted a woman in front of 1030 Kenmore Avenue slamming a baby's head into the sidewalk.

Wouldn't it almost always be a bad idea to leave small children alone with unstable people?

[Liberal]

I think that people, particularly leftists, enjoy blaming abstract entities like society. It assuages their self-imposed guilt and gives them an excuse to enact yet another economic black hole social program.

[Metacom]

Well, this leftist would prefer not to "blame" anyone in cases like this: The authorities have to walk a a line between protecting children and protecting the rights of their parents, even when the parents are mentally ill. In a system that errs on the side of leaving children with parents, incidents like this are bound to happen. If the mother was so mentally ill that she isn't culpable, and the cops didn't see sufficient evidence to remove the child, then no one did anything wrong and it's simply a tragedy.

[Hamadryad]

I think that people, particularly leftists, enjoy blaming abstract entities like society. It assuages their self-imposed guilt and gives them an excuse to enact yet another economic black hole social program.I'm trying to figure out how this response has anything whatsoever to do with the OP. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a "leftist" who will step up and say, "I think it's wonderful that this eight-month-old baby had her head dashed open on the concrete, for it will surely bring more attention to the plight of the mentally ill, thus lining the pockets of the people who run the food bank! THAT'LL SHOW 'EM!"

I also think this whole "leftists enjoy blaming society" thing is getting pretty goddamned tired, too. Although, you know, this sentence seems to stand up, too:

I think that people, particularly Liber(al)(tarian), enjoy blaming abstract entities like leftists. It assuages their fear that they don't have any actual points to make, and gives them an excuse to slam yet another non-conservative organization.

Can you please - PLEASE - check to make sure that the posts you're making have anything whatsoever to do with the OP? Sometimes? Please? It's getting to where I see your name in a thread and my temples start throbbing before I even get to the body of your post.

So anyhow....the linked article was primarily an interview with her pastor. It didn't say anything about social programs, or what caused her to do it, or anything else. I think she's a sick, sick woman who should never be allowed to have another child. I hope her kid didn't feel much pain before she died. The linked article doesn't have anything in it about the baby's father except his name - I hope he's making it through his own horror as well.

[Liberal]

I'm trying to figure out how this response has anything whatsoever to do with the OP.Have someone read this to you from the OP: I guess it's natural to want to place the blame somewhere, but people knew that she was unstable.


It's getting to where I see your name in a thread and my temples start throbbing before I even get to the body of your post.Likewise, I'm sure.

[Metacom]

I'm trying to figure out how this response has anything whatsoever to do with the OP.
Actually, in this specific instance, I think Lib's post was sort of relevant. If you'll note, that OP did say:

The police had even checked up on her just before the incident took place, so people clearly thought that she might be dangerous/need outside help in the immediate future.
...
Wouldn't it almost always be a bad idea to leave small children alone with unstable people?

Which clearly tries to put some of the blame on the "society" that wouldn't remove the child from its mother. And I half-agree with Lib's "leftists like to blame society" statement--only half though, because the right is just as bad, what with all the "family values" and "moral decay" bullshit.

The bit about it being an excuse to enact black-hole social programs was just silly though. You could just as easily say that the right sees stuff like this as an excuse to enact tax cuts for the upper class, so that they'll be able to donate more of their money to charities that will help children like this. :D

[CrankyAsAnOldMan]

I think that people, particularly leftists, enjoy blaming abstract entities like society. It assuages their self-imposed guilt and gives them an excuse to enact yet another economic black hole social program.

Well, to further this discussion productively, specifically which "black hole" social programs were enacted by leftists on the basis of blaming abstract entities like society?

[Hamadryad]

Have someone read this to you from the OP: I guess it's natural to want to place the blame somewhere, but people knew that she was unstable.


Likewise, I'm sure.To your first point: I still don't see what that has to do with "leftists," or with black-hole social programs. Maybe I'm just stupid.

To your second: I rather doubt, with my posting frequency, that I've shown up on your radar enough to cause that reaction.

And I half-agree with Lib's "leftists like to blame society" statement--only half though, because the right is just as bad, what with all the "family values" and "moral decay" bullshit.Okay, so you feel that what he said had some bearing - since the societal aspect was raised, which I'll concede - but essentially only half of the first bit, since it's really just standard party-line hyperbole, and the rest has no relevance.

I'll retract the part about having NOTHING to do with the OP, but I think it's broad, vague, and tangential, at best, to the content of the post.

[Liberal]

What I don't understand is why you felt compelled (and apparently still do) to hijack the poor woman's thread just so your could hurl a screed at me and tell me how you hate reading what I write — in response to what I wrote. You have ignore. Use it.

[tiny ham]

But...you don't think running in here to blame leftist black hole social programs was a hijack at all?

Really?

[Capt. Ridley's Shooting Party]

He didn't blame the social programmes.

[Omega Glory]

Okay, Liberal I can see where you'd believe that I was placing the blame on all of society, but I was thinking more along the lines of the immediate family in this case. Now that it's not 1 am, I see the flaws in that statement. Should we put the children of all mentally ill people in foster care? Of course not.

To be fair, you're the one who brought liberals into it, which is part of the reason that the thread is taking its current path.

[tiny ham]

He didn't blame the social programmes.

Give him time. His post was essentially BLAMING leftists for creating black hole social programs.

Which has shit all to do with the horrors of smashing a baby's head on a sidewalk...which he seems to overlook completely.

[Capt. Ridley's Shooting Party]

Which has shit all to do with the horrors of smashing a baby's head on a sidewalk...which he seems to overlook completely.


His post was referring to the claim in the OP that there had to be someone to blame for the incident, aside from the mother.

[tiny ham]

But rather than address that he addressed his personal feelings of ALL LEFTISTS and brought up the term 'black hole social programs'.

Besides, I didn't read the OP as NOT blaming the mother at all, rather suggesting that signals were there that the mother was unstable and no one did anything. Lib decided to make a big political speech instead.

[RTFirefly]

I think that people, particularly leftists, enjoy blaming abstract entities like society. It assuages their self-imposed guilt and gives them an excuse to enact yet another economic black hole social program.Ah, the classic Libertarian cryptic-yet-infuriating short post. A SDMB tradition since 1999.

One kinda has to admire the structure of such a post, in the same sort of perverse way one has to admire al-Qaeda's tactical imagination re 9/11. Such a post (like the 9/11 attacks) is an elegant solution to a 'problem' that shouldn't, by any stretch of the imagination, be anyone's problem. It slams in a way that gets under people's skin, without really saying something concrete enough to actually be rebutted. Such a post is completely contrary to the spirit of GD, but unfortunately within its rules. And the result is usually to turn Lib's original post, and his followup explanations, into the new subject of the thread, hijacking it from whatever it was originally about.

Elegant, but kinda pathetic really.

[Liberal]

In your zeal to admire al-Qaeda, you failed to notice this is not GD. Frankly, if you and your people would just let me speak my peace and leave me alone, this sort of thing wouldn't happen. But no, lacking self-control like all leftist extremists, you cannot help but jump on the bandwagon while simultaneously condemning it. I was one voice — you have turned it into five.

[Coldfire]

I think that people, particularly leftists, enjoy blaming abstract entities like society. It assuages their self-imposed guilt and gives them an excuse to enact yet another economic black hole social program.You mean, sort of like how Libertarians like to blame abstract entities like "the government" for everything?

Ye Gads, man. Are you having a special on irony this week?

[tiny ham]

Lib, speak your PIECE in the appropriate threads like, you know, ones about the election or GOVERNMENT.

drive bys in every friggin thread are not going to go unacknowledged

[WILLASS]

His post was referring to the claim in the OP that there had to be someone to blame for the incident, aside from the mother.

Excuse my ignorance but if you are mentally ill and you kill someone because of the effects of your illness I thought that, in the eyes of the law, you essentially weren't to blame. You would get banged up in a mental home for the rest of your life but they couldn't try you for commiting a crime. I may be wrong and more than likely this is a very compressed, inarticulate, simplistic take on it but I'm pretty sure that, in essence, that is what happens.

[Omega Glory]

Besides, I didn't read the OP as NOT blaming the mother at all, rather suggesting that signals were there that the mother was unstable and no one did anything. Lib decided to make a big political speech instead.

That is exactly what it meant. If this woman passes her psych evaluation, then she is to blame. If not, then the baby's death was just a horrible accident that may not have been preventable. All too often though, someone in a similar situation will say "I knew that Joe was unstable/abusive to the child but I never thought he'd kill her. He loved the baby". I don't want mentally ill people being harrassed, but their family and friends shouldn't overlook/explain away signals that something isn't right. That has nothing to do with the government or failed social outreach programs or liberals.

[Hamadryad]

Excuse my ignorance but if you are mentally ill and you kill someone because of the effects of your illness I thought that, in the eyes of the law, you essentially weren't to blame. I think that's basically the case. I think that's where discussions like this actually come from. The first thing people want to know is, "How could something like this have happened?" When the answer is "Because the mother is off her rocker," there's no one concrete to blame....so the question becomes "How could something like this have been allowed to happen?" What should be genuine concern for the factors leading to the tragedy becomes a witch hunt for someone to pin the Blame!!!! on. The fact that there isn't one single thing on which "blame" can be put makes the whole thing even muddier.

[tiny ham]

But What Of The Social Programs??!?!!

[Hamadryad]

That is exactly what it meant. If this woman passes her psych evaluation, then she is to blame. If not, then the baby's death was just a horrible accident that may not have been preventable. All too often though, someone in a similar situation will say "I knew that Joe was unstable/abusive to the child but I never thought he'd kill her. He loved the baby". I don't want mentally ill people being harrassed, but their family and friends shouldn't overlook/explain away signals that something isn't right. That has nothing to do with the government or failed social outreach programs or liberals.And this is why I took issue with Lib's post - I thought it had absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the subject. I didn't think the OP was saying, "Social Services should have jackbooted their way in and taken that baby at the first whisper!" I think he was saying "Why weren't her family and neighbors watching her extra carefully, knowing that there were potential problems?" It didn't seem (to me) to be a politically charged issue in the first place.

[Hamadryad]

But What Of The Social Programs??!?!!FOR GOD'S SAKE, WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?

Oh, wait.....

:cool:

[RTFirefly]

you failed to notice this is not GD.Well, my goodness! That just entirely invalidates my statement.

Or maybe just requires a trivial amendment: it's antithetical to the spirit of honest debate. And last I checked, the Pit was a debate forum, just with less restrictive rules than your usual stomping ground in GD, where you originally introduced this technique and raised it to the art form you have made it into.
Frankly, if you and your people would just let me speak my peace and leave me alone, this sort of thing wouldn't happen.Let me explain about message boards, Lib. You get to speak your piece, but so does everyone else. Which means you have no reasonable expectation of speaking your piece and then being left alone, which means it's pretty dumb to go blaming those who don't let your words go unchallenged.

You've been a regular at this message board since 1999. One would think you'd have figured this out by now.
But no, lacking self-control like all leftist extremists, you cannot help but jump on the bandwagon while simultaneously condemning it. Hey Lib, how many times have I said diddly to you in the past year? I see your posts all the time, but I leave it to newer posters to deal with you. They generally do a pretty good job.

Nah, I was pointed to this thread from somewhere else, and decided to offer some historical perspective on you. Having done that, I'm out of here again.
I was one voice — you have turned it into five.Admittedly, you have always counted on the visceral reactions of others to your cryptic-yet-infuriating posts to gain a platform and an audience for your views. In another time, I frequently fell for the technique. I think it's a net positive to point out what you are doing (rather than react to it), so that others may more quickly recognize it and sidestep it.

Since you've said you want other people to let you speak your piece and leave you alone, hopefully this will help you achieve that goal, whether it's reasonable or not.

[tiny ham]

RTFirefly, don't forget the part where you admire AlQaeda!

[Liberal]

Let me explain about message boards, Lib. You get to speak your piece, but so does everyone else.Well then, quitcher bitchin. If five or ten of you want to come in here and make me into some big deal, don't be surprised when the thread derails. You're like the guy who shoves a knife up his butt and doesn't understand why his ass is bleeding.

[tiny ham]

And you're the guy who walks up to the guy with a bleeding ass and blames it on leftists.

[Liberal]

And the beat goes on... Next?

[CrankyAsAnOldMan]

I don't get the whole "next" part, but my question remains unanswered.

[Capt. Ridley's Shooting Party]

Excuse my ignorance but if you are mentally ill and you kill someone because of the effects of your illness I thought that, in the eyes of the law, you essentially weren't to blame. You would get banged up in a mental home for the rest of your life but they couldn't try you for commiting a crime. I may be wrong and more than likely this is a very compressed, inarticulate, simplistic take on it but I'm pretty sure that, in essence, that is what happens.

Yes, perhaos I worded my response poorly. I think Lib's point is that there are situations where blame cannot be attributed to anyone. It was a terrible occurence, which nobody could have prevented.

[RTFirefly]

Well then, quitcher bitchin. If five or ten of you want to come in here and make me into some big deal, don't be surprised when the thread derails. You're like the guy who shoves a knife up his butt and doesn't understand why his ass is bleeding.Who's bitching? I'm just saying to the others, "This guy has a standard technique for hijacking threads. He's been perfecting it for years. Don't fall for it."

I don't really care what you think about that, even if (by your own logic) you should appreciate my assist. I've long since given up expecting you to be logical.

I'm amused by your analogy, though. Let me try one of my own: you're running a con game, and when I point that out, you say it's all the fault of the marks who fell for your con. I admire your adroit dodge of personal responsibility.

At any rate, this here is my hijack now, and I take full responsibility: this seems like as good a place as any to analyze and discuss your con, rather than fall for it. The best place for fighting ignorance is always here and now.