so this is what my parents meant when they’d threaten my brother and i with the classic “don’t make me pull this car over…”
She may or may not have acted willfully. You don’t know. Just because someone does something and wasn’t forced by another person doesn’t make it willful.
Your opinion that you can be mentally ill and evil at the same time isn’t shared by most of the jurisdictions in this country. Just so’s you know.
Would that be in terms of the legal definition of insanity? Which is a very different tureen of chowder from the treatment community’s definition, isn’t it?
No, you get a grip. These postings go on all the time. It has been clearly stated by a number of posters on these boards that not only do they believe in capital punishment, but that they embrace an eye-for-an-eye style of revenge (or worse). They probably wouldn’t have the balls to do it themselves, but they’d have no problem watching someone else (preferably the state or an inmate) do the deed for them.
And I didn’t prescribe anything. I’m merely suggesting the boards would be a nicer place if some people took a little “sleepy time” with their Wheaties in the morning.
AFAIK, there is no verdict of “evil” in our legal system.
I know you didn’t prescribe anything. I was giving an example of taking a statement too seriously. Please note I said if I was to be unreasonable.
No action so reprehensible that someone isn’t willing to defend it, eh?
How is what Kalhoun said defending what she did? I haven’t seen anyone in this thread say, “Oh,the poor dear, all she needs is a hug,” just “How about waiting till we know why this thing happened before we start heating the tar and plucking the chickens?”
Diogenes, I spoke a little strongly there. Sorry, did not mean to smear all CPS workers, or former ones.
We were investigated because my then 4 m/o son displayed symptoms of what could be Shaken Baby Syndrome. It turned out that he was born with external hydrocephalis, which displays many of the symptoms of SBS, except there is no bruising. My son wasn’t bruised. He was in a loving home that was happy to have him. Didn’t matter to WA CPS, they had a process to follow, no matter what.
We were, in fact, told by a CPS worker that they saw no “red flags” when they interviewed us, even so, they removed our son. For two fucking years. We did everything CPS asked of us. Now, I’m sure that CPS is full of fine, ethical people, but this experience leads me to deep distrust.
Well, i apologize for my own oversensitivity and my uncalled for insinuation.
Like you said, they have a process they have to follow. You say “they” (CPS) removed your child, but they couldn’t have done that without a judge signing off on it. What I object to and was trying to correct is the misperception that CPS has the authority or the autonomy to make those kinds of decisions on their own. It sounds like you got a bad judge. I would have thought the medical evidence of hydrocephalis at birth should have been enough to end the investigation.
Some cases can be tough, especially with infants. The caseworkers don’t know what the truth is and if they get it wrong the consequences can be pretty severe. If they don’t petetion a judge for a temporary removal and the parents are guilty of something, then they suffer not only the PR consequences but their own emotional ones. They see a lot of really bad shit as without having to live with the knowledge that they may not have been cautious enough in a given case. I’m sure there are some case workers who get jaded enough to start thinking everyone is guilty (like some cops get), but they still have to go through judges. They don’t have the ultimate power to make decisions about what happens to families (not that those people shouldn’t be rooted out where possible).
'Cept there’s a 4 year old kid wondering the side of a busy highway at night. Cut and bruised. Likely very afraid and very much alone. He didn’t get there all by himself. Even if the mother is batshit insane, it doesn’t mean she isn’t deserving of condemnation.
And just so it’s clear, nobody is advocating the organization of a lynching party. Just a hearty “fuck you” on behalf of the child with whom a large part of the sympathies ought to lay.
The word you want is “wandering”, not “wondering”; also “lie”, not “lay”. And you still haven’t pointed out where anyone was explicitly defending the woman, which is what you originally alleged:
Maybe you should stop puffing yourself up with righteous indignation long enough to read what people are actually saying.
We’re talking apples and oranges here. Why is that so hard to see?
The fact that I disagree with you does not automatically imply that I haven’t read what you’ve written.
Maybe you should put away your spell checker and nifty red pen long enough to realize that I’m simply venting and not advocating any dreadful action against the woman in question, except that which may be deemed appropriate by the authorities.
You still haven’t answered my question: Where does anyone explicitly defend the woman’s reprehensible actions?
Put up or shut up.
I see it. I chose to see one clear victim here. You’re suggesting that there may be two.
While that’s possible, I’m simply venting about the fact that the kid is really the more defenseless and innocent one. I’m not sure why that is. Possibly because kids are usually built so cute that we’re always more willing to be more protective of them than of adults.
It was the suggestion of “innocent by reasons of insanity” defense. Did you miss it?
How would finding the woman insane equate to defending the action?
Ah, yes, you mean this ringing endorsement of throwing children onto the highway, right?
Yeppers, that sure does look like Kalhoun is defending what she did.
On preview: Dio, precisely. Not that the screeching venters will understand that distinction.
That’s got nothing to do with the comments that are being tossed around here, and certainly nothing to do with the sympathy being felt for this kid. Just because something horrible happened to him doesn’t mean we go out and lynch his next of kin.