It says in the last linked article that she noticed the 6 week old dead 2 days ago and just covered him with a blanket and went back to drinking (it also says she thought she was doing a good job with the kids!)
I’m sorry but there has just been a massive failure of the system here. This woman should never have been allowed to keep these children on her own. The boyfriend sounds like a piece of work himself. Good og…what is the world coming to?
From the last update in Boscha’s post
I don’t know for sure as to whether she drank all of them, but she likely drank a majority. I’m relatively sure that an alcoholics tolerance goes up the more that they drink, but that I’m not sure on.
As for the ignoring the fact that she was drunk while her kids died, I haven’t ignored it. I just don’t care.
Now if I may, what’s with the arguing over the level of outrage some of us are feeling? I haven’t come on this thread telling those who have sympathy for the mother how they should feel. If I came across like that, I’ve already apologized. What’s with this shit about “chest thumping” or the “kid button” being hit?
I respect your analysis but I am still not completely convinced. I do believe there is an element of substance abuse that still relates to personal choice. There are a TON of factors that push a person into abusing drugs/alcohol, but there are still many points of rational decision making that occur. This is why I suspect courts do not accept this as a defense.
As for the analogy, I am not so sure of your rebuttal. Neglect and abuse can and do exist independent of alcohol and drugs as well, so I still see a good analogy there. However, your thoughtful post inspires possibilities and I am interested in a further explanation of your perspective.
I could not agree more. Compassion is always necessary. I have compassion for all parties involved. However, compassion does not preclude accountability. She must be held accountable.
Actually, this is very much different. This is not a point-event, but rather it took many days to kill these children. Each and every time she opened one of those cans of beer, she also had the chance to decide whether or not to feed her children. That is at least 307 chances to decide to feed the survivor, and certainly many scores of times for each of the dead children.
Anyone that passes up that many chances to save their children’s life is clearly demonstrating depraved indifference. Showing depraved indifference to the life of her children is clearly evil. Small ‘e’ evil, perhaps, but evil nonetheless.
Answer my question willya, mate? Were her actions evil actions? Until we establish terms, you’re blasting people with no purpose.
And should do prison time. But call him evil? No.
There is no such thing as an evil action, andros. Evil is in the intent.
Well, then. What constitutes evil intent?
That depends on whether or not you’re John Milton. I’m not, so I say you have to set out to cause harm before you’re actively evil.
This mitigates any sympathy I may have had as well. Depression and severe addiction togther can be so debilitating, that you are in a haze and your judgement is so severely compromised that you may do really stupid things that “made sense at the time.” However, upon the discovery of a dead infant to not be mentally functional enough to dial 911 strains believability.
In all honestly, while in the throes of my own mental illness, I have thought “well, nothing really matters anymore I’ll be dead soon enough too. Because no one can feel this bad and survive.” So it is quite possible that she was that far gone and intended to continue drink until she just never woke up again. I can see her staying in bed while the house burned down around her because it just didn’t matter anymore…
Okay, so I can see that. I can see an addict so depressed and so far gone to be overwhelmed by total apathy…
BUT no matter now messed up she was at the time she found her dead child, there were other times where she was not under the influence – like when she gave birth at the hospital (and presumably was not in an alcoholic stupor) – when she would have had the opportunity to make rational judgements like “I can not care for these children.”
She would buy food with food-stamps and then return the food for cash which she used to buy beer – that shows a capability to think and make rational decisions. If she was lucid enough to do that, then those were the times when she should have stopped and thought “hey, someone should take care of the kids while I’m out of commission on my forthcoming bender.”
As for CPS I can not imagine what a nightmare this would present!
You’re an intake case-worker and you show up one day. How hard it would be to get definitive proof of neglect or abuse? The parent is present and the children have not been left alone or abandoned, there are no marks on the kids to show battery, the kitchen is well-stocked with food and baby formula (as opposed to empty pantries), the mother is drunk but coherent, softspoken and even reasonable (hey, a lot of folks get raised by alcoholic parents and don’t end up dead).
The house is a mess of empty beer cans (no proof of how long they’ve been threre or how many people were drinking them), the mother explains “oh, yeah we had a party the other night and I haven’t cleaned up yet.” And unless there are clear health code violations, it’s hard to remove children from a home just because it was a pigsty anyway.
They could have “strongly suspected” or even known in their hearts that it was a disaster waiting to happen, but to go to a judge:
CPS: “Well your Honor, today they look like they’ve eaten, the pantry is full, and they don’t have bruises, and they are supervised by an adult – but, I still think the children are in jeopardy!”
Judge: “Why?”
CPS: “Why? Uh, well she seems to be a serious alcoholic… and the place is messy.”
Judge: “So?.. I drank my way through Law School in a filthy dorm room and still graduated Suma Cum Laude and took care of all my priorities and responsibilities. She drinks a lot and her house is a mess. What’s your point?”
CPS: “I think the kids will be neglected?”
Judge: “Are you psychic?.. You saw kids that were fed, clothed, uninjured, and adult-supervised… Next case!”
I expect that unless a child is showing obvious signs of malnutrition or neglect (like being in days-old diapers) it must be tough to get enough proof together for a judge to agree to intervene. A nightmare! I wonder if you could even justify putting them on a “check back soon” list, considering the household looked fucked up, but not obviously anymore than plenty of other fucked up homes where the kids are okay? A nightmare!
What about unintentional evil?
This woman did not set out to starve her children. That was the end result of her bender. She may not have foreseen the consequences of her actions, but she’s still responsible for the deaths of her children. If she did not start out to consciously cause harm, can we still call her actions evil? Or, can we say, that due to the result of what happened, her actions were evil, despite the fact that she may not have foreseen the consequences?
Nowadays, being a perpetual drunk does not disqualify you as being a primary caregiver.
Kalhoun, for what its worth, I’m with you. I never cease to be saddened and shocked when some terrible story like this comes up and the majority reaction around here is a simple “off with their head! burn them at the stake!”.
Sigh.
I hear you.
My compassion for the children is not limited by my compassion for their mother. My compassion for the children is not limited by the fact that I don’t wish to see the mother tortured, or put to death. In fact, my compassion for the mother doesn’t mean I don’t wish to see her jailed, and ideally sterilized. However, I still have compassion for her. My heart breaks to think of what kind of pain you’d have to be in to try as hard as she did to feel nothing.
I too feel compassion for this woman and I hope she gets the max jail time to rot in stark sobriety. However, I wouldn’t shed any tears if her jailor went on a 2 week bender toward the end of her sentence and forgot to feed and water her. Somehow I can’t believe that any amount of mental anguish and physical restraint could possibly balance against the mental anguish and physical restraint she meted out.
It’s not like she got drunk and let her kids drown in the tub. That would be tragic. This is evil, and I’m not buying the mitigating circumstances of her illness.
Nor am I cynical enough to believe that the ‘kid button’ is invalid. We sink to a cultural low when we suggest that a heightened level of outrage over the slow and painful torture and death of babies is somehow inappropriate.
Now I’m going to go and rub some ointment on my bruised breasts.
Has it ever?
It can be found between “unicorns” and “unique sitcom jokes” in The Dictionarie of Fantastickal Creetures.
As I’ve already said twice to my certain recollection, stupidity and carelessness are not evil. A good job for most of us, too.
Evil is usually small and banal, the rarity is for evil to be large and dramatic.
Evil creeps around unseen, it hides in the recesses of the mind, and comes out when we are neglectful enough to fail to keep it under control.
Neglect can be evil, its not just the bad intent, its not just actively doing something, its also not actively keeping under control, that is evil at its most pernicious.
We have freedom of choice, but not choosing right is also evil, standing around doing nothing is evil, think of some of the worst excesses of humanity and remember that much of it was enabled by those who did nothing.
Before she had her 307 can of beer, she drank her 306 can of beer, and before that…
She had her choice before and after every drink, the consequencies of her actions were apparent once the first child died, so she had more beer.
I have a friend who had severe depression, he was actually told by his GP that there would have been more help available to him if he would sign a form to state he had a drug addiction, depressives usually don’t hve a choice, addicts do, those children had none, she made that choice for them 307 times.
I think it’s clear the woman is seriously mentally ill. There’s no way an even semi- rational person, even an semi-rational alchoholic person, just covers up their dead child and goes back to drinking without calling help.
That, in my not-being-a-doctor opinion denotes some serious mental illness far beyond even your run-of-the-mill alchoholism.