b) If I posted to whine about every thread title which squicked me out, I’d have half again as many posts. Sheesh.
And the author’s conclusion from this story - “This Sanchez case suggests – oh, bother – that there are some steps we as a society should be taking to support new mothers”
:eek: :eek:
How about - two people with severe mental problems shouldn’t be making babies??
or
How about - if she had to go off of her meds to breastfeed - DON’T BREASTFEED
I agree with you. I don’t know how you could stop them, though.
The problem is, I think people are in denial that something like this could really happen to someone they know. Who can really imagine that their sister, or child’s mother, or friend, might kill and eat her baby? It’s hard for me to think about even now, knowing for a fact that it did happen. Unfortunately, this denial seems to extend to the medical professionals Sanchez went to for help with this…
I think the best way to prevent this is to take someone seriously when she says that she feels like she’s going crazy. From the Salon article:
This is the problem with going to an ER for something like this, instead of your family doctor or personal psychiatrist, who knows you and has some investment in your long-term wellness. But, you know, maybe Sanchez was uninsured, and had no other options. She tried to get help, it seems, several times from various sources, and each time, was ignored or her concerns not taken seriously enough.
I would be hesitant to give authority to anyone to make that judgment.
Well brains are tasty.
I was responding to the author’s conclusions that the answer to things like this is to throw more money at it, rather than - oh I don’t know - expecting people to have more brains, be more responsible?
Apparently, a lot of people have trouble thinking about it and so are in denial that mothers abuse and kill their children. Despite the thousands (or tens of thousands?) of cases that prove otherwise.
Way to try to prove your pet cause with something that doesn’t fit. :rolleyes: This woman was getting counseling, had a diagnosis of schizophrenia and was on meds, none of which one gets in the ER. People with insurance do go to the ER you know.
Instead of “supporting” people like this, she should have been counseled that having a child was a bad idea, particularly one sired by a fellow schizophrenic, to whom one (apparently) is not married. And wasn’t this her third kid? Also, people need to get over the idea that the best place for a child is always with the mother - why did the sister give the baby back to her just because she “appeared to be calmer”? That was just idiotic.
The whole situation is idiotic, and the author of that article thought the answer is to give more “support” to people who do things like this? :smack:
No, it’s to give more support to people so they DON’T do things like this.
If her other two children were up until that point unharmed (I don’t doubt that they’ll be traumatized, probably for life), what would the argument have been against her having another?
I know people on serious meds who have decided not to have children both because they do not want to pass along their genes and because they would likely have to choose between staying sane and damaging the fetus while pregnant. They are relatively young, so I do wonder whether they’ll change their minds, especially if their chosen method of birth control fails (hormonal birth control and certain anti-depressants and anti-psych meds don’t make for great bedfellows).
Well, to be fair, she did try to get more brains.
\ ticket please
That’s what Paul Krendler tells me.
Babies brains are small. Perhaps she only wanted a snack instead of a full meal.
Where did the article say “throw more money at it”? Why do you have to horn your pet issue into this where it doesn’t belong right back atcha. “Support” does not necessarily mean money. It means, when someone tells you they can’t handle dealing with their infant, they feel psychotic, you take them seriously and help them, instead of disregarding their concerns.
The ER booted her in 24 hours and sent her back home. That was a mistake, no? Her counseling was not working either, and she wasn’t on meds anymore, for whatever reason (we don’t know why). I’m not sure why she would go to the ER if she had a counselor she could call, or a shrink, so I simply offered a hypothesis. I have as much proof for it as you do that people want to give her money.
How many times does it have to be said to you: once the child is born, telling her she shouldn’t have conceived is not going to help anyone or achieve anything. You could tell her until you were blue in the face, but if she gets pregnant, that’s that. Once the crisis was unfolding, and she was looking for support, a lot of people let her and her baby down, including medical professionals.
Yes, she should have had more support, like a more lengthy hospitalization for instance, including intensive treatment for her psychosis. Or someone counseling her to get back on her meds, forget about breast feeding. Or someone taking her kid away until she could get help. Any of these would be needed support and could have saved the baby’s life. Are you seriously suggesting that this woman should have gotten LESS support? :smack: indeed, and :rolleyes:
We aren’t doing that. We are supporting the idea that it is ok for a woman to have a child(ren) no matter what her circumstances are, and then we are surprised/shocked when things go wrong.
Who is saying it’s OK? I think it’s a terrible idea. But what you fail to realize is, you don’t get to have a say in who conceives. Neither do I. Free adults are able to make choices of which other people disapprove, and we can’t stop them. What we can do is, when they ask for help, we can help them, so they don’t compound a bad decision into a horrendous nightmare. I know you see this as implicit approval of the bad decision, but the alternative is not to help these people, let them do horrible things, then sit back and say, “See? I told you so!” Not great as public policy, though I’m sure for you it’s very emotionally satisfying.
I’m in agreeance with you if in fact this postpartum psychosis is an acknowledged disease (which it seems to be).
While rare, it’s obviously a serious mental condition. I hope more is done to rectify the diagnosis of these people with this disorder. Maybe the silver lining in this case is that it will bring more attention to a debilitating disease.
We have no idea what is going on with those other two children. I haven’t even seen anything that indicates if they had the same father.
I hope they stay with the intelligent, selfless decision and do not fall prey to their hormones and/or society. However, if they haven’t opted for permanent birth control, it doesn’t look good.
No, the other two children were her sister’s kids. She was living with her sister and there is no mention that she has any other children. But nice reading failure/massive assumption.
And to help them, this will be free?
Do you honestly not know why people go to the ER even if they have their own doctors? Could it be because those doctors are humans and have their own lives and are not on 24/7 beck and call to all of their patients? Heck, I went to the ER myself in June because it was late on a Sunday, and I have plenty of doctors. You need to get past this idea that only poor people with no insurance go to the ER.
Did I say that? Of course not. I said she should have been counseled that having a child, particularly another child, was a bad idea. Since you couldn’t grasp that, it means before she decided to have number three. Actually, it should have been before she had number one, if she has had this diagnosis of schizophrenia for that long. But society pressures women to have children and would never try to talk one out of having them, even if the woman is obviously not a good candidate for motherhood.
I have come to believe that society likes the idea of children more than it actually loves the children themselves. Why else would it be OK for so many children to be born into appalling circumstances, to women who are not good mother material?
I am saying she should have gotten support that would not have led her to have a third child, in her condition. I am saying that the child should have gotten support from the sister that it didn’t get. And I am saying that society should quit supporting women having children whenever they feel like it.
Did I say anything about that? No, of course I didn’t. I said that we are supporting the idea that it is ok for a woman to have a child(ren) no matter what her circumstances are, and then we are surprised/shocked when things go wrong. No where in there is there any indication that I think we should have a say on who conceives.
Cat Fight said they were her children. I cannot look at the link in the OP because it crashes my browser - I am assuming that is where you got the information that this was her first kid.
I was thinking more of the schizophrenia. It just doesn’t seem like a good idea that someone dealing with that sort of diagnosis should be taking on pregnancy and childcare. Particularly since it seems to have led to her going off her meds.
You’re the one saying she had insurance. If so, it certainly won’t cost YOU anything.
- She only had one child. I stated this already. It’s in the article in the OP.
- How do you know she wasn’t counseled not to have children?
- She got pregnant anyway. Maybe she wanted to, maybe her birth control failed.
OK, now it’s about society’s pressure on women to have children. You are totally just pulling shit out of the air. The circumstances of the conception are not in evidence. You can postulate that she caved into social pressure. You can suppose that she was a member of the cult of motherhood. You might want to consider that getting pregnant was an accident. Maybe she thought she was OK, but turns out, she couldn’t handle it. In any case, it’s generally better not to drag your own baggage into this.
I’ll say this one more time, for the record: in this free society, no one can stop people from having children. I know, you’d like it to be different, but that’s the way it is. Now, when an unsuitable candidate for motherhood has a child, can’t handle it, and makes numerous cries for help, what should you do?
SHE ONLY HAD ONE CHILD, ffs. If you can’t read the article in the OP, don’t comment on it. The child should have gotten support from the sister, the ER docs, and the mother’s counselor. Everyone failed here.
Who is saying it’s OK? Please, point to one person. I’ll wait.
OK, no one says it’s OK. What do you do when someone like Otty Sanchez gives birth? Considering our current legal framework, not your Dickensian fantasy world. Note that I think her child should have been taken away from her when she asked for it to happen.