I didn’t put this in the pit, because I really don’t feel any recreational outrage over this. I just want to know what is it withyoung mothers in Texas?
Does this happen in other states with the same frequency? Or is it just a Texas thing?
So, per capita, you think this doesn’t happen more often in Texas than in other states? I guess we just aren’t hearing about all the maternal murder/suicides in New York and California, both of which have larger, more diverse populations.
It seems unlikely that Texas has a role per se, but I wouldn’t be surprised if these disturbed and depressed women get the idea from media reports, at least in part.
I don’t think that is done just out of depression – even post-partum depression. I would think it’s more likely to be post partum psychosis. That doesn’t help to answer you question.
The population of Texas has exploded over the last several decades with many people moving there because of a robust economy and thriving job market. My suspicion is that this has resulted in many families losing their traditional support network of close relatives, friends, etc. If and when things turn bad, possibly they’ve no one to turn to.
This woman was already the victim of domestic violence on the part of her husband. Could be that violence as a solution was something she’d long been exposed to. I don’t believe she spoke any English and obviously her financial plight was dire and prospects likely dim.
Whatever the reasons though, for her or others encountering seemingly unsurmountable obstacles, I’m leaning towards geographic boundaries being among the last of their motivational concerns.
Nitpick. Texas is the 2nd most populous state and has a bigger population than New York (about 23 million versus 19 million). Texas is also diverse as well as should be obvious by their large Hispanic population but also other groups.
I live in Texas. My wife and I haven’t killed either of our children so far, although sometimes it’s tempting.
Texas has an area larger than New York, Ohio, Indiana, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and Virginia combined. So if, say, a sniper kills a bunch of people in Ohio, and another one kills a bunch of people in Virginia, what silly question would you ask?
I’m not actually picking on Canada, mind you, just pointing out that these things actually happen more often than you might realize and in a lot of different locations, not just Texas.
Does Texas have a larger population than all those states combined? Geographic area has little relevance here. If you have some data that supports your claim that this happens no more often in Texas than anywhere else, post it. Otherwise, you just sound defensive.
This is truly a red-letter day, because this Coloradoan is going to bat for Texas.
To answer your question, Texas’ population is just under 23,000,000, while the combined populations of Virginia, Ohio, New York, Pennsylvania, Indiana and Kentucky is just under 55,000,000. But population isn’t the point. Texas is also larger than any four states west of the Mississippi, except California and Alaska, and pretty much has the same population as the rest of the western states put together except California. Take any area of the continental U.S. that doesn’t include New York or California and you’ll find as many as five states with combined populations somewhere under 35,000,000. The point is, the deaths in Texas were widely scattered across an area as large as any three, four or five other states on the continent, and as diverse and dense as ALMOST any three, four or five states on the continent. If you make a pin map of the deaths in Texas and superimpose it over the rest of the U.S., you’ll see that the deaths spread out over a wide area. That’s the point **kelly ** was trying to make, and I think it’s a valid one.
