Psychiatrist Warned Yates Against Having 5th Baby

CBS2CHICAGO ^ | 07 JULY 2006 | AP

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

(AP) HOUSTON A psychiatrist testified Friday that she warned Andrea Yates not to have any more children after she tried to commit suicide twice within months of having her fourth child in 1999.

"I could pretty much predict that Mrs. Yates would have another episode of psychosis," Dr. Eileen Starbranch told jurors in Yates' second murder retrial.

Starbranch said Yates suffered from postpartum psychosis, which she said causes a mother to have delusions and lose touch with reality, making it much more severe than postpartum depression.

Yates drowned her five young children in a bathtub in June 2001, 6 months after the birth of her fifth child, Mary. She is being tried again because an appeals court overturned her 2002 murder conviction based on erroneous testimony that might have influenced the jury. She has again pleaded innocent by reason of insanity.

Yates' attorneys have never disputed she killed the youngsters but say she didn't know that the drownings were wrong.

Prosecutors say Yates may be mentally ill but does not meet the state's definition of insanity.

They say Yates planned to drown the children when she was alone with them, after her husband went to work and before her mother-in-law arrived. Then Yates called 911 and later told a detective she killed them because she was a bad mother and wanted to be punished, according to witnesses.

Along with Mary, Yates drowned 2-year-old Luke, 3-year-old Paul, 5-year-old John and 7-year-old Noah.

Starbranch said she treated Yates after she tried to kill herself by overdosing on sleeping pills in June 1999.

About a month later, Starbranch said, Yates' then-husband, Rusty, told her that Yates had held a knife to her own throat the previous day.

Starbranch said Yates had a bald spot on her head from scratching it, had not been taking her antipsychotic medication, had filthy hair and could not function. Starbranch said she sent the couple immediately to a mental hospital so Andrea Yates could be admitted.

Under cross-examination, Starbranch acknowledged that the words "filthy" and "catatonic" were not in her notes and said that Yates' nervousness and anxiety may have been a sign that she simply did not want to be at a psychiatrist's office. But Starbranch maintained that Yates was psychotic and not lethargic or exhausted from caring for four young children.

Over the next two weeks or so while hospitalized, Yates steadily improved while on antipsychotic drugs, Starbranch said.

But then in March 2001, Rusty Yates called Starbranch's office trying to make an appointment, saying his wife was getting worse since having the couple's fifth child in November, Starbranch testified.

"I knew that was a very ominous sign ... that lives were at stake, so I asked that she be brought in immediately," Starbranch said.

The couple never showed up, but Starbranch later learned that Yates was admitted to another mental hospital, the psychiatrist testified.

Yates, being tried in only three of the children's deaths, will be sentenced to life in prison if convicted. After the first jury rejected execution, prosecutors could not seek the death penalty again because they found no new evidence.

[Amelia]

I believe he is partly responsible,

Then we agree.

I dont understand Post partum any more than her Psychiatrist did.

Probably much less.

Why if you feel so badly after one child is born would you kill 4 others?

She was psychotic after the birth of the 4th child, in fact she tried twice to kill herself then. That's why the doctor said she shouldn't have any more children.

Post partum depression or pyschosis doesn't mean she's sorry she had the child.

I suppose now that her kids are dead she wants to be freed, Maybe she will even breed again. In jail she is where she belongs, she isnt harming anyone there.

I haven't seen any evidence that she wants to be freed or have more children, and she does belong in a hospital or prison, more likely the hospital, because I don't believe she's sane.

In fact, as she becomes more sane, the knowledge of what she did will probably keep her insane.

[pollyannaish]

Sometimes, you can have compassion for everyone involved in a situation. Even the guilty ones.

That does NOT mean that there should not be severe consequences for behavior. Only an acknowlegement that we are all human.

Fair enough?

[pollyannaish]

Wow, I was completely with you until you started blaming her husband for keeping her barefoot and pregnant.

How do we know that she didn't trick him into getting pregnant? Maybe she really wanted a girl.

There is too much we really do not know to make that assumption, despite their unconventional (ok weird) lifestyle.

[after dark]

I will not flame you.

Andrea's psychiatrists were making money off of Russell's insurance policy.

They had a stake in keeping that mismatched pair together. Andrea would not have been able to afford their services.

While I'm sure the States psychiatrists would insure Andrea's biological clock ran out. Andrea could still eventually get out of the hospital. She is very charming and educated.

I would not want a woman who could viciously kill her own children to come in contact with other children.

[sgtbono2002]

I am sure that we disagree greatly on the degree of his guilt.

As for her Psychiatrist i am not sure she knows that much more than I since she allowed the woman back out with her kids. I wouldnt have. Suicidal Mothers dont belong raising kids.

[pollyannaish]

First of all, this all seems exceptionally personal to you. Do you know any of these people or been in an abusive relationship yourself?

Secondly, could you square the following two comments for me?

From your post #96: Some people clearly have a low opinion of women.

From your post #110: a typical lard assed housewife

[pollyannaish]

Thank you for your post.

While I do not have first hand knowledge of this sort of thing, I do have a deep respect for the fact that things look much different from the inside than they do from outside. The old saying of not being to harsh until you have walked a mile in someone else's shoes is really true.

That does not mean we don't hold people accountable for their behavior, because we certainly must. It just means that it is important to approach things with a certain level of humanity.

For instance, I believe that the death penalty is an ugly necessity. But I still feel an enormous sadness for those who find themselves facing death because of the appalling choices they have made. One does not preclude the other.

May you find peace and hope in the days ahead.

[pnz1]

They didn't attend there. The church just offered their building for the funerals.

[after dark]

Post 96 is self explanatory.


110 is also self explanatory.

I have never met Andrea Yates ,but she incites hatred in me.For the last couple of years, Andrea Yates has been in all the newspapers (where I live), so yeah I know much about Andrea Yates.Just when I was beginning to forget her sorry ass , the powers that be decided to parade her around again. I see through this farce. Andrea was a homeschool mama ( Let's ban homeschooling!) Andrea was a member of a weird Christian Church.(Let's ban weird Christian Churches!)Andrea married a chauvinistic man (Let's ban chauvinistic men!)Andrea had five children.(Let's ban large families!).

My personal back ground is irrelevant.

Now tell me all about yourself.

[hopespringseternal]

She's crazy as an crap house rat. Unfortunately, our legal system doesn't deal with crazy folks very well nor does society, since she was still allowed to run around nutty until she did something heinous.

If your psychosis makes you dangerous, then the relevant point isn't your psychosis, it is the fact that you are dangerous.

If you intentionally kill people who are no threat to you, your life should be forfeit. What craziness boils down to is lack of a good motive, a moot point.

[after dark]

>No one is arguing for such a "right." The only question is whether Andrea Yates will spend most or all of her life in prison or confined to a mental hospital.


Oh, yes! By locking Andrea Yates up in a nut house , you are absolving her of five murders. She was crazy so she had the right to commit murder five times. Our state does not require psyche to be hospitalized for life. Only death would spare the public the presence of Andrea Yates. The next best thing, is life in prison without the possibility of parole.

[pollyannaish]

Ok, they just seemed a tad bit incongruent, but since you don't see them that way. No big deal.

As far as my other comment, it wasn't anything personal. It just seems to me that people come to this case with their own baggage. Without actually knowing first hand what happened in that household, its easy to apply our own experiences to what we think happened. Its natural and human and we all do it.

I don't hate any of the Yates. I do not know them well enough to know the dynamics of the household, so its difficult to judge what more could have been done to prevent this horror.

I do hate what Andrea did and believe that she should face the harsh consequences of her behavior. That said, I also have compassion for all the players in this drama. Being human is a complicated thing...for good and for evil.

And by the way, you're right that banning is a very bad way of producing results. Especially since the evil thing Andrea already banned, but in the end the "ban" made no difference whatsoever.

May the remaining members of this family find peace and courage.

[after dark]

You and I are not that far apart.

I hold out hope that most of the people we call crazy will one day lead normal lives once the brain and genetics are properly understood.

The problem with Andrea is she had reason to hate her husband. If she killed as an act of revenge against her terrible husband , she should be locked up away from the rest of us.She should not even be around crazy people or criminals. Her crime is an abomination.If she was insane at the time of the murders and did not understand what she was doing ,curing her would be an act of cruelty.

[pollyannaish]

We don't really know if she had reason to hate her husband, actually. That is far too complex a motive for us to ascertain.

We can only judge what people do and impose consequences for that behavior. Why Andrea may have killed her children is actually immaterial. Only that she did, and knew what she was doing.

What is interesting is that as human beings we always struggle to find an answer to why. We seek desperately to cast blame somewhere in a vain attempt to create order in a chaotic world.

The truth is, most the time it just isn't that easy. We can guess, we can speculate, we can project. But we just don't know. In fact, I suspect that there are many players in this story that wake up nights wondering how it got as far as it did, and just what exactly happened. Where they went wrong. None of us will ever really know.

But what I do know, is that in the final analysis God understands what is in an individuals heart. He will take everything into account. I for one, find great peace in that.

[Amelia]

Suicidal Mothers dont belong raising kids.

My point exactly.

[after dark]

I once lived in the area where the murders took place. There are many details which people from other areas do not see such as Russell consistently picked insanely ugly places for Andrea and his kids to live.He once had them living on a bus for Pete's sake.The house that he picked for his wife and children to live in was an ugly 70's spanish ranch style house. In a city like Houston, he could have done better if he had chosen a house further from his job. People try to unload those houses as starters homes. They are not meant for large families. People only buy houses like that because they are cheap. I could go on about all the other stupid things he did to his wife and family. Russell was tight with both his time and his money. Most women sane or insane could learn to hate a man like Russell

[pollyannaish]

Wow. So are you honestly saying that she hated him because they lived in a house you believe is small and ugly? That because they did not embrace material things he was tight and cheap? That people only buy houses like that because of a character flaw?

There may be other reasons that he wanted to be closer to his family so he didn't spend so much of his day commuting, or that they wanted to put money away for the children's college fund, or they believed it was important to live within their means instead of being leveraged to the hilt.

I sincerely don't know...but things can be read very differently.

In addition, there is as much reason to believe that she helped make those decisions as their is reason to believe they were forced upon her...we don't actually know. The bus thing was certainly unconventional.

But my point stands. There are MANY interpretations for behavior and we don't honestly know because we were not on the inside.

I can't endorse your position that most women would "hate a man like Russell" based on your assumptions. And after reading this post, I am inclined to think you don't actually hate Andrea, but you have hated a man you believe to be similar to Russell and are projecting that on to him.

Which, btw, is entirely human and completely understandable.

[after dark]

>Wow. So are you honestly saying that she hated him because they lived in a house you believe is small and ugly? That because they did not embrace material things he was tight and cheap? That people only buy houses like that because of a character flaw?

In my opinion, yes. Russell had a good job,and Houston is not an expensive city. He could have done much better for Andrea and his family. He could have still lived within his means and saved money for college. The house is just one of many things which scream he did not give a damn!

[pollyannaish]

Well, ok.

I've got to go, it's been nice chatting with you. Hope you have a great evening.

[after dark]

How about this? Russell allowed Andrea two hours a week to spend by herself. Maybe he is your type. That would make you a very unusual woman.