Posted on 03/01/2002 1:45:51 AM PST by MeekOneGOP
One thing is certain. If he had requested a separation because of her state, they would have placed the kids with her. It always seems to work that way. I can think of two cases right now where the mother was certifiably nuts but got custody.
I think excercise is good for the blood pressure, and kicking certainly qualifies. And if anyone ever needed it, he does... along with the charges that he ought to be facing.
I've been reading this thread and thinking about saying something. This has rendered me speechless. (Not barefoot. Not pregnant. Not in the kitchen. Just speechless.)
Both conditions simply can't be true. It's clinton-like, you know, expecting to be able to have things be true every which way that happens to benefit you.
I think it is wrong to represent children and home-schooling, or natural childbirth as a punishing regime. Or even three hours off a week. These are not things that are in themselves punishing. It does not lead to mass murder of the children. People should look elsewhere for an explanation.
As an example, when I had three babies. I taught them, but did not home school. I stayed home with them until they were in second grade. At that time, I had one hour off a week, during which I watched Mission Impossible. I was totally scheduled and I loved it. My babies were a constant source of joy, teaching them was amazing. Every minute with them was better than anything since.
I am saying these things to buttress the FACT that these things are not in themselves punishing. It is ridiculous for anyone to view with alarm the fact that a woman spends all her time caring for her family. There was something wrong in this case, but it was not an inevitable consequence of a cruel schedule.
What sane woman wants to be treated the way he treated her.
When I worked for the ambulance service, we had one steady call. The wife would call the ambulance if her husband stayed in the bathroom too long. We eventually threatened her with jail. But he stayed with her.
Two suicide attempts are a pretty good indicator that she was NOT happy with her life. Unfortunately, it looks as though justice will have to wait for the 'final judgment'. jmo
Don't the mental health professionals have to report a possibly dangerous condition ?
This woman is guilty but it is a sad case. Her husband is not guilty of killing the children but he is guilty of choosing to see what he wanted to see and have more children with a mentally defective wife even though she could not handle the ones she had. Did he care that the mental disease could be passed on to more children?
When Andrea called him at work - she said "I've finally done it" (or something similar). So, she must have told him earlier of her desire to kill the children. If she had not, she would have said "I've done something to the children". If she had told him earlier - why in the xxxx didn't he arrange for those children to have someone else there also. Why didn't he then get them into public school where they would be away from a mother considering killing them?
IMO he didn't because he refuses to see anything but what he wants to see. His desire for a traditional family with his wife teaching them is more important than the fact that his children are in danger. With a sick and dangerous mother, the children need to look to a sane father to see that they are protected - he failed them.
He may not be guilty of murder but he failed those children and now they are dead. What about his traditional family now? Another thing, how can a man continue to love and protect a woman who has killed five of his children. Where is the anger, and fury?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.