Yates lived by rigid schedule, according to husband
Posted on 03/01/2002 1:45:51 AM PST by MeekOneGOP
Yates lived by rigid schedule, according to husband
Husband also testifies she was allowed 3 hours a week without her kids
03/01/2002
HOUSTON - Russell "Rusty" Yates told jurors Thursday about how his wife, Andrea, lived by a rigid schedule as housekeeper and teacher and was allowed three hours each week to do whatever she wanted, alone, without her children.
"Man's the breadwinner and the woman's the homemaker," Mr. Yates said Thursday during Mrs. Yates' capital murder trial. Mrs. Yates pleaded insanity after admitting that she drowned her five children in June.
While he talked proudly of the couple's decision to toe a higher ethical line based on biblical teachings and lessons gleaned from a conservative newsletter called "Perilous Times," Mr. Yates coincidentally painted a picture for jurors of a bleak life bereft of any outlet for Mrs. Yates besides her children.
AP "A scared animal" is how Debbie Holmes testified that her friend Andrea Yates behaved in the days before she killed her children. |
Mr. Yates, 37, told the jury that he and his wife agreed before their wedding in 1993 to a "traditional" marriage in which he would serve as sole breadwinner and she would be homemaker.
The pact included being a stay-at-home mother, primary caregiver and, eventually, home-school teacher. Mr. Yates said that he controlled the cash and that she stuck carefully to an allowance.
Therapist Earline Wilcott, who met with Mrs. Yates after her suicide attempts, testified that her client felt overwhelmed and trapped.
Ms. Wilcott said Mrs. Yates felt criticized for the way she ran the household. Ms. Wilcott said Mrs. Yates told her that her husband bought her a book on how to get organized.
When pressure from raising their children appeared to be getting to Mrs. Yates, she could always look forward to Thursdays. Mr. Yates testified that for three hours once each week from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. Mrs. Yates could do whatever she wanted, alone, without the children.
The free time was to provide some relief for his wife, Mr. Yates said. "I guess that's what we decided," he said.
Mrs. Yates is a diagnosed schizophrenic predisposed to pitch-black depressions that followed the births of her last two children. Testimony has shown that the 37-year-old registered nurse with perfectionist tendencies and a solid Christian faith went along with the home management plan she and Mr. Yates hammered out before marriage.
During a second day of testimony, this time during questioning by Harris County prosecutor Joe Owmby, Mr. Yates, a NASA engineer, said he and Mrs. Yates agreed before marrying that she would give up her job at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center at Houston.
"We thought it best that Andrea be home," Mr. Yates testified.
Prosecutors say Mrs. Yates was fully aware of what she was doing when she drowned Noah, 7; John, 5; Paul, 3; Luke, 2; and 6-month-old Mary in the family bathtub.
Mrs. Yates' trial, which began Feb. 18, is expected to go through next week. She faces life in prison or lethal injection if convicted.
During questioning, Mr. Yates said his wife was quiet and remarkably modest. After they were married, Mrs. Yates wouldn't undress in front of her husband. "That's a pretty personal question, but generally that's true. She's shy," he testified.
While Mr. Yates found time for interests such as biking to work, joining a gym and working in the garage, Mrs. Yates had the children and home-schooling to keep up with.
Their life also included some unusual experiments and choices.
Almost as soon as their first home was built, they rented it out, trading it for a 38-foot trailer to live a "simpler life."
"I think a lot of it was that Andrea was generally happy in the house, I probably wasn't as happy in the house," he said.
After being married 41/2 years, with three young children and another on the way, they sold the trailer for a $37,000 converted Greyhound bus.
"I didn't view it as a hardship," Mr. Yates said. "We like it better than a house."
After the 1999 birth of their fourth child, Luke, the close quarters appeared to get to her. She summoned her husband home one day. He found her sobbing and shaking in the back of the bus.
The next day, she took an overdose. Less than a month later, she held a knife to her throat.
Mr. Yates told jurors how he faithfully drove his wife to therapy after her two suicide attempts.
He also told jurors that his wife opted for natural childbirth.
Although he conceded that the newsletter he and his wife read advocated natural childbirth for a "humbling experience for a woman," Mr. Yates said it was his wife's idea to go without local anesthetic.
"It was her choice," he said. "Sometimes Andrea liked to take the hard road instead of an easy road."
Despite warnings from at least one psychiatrist who said having more children would bring Mrs. Yates a harsher version of the depression that sent her to try to kill herself, they had a fifth child on Nov. 30, 2000.
They knew that Haldol pulled her out of the depths in 1999, after the birth of Luke. When Mrs. Yates faltered again, particularly after her father died in March 2001, they asked for the drug again.
"I knew she was sick," Mr. Yates said. "She wouldn't have tried to commit suicide if she hadn't been sick."
Four days before she drowned her children, Mrs. Yates awoke screaming that she was trapped. As her husband comforted her, she told him about her nightmare. "Something about in her dream she was trapped in her bed," Mr. Yates said.
"A scared animal" is how Debbie Holmes later testified that Mrs. Yates behaved in the days before she killed her children. The women met about 16 years ago at M.D. Anderson.
Mrs. Holmes said Mrs. Yates spoke only three complete sentences to her in the four months before the children died. Her hair greasy and matted, her body reeking, Mrs. Yates was a walking zombie then, Mrs. Holmes said.
"I was appalled," said Mrs. Holmes. "She looked like a cancer patient." When she heard that the children were drowned, a teary Mrs. Holmes said she collapsed.
"I fell on the floor, and I just cried," Mrs. Holmes said. "I was screaming. It can't be my Andrea."
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.
