Yates lived by rigid schedule, according to husband

Trying to "point out that he was over his head" is one thing, but a few of you are making excuses for his lack of taking responsibility for his children.
If you think he acted responsibly, or even to the best of his abiility, that is your right, and I'll not waste words repeating the evidence that by now should have convinced you otherwise. I only hope others who find themselves in such a situation wont find those excuses to be legitimate.

"( just because he is a little different does that make him wrong?)."

Before I draw any conclusions about where you are coming from, I will assume that you are unaware of just how "different" we are talking here. I'd wager that if you look a little deeper, you'll be less willing to make excuses for him. : )

We don't want people blaming themselves for a suicide they could not prevent. But we also tell people to watch for warning signs and give them guidelines for responding. Letting Rusty off the hook because we don't want others in different situations to feel undeserved guilt is not only wrong, but it sends a deadly message to those who might use him as an example to follow.

In Rusty's personal situation, he was indeed neglectful, and his reaction (as well as that of her doctors) to events should act as a guideline for how not to respond to the danger signs flashing all around him/them.

Before I draw any conclusions about where you are coming from, I will assume that you are unaware of just how "different" we are talking here. I'd wager that if you look a little deeper, you'll be less willing to make excuses for him. : )

I am sure he will look very bad (The mental health folk have to CYA too ya know!) I will also say that most people involved in something like this do irrational things because they are dealing with an irrational person. I would also say that most anyone that is dealing with a suicidal person cringes at the thought of having their lives put to scrutiny . These people endure enourmous stresses that bring out the best and worse in them. After the fact if one only puts the worse on trial it would be very shameful for most everyone.

Society will do nothing; he broke no laws. I don't think he has a conscience. I've seen nothing saying that he has ever questioned anything that he did that might have contributed to this horrible mess.

Most people want to blame themselves. Most people spend years going through hundreds and hundreds of what ifs. In the end, most people eventually realize, after exhausting these what ifs, that the professionals are correct and there was nothing they could do.

You are right. No one causes someone to commit suicide (or murder their children), it's an internal problem in that person. You cannot force a mentally ill person to become better, you cannot force an alcoholic to stop drinking or a drug abuser to stop drugs. No one really has that kind of control over another person's will.

As a parent, when my children have hurt themselves I blame myself and think "I should have been watching them better."

But with the Yates, you are talking about a husband-wife relationship, not a parent-child relationship. He did not have control over her mind to prevent her or cause her from doing terrible things. She was an adult, you'll learn you cannot control adults --for good or for bad ---and children too once they reach a certain age.

Agreed. People will look for a scapegoat, and people don't always read the signs or respond appropriately.

But you are speaking in generalities. None of which negate the truth of, or mitigate his responsibility for, his particular behavior. (Which most of us see as far more negligent than can be excused as a common reaction. Again - read up on the background. There was a lot more to this than your typical family with a mentally ill member - for which I have much sympathy gained from experience.)

"After the fact if one only puts the worse on trial it would be very shameful for most everyone."

Not as shameful as allowing his worst mistakes to go without censure, thus setting a potentially fatal example for any others in his situation.

BRL,

What little I know about mental illness is that there are chemical imbalances/brain dysfunctions causing depression, schizophrenia, pschosis, etc, and then there is "situational" depression....the kind of depression caused by the death of a loved one, physical or emotional abuse, extreme stress, etc.

Some of us here happen to think that Andrea Yates probably suffered from some type of chemical imbalance/brain dysfunction AND situational depression. Some women do tend to crack when put under enough pressure. None of us will ever know if she could not have been helped had they stopped at child number three like the doctor recommended. These are all factors that are important for the jury to consider, and the reason we are discussing them.

"I've seen nothing saying that he has ever questioned anything that he did that might have contributed to this horrible mess."

In fairness, I would imagine that he's taking quite a bit of medication himself just to cope from day to day. I'm not surprised he's rather zombie-like. I don't expect anything more of him at this point, regardless of my opinions on his actions previously. I'm sure he loved his family, and is suffering in ways you or I would never understand. I just hope we learn a lesson from it.

But you don't leave your children in their care.

He could have (should have) had her committed to the state hospital until stabilized, or at least made sure someone else was always with her and the children - not depending solely on his mother.

Fitz, I love ya, and usually you do such a good job saying what I think, I don't bother to post. : ) But I can't go with you on this one. I agree that she deserves whatever she has coming, maybe more, but I can't picture you as the type to make excuses for this bozo.
Nor can I picture you as the type to let your children live in squalor just because you have a principle that, because it is the woman's job, if she can't/wont provide a healthy home, they'll just have to grin & bear it. That is typical Illbay, but you???

I keep wondering what personal experience you endured to get you off-track on this one. ; )

You may not have read through to my response to someone else.... It's not that I consider there to be anything wrong with natural childbirth. But put into context of her life with her husband, what he says about it being her choice doesn't ring through.

"Is he a creep?" I would say expecting one's wife to live in a greyhound bus with four young children --when clearly he didn't HAVE to do that -- makes him a creep.

"But he behaves the way he does, in large part, because he has been living with an insane person for many many years." Sorry, but that isn't the case. Her signs of severe mental illness didn't manifest until after she had her fourth child. His odd behavior existed before that.

"It is very doubtful that her living in a bus or his going to a gym or his "contolling" personality caused this." So true. And, if you had taken the time to read my posts you would know that I said this. Some people are simply genetically predisposed to depression. However, he had it within his power to alliviate some of her pressures and chose not to.

"The mentally ill person takes no responsibility, and the "controlling" person tries to. I guess he could have been a nice uncontrolling person and run out on her." Yes the healthy spouse does have some "controlling" to do -- but there is good controlling and bad controlling. "Controlling", when it is done for the best interest of the ill person, is to be expected. How was having a fifth child, against doctor's advice, something done for her benefit? How is complaining about her organizational skills, when she is caring for 5 children and schooling two of them done for her benefit?

"The mentally ill person is not evil, they just have a plethora of problems that all come together when great stresses are placed on them. It is very stressful to raise a family." I agree. "It turns out that she could not cope. Is that really his fault?" Uhhhh....when he introduces a fifth child into the situation, I think he bears some of the responsibility. If he doesn't "rethink" their "plan", I think he bears some of the responsibility.

In my very first post on this thread, I noted that I used to defend Russel Yates and get annoyed with those who would blame him. It wasn't until I learned some of these details that I realized he bears some of the responsibility. I am very sorry for your loss and can't imagine a worse fate for you and your children. I can't even comprehend your pain and that of your dear children. But I am not as removed from all this as you may think. My husband has bipolar disorder. And yes, I have to do some "controlling" -- especially when he gets manic and spends money like it grows on trees. Fortunately for all of us, he has a mild case. He has never attempted suicide and has said he never would. Nor has he ever appeared suicidal. But, I know that if my husband had attempted suicide and then was in a funk where he wasn't taking care of himself and the children I wouldn't be leaving them in his care all day.

He should not have left them in her care ---the only thing is I think she never hurt the kids before and he left them with her about an hour in the am and an hour in the pm. I don't think he realized she was capable of killing them since apparently she had never injured them before.

I do find it odd that he seems to be sticking with her ---I think he's taking his marriage vows way too far. I don't know if you're supposed to divorce someone if they're mentally ill as bad as she was but I would not stay with someone who wasn't bathing and who was that psychotic. Maybe there is something wrong with him ---but I think it's possible he really is that committed to his religious beliefs and marriage vows.

Good question. I did read somewhere that he said that if she isn't released, he couldn't see himself holding on to her for 50 years - or something like that.

That is typical Illbay, but you???

LOL!

<G> I thought that would get you, lol.

Well, as one "disgusting animal" to another, I agree with every word you said!