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."
"( 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. : )
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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. ; )
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.
LOL!
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.
