ChatterBank0 min ago
Woman To Be Freed After Only 2-3 Months In Jail.
100 Answers
http://
Is 2-3 months in jail a satisfactory punishment for causing "catastrophic" brain injuries to one's child?.
Is 2-3 months in jail a satisfactory punishment for causing "catastrophic" brain injuries to one's child?.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
// Abdulrahman admitted concocting a fake story about her daughter being snatched by a couple who burst into her flat sparking a major police hunt before she confessed.
She did not seem to be suffering any mental defect at that time, enough to say that she was trying to load her actions on to others who did not exist.
Most have seemingly offered their sympathy towards this women, but no one has done likewise towards her poor little infant who will suffer real mental problems from the serious brain injuries inflicted by the child's mother.
Regarding her being mentally ill at the time, are not most persons also mentally ill when they commit such acts, had it been a man with mental problems and also did similar, what support could he have expected?
She did not seem to be suffering any mental defect at that time, enough to say that she was trying to load her actions on to others who did not exist.
Most have seemingly offered their sympathy towards this women, but no one has done likewise towards her poor little infant who will suffer real mental problems from the serious brain injuries inflicted by the child's mother.
Regarding her being mentally ill at the time, are not most persons also mentally ill when they commit such acts, had it been a man with mental problems and also did similar, what support could he have expected?
AOG, had your question been 'what do you think of this poor child....' then you might have got such a response. I think in terms of most depression there is an inherent mechanism of denial before realisation, and given what she had just done it was no doubt exacerbated. Are you doubting she had PND and that she made it up to get off ?
Welcome back AOG - I never for one moment considered that your absence was connected to the trend of the responses you received - regulars on here know you better than that.
However, I must comment on your response involving my point -
"May I also thank both mikey444 and Bazwillrun for their support regarding the spin that Andy-Hughes tried to put on my words, it is obvious that he is not accustomed to the rudiments of debate, else he and others (after being stirred on by AH) would have noticed that I asked a question for debate and didn't follow on with a comment of my own."
It was never my intention to 'spin' your point in any way, but i feel you must take some responsibility for the wording of your OP.
If you put out an observation which may not coincide with your personal viewpoint - but do not advise that fact - you cannot blame others, including myself, for concluding that this is indeed your viewpoint, and answering accordingly.
To make it my responsibiity fo failing to read into your intention is baseless, and I think you should acknowlege that in that case, your OP was clumsily worded at best.
As for 'stirring on' others, I cannot accept responsibility for the responses of others to any point I make - I am fully accomstomed to the rudiments of debate - I have enjoyed ample practise!
However, I must comment on your response involving my point -
"May I also thank both mikey444 and Bazwillrun for their support regarding the spin that Andy-Hughes tried to put on my words, it is obvious that he is not accustomed to the rudiments of debate, else he and others (after being stirred on by AH) would have noticed that I asked a question for debate and didn't follow on with a comment of my own."
It was never my intention to 'spin' your point in any way, but i feel you must take some responsibility for the wording of your OP.
If you put out an observation which may not coincide with your personal viewpoint - but do not advise that fact - you cannot blame others, including myself, for concluding that this is indeed your viewpoint, and answering accordingly.
To make it my responsibiity fo failing to read into your intention is baseless, and I think you should acknowlege that in that case, your OP was clumsily worded at best.
As for 'stirring on' others, I cannot accept responsibility for the responses of others to any point I make - I am fully accomstomed to the rudiments of debate - I have enjoyed ample practise!
\\\\ Are you doubting she had PND and that she made it up to get off ?\\\
I apologise for answering for answering for AOG, but yes, from my point of view, I was wondering what the evidence was to support a diagnosis of PND.
We heard very little of the medical evidence either from the defense or prosecution and the psychiatrists giving evidence were not named or even mentioned.
Yes the judge did accept that PND played a part but still gave a custodial sentence, which makes me wonder if the judge did believe the medical evidence.
I apologise for answering for answering for AOG, but yes, from my point of view, I was wondering what the evidence was to support a diagnosis of PND.
We heard very little of the medical evidence either from the defense or prosecution and the psychiatrists giving evidence were not named or even mentioned.
Yes the judge did accept that PND played a part but still gave a custodial sentence, which makes me wonder if the judge did believe the medical evidence.
AOG - "Most have seemingly offered their sympathy towards this women, but no one has done likewise towards her poor little infant who will suffer real mental problems from the serious brain injuries inflicted by the child's mother."
I would suggest that such sympathy can be taken as read to the extent that no-one felt the need to mention it.
I would suggest that such sympathy can be taken as read to the extent that no-one felt the need to mention it.
andy-hughes
/// It was never my intention to 'spin' your point in any way, but i feel you must take some responsibility for the wording of your OP. ///
If it was not your intention then why did you?
And I also take full responsibility for the wording of all my posts, but I can't take responsibility for others (including yourself) who regularly twist them so has to put their own individual spin on them.
/// If you put out an observation which may not coincide with your personal viewpoint - but do not advise that fact - you cannot blame others, including myself, for concluding that this is indeed your viewpoint, and answering accordingly. ///
Why should I, do others? in fact there are no other ABers who have their words and comments put under close scrutiny as mine are, and if they can't attach any wrongfulness they will invent some themselves, the comment regarding the woman's head covering was a prime example.
/// It was never my intention to 'spin' your point in any way, but i feel you must take some responsibility for the wording of your OP. ///
If it was not your intention then why did you?
And I also take full responsibility for the wording of all my posts, but I can't take responsibility for others (including yourself) who regularly twist them so has to put their own individual spin on them.
/// If you put out an observation which may not coincide with your personal viewpoint - but do not advise that fact - you cannot blame others, including myself, for concluding that this is indeed your viewpoint, and answering accordingly. ///
Why should I, do others? in fact there are no other ABers who have their words and comments put under close scrutiny as mine are, and if they can't attach any wrongfulness they will invent some themselves, the comment regarding the woman's head covering was a prime example.
Sqad - I think it's best to use the term post natal psychosis here (as the judges and psychiatrist did) Post natal depression runs the spectrum from mild to serious depression and the most extreme ( and rarest) form is postnatal psychosis.
Psychosis is characterised by
hallucinations
delusions
confused and disturbed thoughts
a lack of insight and self-awareness
"A psychiatrist said her symptoms ‘fitted perfectly’ with a mental illness known as postpartum psychosis."
http://
The judge may have been swayed by the fact that the mother alleged that the child had been abducted.
It is a of course a tragedy that the infant suffered such horrendous injuries, and the mother will surely suffer from the knowledge that she inflicted them for the rest of her life.
Psychosis is characterised by
hallucinations
delusions
confused and disturbed thoughts
a lack of insight and self-awareness
"A psychiatrist said her symptoms ‘fitted perfectly’ with a mental illness known as postpartum psychosis."
http://
The judge may have been swayed by the fact that the mother alleged that the child had been abducted.
It is a of course a tragedy that the infant suffered such horrendous injuries, and the mother will surely suffer from the knowledge that she inflicted them for the rest of her life.
Gromit
/// AOG,
Now that you have batted back the comments, maybe you would give us your answer to the question you posed: ///
/// Is 2-3 months in jail a satisfactory punishment? ///
Having now read both sides of the debate, and considering the little child's injuries that it has to bear for the rest of it's life, and also taking into consideration her attempt at blaming others, I will now gladly give an answer to the question I posted.
No, not nearly enough.
/// AOG,
Now that you have batted back the comments, maybe you would give us your answer to the question you posed: ///
/// Is 2-3 months in jail a satisfactory punishment? ///
Having now read both sides of the debate, and considering the little child's injuries that it has to bear for the rest of it's life, and also taking into consideration her attempt at blaming others, I will now gladly give an answer to the question I posted.
No, not nearly enough.
andy-hughes
/// I would suggest that such sympathy can be taken as read to the extent that no-one felt the need to mention it. ///
That seems to be rather strange since my question was,
*** Is 2-3 months in jail a satisfactory punishment for causing "catastrophic" brain injuries to one's child? ***
Nothing about "should this woman have been given a harsher sentence"?
Yet wasn't the child's injuries ignored, and most leapt to the defence of the perpetrator of these injuries?
/// I would suggest that such sympathy can be taken as read to the extent that no-one felt the need to mention it. ///
That seems to be rather strange since my question was,
*** Is 2-3 months in jail a satisfactory punishment for causing "catastrophic" brain injuries to one's child? ***
Nothing about "should this woman have been given a harsher sentence"?
Yet wasn't the child's injuries ignored, and most leapt to the defence of the perpetrator of these injuries?
AOG, you seem determined to see attacks and twists where none exist - certainly as far as i am concerned.
Yet again this is turning into another thread where you complain of being attacked and misunderstood, and I for one do not wish to continue grinding over the smae minutia for days on end, so I will excuse myself from here, and see you on another thread another time.
Yet again this is turning into another thread where you complain of being attacked and misunderstood, and I for one do not wish to continue grinding over the smae minutia for days on end, so I will excuse myself from here, and see you on another thread another time.
Latest Posts
Crosswords1 min ago
ChatterBank2 mins ago
Is It Safe To Take Paracetamol
How it Works5 mins ago
News7 mins ago
News20 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.