Family & Relationships0 min ago
How much more sympathy can you have
for YET ANOTHER of these cases? Another case of a mother who's hads enough of the role.
http://uk.news.yahoo....at-named-6323e80.html
http://uk.news.yahoo....at-named-6323e80.html
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Snafu03. 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.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Were there no help to hand, there may be some kind of argument possible in mitigation of her actions. That, however, is just not the case - there are all sorts of groups, therapists, medical agencies etc etc to turn to.
She is therefore guilty of murder, i.e infanticide, and should pay heavily for having taken the life of a helpless and defenceless baby. No excuses.
She is therefore guilty of murder, i.e infanticide, and should pay heavily for having taken the life of a helpless and defenceless baby. No excuses.
again eyethengyou I hope you are never in the same position, at the end of your resources and feeling alone....I do however agree in a way with the judge...we have thrown the morality baby out with the bathwater and with it much protection for folk who aren't able, for whatever reason, to make good choices.
Not the fault of this woman but certainly the fault of society
Not the fault of this woman but certainly the fault of society
-- answer removed --
eyethenkyew - it must be marvellous to live in your world.
Everything is black and white, cut and dried, something iks right or it is wrong.
Unfortunately, where i, and the rest of the posters on this thread live, life is nothing like that simple.
This is not an EastEnders episode where everything knits up in twenty-eight minutes, this is the life, and death, of real people who will have to deal with the consequences of what has happened for ever.
If you seriously believe that this woman glibly decided that she could no longer be bothered with her baby, and killed her to save the inconvenience, then I hope you never happen upon me in a car accident in the early hours of the morning as I bleed to death. My passenger, who had drunk some wine has gone to find help, so my car smels of alcohol. You will decide i am a drunk driver, and dserve to die, and I will not be able to tell you that not everything is as it appears second-hand, but I will be gone, and you will be satisfied that | got what i deserved.
I hope it doesn't happen - to me, or anyone else. Your seat on your moral high horse is preventing you from taking a clear view of what might be going on around you, instead of what fits your own ideas of how people should live their lives.
Everything is black and white, cut and dried, something iks right or it is wrong.
Unfortunately, where i, and the rest of the posters on this thread live, life is nothing like that simple.
This is not an EastEnders episode where everything knits up in twenty-eight minutes, this is the life, and death, of real people who will have to deal with the consequences of what has happened for ever.
If you seriously believe that this woman glibly decided that she could no longer be bothered with her baby, and killed her to save the inconvenience, then I hope you never happen upon me in a car accident in the early hours of the morning as I bleed to death. My passenger, who had drunk some wine has gone to find help, so my car smels of alcohol. You will decide i am a drunk driver, and dserve to die, and I will not be able to tell you that not everything is as it appears second-hand, but I will be gone, and you will be satisfied that | got what i deserved.
I hope it doesn't happen - to me, or anyone else. Your seat on your moral high horse is preventing you from taking a clear view of what might be going on around you, instead of what fits your own ideas of how people should live their lives.
pinkilady, I, and the majority of posters here will find your story an upsetting and all too common one.
The assumption that because help is availabl,e that everytone is clear-headed enough to be able to go out and find it is a seriously dangerous one - as you so eloquently explain, and as you also confirm, the consequences of our actions are ours to live with, howsoever caused.
I salute your honesty in sharing your story with us - thank you.
The assumption that because help is availabl,e that everytone is clear-headed enough to be able to go out and find it is a seriously dangerous one - as you so eloquently explain, and as you also confirm, the consequences of our actions are ours to live with, howsoever caused.
I salute your honesty in sharing your story with us - thank you.
new Judge - I would only take issue with you on point in your last post -
although statisticaly it is shown that a two-parent family is more stable tham a one parent family, it does not follow that frowning upon single mothers was as a result of this, rather than moralistic outrage. I think it was, and still is, the vierw of society that the majority of single mothers are feckless fools who require state housing and handouts.
My wife and my eldest daughter have both been single parents at times in their lives, and both worked and made their way without the benefit of the above, and rode out the disproving glares of the moral high ground occupiers - as well they should.
The absence of parenting skills in this generation is the result of a number of social factors, not least the breakdown of family support systems, and proper education in the art of humanity can caring.
Until a government will invest properly in infant childcare, which is where such lessons begin, we will contrinue our downwards slide as a society, but as long as we have the uprightness and unshakeable belief that everything is either right or wrong - as evidenced by some posters - then we have nothing to fear ... do we?
although statisticaly it is shown that a two-parent family is more stable tham a one parent family, it does not follow that frowning upon single mothers was as a result of this, rather than moralistic outrage. I think it was, and still is, the vierw of society that the majority of single mothers are feckless fools who require state housing and handouts.
My wife and my eldest daughter have both been single parents at times in their lives, and both worked and made their way without the benefit of the above, and rode out the disproving glares of the moral high ground occupiers - as well they should.
The absence of parenting skills in this generation is the result of a number of social factors, not least the breakdown of family support systems, and proper education in the art of humanity can caring.
Until a government will invest properly in infant childcare, which is where such lessons begin, we will contrinue our downwards slide as a society, but as long as we have the uprightness and unshakeable belief that everything is either right or wrong - as evidenced by some posters - then we have nothing to fear ... do we?
<<She is therefore guilty of murder, i.e infanticide>>
wrong again eyethankyew!
1. Murder is the unlawful killing of another human being with "malice aforethought"
2. a person may be found guilty of "manslaughter" on the basis of "diminished responsibility" rather than murder, if it can be proved that the killer was suffering from a condition that affected their judgment at the time. Depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and medication side-effects are examples of conditions that may be taken into account when assessing responsibility.
3. Some countries, such as Canada, Italy, Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Australia, allow postpartum depression (also known as post-natal depression) as a defense against murder of a child by a mother, provided that a child is less than two years old (this may be the specific offense of infanticide rather than murder and include the effects of lactation and other aspects of post-natal care)
Law isn't your strong suit is it?
.
wrong again eyethankyew!
1. Murder is the unlawful killing of another human being with "malice aforethought"
2. a person may be found guilty of "manslaughter" on the basis of "diminished responsibility" rather than murder, if it can be proved that the killer was suffering from a condition that affected their judgment at the time. Depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and medication side-effects are examples of conditions that may be taken into account when assessing responsibility.
3. Some countries, such as Canada, Italy, Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Australia, allow postpartum depression (also known as post-natal depression) as a defense against murder of a child by a mother, provided that a child is less than two years old (this may be the specific offense of infanticide rather than murder and include the effects of lactation and other aspects of post-natal care)
Law isn't your strong suit is it?
.
-- answer removed --
I have boundless sympathy for this woman and of course her unfortunate baby- and I really do wish I lived in NJ's world where I could have forseen my ex wife and I parting- she was for a while a simgle parent ( not claiming state handouts I might add). NO-ONE enters a relationship, has a child and assumes it's not the ' right one'. Anyone who thinks people glibly chuck their life and the life of their child away in a situaiton such as this are absolutely in a dream world. Thanks pinkilady, brave to bare your soul like this on here.
As I think I suggested, Andy and NOX, you cannot tar everybody with the same brush. Some people end up as single parents through no real fault of their own, and many of them make an excellent job of bringing up their children.
My point is that either society, or the State, or government (choose what you like) has made a pig’s ear of maintaining the idea that a two parent family is the ideal which should be the aim. Because it is not always achieved is no reason to suggest it should not be the aim.
Perhaps a few years ago the emphasis was placed too heavily on the “moral” aspect of the issue. But these morals usually developed for sound reasons. In the past generation or so, in doing away with the moral aspect in a desperate bid to avoid sounding like preachers we have also done away with the purely practical aspects of these unsuitable circumstances.
I think that's enough from me !!
My point is that either society, or the State, or government (choose what you like) has made a pig’s ear of maintaining the idea that a two parent family is the ideal which should be the aim. Because it is not always achieved is no reason to suggest it should not be the aim.
Perhaps a few years ago the emphasis was placed too heavily on the “moral” aspect of the issue. But these morals usually developed for sound reasons. In the past generation or so, in doing away with the moral aspect in a desperate bid to avoid sounding like preachers we have also done away with the purely practical aspects of these unsuitable circumstances.
I think that's enough from me !!
I was very ill when I had my son and didn't set eyes on him for over a week. By that time I had no feelings for him whatsoever and just dealt with his needs on autopilot. There was not so much help around then (mid-70s) and I can remember exactly how dreadful it felt. I would never judge anyone in such a situation.
Latest Posts
Climate Change Robs Family Of Life...
ChatterBank12 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles20 mins ago
Crosswords22 mins ago
Are Labour Preparing To Dump The P M ?
News28 mins ago