Should Andrea Yates be allowed to go to church once a week?

[MoonRiver]

I heard a psychiatrist yesterday who said that, based on her dark history with religion, it might be risky. Another said that as long as she is taking medication for her psychosis this should be ok. I'm not sure if she's identified a church she wants to attend.

15 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
	Yes
	5 (33%)
	No
	10 (67%)
	Depends
	0 (0%)
	Other
	0 (0%)
	1 DU member did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[yellerpup]

1. No, but they should let her be deprogrammed instead.

She was brainwashed and brutalized by her (very devout, totally controlling) husband. She needs help, but her religion doesn't need reinforcing.

[MoonRiver]

2. Yes, all of her delusions, leading to murder, were based on extreme religious views.

They are also talking about release in a few years. Right now she is forced to take her anti-psychotics. On her own, who knows. Many people with psychosis stop taking their meds without constant oversight. Not sure if she's still of childbearing age, but what a scary prospect if she were when released.

[yellerpup]

4. Good points, all.

I once had a brother-in-law who wouldn't take his schizophrenia meds when he was feeling good because he thought he was 'cured' and didn't need them any more. Spiral up, spiral down, he's in his 50's now. As an adult, no one can make him take the meds and he is not really competent to make his own decisions. You gave me a chill when you mentioned her being (possibly) childbearing age. Without help now, she could certainly do it again. But, this time I hope she drowns that husband first.

[cali]

6. thankfully, it's

not up to the general public.

[yellerpup]

20. Thankfully, yes. eom

[hlthe2b]

3. only if her psychiatrist goes with her and halts it at the first suggestion...

that either the message or her reaction/response/interpretation is becoming problematic.

[ScreamingMeemie]

5. Agreed.

[JitterbugPerfume]

7. no

hyper religiosity was at the root of her craziness. She needs to be deprogrammed

[MoonRiver]

9. Also, I thought church services were offered in jail.

I'm wondering if what she can go to in prison isn't fundamentalist enough for her.

[Meiko]

25. I was wondering

the same thing. There are no services available in jail?

[Texasgal]

8. NO.

She can go to church behind bars.

[liberalhistorian]

43. The woman was seriously mentally ill

and her husband refused to allow her to continue with the treatment she badly needed; instead, he removed her from the facility where she was being treated, against the adamant advice of those treating her, and put her right back in the same situation that was exacerbating her illness. He didn't even hire any help for her with the kids or have anyone watching her during the day even though HE KNEW the dangers of that and had been warned and told of it. He just didn't want to hear about it or deal with it, he wanted to continue being the controlling, patriarchal, emotionally abusive hyperreligious asshole he was and is.

She needed and needs treatment, not criminal jail. Period.

[customerserviceguy]

10. I'm an atheist and I voted yes

I doubt she's ever going to get out of prison anyway, I don't think she'll do any harm by going to some sort of church services in the four walls of that place.

[cali]

15. She's not in prison. She's in the North Texas State Hospital.

[customerserviceguy]

17. And the fundamental difference is?

She wouldn't be free to leave either place on her own. I'm sure this mental institution has her in a secure place.

Sorry, my mistake about the type of institution, but it's a difference without a distinction for the purposes of the subject of this thread.

[LisaL]

19. She wants to attend church outside the institution.

Not inside of it. Jeez.

[customerserviceguy]

21. Ok, if that's the case, fuggetaboutit. n/t

[MineralMan]

11. Without more information, I'm unable to form an opinion on this.

[LiberalFighter]

12. Hell no!!

She is committed to a mental institution and should not be released for any purpose until judged sane. Any religious request should only be provided within the institution if available.

[frogmarch]

13. Sure, “hair of the dog” will fix her right up.

Even if it doesn’t, I thought church was for sinners. If it is, I’d say she qualifies.

[backscatter712]

14. Which church?

If we're talking about a moderate or liberal church, say a Unitarian-Universalist church, hey, I'd have no problems.

If we're talking about a cultish fire-and-brimstone church that would have a bunch of triggers for her in their rituals, then the answer is no.

Of course, I say this as an atheist.

[obamanut2012]

34. Exactly -- most Christian churches aren't Fundamentalist

And, there are also definitely non Christian options, like the UUs, as you suggested.

She and her husband belonged to a Christian CULT. They didn't even follow a "normal" Fundie church and doctrine.

I think she could find much solace and do much good living a life of faith and service.

[WolverineDG]

16. Her now ex-husband should have been prosecuted along with her

but in Texas, only women are prosecuted & convicted for "murder by omission." He was the real whack-job in the family. Since she's no longer under his control, I've got no problem with her attending services.

dg

[liberalhistorian]

44. I so totally agree.

He even removed her from the facility where she was receiving badly needed treatment, refusing to allow continued treatment or to even acknowledge her illness, and put her right back in the same situation with complete responsibilty for the kids, no help and no aid and no one to even watch her at all, KNOWING, HAVING BEEN WARNED about the dangers of that. Then the fucker has the nerve to be surprised when she did what she did just a couple months later. HE was equally responsible. I sure feel sorry for his current wife.

[Arkansas Granny]

18. I would be OK with that as long as there are some conditions. She should be monitored and

only allowed to attend services if they don't cause her emotional distress or delusions. I think she had some underlying problems with depression before that may be controlled with medications.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

22. No.

They have clergy who comes to prison to do church services. Let her have them there with the other murderers.
With all the people that find God while in Prison, I'd say he dwells there anyway, so just let her stay there. She is mentally ill, sure, but we don't let the Son of Sam out to go to church. Why should we let her? Just because she's a woman and murdered her kids instead of strangers? Doesn't that make it worse?

[obamanut2012]

35. Andrea Yates isn't a murderer

And, comparing her to "Son of Sam" is ridiculous.

Do you know about her case, or just that she killed her children?

[YellowRubberDuckie]

40. I know about her case. It happened while I was in college. We studied it.

Andrea Yates murdered her children. She is a murderer, mental illness or not. Mental illness made her not culpable for her actions, it doesn't excuse them nor does it make her not a murderer. If mental illness makes people who kill not murderers, then there are an awful lot of people in prison who aren't murderers by your definition.
The only difference between her and Son of Sam is that he killed strangers at random while delusional. She killed her kids while delusional. The only thing that separates the two is the diagnoses, Yates's being Post Pardom Depression and Son of Sam's being Schizophrenia. I realize they're entirely different illnesses, but both killed, both doing so quite deluded, however, both are Murderers, regardless. But I guess since she just killed her kids makes it not murder? I'm not sure I follow your logic.

[libodem]

23. If she earned that through her compliance

To the rules of her theraputic community, why not? The woman is truely mentally ill. Why punish crazy? It may bring her some comfort and feelings of forgiveness

I'm sure this is tiresome to hear again but I spent a couple of years working in a state mental hospital back in the 70's, as a therapy tech. I worked with a lady who had killed two of her children. She actually seemed pretty normal. You wouldn't know by looking at her. I worked with a guy who had killed parents. Life goes on for them.

I will say that sexual or religion obsessions as an undertone to psychosis are very problematic. But it is not a reason to deny someone the civil right to practice their religion. Patients earn their rights to a pass off of the grounds by demonstrating correct behavior in the institution. You behave you receive status that entails certain privileges. It's not Gitmo, yet.

[Liberal_in_LA]

24. as long as all the others mentally ill killers are allowed to attend the weekly event of their

choosing. be fair about it. males, people of color. let them all out.

[Zalatix]

26. She should get life imprisonment in the deepest hole under the ground, no parole, no sunlight. Ever.

And that's because I oppose the use of the electric chair.

Her insanity defense was a rancid pile of bullshit.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

27. It wasn't bullshit.

She was made insane by the patriarchal fundamentalism that her husband shoved down her throat and refused to look up from when his wife was seriously suffering. She told him she'd hurt her kids. And she did. That asshat should be in prison right along with her for the rest of his life. Instead, I think he's remarried with more kids. There is seriously something wrong with that.
I'm not apologizing for her, btw, but to say she's not mentally ill is ridiculous. Perfectly sane people do not drown their children one by one.

[cali]

29. that's like saying her husband caused cancer.

He may have acted as a trigger, but he didn't "make" her insane.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

30. It is possible to make insane people worse by ignoring the problem...

...and making them feel impotent. And that's what he did.

[obamanut2012]

38. He also kept impregnating her and not letting her take her meds

Both actions would have stabilized her illness. The doctors said NO MORE KIDS and TAKE THE MEDS! And, don;t leave her alone until she is stabilized. Rusty Yates, the morning of the killings, left her alone.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

41. He should be in prison as well.

She, while mentally ill, still needs to be locked up. She is a murderer. People can't kill their kids and then expect a pass because they're mentally ill. That's what state mental hospitals with prison wards are for.

[Zalatix]

31. "She was made insane by the patriarchal fundamentalism"? WTF?!!!

Nobody put a gun to her head and told her to drown all five of her kids.

At what point does someone take responsibility for killing her own kids?

Blaming her husband is a whole new low. She killed her kids, he didn't put a gun to her head.

[obamanut2012]

37. Wow, you really don't understand psychosis, do you?

Or brainwashing and controlling spousal behavior, or demanding your wife not take her meds, and demand she have more children even when told that is a loaded gun, and then leaving her alone with the kids.

It really is shameful, imo, to speak like this about mental illness.

[Zalatix]

46. I do understand the mentality behind finding the nearest MALE to turn into a scapegoat

when a woman murders her kids.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

42. Nope...

He didn't. But by ignoring the doctors and pushing her to be with her kids all the time, he made it worse. She's a murderer, and she deserves whatever she gets, but she's not entirely at fault for it.

[cali]

28. It would be difficult to find someone more clearly psychotic than Yates was

at the time of the crime. The psychiatrists all agreed that she was psychotic.

If you think she wasn't, care to explain how a devoted and loving mother committed such a crime? Can you explain why she was hospitalized multiple times for psychosis.

[obamanut2012]

36. You apparently only know the Nancy Grace version of her case

None of what you wrote is remotely true or fair.

imo the real murderer is enjoying his Quiverfull life with his new wife, instead of being in prison.

[Zalatix]

47. The REAL murderer is her husband? Ok that's too much crazy for me to deal with this morning.

[mojitojoe]

32. So somewhere in Texas there's some fundamentalist church...

...willing to let a woman who drowned her 5 kids to keep them safe from Satan join their congregation. But what do you think their reaction would be to letting a loving' committed gay couple join?

[obamanut2012]

33. I feel so sorry for Andrea Yates, and so much loathing for her ex husband

Who should be in prison, instead of being all Quiverfull with a new, younger wife.

I think she should be allowed to go to services, although I think the scripture used for sermons should be noted by her psychiatrist.

[etherealtruth]

39. I would leave that up to her psychiatrist(s)

Some of the responses in this thread are very disturbing ... they display a woeful ignorance related to mental illness (specifically psychosis).

[SmileyRose]

45. In very humble opinion that's the wrong question

In my mind the question is not SHOULD she but CAN she? We don't get to decide if someone else is permitted to be religious.

Given her past, I would certainly expect the doctors and legal folks in authority over her to be overly cautious in this regard. She has every right to practice or not practice whatever faith she pleases, whether it's in solitary confinement chained to a rubber wall or out in public unescorted or anyway in between.

I think the question is can she be trusted outside whatever facility she's in with minimal supervision. If it's determined that she can, then what she does with her time is none of my business so long as that time is not spent hurting someone.