Quote:
Originally Posted by Platapus
While August's comments are quite correct, the point I was making is that attempting to kill someone with one method, and when that method does not work, switching to another method makes it hard to use the insanity (I did not know that what I was doing was wrong) defense. That and her voluntary statement (no Miranda concerns here) that she killed them because she did not want autistic children, will seal her fate.
I don't think a Texas jury will buy an insanity defense on this one.  |
Insanity has far more variety than complete normality or complete incoherence. It is all very well to fire condemnation in a blind, normative fashion at a case of infanticide, but somehow I doubt any of you complainers here are:
1) Autistics (presumably of the "High Functioning" variety or you won't be functional enough to type)
2) Relatives (especially parents) of autistics.
Being someone diagnosed with "autistic tendencies" back in the late 80s, I can confirm the common medical opinion that it is in fact incurable. Though extensive "early intervention" (I think this was before Lovaas technique or any of the newer ones) worked well enough I marginally fit in society, I can count countless cases of minor social
faux pas, auditory handling difficulties ... etc and though I like the fact that I can look at many things in our society in ways that my "neurotypical" brethren cannot, I can definitely conclude that overall life as an autistic is no bowl of cherries, and I'm probably on the very edge of autism, any better and it'll likely have gone undiagnosed entirely.
Now, consider how much "fun" it'll be to be parenting such kids, trying to bludgeon them into some semblance of normality or at least of limited independence. Without having experienced the actual despair and hopelessness of this entire enterprise, un-objective normative "blindfire" lambasting of this tragedy does no one any good.