the ultimate throwaway baby - makes me sick

[p3medic]

She needs a bigger toilet.

[DwayneEMTP]

Jess, Annie, Michael, Ak, Hammer...man, you guys restore my faith in human nature.

When I made my first post on this thread I sent a PM to some friends saying something along the lines of "Hey, I just said we need to study this woman instead of stone her! Come watch, it's going to be a bloodbath!" But as often happens, you've proved me wrong.

Kat, though I disagree with you nearly point for point, it's pretty cool you spent the time to explain your opinion to the rest of us.

I long for the day when the majority of society will be of the opinion that you can hate the behavior without hating the person performing the behavior. Not because hating the subject is morally wrong (maybe it is, maybe it isn't) but because it's simply unproductive.

As an example. Some of you know I have a 10 y/o autistic son. The other day he decided to go across the street and check the mail while I was on the phone in my office...naked. (Him, not me)

I heard the door, ran out to find him in the living room without his clothes, a normal day in my household. Until the police showed up. The lady officer knocked on the door (this was several minutes later, I was back in my office) and my son let her in...yeppers...still naked.

She said " A neighbor complained about a boy from your house being outside naked...I'm guessing that might be him there...and when she tried to make him go inside she said (and I quote) "He gave me the most evil look, it sent chills down my spine!""

I explained that he was autistic, that the best that we can tell he has no concept of hate, or "evil", or rudeness, or so far...issues with being naked. She asked if she could speak with him, I said "of course", so she said slightly firmly "young man, you shouldn't be outside naked! He said "Yeah...I'll go get some underwear" At which point she said "Well, that didn't seem very evil", laughed, said she would spread the word there was an autistic child in the neighborhood in case he ever got lost or hurt, and went to have a chat with the neighbor.

I took immediate action by sending a letter to everyone on my street saying "I understand some of you may have seen my son naked this afternoon. I would just like to say that it would be unfair to make any assumptions about the penis size of his father based on a single sampling from one prepubescent child" (Yeah, ok...I didn't really do that)

My point is, had this been a "serious" behavior instead of simply a little boy running around naked, what have we gained by putting him in jail if our true intent is to prevent this behavior in the future? Doesn't it make more sense to say "Hmmm. This boy behaves differently. He predictably exhibits X type of behavior. Perhaps based on this understanding we can learn to prevent X behavior in this boy. Plus, we seem to have a group of people that exhibit these same types of behaviors. Could it be that what worked on him will work on them as well?

Isn't it possible that based on this logic that soon the scourge of naked autistic kids could be eliminated not only for the mental well being of my one neighbor, but for prudish neighbors everywhere? (Besides, who really wants a prison full of laughing, naked kids?)

My neighbor hated my son's behavior. But she chose also to hate the person exhibiting the behavior, when in fact, the behavior and the "intent" of/for the behavior had almost no relationship. (He has no concept that nakedness in public is bad, as well as having no concept of purposely attempting to offend the neighbors)

It's time to separate the two for the purpose of productivity.

Yikes, FireEMT177959, you're really going to hate this post! Perhaps you can tell there's a giant thunderstorm here and I'm feeling a bit reflective (stop it Michael). Also a little giddy from having time to post again!

Going to run all...Have a great day! Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Dwayne

[DwayneEMTP]

It just occured to me...where are the opinions from all of the early posters?

Were you just blowing smoke? Or have you had a change of heart?

Dwayne

[Dustdevil]

Wow, now that's a borderline Godwin's Law violation there.

Yeah... I was hoping somebody would invoke Godwin. Unfortunately, my attempt at nuking this topic has failed. Just like those Japanese Army stragglers we were still finding on Pacific islands in the 1970s, some people just don't realise the war is over.

Dwayne, I cannot disagree with anything you said. However, I can disagree that it has any relevance to this situation. I don't believe there is an equation that can be made between those with mental defect and those who just have really shitty values.

[DwayneEMTP]

My story had two purposes.

First..an attempt to be funny, which nearly always fails when I try to do it on purpose.

Second, to show that though there is little correlation between the mentally challenged and those that are biologically sound, in both cases it is necessary to separate the behavior from the actor.

Skinner, and those that came before him thoroughly proved that nearly any behavior can be altered, redirected or extinguished once it's isolated and understood. These behaviors are no exception.

I am surprised though that someone with your love of scientific medicine would allow "shitty values" as a working diagnosis for such a serious issue, as those values are not the condition, but only a symptom. I'm curious if you're familiar with Skinners “autonomous man” theory? It describes your, and many others' attitudes pretty well.

I'm curious also as to why you want to kill the thread? It seems to me that there has been some productive material here...what harm is it doing?

And lastly, as to the "war is over" analogy, I couldn't disagree more. This lady flushing her baby, is related to kids killing themselves in drunken accidents which is related to the senseless murder our kids do to each other daily. We see it, we hate it, yet in the evolution of resolving these problems, instead of working to develop the next wonder vaccine...we choose to continue burning witches.

Dwayne

[katbemeEMT-B]

Dwayne, first off, I did get a giggle out of your post about your son. It is sad that he is autistic, but it also sounds like you have a grip on it. That is wonderful. I myself, am living with a son who is extremely ADHD and recently diagnosed with mild Tourette Syndrome. I do feel that these things often times make us stronger as parents. It also allows us to see things differently from other people. I also understand how others don't see these children for the loving people they are and instead find it easier to hate them and tease them.

I am not a hater. I NEVER say I hate anyone. It is a very strong word that I believe is asking for Damnation. I have taught my kids not to use it when talking about people. I can not like some one, and I can hate what some one has done. There is a definite difference.

As to the original post, there may or may not be reasons for what this girl has done, but I believe that there should be consequences for your crimes. These consequences should be more than just having to see a shrink for a short while. Should we take the time to understand why she did it? Maybe we should, but that still doesn't take away the fact that she tried to kill her baby. She should still be punished.

Let me give you an example that happened a couple of years ago. I tried to find the link to the story, but it no longer exists. I do, however, remember the story very well. A newborn infant was found wrapped in bloody towels and a plastic bag, and left on the side of the rode. It was December and the temperatures were above normal (but still cold). A county worker spotted the bag and went to pick it up when he heard a small cry. He opened the bag to find a baby inside. Well, the mother was found two days later. She was 17 y/o and came from an average income, two parent home. She was part of the "in" crowd in school, homecoming queen, and the all American Girl. When asked why she did what she did, she responded, "I didn't want to give up what I had and didn't know what else to do." Charges were filed against her for child abandonment and child endangerment. The baby lived but did suffer some frost bite to her fingers resulting in the amputation of two of them. After about three months the story aired again and it was reported that the girl would never serve a day in jail. All charges were dropped against her and the baby was returned to her. The one stipulation was that she had to finish high school. There were cries of outrage from all over at this decision. A friend of the girl told the reporter that the girl had visited a clinic while she was pregnant and they explained to her what her options were, yet she still made the decision to leave her baby on the roadside. An update on the story a year later found the girl at college enjoying her life but her baby was no longer with her. It was never reported as to where the baby was. All they could find out was that the mother no longer had custody of the baby.

This is what I am referring to. In most cases, these girls just don't care. That's what upsets me. It's a total indifference. I will say this. I don't completely blame these girls either. I do feel some it comes from their upbringing and society. Many parents don't take the time to show their children how to love. They are too busy with their careers and their own lives. Society makes it acceptable and almost glorifiable for girls to have sex at earlier ages, to have babies without being married, and to dispose of those babies without consequence. Then, when they get caught, they give some sad story and they get their baby back. How is that right? How is that fair to those innocent babies?

I know that I have very strong feelings about this topic and for that I will never apologize. I feel some one has to be there to speak for the babies as they are unable to speak for themselves. I also realize that I am only one voice, and one voice can't change the world. My hope is to help others to understand why I feel as I do. This problem in and of itself is very complicated and there is no easy solution.

[Michael]

katbeme, thank you for taking the time to explain your thoughts. My sense is that you want to relieve unnecessary suffering, and you say your "hope is to help others to understand why I feel as I do." I would like to understand, but what may be blazingly obvious to one person might be invisible to another, and vice-versa. So here are some things that are still not clear to me.

She should still be punished.

How would you punish her, for what purpose, and how would you know whether your purpose had been accomplished?

Many parents don't take the time to show their children how to love.

How would you address the results of that once those children have become adolescents or adults?

when they get caught, they give some sad story and they get their baby back. How is that right? How is that fair to those innocent babies?

What would be fair to those innocent babies?

there is no easy solution.

What is the difficult solution?

[Dustdevil]

Second, to show that though there is little correlation between the mentally challenged and those that are biologically sound, in both cases it is necessary to separate the behavior from the actor.

I completely agree. In both cases, I am completely unconcerned with the actor. It is only the behaviour that I consider. And the goal in both cases is the same: to protect society from such behaviour in the future.

Skinner, and those that came before him thoroughly proved that nearly any behavior can be altered, redirected or extinguished once it's isolated and understood. These behaviors are no exception.

Agreed. But I don't believe that society has a responsibility to do that. Their only responsibility is to protect the rest of society from those behaviours by removing the offender from society for as long as s/he presents a danger. Any correctional or curative action is not society's responsibility to force upon them. I don't believe in corrections or criminal justice. I only believe in public safety.

I am surprised though that someone with your love of scientific medicine would allow "shitty values" as a working diagnosis for such a serious issue, as those values are not the condition, but only a symptom. I'm curious if you're familiar with Skinners “autonomous man” theory? It describes your, and many others' attitudes pretty well.

I am indeed familiar with the theory, as well as Skinner's views on it. He actually didn't believe in its practical validity any more than Marx believed in the practical validity of Marxism. I don't either. And that doesn't negate "shitty values" as a valid diagnosis. It only holds that such values are the result of the larger societal influence, i.e. bad parenting, violence on television, hoodlum friends, etc... That problem is beyond the control of society. That, again, is why I find it irrelevant when considering our solutions. But the fact remains that some people (though not necessarily the woman we are discussing) are just bad seeds. They're wired that way. Their elevators don't go all the way up. Societal influence is not really effective on them to any large degree. While they would definitely not be the elusive "autonomous man," they also would not be manipulable to any successful degree.

I'm curious also as to why you want to kill the thread? It seems to me that there has been some productive material here...what harm is it doing?

Because, as much as I truly enjoy intelligent philosophical and psychological discussion, I simply don't like arguing overly emotional or unsolvable issues, especially with friends. Somebody's bound to get upset, offended, or even hurt, and it's not even possible for anybody to win. When nobody wins, we both lose.

And lastly, as to the "war is over" analogy, I couldn't disagree more.

Well, that was my failed attempt at humour. But what I was getting at was that, if nobody can win, and we all eventually lose, it might as well be over, as there really is no point in continuing.

[Michael]

"shitty values" as a valid diagnosis

New DMS IV Category: Community-Acquired Caproseptideontitis, Asymptomatic [CACA] - Inflammation of fecally toxic morals, from capros (excreta) + sepsis (putrefaction) + deon (obligation) + -itis (inflammation). Although highly infectious and amenable only to autodidactic treatment, quarantining prevents opportunities for others to develop herd-immunity and insulates the patient from feedback loops required for generating suitable antibodies. Therefore, controlled exposure through social integration seems the optimal treatment-setting for suspected carriers. When pandemic, acute signs accepted as population baseline norms render differential diagnosis impossible prior to acute crises, at which point caregivers are equally at risk and recovery may appear aleatoric.

[hammerpcp]

New DMS IV Category: Community-Acquired Caproseptideontitis, Asymptomatic [CACA] - Inflammation of fecally toxic morals, from capros (excreta) + sepsis (putrefaction) + deon (obligation) + -itis (inflammation). Although highly infectious and amenable only to autodidactic treatment, quarantining prevents opportunities for others to develop herd-immunity and insulates the patient from feedback loops required for generating suitable antibodies. Therefore, controlled exposure through social integration seems the optimal treatment-setting for suspected carriers. When pandemic, acute signs accepted as population baseline norms render differential diagnosis impossible prior to acute crises, at which point caregivers are equally at risk and recovery may appear aleatoric.

Woosh.