09-29-2006, 09:29 PM
09-29-2006, 09:37 PM
If you watch the latest episode of AutTv (number 10, I think it is?), there's a television interview with the boy's mother and his sister.
09-30-2006, 02:53 AM
and im sure that is was the mom suffering, not the kid. People are so selfish, well, she'll get her punishment when she goes to hell (if you believe in that sort of thing).
10-01-2006, 03:39 PM
I don't know what to say about this, if, and only if the mother really did have the intention of mercy killing and NOT for herself, then I understand her, if my mom would have done that to me I would have thanked her. BUT, if she did that for the purpose of satisfying herself then I hope she burns in hell. it's pretty much the same situation as to when people take an abortion.
I totally agree that everyone has the right to live, but everyone should also have the right to stop living if they choose.
I dont agree with what she did because of the his age, she should have let the child live longer so he can understand what he has to live with and let him decide for himself as to weather he wanted to live or die.
In my opinion, if you decide you dont want to live anymore you should have the right to receive a lethal injection.
But from what it sounds, she did that because she was too lazy to raise that child so she deserves to be punished.
I totally agree that everyone has the right to live, but everyone should also have the right to stop living if they choose.
I dont agree with what she did because of the his age, she should have let the child live longer so he can understand what he has to live with and let him decide for himself as to weather he wanted to live or die.
In my opinion, if you decide you dont want to live anymore you should have the right to receive a lethal injection.
But from what it sounds, she did that because she was too lazy to raise that child so she deserves to be punished.
10-12-2006, 04:49 PM
Gareth Wrote:
Perhaps we should track down the names of all these judges who have given such easy sentences to child murderers.
Get me to the UK and I will happily make examples of them. If they think even a death penalty can frighten me, they have another think coming.
10-13-2006, 09:50 PM
God, that's horrible. The Aspergian boy was fine, but this girl had to treat the murder as if it were euthanasia. The boy didn't ask to be killed. The boy didn't want to be killed by his mother.
The goverment can be so stupid. Murder is murder and murder must be treated like murder or my mind gets murdered by stupidity letting a woman get away with murder. I certainly wouldn't let the woman off, no matter what the boy was. I would lock her in jail where she belongs. Nothing gives her the right to spontaneously murder her child like that.
The goverment can be so stupid. Murder is murder and murder must be treated like murder or my mind gets murdered by stupidity letting a woman get away with murder. I certainly wouldn't let the woman off, no matter what the boy was. I would lock her in jail where she belongs. Nothing gives her the right to spontaneously murder her child like that.
10-14-2006, 11:17 AM
True. But instead, she kills an innocent, and is as free as a bird. AND being shown in a positive light. This is an outrage to human dignity, and to Autistic rights! She goes unpunished for murder by taking a moral high ground, so let's blast the foundation out from under her!
We just need to prove it doesn't fit with her religion, what she did. Emphasize that he struggled, as in fought for life. He had his life stolen, and to have the media portray it positively... This denies the most basic of human rights of humans, the right to life.
I think we should organize an Email writing campaign. We'll knock the magazine for a loop with the number of letters, and stop that nonsense, have it stricken from the archives.
We just need to prove it doesn't fit with her religion, what she did. Emphasize that he struggled, as in fought for life. He had his life stolen, and to have the media portray it positively... This denies the most basic of human rights of humans, the right to life.
I think we should organize an Email writing campaign. We'll knock the magazine for a loop with the number of letters, and stop that nonsense, have it stricken from the archives.
10-25-2006, 04:38 PM
That's sick.
10-27-2006, 10:34 AM
Introducing the ideal equation
m1=m2=(ls)
where m1="mercy killing," m2=murder and (ls)=life sentence in prison.
The mother should have been commited to prison for the rest of her life.
When it comes to justice for autistic citizens, the world is far from the ideal equation.
m1=m2=(ls)
where m1="mercy killing," m2=murder and (ls)=life sentence in prison.
The mother should have been commited to prison for the rest of her life.
When it comes to justice for autistic citizens, the world is far from the ideal equation.
01-01-2007, 07:28 PM
01-01-2007, 10:36 PM
I think maybe she could've gotten off on an insanity plea... How could anyone murder a ten year old child, think they were right to do so, and still be in their right mind?
I think she would have gotten what she deserved, if she had been given "not guilty by reason of insanity", and confined to a mental institution for the rest of her life.
Then she would have known what it is like to be "disabled" and "subhuman". And there wouldn't have been any "mercy-killing" mother to get her out of it.
Disclaimer: I don't think she was insane, actually. I just can't imagine ever wanting to kill a child, no matter how disabled; and I'd like the justice of her having to experience having her own life devalued because of her "insanity".
You'd think she could have put him up for adoption... even dumped him at a hospital or a police station or something. But apparently, to this woman, her son's life wasn't worth living. That is the sort of message those "Autism-is-the-end-of-the-world-and-we-want-your-money" charities put out... and she believed them.
I think she would have gotten what she deserved, if she had been given "not guilty by reason of insanity", and confined to a mental institution for the rest of her life.
Then she would have known what it is like to be "disabled" and "subhuman". And there wouldn't have been any "mercy-killing" mother to get her out of it.
Disclaimer: I don't think she was insane, actually. I just can't imagine ever wanting to kill a child, no matter how disabled; and I'd like the justice of her having to experience having her own life devalued because of her "insanity".
You'd think she could have put him up for adoption... even dumped him at a hospital or a police station or something. But apparently, to this woman, her son's life wasn't worth living. That is the sort of message those "Autism-is-the-end-of-the-world-and-we-want-your-money" charities put out... and she believed them.
01-02-2007, 02:13 PM
Surely no one who takes another human being's life without justification is sane?
Murder is murder. It's sick how it's being dressed up as something else. I can't believe her daughter supports her. I just hope the girl doesn't get in an accident and paralysed, or else...
It's like, "my child isn't good enough so I'll kill them, for their 'own good'!" -- What the hell?
This makes me so angry.
Murder is murder. It's sick how it's being dressed up as something else. I can't believe her daughter supports her. I just hope the girl doesn't get in an accident and paralysed, or else...
It's like, "my child isn't good enough so I'll kill them, for their 'own good'!" -- What the hell?
This makes me so angry.
01-10-2007, 07:02 AM
Did she kill her son on purpose?
12-09-2007, 09:18 PM
From the first page:
Quote:
Mercy killing is murder no matter how you look at it.
One exception: if the person wishes to be killed.
04-11-2008, 12:28 PM
I think it's possible to be sympathetic to the plight of the family and to understand that the mother was stretched to breaking point by the failures of the services she should have received support from. I also think it's possible to, while understanding the context, condemn the killing.
Should the authorities be condemned for allowing that poor woman to reach breaking point? Yes. Certainly.
Should the killing of a child be condemned? Yes. Absolutely. Condemning her killing of her child doesn't mean that people don't appreciate the very difficult circumstances the mother was trying and failing to cope with.
I appreciate that friends, and friends-of-friends, are arguing about the extraordinary circumstances and failures of the system, and I agree with them on that point, but disagree on this point: the killing *has* to be condemned.
I believe the killing has to be condemned, because the absence of condemnation implies some kind of acceptance and even approval. That cannot be right. To refuse to condemn the killing implies a subconscious belief that the life of an autistic is somehow of less worth, that killing an autistic person isn't as bad as killing an NT person.
What would happen if, say, a nanny, other carer or teacher was stretched to breaking point by behavioural problems, snapped and killed the child in their care? They would rightly be condemned and justice would be sought. So why should the situation be different for the mother?
Should the authorities be condemned for allowing that poor woman to reach breaking point? Yes. Certainly.
Should the killing of a child be condemned? Yes. Absolutely. Condemning her killing of her child doesn't mean that people don't appreciate the very difficult circumstances the mother was trying and failing to cope with.
I appreciate that friends, and friends-of-friends, are arguing about the extraordinary circumstances and failures of the system, and I agree with them on that point, but disagree on this point: the killing *has* to be condemned.
I believe the killing has to be condemned, because the absence of condemnation implies some kind of acceptance and even approval. That cannot be right. To refuse to condemn the killing implies a subconscious belief that the life of an autistic is somehow of less worth, that killing an autistic person isn't as bad as killing an NT person.
What would happen if, say, a nanny, other carer or teacher was stretched to breaking point by behavioural problems, snapped and killed the child in their care? They would rightly be condemned and justice would be sought. So why should the situation be different for the mother?