Now we're being told not to judge the mom "too quickly".

[conuly]

Oh, lordy....

My heart goes out to Katherine McCarron and her family. We may never know what drove this mother to allegedly perform this heinous act.

From all accounts, other than dealing with the autism, they were a regular family. I think the key words here are "dealing with autism." Please do not misunderstand and think I am defending McCarron's alleged actions. No one has walked in her shoes. Unless you have a child with special needs you cannot possibly understand the physical, emotional and spiritual strength each day requires.

Speaking as a mother with a child who has special needs, I can tell you many times I have prayed not just to make it through the day, but to get through a moment. Again, this is tragic. But let's not be too quick to judge.

Debbie Bloom

East Peoria

I've never raised a kid, NT or not. Watching the niecelings doesn't count. I can tell you that some days, Ana's behaviour leaves so much to be desired that I can't wait for the day to end, though. I'd never *kill* her over that - even if the day would never effectively end for me. And if I did, as she's never been diagnosed with anything, I'm sure nobody would write touching letters to the newspaper telling people not to judge me too quickly. Probably, they'd write touching letters telling people that I deserved to be sent to all kinds of hell for hurting a child.

Of course, should I write to the newspaper and tell them that, I'm sure the reply would be "It's not the same! You don't understand!"

So... anybody raising a "child with special needs" (autism favored) care to step up to the plate and reply to this letter for me?

It's not about this mom, her fate is pretty much sealed. I doubt there'll be any surprises there. It's about the rest of the world's attitudes.

http://www.pjstar.com/opinion/writeus.shtml

Comments

[malantha.livejournal.com]

I haven't been reading anything about this other than what's in your posts.. but has anyone denied that she killed the child? Why is this person saying "allegedly perform" and "alleged actions"?

[conuly]

Because we're supposed to always say alleged until it's proven in court. Even if there's a film of the person doing it, and 29 witnesses, and they confess - they're "alleged" to have done it.

[l33tminion]

While the media usually follows that courtroom standard, it seems rather out of place in a letter to the editor.

[conuly]

Not if you're trying to make yourself sound unbiased or professional or any of a number of things.

[l33tminion]

Not if you're trying to make yourself sound unbiased or professional...

... or like an idiot who doesn't understand the word "allegedly" enough to realize that "what drove this mother to allegedly perform" makes no sense.

[conuly]

That's not what she's trying to sound like - but agreed :)

[l33tminion]

I don't think I've ever seen the media show so little sympathy for a murder victim. Not a positive word about her, not a single person saying that they'll miss her, all the mention of a "tragedy" seems to include her only as an object (if at all).

It's infuriating.

[conuly]

This isn't the first time, and it won't be the last. That's the really sad part.

http://www.geocities.com/growingjoel/murder.html

His site focuses a lot on the eventual lack of consequences for murdering autistics, but it starts out not in the courts, but in the community.

[wakasplat.livejournal.com]

I've seen so little sympathy over and over again.

It is nearly always in the murder of disabled people. Also 'gang-related' killings seem to generate little sympathy either unless the victim was of a particularly valued category.

[conuly]

Well, you have to see the twisted logic there. Why care if one crook kills another, it's one way of getting them off the streets, har har har!

My reply to that letter

[brownkitty.livejournal.com]

I'd like to know when eugenics became an approved method of dealing with special needs children. The death penalty is hotly debated over for people who have proven through their actions that they are outright evil. When did being handicapped become evil? When did being born with genes that didn't create a person who conforms to "normal standards" become a deliberate act on the part of the handicapped person?

People will say "Oh, but it's so hard on the parents, you have to feel for them!" I don't have to feel sympathy for anyone who decides that to kill an innocent is the right thing to do. I may feel sympathy for the mentally ill, or mentally handicapped: I do not feel sympathy for murderers.

The key word in the phrase "handicapped person" is PERSON. The laws against murder are not suspended because someone regards someone else as not-a-person due to handicap.

Re: My reply to that letter

[leora.livejournal.com]

Uh, ages ago. I'm fairly sure that killing or abandoning the disabled has been a part of human culture for far more time and far more culture than it hasn't been a part of it. Not killing inconvenient children after they are born strikes me as a very modern thing. And continuing to not kill them if they have disabilities is really not the norm. There are countless examples of the killing of people with issues. From the obvious extremes of Nazi Germany, to the day to day smothering of extra infants in Europe in the Middle Ages, to the abandonment of the deformed by the Greek who saw it as a moral imperative and that to raise a child with a deformity was to give in to weakness and evil. Abadonment and killing of the elderly who are now too weak to be productive was so common that the theme is considered a major category for fairy tales, and you can find a dozen different stories with it as a key element.

Not that I agree with it. I'd have been killed multi[ple times over by Nazi Germany standards and am missing large pieces of my family tree because of them, so it hits a bit close to home. But mankind is not so close to civilized as you seem to think, and our recent attempts to become so are recent and just small steps in the right direction. It's not surprising that we're not doing that well yet.

Re: My reply to that letter

[brownkitty.livejournal.com]

I know you're correct. I wish we as a race had grown beyond it.

I had hoped to shame anyone who doesn't act consistently with their veneer of "civilization".

Re: My reply to that letter

[(Anonymous)]

Okay then. I have an autistic son. He is a challenge. Granted, he has not been diagnosed severely autistic, more moderately so. He did not speak until close to four years of age, would bang his head until he had large knots on his forehead, and slept very little. He has some pretty major issues behavior wise, but we deal with them the best we can.
My family loves my son with all our hearts. He is happy a lot of the time, loves to draw and color and paint, adores being outside in all kinds of weather. His headbanging and sleep issues have been resolved for the time being.
This murder is not about pity for the mother. She did not have a lack of supports, either governmental, or familial. It appeared as though they were all pulling together to help little Katie achieve what she could.
This is about murder. Plain and simple. I don't care what the mother was thinking at the time. She planned it. She removed the child from her own home, drove to the grandmother's house, placed the garbage bag over her sweet child's head and suffocated her. There is no excuse for this heinous crime. Illinois has the death penalty, but I seriously doubt that Dr. Mccaron will suffer death for her actions that fateful day. A few years ago, a mother in my small town stabbed her two sons in her home. One of the young boys died there, the other suffered horrendous injuries but survived. The mother NEVER EVEN STOOD TRIAL. She was, like Karen Mccaron, a doctor. She was pronounced "unfit to stand trial" and instead is currently wasting away in a mental facility. She actually tried to sue for visitation rights to her surviving child!
No, Katie Mccaron's untimely and tragic death will not be punished. Sadly, there is far more pity for this "mother" than for the innocent life she snuffed that Saturday--the day before Mother's day.

Autism is NOT the end of the road. It is a chanllenge, to be sure, but not unsurmountable for most. We have felt our lives enriched by a delightful, beautiful boy who has autism. We are kinder, more patient, more forgiving, more tolerant, all because of him. He has taught us more about life in his four (almost five!) short years on this planet than any other person or event.

Poor little Katie never had a chance. Her mother seems to one of those parents/individuals who strive for the absolute perfection that so often eludes us. Katie was not perfect in her mother's eyes, so she had to eliminated.
Poor Karen? Oh no. Poor, poor Katie.

Re: My reply to that letter

[conuly]

I completely agree.

I've posted a number of articles related to Katie's death, including an interview with her grandfather where he says just about what you just said.

[malantha.livejournal.com]

I haven't been reading anything about this other than what's in your posts.. but has anyone denied that she killed the child? Why is this person saying "allegedly perform" and "alleged actions"?

[conuly]

Because we're supposed to always say alleged until it's proven in court. Even if there's a film of the person doing it, and 29 witnesses, and they confess - they're "alleged" to have done it.

[l33tminion]

While the media usually follows that courtroom standard, it seems rather out of place in a letter to the editor.

[conuly]

Not if you're trying to make yourself sound unbiased or professional or any of a number of things.

[l33tminion]

Not if you're trying to make yourself sound unbiased or professional...

... or like an idiot who doesn't understand the word "allegedly" enough to realize that "what drove this mother to allegedly perform" makes no sense.

[conuly]

That's not what she's trying to sound like - but agreed :)

[l33tminion]

I don't think I've ever seen the media show so little sympathy for a murder victim. Not a positive word about her, not a single person saying that they'll miss her, all the mention of a "tragedy" seems to include her only as an object (if at all).

It's infuriating.

[conuly]

This isn't the first time, and it won't be the last. That's the really sad part.

http://www.geocities.com/growingjoel/murder.html

His site focuses a lot on the eventual lack of consequences for murdering autistics, but it starts out not in the courts, but in the community.

[wakasplat.livejournal.com]

I've seen so little sympathy over and over again.

It is nearly always in the murder of disabled people. Also 'gang-related' killings seem to generate little sympathy either unless the victim was of a particularly valued category.

[conuly]

Well, you have to see the twisted logic there. Why care if one crook kills another, it's one way of getting them off the streets, har har har!

My reply to that letter

[brownkitty.livejournal.com]

I'd like to know when eugenics became an approved method of dealing with special needs children. The death penalty is hotly debated over for people who have proven through their actions that they are outright evil. When did being handicapped become evil? When did being born with genes that didn't create a person who conforms to "normal standards" become a deliberate act on the part of the handicapped person?

People will say "Oh, but it's so hard on the parents, you have to feel for them!" I don't have to feel sympathy for anyone who decides that to kill an innocent is the right thing to do. I may feel sympathy for the mentally ill, or mentally handicapped: I do not feel sympathy for murderers.

The key word in the phrase "handicapped person" is PERSON. The laws against murder are not suspended because someone regards someone else as not-a-person due to handicap.

Re: My reply to that letter

[leora.livejournal.com]

Uh, ages ago. I'm fairly sure that killing or abandoning the disabled has been a part of human culture for far more time and far more culture than it hasn't been a part of it. Not killing inconvenient children after they are born strikes me as a very modern thing. And continuing to not kill them if they have disabilities is really not the norm. There are countless examples of the killing of people with issues. From the obvious extremes of Nazi Germany, to the day to day smothering of extra infants in Europe in the Middle Ages, to the abandonment of the deformed by the Greek who saw it as a moral imperative and that to raise a child with a deformity was to give in to weakness and evil. Abadonment and killing of the elderly who are now too weak to be productive was so common that the theme is considered a major category for fairy tales, and you can find a dozen different stories with it as a key element.

Not that I agree with it. I'd have been killed multi[ple times over by Nazi Germany standards and am missing large pieces of my family tree because of them, so it hits a bit close to home. But mankind is not so close to civilized as you seem to think, and our recent attempts to become so are recent and just small steps in the right direction. It's not surprising that we're not doing that well yet.

Re: My reply to that letter

[brownkitty.livejournal.com]

I know you're correct. I wish we as a race had grown beyond it.

I had hoped to shame anyone who doesn't act consistently with their veneer of "civilization".

Re: My reply to that letter

[(Anonymous)]

Okay then. I have an autistic son. He is a challenge. Granted, he has not been diagnosed severely autistic, more moderately so. He did not speak until close to four years of age, would bang his head until he had large knots on his forehead, and slept very little. He has some pretty major issues behavior wise, but we deal with them the best we can.
My family loves my son with all our hearts. He is happy a lot of the time, loves to draw and color and paint, adores being outside in all kinds of weather. His headbanging and sleep issues have been resolved for the time being.
This murder is not about pity for the mother. She did not have a lack of supports, either governmental, or familial. It appeared as though they were all pulling together to help little Katie achieve what she could.
This is about murder. Plain and simple. I don't care what the mother was thinking at the time. She planned it. She removed the child from her own home, drove to the grandmother's house, placed the garbage bag over her sweet child's head and suffocated her. There is no excuse for this heinous crime. Illinois has the death penalty, but I seriously doubt that Dr. Mccaron will suffer death for her actions that fateful day. A few years ago, a mother in my small town stabbed her two sons in her home. One of the young boys died there, the other suffered horrendous injuries but survived. The mother NEVER EVEN STOOD TRIAL. She was, like Karen Mccaron, a doctor. She was pronounced "unfit to stand trial" and instead is currently wasting away in a mental facility. She actually tried to sue for visitation rights to her surviving child!
No, Katie Mccaron's untimely and tragic death will not be punished. Sadly, there is far more pity for this "mother" than for the innocent life she snuffed that Saturday--the day before Mother's day.

Autism is NOT the end of the road. It is a chanllenge, to be sure, but not unsurmountable for most. We have felt our lives enriched by a delightful, beautiful boy who has autism. We are kinder, more patient, more forgiving, more tolerant, all because of him. He has taught us more about life in his four (almost five!) short years on this planet than any other person or event.

Poor little Katie never had a chance. Her mother seems to one of those parents/individuals who strive for the absolute perfection that so often eludes us. Katie was not perfect in her mother's eyes, so she had to eliminated.
Poor Karen? Oh no. Poor, poor Katie.

Re: My reply to that letter

[conuly]

I completely agree.

I've posted a number of articles related to Katie's death, including an interview with her grandfather where he says just about what you just said.