|
Post by Fingerplucked on Dec 17, 2012 10:50:34 GMT -5
News reports are coming out with portraits of the victims -- unique little kids with lives ahead of them, dedicated young teachers at the beginning of their careers and middle-aged women working hard while looking forward to retirement. Some may see this as intrusive media, I see it as a way of keeping us human, to resist desensitization. There were some real heroes that day, teachers who put the kids first, and died because of it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2012 10:55:41 GMT -5
There is an essay circulating from a mother named Liza Long entitled "I am Adam Lanza's Mother" in which she details some of the difficulties of having a child with mental problems that you know will oneday cause him to hurt himself and/or others and not seeing options on how to deal with that child. Much to think about. There is another post doing the rounds . More to think about. You Are Not Adam Lanza’s Mother Posted on 16/12/2012 405 After this blog post was republished on Huffington Post, I thought it necessary to summarise the main reasons why it’s a terrible springboard for further conversation on the subject. 1) The suggestion that this woman’s son is of the same type of person who would or will commit a “rage murder”, without any real evidence to back up this suggestion. 2) The article doesn’t divulge, or even acknowledge, that its subject might have his own perspectives, beliefs and motivations that are worth mentioning. His mother’s perspective, mainly on his ‘evil eyes’ with their ‘calculated pupils’ is the only one given. Thus the child is presented solely as a problem, or at best, as a two-dimensional contradiction of his “behavioural problems” and his “intelligence” and not as a person with any more than shallow emotions. By reducing ‘mental illness’ to ‘outward behaviour’ the article dehumanises the mentally ill and completely glosses over the inner mental life and experiences of those with mental illness. 3) The article complains about mental illness stigma while reinforcing it by explicitly tying it to violence, and in particular, mass killings. The reality is that there is no such observed link: “after analysing a number of killers, Mullen concludes, ‘they had personality problems and were, to put it mildly, deeply troubled people.’ But he goes on to add: ‘Most perpetrators of autogenic massacres do not, however, appear to have active psychotic symptoms at the time and very few even have histories of prior contact with mental health services.’” And most people with mental illness are not violent, although they are far more likely to be victims of crime (see here, for instance). 4) The article, with this link established, implies a desire to stop violent crime allegedly perpetrated by those with mental illness should motivate better care and provision for those with mental illness, and not, say, the lower life expectancy, unemployment, isolation, suicidality, homelessness, victimization or in general the suffering endured by those with it. The continual disregard for this reality perpetuates stigma on all levels of society and further exposes those with mental illness to harm. 5) Antipsychotics and antidepressants are not designed for children and most of them are not indicated for disruptive behaviour in children. Zyprexa, the prescription given to the child in the article, is not indicated for disruptive behaviour or autism in the US. This sort of willy-nilly prescribing with little real knowledge of or regard for the long-term consequences, particularly for those whose brains are not fully developed yet, is potentially extremely damaging, and it’s not unlikely that a forever-changing cocktail of unwise psychotropic prescriptions contributes to worsening psychological problems. However, there is no criticism of psychiatric or pharmaceutical practice in the article: merely a cry for more of the same. 6) You are NOT Adam Lanza’s mother. The sort of quasi-solidarity expressed in “We are [oppressed people]” or “I am [dead person]” appropriates the experiences of people who are unheard, in this case the victim of a mass homicide, and uses that to bolster a narrative that doesn’t even attempt to discover or represent the experiences of those they claim to speak for. Don’t do that. thegirlwhowasthursday.wordpress.com/2012/12/16/you-are-not-adam-lanzas-mother/
|
|
|
Post by Lonnie on Dec 17, 2012 11:00:10 GMT -5
Thanks for posting this, Rob. I read it yesterday and was very moved. I am watching this scenario play out with a very dear friend of mine, a recently separated single mom with a 12 year old son who in many ways equals the behavior of the author's son. She has visited with school counselors and I believe there has been a consultation with a child psychologist, but the behavior persists and nothing of substance is being done. Her overriding belief is that this is a phase he will grow out of. There's a chance I will destroy my relationship with her by giving her this article, but the potential danger is too real to ignore. I'm open to suggestions and advice... should I even enter this fray?
|
|
|
Post by Fingerplucked on Dec 17, 2012 11:09:32 GMT -5
You Are Not Adam Lanza’s Mother I don't know if I agree with all of that post or not, but there are parts that are good. The first woman was terrified of her son. I'd give her the benefit of the doubt and assume that she had good reason, rather than critiquing her writing style. But the second letter was right, the first woman was not Lanza's mother. Lanza's mother didn't seem afraid of her son. She encouraged his use of guns and took him to the range for target practice. Lanza's mother and the mother in the first letter are not the same at all. I also agree that mental health issues go way beyond our fear of where the next mass murderer is coming from. I think these two letter-writing mothers should get together. Combined, they make some pretty good arguments for stepping up our support for the care of the mentally ill.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Hanesworth on Dec 17, 2012 11:27:02 GMT -5
With respect for your opinion, James, I am more convinced by the mother struggling with the problem than by the person analyzing her struggle from afar.
|
|
|
Post by Fingerplucked on Dec 17, 2012 11:28:43 GMT -5
Thanks for posting this, Rob. I read it yesterday and was very moved. I am watching this scenario play out with a very dear friend of mine, a recently separated single mom with a 12 year old son who in many ways equals the behavior of the author's son. She has visited with school counselors and I believe there has been a consultation with a child psychologist, but the behavior persists and nothing of substance is being done. Her overriding belief is that this is a phase he will grow out of. There's a chance I will destroy my relationship with her by giving her this article, but the potential danger is too real to ignore. I'm open to suggestions and advice... should I even enter this fray? I don't know that there's anything you can do that will make any difference. If her son's behavior is like the author's son, you'd think she'd already know that something has to be done. The fact that she hasn't figured it out on her own probably means that she's working very hard to convince herself that it's no big deal. Yet if you do nothing then later find that he hurts her or others, it'll be too late to try to do anything about it. I don't have any good advice, but if you're already thinking about giving her a copy of Rob's letter, which is not a bad idea, I think I'd also give her a copy of James' letter. The kid may or may not prove to be dangerous, but waiting for him to grow out of it while doing nothing is foolish.
|
|
|
Post by epaul on Dec 17, 2012 11:58:02 GMT -5
That was a powerful piece . I have no idea about solutions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2012 12:24:53 GMT -5
Identifying the people who are unstable and unpredictable is the easy part. What to do next is the problem without any hope of meaningful sollution. Adam Lanza, Cho, Holmes ... these guys all were identified by professionals as having mental problems.
But what of the crucial next step? What is a parent to do when they are powerless, they do not know what their child will do next and often have no idea what their child may ultimately be capable of. What can a therapist do when they identify a patient that has potential for violence? A 72 hour mental hold is not going to solve a lifetime of problems, and often that 72 hour hold is the most that can be done for someone that is comitted involuntarily for treatment. After 72 hours parents and patients are left with the same problem and no hope for meaningful help.
What if there are funds available for treatment? Many parents and patients that can not afford therapy will resist the Big Hand that offers treatment. Do we commit these people involuntarily for as long as "we" deem necessary? Frankly the lack of funding makes every other question rhetorical regarding treatment of those in the most unstable state. The help just does not exist on anywhere near the necessary level ... nor will it.
A common theme we hear in the aftermath ... "what have we learned?" It's hard to identify anything meaningful with regard to preventing another incident. What we learn is that it will happen again and again ...
Paul
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2012 12:33:10 GMT -5
I think "I am Adam's mother" is a compelling cry for help made in an inappropriately public forum. The author has, according to her blog been going through a messy marital and also a nervous breakdown in the not too distant past and seems to be almost at the the end of her tether. I also think that what has sadly emerged is a very unfortunate betrayal of her son's privacy, (there are photographs of him there) and an unhelpful near demonisation of him and millions of others.
on edit - The woman, Lisa Long has apparently now been interviewed on national TV saying "“Every time I hear about a mass shooting, I think about my son. And I wonder if someday, I’ll be that mom”. That's awful to hear and I pity her situation but really do not think it was a good idea to be so very publically identifiable when talking about a troubled/mentally ill thirteen year old who will now be regarded by many people as a would-be mass murderer. That's not useful for the boy.
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Dec 17, 2012 12:34:00 GMT -5
I note in the Girlwhowasthursday response some lefty language and rhetoric that is often employed to critique those who are seen as clueless or insincere or focused on the wrong set of problems. While there are some points worth considering--for example, the use of various drugs on children and adolescents or the actual connection between various psychological conditions and spree killing--there are also the rather dismissive points #2 and 6, which have more than a whiff of neo-Marxist intellectualizing about narratives and presentational modes. As fussily pedantic as I am myself, I find Ms. Thursday's response just a bit heartless and more than a bit self-righteous.
|
|
|
Post by AlanC on Dec 17, 2012 12:56:04 GMT -5
If the mother knew her son had problems, why in the hell would she let him have access to semi-auto weapons and high capacity magazines? I love guns and shoot regularly but when my kids were small, I didn't have a handgun in my house because I remember how many times I was stupid with my father's pistol when he wasn't around. She is the only one who could have prevented this tragedy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2012 13:01:56 GMT -5
If the mother knew her son had problems, why in the hell would she let him have access to semi-auto weapons and high capacity magazines? Reports that may have some relevance. Mother of Sandy Hook school gunman Adam Lanza was a 'prepper' survivalist preparing for economic and social collapse, say reports"The mother of Adam Lanza, the gunman who killed 20 children and six adults in one of America’s worst ever school massacres, was a “survivalist” preparing for economic and social collapse, it has emerged.
According to reports, Nancy Lanza was a so-called 'prepper', a part of the survivalist movement which urges individuals to prepare for the breakdown of society by training with weapons and hoarding food and other supplies.
“She prepared for the worst,” her sister-in-law Marsha Lanza told the Chicago Sun-Times."www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/mother-of-sandy-hook-school-gunman-adam-lanza-was-a-prepper-survivalist-preparing-for-economic-and-social-collapse-say-reports-8422298.html
|
|
|
Post by Lonnie on Dec 17, 2012 13:04:40 GMT -5
I agree in part, Russell. I thought girlwhowasthursday grabbed points she (perhaps validly) argue, but completely missed the original article's overall content and intent. I didn't get the "lefty" aspect, however. I wasn't tuning to any political side when I read it... nor do I see it upon a second reading. Heartless and self-righteous, yes...
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Dec 17, 2012 13:22:56 GMT -5
Lonnie--The lefty language is mostly in point #6: "appropriates the experiences of people who are unheard [. . .] and uses that to bolster a narrative that doesn’t even attempt to discover or represent the experiences of those they claim to speak for."
In #2, the lead sentence--"The article doesn’t divulge, or even acknowledge, that its subject might have his own perspectives, beliefs and motivations that are worth mentioning"--is less obviously left/post-modernist, but it exhibits one of the social-issues-left's ways of framing these matters. This language and these kinds of arguments have been common currency in left-leaning neighborhoods of the academy for decades.
I actually sympathize with some of this approach--it grows out of a desire to avoid demonizing or Othering people who have problems that might otherwise be seen as moral failings (the homeless, the disturbed, the structurally unemployed). But it has its own problems and can lead to the kind of lefty sentimentalizing in which nobody is at fault except Society or Capitalism or the Power Elite or The Patriarchy. Every time I encounter it, I get flashbacks to the vast and rather smug moral certainties of my Catholic upbringing--a nice irony.
|
|
|
Post by Lonnie on Dec 17, 2012 13:39:44 GMT -5
Ah, thanks for the clarification. Having not spent time in the "academy," I was unaware of this.
|
|
|
Post by dickt on Dec 17, 2012 14:25:56 GMT -5
Other than the fact that she had a gun collection I haven't seen anything credible that would lead me to believe she's a prepper. That sounds like a journalist jumping to conclusions over the one remark from her sister. It is also in dispute whether she really did take her sons shooting. Police say they have uncovered no evidence (from talking to local shooting ranges) to suggest they were regulars.
What is clear is that she's a regular at the local watering hole. While her neighbors seem to have very little knowledge of her the local bar owner and a group of regulars seem to know her pretty well.
Details of her divorce settlement are being reported on today--she got $289K in alimony in 2012.
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Dec 17, 2012 15:01:47 GMT -5
While the prepper conclusion might be a jumped-to one, there is certainly something eyebrow-raising about the size and nature of the arms collection that the son was able to draw on. Unless he had some other source of high-capacity magazines. And assuming that that particular characterization is accurate--in an environment in which there is not always perfect understanding of what "assault weapon" or even "semi-automatic" might mean, I'd want technical descriptions or even model designations before I felt confident about the basic facts.
And while I'm not fully conversant with gun-enthusiast culture, I find the Bushmaster .223 (a civilian version of a military rifle) an interesting choice for a target-shooting woman. Nor is it apparently an appropriate rifle for deer hunting (though I guess it's OK for small varmints). It's pretty clear to me that the kind of firearm(s) one owns says something about one's personality, and the selection from which that boy got to choose had some weapons that don't say "plinker" or "deer hunter" or "history buff." Technology enthusiast, maybe. But if I were trying to reconstruct the environment out of which this event grew, my attention would be caught by those weapons in that household.
|
|
|
Post by dickt on Dec 17, 2012 15:48:26 GMT -5
I make a distinction between gun enthusiasts and preppers. A prepper would also have a fortified house, stockpiles of food and water, shared plans for various doomsday scenarios with her family, etc.
There's been so much misinformation in this event--some of which died within one news cycle but other things persisted for several days. She apparently had no connection to the school when major news organizations for days insisted she was a teacher there or worked there. There were endless reports about the shooter having had a confrontation with school officials prior to Friday. That also isn't panning out the last I've heard. They misidentified Adam as Ryan, gave his age as both 20 and 24, gave his address as both Hoboken and Newtown. They reported the father lived in Hoboken, not Stamford. They variously said the rifle was in the car and that the shooting was done with the handguns--now corrected after the medical examiner pointed to the rifle as the killing weapon.
It's frustrating reading and listening to reports given as gospel when contradictory statements have already been reported.
|
|
|
Post by Fingerplucked on Dec 17, 2012 15:51:58 GMT -5
And I can predict that more revelations are not going to be released until after President Obama visits town tomorrow and lends comfort to the grieving. Sunday. Starting around Monday, I think some very unpleasant facts will begin to be released. I think the State Police would rather keep the cat in the bag until then. There is more to this story than meets the eye just yet. I realize Monday's not over yet, but are they really going to wait until 11:59 PM?
|
|
|
Post by Rob Hanesworth on Dec 17, 2012 16:52:01 GMT -5
I heard on NPR earlier that the school would be closed for months as a crime scene while authorities studied every recovered bulllet to see what they could learn.
What will they learn? Will they learn something from bullet 67 that they had not learned from bullet 43? Honest question. I am a ballistics idiot.
|
|