Author Topic: Andrea Yates  (Read 38426 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Andrea Yates
« Reply #45 on: December 25, 2005, 10:54:00 PM »
If she had psychosis then I doubt they
gave her an SSRI, anti-depressant.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Andrea Yates
« Reply #46 on: December 25, 2005, 11:02:00 PM »
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Andrea Yates
« Reply #47 on: December 25, 2005, 11:54:00 PM »
Sick, sick, sick! Celebrity marriages? WTF?! Ol, OJ was celebrity gossip. But this? WTF!!!!!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Andrea Yates
« Reply #48 on: December 26, 2005, 07:09:00 AM »
Quote
But this? WTF!!!!!


It is called information ...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Andrea Yates
« Reply #49 on: January 06, 2006, 10:01:00 PM »
Jan. 6, 2006, 11:10AM
Andrea Yates headed to Houston for hearing

By PAM EASTON
Associated Press

Andrea Yates was released today from the East Texas prison where she's been jailed since 2002 for drowning her children and was headed to Houston for her first court hearing since her capital murder convictions were overturned last year.

Yates, 41, will remain in the custody of the Harris County Sheriff's Department until she is retried in the deaths of three of her five children. A trial date has not yet been set, but her pretrial hearing is scheduled for Monday.

Her attorney, George Parnham, has asked that Yates be sent to Rusk State Hospital until the trial, but no decision has been made.

Parnham and prosecutor Joe Owmby could not immediately be reached for comment Friday.

During her time at Skyview Prison Unit, Yates worked in a therapeutic garden and in the commissary.

"She was in good spirits and she thanked me for the treatment she received at Skyview," Warden Todd Foxworth told The Associated Press, describing her behavior there as "excellent."

Yates wore a blue-and-white striped shirt and walked with her head down as she got into a Harris County Sheriff's Department van.

Foxworth said Yates has "some anxieties" about her new surroundings and having to form new relationships.

"She is ready to continue that and do what she can to try and become a productive person," Foxworth said.

Jurors rejected Yates' insanity defense, finding her guilty for the 2001 deaths of three of the children drowned in the family bathtub: 7-year-old Noah, 5-year-old John and the youngest, 6-month-old Mary. Evidence was presented about the drowning of the other two children ? Paul, 3, and Luke, 2 ? but Yates was not charged in their deaths.

Yates was sentenced to life in prison.

The First Court of Appeals in Houston overturned Yates convictions last January because the state's expert witness, forensic psychiatrist Park Dietz, testified that television's "Law and Order" series aired an episode about a woman with postpartum depression who drowned her children shortly before Yates killed her five children. Such an episode never existed.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Andrea Yates
« Reply #50 on: January 08, 2006, 10:29:00 PM »
They better give her the CHAIR. Better yet Drown her. :flame:  :flame:  :flame:  :flame:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Andrea Yates
« Reply #51 on: January 08, 2006, 11:01:00 PM »
Andrea Yates' attorney doesn't want her to go free
Yates due back in Houston courtroom


(1/08/06 - KTRK/HOUSTON) - Monday morning, Andrea Yates will walk back into a court room for the first time since an appeals court overturned her capital murder convictions.

Yates will go back on trial for the murders of three of her five children. Yates claimed she drowned them to keep them from going to hell. She has been serving a life sentence at an east Texas prison.

During Monday's hearing a judge may ask Yates to enter a plea. Her attorney would like to see Yates committed and kept off the street.

Attorny George Parnham said, "I don't think that's the & place for her. I think that she would be subjected to threats of physical harm. I know that to be a fact."

A trial date has not yet been set.
(Copyright © 2006, KTRK-TV)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline screann

  • Posts: 189
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Andrea Yates
« Reply #52 on: January 11, 2006, 10:54:00 AM »
I dont blame him. Who in there right mind would want to see this Baby Killer go free? She needs to go to jail so what if shes subjected to physical harm she needs a jail house ass beat down. Tell me what is the price to pay for killing Babies? This BITCH makes me sick and all that feel sorry for her. Feel sorry for those poor kids that didnt have a chance in hell of getting away from her that sad,sad day. :skull:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Antigen

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12992
  • Karma: +3/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://wwf.Fornits.com/
Andrea Yates
« Reply #53 on: January 11, 2006, 11:33:00 AM »
Look, she obviously is or was out of her cotton pickin mind when she did it. And she'll have to live with that for as long as she lives. Nobody, probably not even she, wants her on the loose. But what would be the point in tormenting her? Prison is for people we're afraid of, not people we're mad at. Long as she's locked down so that she can't harm anyone, I have no desire at all to see her suffer any more than all that.

Resentment is like taking poison and waiting for the other person to die
-- Malachy McCourt

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
"Don\'t let the past remind us of what we are not now."
~ Crosby Stills Nash & Young, Sweet Judy Blue Eyes

Offline WWFSMD

  • Posts: 124
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • http://www.venganza.org/
Andrea Yates
« Reply #54 on: January 11, 2006, 11:49:00 AM »
This woman was batshit crazy no matter what the root cause, environmental or organic.  To tell ya the truth, I'm just as concerned if not more about her husband and that religious nutcase whose teachings they were following, Michael Peter Woroniecki.
  http://hometown.aol.com/pranalite/main.html



 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_Yates

Some believe or believed that her husband, Russell "Rusty" Yates, an employee of the Johnson Space Center, was responsible for creating the conditions that culminated in the tragedy. Andrea's psychiatrist, Dr. Eileen Starbranch, testified that she urged the couple not to get pregnant again to avert certain future psychotic depression, but the procreative plan taught by the Yates' preacher, Michael Peter Woroniecki, a doctrine to which Rusty Yates subscribed, insisted she should continue to have "as many children as nature allows".

Andrea Yates told her jail psychiatrist, "It was the seventh deadly sin. My children weren't righteous. They stumbled because I was evil. The way I was raising them they could never be saved. They were doomed to perish in the fires of hell."


Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
-- John F. Kennedy (1917-63), U.S. Democratic politician, president. Speech, 13 March 1962, the White House.

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
bey your Noodly Master

Emancipate from mental slavery

Offline Deborah

  • Posts: 5383
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Andrea Yates
« Reply #55 on: January 11, 2006, 12:41:00 PM »
The religious crazy-making could have been exaggerated by an adverse reaction to the psych drugs she was taking, aka drug induced mania.
The public will never know if that was the case. It won't even be explored because her new trial is funded by the psych industry. She will be used as a pawn, to ensure that all people get access to MH services.
The witness that gave false testimony is from the media, worked for NBC.
Prime opportunity to use her to further the political their agenda with high media attention.
At this point, it's not about the truth or justice.
She'll remain in prison and the psych industry will prosper... and the chirade will continue....
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
gt;>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hidden Lake Academy, after operating 12 years unlicensed will now be monitored by the state. Access information on the Federal Class Action lawsuit against HLA here: http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=17700

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Andrea Yates
« Reply #56 on: January 11, 2006, 12:55:00 PM »
Quote
On 2006-01-11 09:41:00, Deborah wrote:

"

The religious crazy-making could have been exaggerated by an adverse reaction to the psych drugs she was taking, aka drug induced mania.


The public will never know if that was the case. It won't even be explored because her new trial is funded by the psych industry. She will be used as a pawn, to ensure that all people get access to MH services.


The witness that gave false testimony is from the media, worked for NBC.

Prime opportunity to use her to further the political their agenda with high media attention.

At this point, it's not about the truth or justice.

She'll remain in prison and the psych industry will prosper... and the chirade will continue...."


What kind of statements are these?
Rusty kept her off her meds, I thought.

I don't recall anyone blaming psych meds
during the trial, did they?

Why and how would the Pharmaceutical Industry
fund this trial, it is not about meds?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Andrea Yates
« Reply #57 on: January 11, 2006, 01:01:00 PM »
I am surprised at the hatred directed
toward this lady.

Look at her history.

RN to Home School Mom, Husband and Religion
dictacting that she pop out kids like a
photo copy machine, and then take care of
them by herself!

No help, no social life, no sanctuary.

Nope, Rusty is not to blame, no percentage
at all.

I would like to see how each one of us
would handle the very same conditions.

Our outcomes might be the same!

---

Furthermore, when she exhibited Schizophrenia
it is hard to believe Rusty and her church
did not take it seriously and help her,
instead they demanded more kids and more
stress.

What would you expect you would do in the
same situation.

---

You might want leniancy and freedome after
this debacle.

All she is asking for is to be in a psychiatic
hospital setting that is a type of prison.

Not a prison with little or no mental health
services.

Her husband already denied her treatment,
should the courts continue the essentially
torture treatment she received since she
got married.

---

Remember, RN, Home School Mom, stress,
mental illness, torture ... psychosis.

Doesn't sound like a monster to me, does it
to you?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Deborah

  • Posts: 5383
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Andrea Yates
« Reply #58 on: January 11, 2006, 01:53:00 PM »
Did Drugs Cause Mom to Drown Her Five Children?
 
By Kelly Patricia O'Meara

Andrea Yates' crime shocked the nation. Did mind-altering drugs prescribed to treat her depression actually drive this young mother of five to drown the children she loved?

Only weeks ago, Houston wife and mother Andrea Pia Yates methodically drowned each of her five children. One by one Yates forced her children, ages 6 months to 7 years, into the family's bathtub and held their struggling bodies under the water until each fell limp.

Whatever possessed the 36-year-old mother to commit these unconscionable acts remains murky. Depression and postpartum syndrome topped early speculation, but there has been little discussion about the possible effects of the powerful mind-altering drugs she was taking.

Although Texas District Judge Belinda Hill issued a gag order concerning the case, family members have released disturbing facts about Yates' psychiatric treatment that specialists say may account for her state of mind at the time of the murders.

During a two-year period, Yates was prescribed four extremely potent mind-altering drugs intended to help her through two episodes of severe depression that began after the birth of her fourth child.

The first of these psychopharmacological cocktails included Haldol, an antipsychotic most often used to treat schizophrenia; Effexor, an antidepressant very similar to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs); and Wellbutrin, a unique antidepressant that has amphetaminelike effects.

ccording to Yates' husband, Russell, his wife appeared to respond well to this treatment regimen and, after a short time, became her "old self."

At the onset of the second episode of depression following the birth of her fifth child, and the subsequent death of her father, Yates again was prescribed a psychopharmacological cocktail. This one contained Effexor and, at the end, Remeron.

While information about the Remeron dosage was not made public, Yates' husband has said that his wife was given Effexor at a dosage nearly twice the recommended maximum limit. Just days before the murders, the Effexor was for some reason reduced to just slightly more than the recommended maximum dosage of 225 mg per day and the Remeron was added.

Psychiatrist Peter Breggin, court-qualified medical expert and author of numerous books, including Talking Back to Prozac and the recently released The Anti-Depressant Fact Book, tells Insight:

"The mixture of Remeron and Effexor would tend to be extremely agitating and certainly could lead to behavioral disturbances. The mixture of Haldol, Wellbutrin and Effexor is unpredictable in its effects. Haldol actually can cause depression, and putting the three drugs together is somewhat experimental."

Breggin continues: "Haldol is a very blunting drug. It's difficult to come to any definitive conclusions with so little data about her state of mind at the time. However, Haldol is a drug that produces what can only be referred to as a chemical lobotomy that tends to make a person more docile and robotic."

Many Americans who have read or heard reports about this case have little doubt that Yates was "out of her mind" when she killed her children. What appears to be developing, however, is an argument within the medical community about whether the mother's homicidal state of mind was triggered by the depth of her depression or by the mind-altering drugs prescribed to her.

Were these the actions of a severely depressed woman who "lost it," or did the mind-altering drugs push this emotionally distraught woman over the edge? Should the latter be established in the criminal court, it could raise an even greater issue: Who was responsible? Was it a chemically poisoned mother who carried out the crazed act, the physician who prescribed the mind-altering cocktails or the pharmaceutical companies that manufactured and marketed the treatment?

Only recently have pharmaceutical companies been held responsible for violent behavior associated with their product lines of mind-altering drugs. A case in point is a June trial in which a jury in Cheyenne, Wyo., found that the antidepressant Paxil, one of the newer SSRIs distributed by GlaxoSmithKline PLC, "can cause some individuals to commit suicide and/or homicide."

The jury said Paxil caused Donald Schell, a retired oil-rig worker, to shoot and kill his wife, daughter and granddaughter before turning the gun on himself. Schell had been on the mind-altering drug only two days.

The jury awarded surviving family members $8 million in damages, finding that 80 percent of the fault lay with the drugmaker. Andy Vickery of the Houston law firm of Vickery & Waldner, lead attorney in the Wyoming case, has taken dozens of similar cases seeking to hold responsible those dispensing and manufacturing these drugs.

"The important thing," Vickery explains, "is to lay the responsibility and accountability at the doorstep of those who ought to have it and those who could and should do something about it. Whether it's criminal or civil responsibility, there isn't a lot of difference."

As Vickery puts it, "Look, if I give you a loaded gun and for whatever reason it's likely that you're going to shoot someone, then I'm an accessory before the fact of murder. Shouldn't the drug company that's encouraging doctors to prescribe a drug and is aware that these drugs cause adverse reactions be held responsible?

No one can believe that a mother would do such a thing. It's too horrible. But the fact is these people get completely out of touch with reality because of these drugs. Unfortunately, in most of the cases that I get involved with, we never know if the people committing the violence knew what they were doing when they did it because they also killed themselves."

Although alcoholic-beverage distillers have yet to be held responsible for the overwhelming number of fatalities resulting from alcohol abuse, in many states bartenders are held civilly and criminally liable when customers get drunk and cause automobile fatalities. With the growing number of physicians and psychiatrists prescribing mind-altering drugs and the alarming data filtering out about adverse reactions to them, tort lawyers are asking if medically trained dispensers of psychotropic drugs shouldn't also be held liable.

For example, Yates' psychiatrist, Muhammad Saaed, reportedly prescribed at least one mind-altering drug (Effexor) at almost twice the maximum recommended dose as part of a cocktail of mind-altering drugs that also included Haldol and Wellbutrin during her first bout with severe depression.

A cautionary note in the Physicians Desk Reference says Effexor negatively interacts with Haldol. Apparently, Effexor hinders Haldol's drug clearance by a factor of more than 40 percent and can cause Haldol concentration levels to increase by nearly 90 percent, creating toxicity.

Did Saaed know the contraindications associated with the cocktail he prescribed? If the psychiatrist was unaware of the toxic mix, would ignorance of the potential poisoning make him any less liable than if he had known and prescribed the mind-altering drugs anyway? These are just a few of the questions Saaed may be asked should he have to defend his treatment under oath.

According to Ann Blake Tracy, executive director of the International Coalition for Drug Awareness and author of the recently updated book Prozac: Panacea or Pandora?, there is little doubt about Saaed's culpability.

Tracy, a doctor of health sciences specializing in adverse reactions to serotonergic medications, tells Insight that "when doctors start prescribing 'off label' outside the FDA [Food and Drug Administration] guidelines, they run the risk of being sued for malpractice. In the case of Yates, her psychiatrist already had her on superhigh doses, and on the Monday before the tragedy he dropped the Effexor back to almost the maximum dosage, then added Remeron.

It's well-documented that when doses are increased or decreased, patients experience negative reactions. A great many of the court cases, but certainly not all of them, are a result of the drastic change in the medication."

According to Tracy, "There's a lot of science to demonstrate that depression is the result of an inability to metabolize serotonin, but somehow the drug companies have got the world believing that an increase in serotonin, rather than an increase in serotonin metabolism, is what the depressed person needs. This is the exact opposite of what research on depression shows and, if you look at the research over the last 50 years it is clear that there has been a horrible mistake.

There is such a wanton disregard for life. Why can't these doctors at least read the package inserts so they know how to prescribe the drugs properly? They're not supposed to prescribe over the maximum doses, and they know that they are at toxic levels at that point. That's why they have maximum-dose information; that's why the Food and Drug Administration puts a maximum dose on the packaging. They do it to show that over the allowable dose level, a person becomes toxic and it's extremely dangerous."

When asked what questions she might have for Yates' psychiatrist, Tracy tells Insight: "I'd want to know how he could have ignored so many warnings and contraindications in [reportedly] giving this poor woman this dangerous drug cocktail. I'd also like to know which sleeping pill he uses to knock himself out at night when those five children's faces run over and over again through his mind?"

Harsh words? It appears this is just the beginning. Many who follow such matters say that because of the high profile of the likely trial of Yates for capital murder, it may turn into a landmark case pitting the pharmaceutical giants against the medical practitioners and vice versa, perhaps even dragging in the American Psychiatric Association.

George Parnham, Yates' attorney, has reported that he will enter a not-guilty plea on behalf of his client for reasons of insanity. After meeting with Yates and speaking with psychiatrists that had examined her, Parnham told reporters, "I've accumulated evidence in the last 24 hours that strongly suggests that the mental status of my client will be the issue."

Just what Parnham has discerned is anyone's guess, including whether he'll defend his client by challenging the pharmaceutical companies and his client's psychiatrist. In the meantime, sources close to the case report that Yates still is being medicated. Saaed has turned his files on Yates over to the court and has, to date, made no public statement.

Insight Magazine July 2001
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
gt;>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Hidden Lake Academy, after operating 12 years unlicensed will now be monitored by the state. Access information on the Federal Class Action lawsuit against HLA here: http://www.fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=17700

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164653
  • Karma: +3/-4
    • View Profile
Andrea Yates
« Reply #59 on: January 11, 2006, 07:37:00 PM »
According to the E story, she stopped taking
her meds shortly after leaving the hospital.

Read on:

http://www.eonline.com/On/Holly/Shows/Yates/

An Infanticide Trial Grips the Nation and Shakes Up the Texas Law Books

Andrea Yates

Things were finally looking up for Rusty and Andrea Yates when they moved out of their cramped, renovated bus into a nice suburban home in Houston. The outlook was even brighter for their five young children. Then things got dark. Very dark.

Andrea Yates: E! True Hollywood Story examines the descent and destruction of a mother whose psychiatric struggles led her to do the unthinkable: drown her four sons and infant daughter. See what motivated a mother to commit such heinous crimes and the strange, meandering murder trial that followed.

What were the warning signs? Was Andrea Yates insane, or was she suffering from an extreme case of postpartum depression? And how did an episode of the legal drama Law & Order overturn her murder conviction?

When Rusty Yates came home from work one day to find his wife shaking involuntarily and chewing on her fingers, he knew she needed help. A brief hospitalization and a strict regimen of medication seemed to put Andrea Yates back on the road to recovery. But it wasn't long before she stopped taking the pills. She became paranoid and told her husband that the characters on TV shows were talking to her and the children.

Andrea's psychiatrist warned them that having another baby might bring on more episodes of psychotic behavior, but the Yates wouldn't listen. Six months after the birth of their first daughter, Andrea drowned her children one by one in the bathtub, saying she wasn't a good mother and needed to be punished.

Prosecutors claimed the gruesome murders Yates committed and her insanity defense were inspired from an episode of Law & Order. A jury found her guilty after three and a half hours of deliberation, but Yates' defense team later discovered that there was no such episode.

An appeals court ruling could lead to a new trial, but what is your verdict on Andrea Yates? Tune in to her True Hollywood Story--and judge for yourself.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »