In the case of infanticide it does. We are designed biologically to ensure the survival of our genetics. The very presence of the impulse to kill ones child indicates that something is defective.
We are also hard wired to cooperate and support the survival of our tribe/community. Anyone who murders any member of their community is basically defective then and unaccountable for their actions?
I dont buy this. Yes, some people lack the morality and compassion that others have. They are called sociopaths and yes they do lack something that the rest of us have.....but unless they didnt know what they were doing, were not in control of their actions or didnt understand why their actions were wrong, then they are still fully accountable for their actions, even if they suffer from a condition that prevents emotional bonding or compassion for others.
As unlikely as that is, your solution is still pointless. In fact it may be further victimizing the victim. The child will have a lot of emotional scarring from this incident. If you kill his mom, he won't be able to sit down and ask her why she did it, ask her if she's sorry, ask her if she loves him. Only thing it accomplishes is satisfying your comic book simple view of justice. Do you know how expensive death penalty cases are? More expensive then life in prison. Did it ever occur to you that a jury might not be willing to sentence her to death.
The cost isnt a factor in my decision. I am not a conservative. I am however a father, and despite my preference for egalitarian bottom-up political alternatives, in the event that somebody tried to harm my daughter I think the animal in me would win over any rationalization to remove accountability from my daughters attacker. Anyone who abuses their child is not worth respecting as a human being.
Anyway...Are you 100% positive that the child will sleep better knowing that the woman who tried to kill him is still out there and possibly going to be set free someday? We have not asked the child what he wants, but you are ASSUMING that as an adult he would rather get an answer that he might not like from a woman who tried to kill him, than have the peace of mind knowing that the bad woman who hurt him is no longer a threat.
I mean....you could be right, maybe. But you are still projecting. You dont KNOW that is what the child wants.
I'm willing to presume you have absolutely no clinical experience with organic brain disorders of any kind.
If you took that bet you would lose.
D. I could give you examples of mothers who killed their children, were treated, released, and didn't kill again. I actually can't offer counter evidence to this. But lets be honest it isn't really about that for you.
I didnt say its never possible. I said its not as easy as you might think, and with the means available to us today, generally has a poor success rate...I mean, maybe if we invent something like a Clockwork Orange, we could 'fix' people. That has its own moral implications though....I mean, is it for us to control and alter peoples minds until they are acceptable from our position?
But I just said that there are in fact legitimate cases of temporary insanity, and that is a valid reason to eventually let someone go if they are treated....I think a lot of people try to play on this though even when its flimsy.
You know, you are making a lot of assumptions that might be false. You are assuming that because she murdered her child she must be too mentally compromised to be accountable for her actions....Do you KNOW this to be true based only on the fact that she tried to kill her son with a steak knife with actions that were consistent with rage? Are you 100% sure, beyond any possible doubt, that this woman has an organic brain dysfunction that prevented her from being in control or understanding the effects of her actions on her infant son? Or are you just choosing believe what you want to believe before the evidence is even in?
I would want to know a few things.....was this woman mentally compromised before she got into drugs? Did she have a history of abuse or violence? Was she considered a loving mother before this? What was her IQ? Was she diagnosed as being bipolar? Does she feel any remorse? Is she in shock that she actually harmed her son and feels terrible?.....Dont you want to know these things before making a judgment?
Yes, there are cases where people with organic brain dysfunction may not be accountable for their actions, or entirely accountable for their actions, and a fraction of these people may be successfully treated....we do not yet know that she fits this criteria based only on the fact that she tried to murder her own infant son. Inability to consider the legal consequences does not prove that she was unable to understand the implications of life and death, why killing is wrong, or prove that she was out of touch with reality or that she was not in control of her own actions.....you also have not provided evidence of an organic brain dysfunction that would lead to uncontrollable rage other than 'look, she tried to kill her son, case closed!'. That argument would not convince a jury if not supported better than that.
Unlike you, I want to hear all the evidence first before making a decision.
If this woman was a little emotionally erratic, but otherwise of reasonable intelligence and determined to be in touch with reality without evidence of organic brain dysfunction before she decided that getting high was a bigger priority than taking care of her child....and she spiraled out of control on drugs, refusing help to even attempt to get her life back on track....then I have no sympathy at all.
Part of the reason why I think most drugs should at least be decriminalized if not legalized (make them either a civil infraction or basically permissible if you have only small amounts for personal use) is that I believe we are responsible for our own actions. If I felt that we were not accountable or responsible for our own actions while under the influence, then that would be a strong argument for regulation or even prohibition......even if you were not in favor of prison or mandatory minimum sentencing and saw it as a disease, your position is still consistent with prohibition by removing personal responsibility.
Getting high when you are supposed to be taking care of your children, then flipping out when you are coming down and choosing to kill your child just to get him to shut up is not my idea of somebody who should be waived of all accountability....not if there was no history of an organic mental illness before that time. Even if she was mentally compromised at the time of the murder, there is still the issue of endangering a child by her behavior even before the attempted murder. If I choose to crack open a bottle of jack while I am driving my children to school, maybe I didnt plan on getting drunk and flying off the road with my kids or flying into road rage and ramming the other car and killing my children or theirs.....yes, I was mentally compromised at the time, but I did it to myself in this example. The choice to compromise your brain function when you are responsible for children should be punished if she was reasonably sane up until that point.
