I completely agree that nobody wins when the criminal justice system locks the insane up with criminals.

He said they are still "friends" and reminisce about the children.

That sentence seems like a gross simplification of the interview I saw with him. It was more like "well what DO you talk about?" and him all "the children, we both miss them, half the time she doesn't remember what happened to them."

But in cases like this, involving children, I get unreasonably angry and probably make broad statements that I shouldn't. So, I'll just go over there and sit back in my corner and stop upsetting people I care about.

You're not doing the upsetting as far as I can tell. The situation is what's horrible and heartbreaking and your reaction is perfectly reasonable even if I don't happen to agree with your conclusion.

Nutty and Cashmere (and anybody else who has an opinion of course), what do you think of the "Guilty but Insane" plea that is available in some states? It seems to make more sense to me then "Not Guilty by reason of Insanity" but I don't know if I really understand it and how it is applied.

But in cases like this, involving children, I get unreasonably angry and probably make broad statements that I shouldn't. So, I'll just go over there and sit back in my corner and stop upsetting people I care about.

I know you don't think it was a cop out. And I'm not pissed off at you at all. FWIW, DH and I have already had this argument and he agrees with you.

I thought that the motherhood thing might affect how I look at these cases but it doesn't. I've had too much first hand experience with severe mental illness to be able to try to hold these people responsible for their acts. I just can't do it.

In this case, and in the two cases where schizophrenic men (in Columbus) killed several people (the highway sniper and the shooter that killed the lead singer of Damage Plan), the entire system let these people down. The deaths of AY's children (and the people killed here) are tragic but if the system could better deal with mental illness, they might not have happened.

I do understand both points of view. But I think as a society, what we do with the mentally ill is criminal.

But I think as a society, what we do with the mentally ill is criminal.

I am in complete agreement with you.

It seems to make more sense to me then "Not Guilty by reason of Insanity" but I don't know if I really understand it and how it is applied.

It's useless. It's a salve for the people doing the sentencing. The assumption is that the guilty party will get "treatment" in prison. It rarely happens that way. What happened with our highway shooter (he killed a woman and terrorized the city for months by shooting off of highway overpasses), is that he pled guilty but mentally ill and was sentenced to 27 years in prison. He'll serve it in a regular, maximum security facility where he will be lucky if he gets his medication. And Ohio is considered a "good" state for the treatment of mentally ill prisoners.

People flooded the Columbus Dispatch with outrage over his cop out plea and insisted he deserved the death penalty.

Personally, I think he should have been charged with 2nd degree murder because of gross negligence.

This.

The deaths of AY's children (and the people killed here) are tragic but if the system could better deal with mental illness, they might not have happened.

And this.

The people who are not insane have a responsibility to do something when their loved ones are a danger to themselves or others. I have more fury with the husband than with Andrea. If I were a danger to my children I hope that my husband would see this and step in and do whatever was needed to prevent tragedy.

If this woman ever does regain her sanity can you imagine what it will be like for her to live with the memory of killing her children. The whole thing is very upsetting.

The assumption is that the guilty party will get "treatment" in prison.

great. totally useless then.

All I can say about the Yates verdict is that I think the new one is much more appropriate than the old. Family history doesn't allow me to be impartial on this subject, but the "not guilty by reason of insanity" verdict was the better of the options available. Illinois is one of the states that have a "Guilty but insane" option, which I personally think would have been a better result, but sad to say it's not very common across the US.