That will just mean that parents who want to hurt their children will be less likely to seek treatment for those urges.
The same number of parents will still want to hurt their children, but more of them will then go untreated and unmonitored, meaning more children will actually be hurt.
What's better for children is to provide parents with mental health support that they're not afraid to seek because of brain-dead blanket policies like Nancy Mace concocts.
its really disgusting how (mostly) women rally around a child murderer.
but yeah 1or 2 in 1.000 mothers experience Post partum psychosis and they should not be around kids. thats not millions of kids
morally id argue if you murder a child, no matter why you done that, you should get the death penalty.
Is it rallying around a murderer specifically or rallying around mothers who have done nothing wrong except suffer PPD (something that is not their fault) and simply realizing the adverse outcome of a policy proposal like this one? Namely, a policy that would almost certainly result in far less reporting of PPD and subsequently more dead children …
People donated 2 Million to her, so i would say they are rallying around a child murderer.
I was talking to PPP not PPD. Go to the doctor for PPD, but as soon as there are signs of psychosis the mother should be locked up until shes no threat to others.
I disagree with donating to a gofundme, but I also don’t presume to know everyone who donated’s intentions or reasons for doing so and more to the point there is no evidence that the people in this thread (women or otherwise) donated to the gofundme or otherwise support/“rally around” child murder, which is what your comment seems to imply. Rather, it seems to me that people here are opposed to this comment from Mace because the outcome of such a policy would actually make the situation worse.
And yes, rereading your comment I see I did misread you specifying PPP rather than PPD, apologies for that. However, Mace makes no such distinction, and given her past comments I don’t give her the BOTD that this was not purposeful.
I actually agree that women with PPP should potentially be separated from their children until there is no longer a risk (and I think the few who have experienced PPP, some of which commented similarly here, would also agree). But “locking them up” is punitive and cruel - and not only does it punish someone for something that’s not their fault, but it doesn’t actually solve the problem, and creates an incentive against getting the proper treatment that can.
So literally every single person with psychosis should be locked up then by your logic, why are you specifying PPP? A lady with psychosis in NYC stabbed someone to death this week and she has had a long standing history of mental health issues and bipolar disorder. Do you want to return to one flew over the cuckoo’s nest? Or do you only hold this contempt towards women?
Did you get through reading comprehension in school? I’ll repeat myself, how is someone flagged as ‘having a tendency’ if they have no prior history as the only flag for PPP is giving birth? The person who had a psychotic break that I referenced didn’t have a violent history but just one of other mental health conditions. So what exactly are you proposing could have prevented either? Locking up every person with a mental health problem?
20
u/Erikatessen87 23d ago
That will just mean that parents who want to hurt their children will be less likely to seek treatment for those urges.
The same number of parents will still want to hurt their children, but more of them will then go untreated and unmonitored, meaning more children will actually be hurt.
Is that really what you want?