Jani's at the mercy of her mind

[lightningBugout]

With this I officially have a little crush on c2w Don't worry - I will do my best to make sure it doesn't interfere with out working relationship...

[8bitagent]

I think its a scam for the industry to bias psyche testing of children at the behest of big pharma companies. How many kids really have "ADD"?
How many kids *really* need these horrible SSRI?

Still...

I also believe there are the rare occurances of a Damien type. Perhaps not in a high weirdness sense...but for whatever reasons, a bad egg.

Ive read through soul crushingly horrible accounts of people trying to help survivors of extreme abuse...like kids locked in a basement or closet for years on end, or raped in basements most their life.

But what happens if a child is born a bad seed? Im just saying...what if no horrific drugs or "therapy" can help a child destined to be bad and destructive?

I dont believe everyone needs to be in the confines of socially defined "reality". Ive spent enough time in hippy type areas and spent time with my friend who works with adults with mental/physical handicpas to VERY MUCH appreciate people who think way outside the normal means.
But they are still good people. As are most of the homeless "mumbling to themselves"

Some things might be more than schizophrenia.

[8bitagent]

what she needs is a steady stream of friendly adults to talk to and help structuring her creative output, keep her busy drawing and making stories and building. It seems like the environment is not right and I think she'd be far better off in a different environment, with more people around who will engage with her rather than 'deal' and 'cope' with her. but I've no idea how she and her family can get to that place, wherever it is.

Precisely.

I know Hollywood likes to paint disturbed children who incessantly draw disturbing pictures and talk of crazy stuff as devil children bringing the apocalypse...

but in having been around autistic children when my mom worked with special needs kids in the 80's, as well as mentally challenged adults in the last few years...I find these people ride on an almost brilliant xray vision of the world. People just need kindness, someone to listen to them.

[Maddy]

c2w: DSHS

There is a mandetory reporting if you're a medical/health worker, or work for the gov't.

[justdrew]

There's also this to be aware of... I know a woman who's taking classes to become one...

Today, approximately 780,000 children in the US are caught up in the court and child welfare maze because they are unable to live safely at home. Imagine what it would be like to lose your parents, not because of something you did, but because they can’t—or won’t—take care of you. Now, into these children’s lives come dozens of strangers: police, foster parents, therapists, social workers, judges, lawyers, and more. Hopefully, one of these strangers is a CASA volunteer.

CASA volunteers are appointed by judges to watch over and advocate for abused and neglected children, to make sure they don’t get lost in the overburdened legal and social service system or languish in an inappropriate group or foster home. They stay with each case until it is closed, and the child is placed in a safe, permanent home. For many abused children, their CASA volunteer will be the one constant adult presence—the one adult who cares only for them.

Last year, more than 68,000 CASA volunteers served more than 240,000 abused and neglected children through 1,018 program offices. CASA volunteers have helped more than two million abused children since the first program was established in 1977.

See the results of independent research documenting the value of CASA advocacy.

Learn about current employment opportunities with National CASA and throughout the CASA/GAL network.
http://www.nationalcasa.org/about_us/index.html

[justdrew]

But what happens if a child is born a bad seed? Im just saying...what if no horrific drugs or "therapy" can help a child destined to be bad and destructive?

the party political machines have always been the traditional dumping ground for these rare cases.

ok, that was mean. sorry.

as far as I know such very rare cases get locked up for life, and tranquilized for manageability. not a nice outcome. but some are able to "pass" and that is likely where some serial killers come from.

[8bitagent]

But what happens if a child is born a bad seed? Im just saying...what if no horrific drugs or "therapy" can help a child destined to be bad and destructive?

the party political machines have always been the traditional dumping ground for these rare cases.

ok, that was mean. sorry.

as far as I know such very rare cases get locked up for life, and tranquilized for manageability. not a nice outcome. but some are able to "pass" and that is likely where some serial killers come from.

Well, its scary to think some of the psychopaths out there *didnt* come about because of seeing the horrors of war...being abused as a child...being bullied, influenced by the media, etc. Just, they *are*. (Not including the Levenda Sinister Forces theory of some serial killers)

[mentalgongfu2]

So, seen any good movies lately? That A Beautiful Mind is like totally inspiring. It moved me to tears. Psychotics are kinda scary, but what ya gonna do?!? And that Russell Crowe is sooooo cute!! He made me wanna hug him!!! But still, kinda creepy, the whole thing. I'm more of a romcom kind of a gal, to be honest...

Are you married? I'm a progressive. I think Jon Stewart is like totally kewl. And that Michael Schofield is like just incredibly brave and inspiring!!! I just saw him on Oprah!!!! He gave his life for his little girl, that's what he said at her funeral. It made me cry.

Do you have children?

Yes, it is that condescending tripe such as the above to which I was referring with my earlier name-calling. It is designed for the sole purpose of being an asshole; not to advance any point or line of inquiry.

Back to the topic : I've been trying to figure out how to describe what it is that bugs me about the original article. Last night, I excerpted a bunch of quotes from the OP, but I didn't post it because it wasn't all that illuminating. It's not any one passage that bugs me; it's the collection of passages and the way they're put together. The most coherent way I can put it is I feel like it is manipulating our emotions and telling only part of the story. The use of the present tense, as in 'Susan says softly, staring at the floor,' the way the story shifts, the way pieces of information are left dangling (such as the way the author jumps from pre-school, to kindergarten, to first grade) the way numbers are used to enforce the idea of Jani's obsession with numbers . . . just something bugs me, OK, and I might be totally off base, but I wanted to mention it, especially since a lot of people seem to be emotionally affected by the OP, which is not surprising given the content, but I think they might be falling into a well-laid trap by reacting just as they're intended to. I wish I could better explain it, but it's just a feeling I get. I had the response upon my first reading of the article and it hasn't gone away on further attempts, but the more I read it the less sure I am about why it evokes that response.

[OP ED]

So, seen any good movies lately? That A Beautiful Mind is like totally inspiring. It moved me to tears. Psychotics are kinda scary, but what ya gonna do?!? And that Russell Crowe is sooooo cute!! He made me wanna hug him!!! But still, kinda creepy, the whole thing. I'm more of a romcom kind of a gal, to be honest...

Are you married? I'm a progressive. I think Jon Stewart is like totally kewl. And that Michael Schofield is like just incredibly brave and inspiring!!! I just saw him on Oprah!!!! He gave his life for his little girl, that's what he said at her funeral. It made me cry.

Do you have children?

Yes, it is that condescending tripe such as the above to which I was referring with my earlier name-calling. It is designed for the sole purpose of being an asshole; not to advance any point or line of inquiry.

i agree with that. unfortunately.

not suprising to me, really, as i often encounter this with Mac. A symptom of his passion i'd reckon, and therefore not something i'm inclined to condemn him for, in and of itself. but it is off-putting and it makes me less likely to express my general agreement with his notions, in this and many other instances.

the condescension is unbecoming, especially if one is making a pretense towards some sort of moral high ground.

The last few pages of this thread have been just absolutely fucking incredible, and incredibly instructive.

indeed.

[chiggerbit]

Gotta make this short, with t on keyboard missing.

Back to the topic : I've been trying to figure out how to describe what it is that bugs me about the original article

Skimmed through article again, and one of the holes in it slapped me in the face: the school's reaction to Janni's more exreme behaviors. Doesn't this kid have an Individual Education Plan (IEP? Why would they call the parents to bring her home? I would think that they have educational services to deal wih those behaviors. Well, I assume the school would refuse to talk wih the author of the article, so who knows. But I think that's one of the sources of my "there's something missing in this story" feeling. I find it hard to believe they would send her home the way they would a regular misbehaving kid.

edit: As a matter of fact, she should, I would think, qualify to have her own aid attending her. Did I miss that in the article, that she in fact does have one?

[MacCruiskeen]

c2w, please accept my apologies for my meltdown on page 17. (It was nearly 3 am here.) The liking and respect are mutual, believe me, and thanks for what you said and took such trouble to say. I have in fact owed you a response for about 12 pages now, but there were many other people to respond to more urgently, and justdrew had also unearthed M. Schofield's blog in the meantime. Reading, quoting from, and responding to that alone has been time-consuming, to say the least. (To Nashvillebrook, if you are still following this thread: Sorry I didn't make good on my promise to reply to your very informative posts, for reasons just explained to c2w. I'll try to get back to you soon, because what you reported from your own personal life bears heavily on the topic of this thread.)

The straw that broke the camel's back was Chiggerbit's starting an "anti-Americanism" thread, starring me as the main Bad Guy-- the evidence being my exasperated response to her, quoted entirely out of context (I was in fact replying to a senseless, timewasting, and unprovoked personal attack by her on me) and without the basic courtesy of a link to the page in question. And that did annoy me greatly, not least because I had already made a point of replying very politely and patiently to at least two other bizarrely timewasting posts from Chiggerbit in this very thread.

Anyway: That "absolutely incredible" remark was of course not directed at you, c2w, nor at justdrew or lightningBugout or Penguin or mentalgongfu or any of the many other -- mainly American -- posters here whom I like and respect and learn useful things from, not least in this thread. But specifically at agitprop and her ultimately successful deflection of this thread (after many failed attempts) onto two of her personal obsessions:

1) How awful I am, and how mean I am to you and others; 2) In stark contrast, how wonderful agitprop herself is -- a conviction backed up by an unsolicited report of her witty quickfire ultrasmart comeback to some guy in a club who was drawn irresistibly by her charms: "His jaw hit the floor."

It was apparently very important, at least to agitprop, that we be told about that, in this thread. Well, I don't agree with her about that, and I freely admit that it annoyed the hell out of me. If anyone is still wondering why, then I would ask them to consider the exact context of her remarks, the actual topic of this thread, the way she managed to distort it, and her own earliest contributions to this thread (back on page 6), for which she has never apologised:

Dude, if this kid was born to just about anyone else she'd be institutionalized permanently or pitched off a cliff.

http://rigorousintuition.ca/board/viewt ... 104#272104

----------------

Back on-topic, i.e. back to the actual topic of this thread: Live-blogged child-murder, supported by the US psychiatric industry and praised in the US media.

[MacCruiskeen]

One thing to note about Michael and Susan Schofield is that they are of course living in a (specifically Anglo-American) social and cultural context in which various kinds of child abuse are regarded as absolutely normal and necessary. "Smacking" them, "spanking" them, giving them "time-outs", sending them to the "naughty seat", rewarding them for "good behaviour", punishing them for "bad behaviour", depriving them of meals, forcing them to eat, parking them in front of the TV, threatening them, shouting at them, ignoring them, controlling them, giving them moral lectures, etc., etc., etc. - In short: "disciplining" them, and "teaching them right from wrong", i.e. making their children's lives a misery for much if not all of the time. This is normal, which is to say it's the norm, in the Anglo-American cultural sphere.

I have been wondering why Michael Schofield has been getting so much almost-adulatory support from so many other parents, and it strikes me as very likely that most if not all of those parents are routinely abusing their children in the socially-accepted ways listed above. And that not a few of them are probably abusing their children as badly, or nearly as badly, as Michael Schofield is abusing his.

[agitprop]

Thank you for drawing attention to my (actually Desmond Morris's comment about mating strategies) comment to the guy at the party who propositioned me. I'm assuming it was as cathartic for you, as you've drawn attention to it twice since I posted it, as it was for me.

Now back to the subject at hand, and my highlighted statement. I'm not for pitching problem progeny like projectiles off precipices. I don't even like people pitching pop cans off poopdecks.

[agitprop]

One thing to note about Michael and Susan Schofield is that they are of course living in a (specifically Anglo-American) social and cultural context in which various kinds of child abuse are regarded as absolutely normal and necessary. "Smacking" them, "spanking" them, giving them "time-outs", sending them to the "naughty seat", rewarding them for "good behaviour", punishing them for "bad behaviour", depriving them of meals, forcing them to eat, threatening them, shouting at them, ignoring them, controlling them, etc., etc., etc. In short: "disciplining" them, and "teaching them right from wrong", i.e. making their children's lives a misery for much if not all of the time.

I have been wondering why Michael Schofield has been getting so much almost-adulatory support from so many other parents, and it strikes me as very likely that most if not all of those parents are routinely abusing their children in the socially-accepted ways listed above.

What's wrong with a time-out?

[MacCruiskeen]

What's wrong with a time-out?

If it means just leaving the child in peace for a few minutes, with the child's full and free consent and agreement, then nothing's wrong with it; on the contrary. More commonly, though, it means ordering the child to go her room for a period of time to be decided arbitrarily by the commanding officer, i.e. the parent. And that will tend to produce very bad habits in the child, such as repression of her own feelings, guilt, resignation, and unquestioning obedience to authority.

A child who is "throwing a tantrum"* is never doing so for no reason.

*It beggars belief that that stupid phrase is still in common use in the 21st century.