The Girl in the Window....true story.

[MrPickins]

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: Amused
A 77 IQ is borderline retarded. The woman has proved (obviously) that she cannot care for herself, much less others.

While you want to hate her, you have to understand that she is not entirely to blame for this. She is obviously incapable of functioning as an adult, much less a parent.

It is also obvious that her retardation is genetic and she is passing it on to her children.

The story is written with a bias against the mother. Only once is her borderline retardation mentioned and never discussed again. When her inability to function is the very heart of this matter.

I'd say the part towards the end where they describe her current residence as being clean also refutes your argument about her being unable to care for herself. As well as her being organized enough to keep a box of documents supporting her delusions. Plus earlier on she held a job as a cashier. Anyone who can perform these tasks is well aware of the basic tasks involved in caring for a child.

I actually thought they were easy on her. The part where she said no school would take the girl was an obvious lie. Every state has programs and classes for mentally challenged children.

QFT

An IQ of 77 is low, but definitely functional. This woman deserved jail time.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: Amused
A 77 IQ is borderline retarded. The woman has proved (obviously) that she cannot care for herself, much less others.

While you want to hate her, you have to understand that she is not entirely to blame for this. She is obviously incapable of functioning as an adult, much less a parent.

It is also obvious that her retardation is genetic and she is passing it on to her children.

The story is written with a bias against the mother. Only once is her borderline retardation mentioned and never discussed again. When her inability to function is the very heart of this matter.

I'd say the part towards the end where they describe her current residence as being clean also refutes your argument about her being unable to care for herself. As well as her being organized enough to keep a box of documents supporting her delusions. Plus earlier on she held a job as a cashier. Anyone who can perform these tasks is well aware of the basic tasks involved in caring for a child.

I actually thought they were easy on her. The part where she said no school would take the girl was an obvious lie. Every state has programs and classes for mentally challenged children.

What you are not understanding is that the mildly retarded CAN seem functional, to a point. But at that point they become over loaded and everything breaks down.

I am not excusing her, but there ARE mitigating circumstances here. A person with a 77 IQ has no business raising kids without supervision. Especially when those kids range from mild to severe retardation themselves. It's just too much for them to handle. It's like expecting a normal 8-10 year old child to raise kids and keep a house responsibly. Most will fail just like this woman did.

People with mild retardation also have emotional issues as well. They are far more childlike in how they react to things. Note they mention how she seems rationalize like a child? You can have an 8 year old go to school and run a paper route while cared for by a parent, but try having him hold a real job and take care of three mildly retarded children plus all the other responsibilities and stresses of an adult life completely unsupervised. How many would fail?

Finally, note she no longer works and no longer has a severely retarded child to care for. Of course her house is clean. She's no longer overloaded.

 

[ForumMaster]

that's so sad. it seems she might never be able to speak. the mose you can say for the mother (with an IQ of 77) is that she's retarded too. but she refused help. that's what i don't get. excute the mother. i hope that one day that poor child will recover.

and as for those asking for cliffs, this story is not worthy as cliffs. you must read the entire story. only then can you really understand.

 

[BlackTigers]

After Danielle was taken away, Michelle says, she tripped over a box at Wal-Mart and got in a car accident

Third time's a charm? We can hope.

 

[MrPickins]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: Amused
A 77 IQ is borderline retarded. The woman has proved (obviously) that she cannot care for herself, much less others.

While you want to hate her, you have to understand that she is not entirely to blame for this. She is obviously incapable of functioning as an adult, much less a parent.

It is also obvious that her retardation is genetic and she is passing it on to her children.

The story is written with a bias against the mother. Only once is her borderline retardation mentioned and never discussed again. When her inability to function is the very heart of this matter.

I'd say the part towards the end where they describe her current residence as being clean also refutes your argument about her being unable to care for herself. As well as her being organized enough to keep a box of documents supporting her delusions. Plus earlier on she held a job as a cashier. Anyone who can perform these tasks is well aware of the basic tasks involved in caring for a child.

I actually thought they were easy on her. The part where she said no school would take the girl was an obvious lie. Every state has programs and classes for mentally challenged children.

What you are not understanding is that the mildly retarded CAN seem functional, to a point. But at that point they become over loaded and everything breaks down.

I am not excusing her, but there ARE mitigating circumstances here. A person with a 77 IQ has no business raising kids without supervision. Especially when those kids range from mild to severe retardation themselves. It's just too much for them to handle. It's like expecting a normal 8-10 year old child to raise kids and keep a house responsibly. Most will fail just like this woman did.

People with mild retardation also have emotional issues as well. They are far more childlike in how they react to things. Note they mention how she seems rationalize like a child? You can have an 8 year old go to school and run a paper route while cared for by a parent, but try having him hold a real job and take care of three mildly retarded children plus all the other responsibilities and stresses of an adult life completely unsupervised. How many would fail?

Finally, note she no longer works and no longer has a severely retarded child to care for. Of course her house is clean. She's no longer overloaded.

You can keep justifying the mother's actions all you want, but I doubt many people will agree with you that an IQ of 77 precludes someone from an awareness of the basics of child rearing...

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: Amused
It is also obvious that her retardation is genetic and she is passing it on to her children.

The story is written with a bias against the mother. Only once is her borderline retardation mentioned and never discussed again. When her inability to function is the very heart of this matter.

I don't know where you are getting this. What I got from the article and one of the saddest parts of the story is that the girl would have grown up completely normal if cared for. There is absolutely nothing genetically wrong with her. That is why they call her a feral child, her only problem was created by her living conditions, being cut off from the rest of the world.

I can't necessarily blame the mom, without meeting her and knowing what 77 IQ is in the real world and seeing how she functions day to day. However, I can say that I sure a shit wouldn't give her the benefit of the doubt. She strikes me as lazy, she knew her house was dirty, she knew that much because she even admitted it. Even if she failed on every other front as a parent she could have provided a non-cockroach infested hell hole for the kid. Hell, one of the sons even admits that the mom wouldn't take the daughter in to the doctors because she knew they would take her away. That's admitting knowledge that something is wrong. You give her too much credit.

I hope this girl learns how to talk. I know the doctors say that is basically nearly impossible or whatnot, but I really hope she gains that basic functionality as a final fuck you to her mother.

 

[blackdogdeek]

if you'd like to read updates about Dani and see some recent pics of her and her family or if you'd like to leave a comment for her and her family or even make a donation:

danisstory.org

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: MrPickins
You can keep justifying the mother's actions all you want, but I doubt many people will agree with you that an IQ of 77 precludes someone from an awareness of the basics of child rearing...

Do you have an IQ of fucking 42? He's not excusing her, he's merely pointing out other sides of the fucking coin. I don't see him excusing her at all, merely explaining things.

Why you have to somehow immediately jump to the conclusion he's defending or excusing her is beyond retarded.

Does that clear it up, or am I probably going to have to copy paste this at least 11 times before you decide you're wrong, and quit trolling the thread?

 

[slsmnaz]

Originally posted by: fishjie

i'm furious that the "mother" is not in jail

I can see that but her not going to jail allowed the little girl to be adopted and cared for. Seems like a good trade

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: Amused
It is also obvious that her retardation is genetic and she is passing it on to her children.

The story is written with a bias against the mother. Only once is her borderline retardation mentioned and never discussed again. When her inability to function is the very heart of this matter.

I don't know where you are getting this. What I got from the article and one of the saddest parts of the story is that the girl would have grown up completely normal if cared for. There is absolutely nothing genetically wrong with her. That is why they call her a feral child, her only problem was created by her living conditions, being cut off from the rest of the world.

I can't necessarily blame the mom, without meeting her and knowing what 77 IQ is in the real world and seeing how she functions day to day. However, I can say that I sure a shit wouldn't give her the benefit of the doubt. She strikes me as lazy, she knew her house was dirty, she knew that much because she even admitted it. Even if she failed on every other front as a parent she could have provided a non-cockroach infested hell hole for the kid. Hell, one of the sons even admits that the mom wouldn't take the daughter in to the doctors because she knew they would take her away. That's admitting knowledge that something is wrong. You give her too much credit.

I hope this girl learns how to talk. I know the doctors say that is basically nearly impossible or whatnot, but I really hope she gains that basic functionality as a final fuck you to her mother.

You have poor reading skills. The woman is genetically retarded. BOTH of her sons are mildly to moderately retarded.

The child is autistic with an IQ of 50. The mother had no clue how to care for a child like that. Sure, people like you want to say she made the child that way, but considering the fact that HER WHOLE FUCKING FAMILY is retarded, the girl obviously was born that way too.

Yes, I know the story does everything it can to demonize the mother and barely mentions in passing her OBVIOUS social and developmental disabilities. It also BARELY mentions that both sons are retarded.

I give the woman NO credit. I only point out a mitigating circumstance here.

Only on ATOT where everyone is almighty and wise do people call for a retarded woman's execution and make fun of a girl for an OBVIOUS speech impediment probably caused by a hearing disability. All in the same day, no less.

Finally, you obviously have no experience with developmentally disabled people. I pointed out already how they can become over loaded, how many have emotional retardation that stunts them socially and causes many to act very selfishly. How too much stress and responsibility will lead to a total failure to cope.

 

[dainthomas]

Originally posted by: Amused

The child is autistic with an IQ of 50. The mother had no clue how to care for a child like that. Sure, people like you want to say she made the child that way, but considering the fact that HER WHOLE FUCKING FAMILY is retarded, the girl obviously was born that way too.

So her two sons were in diapers until seven and completely lack the ability to speak? I think the argument was that her inherent mental condition was GROSSLY exaggerated by her almost total lack of interaction with other people. Unless you contend that she would still lack the ability to speak if raised in a normal home (even her two brothers can talk).

And the lady still lied about trying to get her in school. If she had taken her to a public school and she wasn't fit to attend, the girl would have been placed in a learning environment suitable to her needs. Period. The fact that she knowingly left her to wallow in bugs and her own excrement was criminally negligent which is why she was convicted.

 

[MrPickins]

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: MrPickins
You can keep justifying the mother's actions all you want, but I doubt many people will agree with you that an IQ of 77 precludes someone from an awareness of the basics of child rearing...

Do you have an IQ of fucking 42? He's not excusing her, he's merely pointing out other sides of the fucking coin. I don't see him excusing her at all, merely explaining things.

Why you have to somehow immediately jump to the conclusion he's defending or excusing her is beyond retarded.

Does that clear it up, or am I probably going to have to copy paste this at least 11 times before you decide you're wrong, and quit trolling the thread?

I'm trolling? I've been far more moderate than many of the posters in this thread...

I'm merely voicing opinions (which happen to be counter to his). He keeps pointing out "mitigating circumstances" which I feel are non-issues. The woman had an IQ of 77. The standard accepted level for retardation is 70. She is not retarded. Dumb yes, but not retarded.

And, regardless how smart she is or isn't, she knew that if the child was taken to the hospital that she would be taken away. That, in my mind proves that she knew at the time that she was in the wrong. So, she knew that she was not raising her child in an acceptable manner, yet she refused offers of assistance from the government.

It does sound like the woman may have psychological issues (like a distinct lack of empathy), and if so, she shouldn't be put in jail. But, she definitely should be in a mental institution.
Edit: Really, my main problem is that this issue could have been decided in the courts had the prosecutor not offered a plea agreement...

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: MrPickins

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: MrPickins
You can keep justifying the mother's actions all you want, but I doubt many people will agree with you that an IQ of 77 precludes someone from an awareness of the basics of child rearing...

Do you have an IQ of fucking 42? He's not excusing her, he's merely pointing out other sides of the fucking coin. I don't see him excusing her at all, merely explaining things.

Why you have to somehow immediately jump to the conclusion he's defending or excusing her is beyond retarded.

Does that clear it up, or am I probably going to have to copy paste this at least 11 times before you decide you're wrong, and quit trolling the thread?

I'm trolling? I've been far more moderate than many of the posters in this thread...

I'm merely voicing opinions (which happen to be counter to his). He keeps pointing out "mitigating circumstances" which I feel are non-issues. The woman had an IQ of 77. The standard accepted level for retardation is 70. She is not retarded. Dumb yes, but not retarded.

And, regardless how smart she is or isn't, she knew that if the child was taken to the hospital that she would be taken away. That, in my mind proves that she knew at the time that she was in the wrong. So, she knew that she was not raising her child in an acceptable manner, yet she refused offers of assistance from the government.

It does sound like the woman may have psychological issues (like a distinct lack of empathy), and if so, she shouldn't be put in jail. But, she definitely should be in a mental institution.
Edit: Really, my main problem is that this issue could have been decided in the courts had the prosecutor not offered a plea agreement...

Institutionalized would my choice as well. But that's just not possible anymore since they closed all the asylums and let the mentally ill out in the streets back in the 80s.

Curiously enough, it was about then that we suddenly had a "homeless crisis" on our hands.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: Amused

The child is autistic with an IQ of 50. The mother had no clue how to care for a child like that. Sure, people like you want to say she made the child that way, but considering the fact that HER WHOLE FUCKING FAMILY is retarded, the girl obviously was born that way too.

So her two sons were in diapers until seven and completely lack the ability to speak? I think the argument was that her inherent mental condition was GROSSLY exaggerated by her almost total lack of interaction with other people. Unless you contend that she would still lack the ability to speak if raised in a normal home (even her two brothers can talk).

And the lady still lied about trying to get her in school. If she had taken her to a public school and she wasn't fit to attend, the girl would have been placed in a learning environment suitable to her needs. Period. The fact that she knowingly left her to wallow in bugs and her own excrement was criminally negligent which is why she was convicted.

No doubt she was negligent. The only question here is, was she capable of understanding her negligence? Was it intentional, or the only way she new how to cope from the overload her life had become? She is obviously very emotionally selfish and lacks empathy. These are very common things among the developmentally disabled.

She should be in an institution, not prison.

 

[MrPickins]

Originally posted by: Amused
Institutionalized would my choice as well. But that's just not possible anymore since they closed all the asylums and let the mentally ill out in the streets back in the 80s.

Curiously enough, it was about then that we suddenly had a "homeless crisis" on our hands.

Texas still runs a network of MHMR (mental health and mental retardation) hospitals. I wasn't aware this was not the case with the rest of the nation. Very sad (and irresponsible, imo).