So, while she's busy and preoccupied, I reckoned I'd fill in for her, especially since her prayer yesterday weren't heeded. Damn dumbasses.
It's been eating up the internet, that story about that woman who killed her baby cuz she was afraid it would have autism and plumb ruin her life. Most people done speculated she had a heap of issues, mayhap postpartum depression. No doubt about it, she weren't right in the head, and ifn justice is done, she'll spend the rest of her days with a ruined life.
Now, sane people can agree to disagree on the course of some things and accept that they might not understand the whys and hows of people go off the deep end.
I said sane people. Reasonable people. People who ain't dumbasses. Ya ken me?
It was just a matter of time, of course, till AoA rustled up a dumbass to tackle the murder. The wonder is it wasn't Stagliano who wrote it up. She musta hit her quota, though.
AoA's top post today is long, twisted, and thoroughly warped, romping through a heap of bullshit with ballads and weird ass poems thrown in, explaining why it's all pharma's fault that mother killed her six month old because she feared he'd have autism. And right behind pharma, apparently, it's everyone else's fault for pointing out those who believe vaccines did it and then went down every quack cure route. Godsamighty, sometimes, there ain't a purse big enough or deep enough is what I'm sayin.
In other words, it's everyone else's fault that woman killed her infant.
What's downright interesting is how the mother writing the piece at AoA discusses this murder. It's a right wonder how she's chosen to proceed. Here's her second paragraph, see for yourselves:
"Stephanie Rochester hadn’t been worn down by financial desperation or a fruitless search for adequate services. She hadn’t dealt with years of social isolation or intractable behaviors, endless night wakings, public meltdowns, life threatening seizures or violent assaults. Rylan Rochester had not been thrown out of daycare, had not suffered school abuse or been arrested at school for exhibiting behaviors associated with his disorder. Stephanie Rochester’s marriage had not fallen apart under the duress of disability."
This has Thelma puredee scratching her head at this, wondering if this author realizes what she's set up here? It almost reads like a one-upsmanship: Ya wanna talk about problems? I got problems. Ya wanna reason to? Here are reasons to! This-un, she ain't gone through hell and back; she ain't got any reasons.
The next paragraph then puts out the punch line, ain't been through shit yet, this mama, but:
"But according to Rochester’s affidavit, she killed her son because she feared what autism could eventually do to her life, not what it had done. Conceivably due to her two years as a counselor for children with autism, raising a child with the disorder did not look like something she wanted to do."See, she hadn't been through any of the things parents have gone through. It's only after you've been through it, ya know? The title of the piece is enough to make reasonable people wonder just exactly how the author is going to get there from here: "Murder Ballad: Autism, Infanticide and the Pharma Footprint." It's enough to make ya go for the purse. Where's she gonna go from this third paragraph, surely yall is a wondering that?
Straight to crazy town on the express train. Right on into some ballads. She goes on for a bit, and then segues into this:
"After years of maintaining a single minded focus of keeping our vaccine injured children safe, the stories of parents murdering their autistic children—or now a child merely suspected of having autism— are incomprehensible to most of us."I reckon most people find it beyond are ken how someone can do something so wrong. And it's a relief of a sort to see this lady set up a divide between autism and vaccine injury, because it makes it downright clear what side of reality she's coming down on. Ya always gotta be on the lookout for them signals, if ya ken me.
"Reactions within the vaccine injury community seem to depend on whether the murdering parent succeeded in also committing suicide: generally the response to those who succeed is slightly more sympathetic."Now, yall note she's created that line: vaccine injury community. Why the hell would ya feel more sympathy for someone who killed herself too? Oh, that's alright, she took herself out, too. Poor thing.
"We know what they faced; we understand the lack of support, the financial devastation, the loss of relationships, sleep and health; the difficulty of sustaining hope and the potentially dismal fate of some disabled children after everyone who loves them is gone."
See, she sure seems to be saying there's situations where it's understandable, don't she? Ain't never an answer. It ain't never okay. And it ain't okay to make it so. Mayhap ya close yourself up from support when ya wrap yourself in a cloak of crazy? Then she justifies that ifn the person don't knock herself off, shewey, folks tend to back up from murderers. Ya think?
And then for some unknown reason, it's time to stump for Wakefield:
"Not to give anything away for those who haven’t yet read “Callous Disregard”, but Dr. Wakefield is one of the few to write about the issue without leaving the wrong fingerprints on it."Ya are kiddin, right? Nah, we know this writer of the murder ballads ain't, not one bit. She blathers on awhile longer about how great Wakefield is.
And then the nuttiness shines through:
"In a world that seems bent on destroying our children—with an excessive and excessively toxic vaccine schedule; with deadly mainstream “autism drugs”; toxic toys, products, food, pollution; restraint, seclusion and abuse in schools and vicious legal attacks on any doctor who offers real help—we’re leaning into the wind to save our kids and become all the more committed."Tell me ya didn't read it with a deep-throated movie announcer's voice going off in your head?
And then, then, then, she writes this and it ought to wake some asses right up and make some folks go,uh, what?
"But before any of us are done reeling from thoughts of the last, lonely moments of the victims’ lives, we can go from shocked bystanders to prospective suspects in a flash."Let Thelma say with one of them horn things that make your voice boom: ifn ya can put yourself there, right there where that mama did what she did, killing her child. Ifn ya can see yourself there, in those shoes, in that place, in that moment, get yourself to a phone and reach out and do it now. Because it's a quick and easy slide into them actual shoes. And ya need some support.
Still and all, she ain't got to how it's pharma's fault, has she? And she's been rambling on awhile. Here ya go: it's Brian Deer's fault and all them studies.
"Put this together with press attacks on parents’ claims of cause for their children’s autism; Brian Deer’s and the New York and London Times’ insinuations that vaccine injury parents have inherent “mental problems”; the endless industry funded studies equating genetic mental illness in parents with risk of autism among offspring. The inference is clear: we’re all crazy."
Ya ever notice the AoAers miss the whole damn forest and every last tree? Might as well be on Mars. Surely ya aren't all crazy. But ya are woefully misinformed. And far too many of ya can't read your way through a study to get anywhere close to the reality. Like ya said a bit before this: "perception is stronger than truth."
Cue the next book plug: Blaxill and Olmsted, this time. Man, they are on a full-court press, ain't they?
And then, nonsense repeats:
"But the average person might not have thought through the logic of a “genetic epidemic”. And I wonder if it’s convenient to certain industries that modern murders of autistic children are framed in a way that silences the horses’ mouths as a whole—the families who saw their children regress from vaccines—by painting them as not credible and even genetically violence-prone by vague association."Conspiracy theory much, hun? Sure now, the numbers have rightly risen. But it ain't an epidemic. And, ifn yall pulled your heads out, ya would see ain't no one but fools arguing about it being entirely genetic. Always been recognized by the folks doin the legitimate science that them genes and the environment work together. Godsamighty, they play the same old tunes, ya ever notice it?
So, she rants a couple more paragraphs about how it's all the GMC's fault and the media's fault that parents "crack open that much faster for being unable to keep up the obligatory act." See, ain't no personal responsibility to be had by any of these folks.
And then, she goes right on off the diving board, bless her, and writes her own ballad. I ain't repeating it here.There's a limit to how much crazy you showcase.
She goes onto talk about all the murders that have been done to kids on the spectrum and then to those on the spectrum who've killed.
And cue pharma's role:
"At the very least she was jumping the gun of maternal intuition and, if so, did this stem only from her post-partum depression, or from the drugs she was taking for it? Because, though infanticide due to post-partum depression has traditionally been very rare, the risk of violence appears to increase when antidepressants are thrown into the mix. And some of the reasons given for the murders by drug maddened parents were no more or less bizarre than Rochester’s (HERE)."
Ain't that bit interesting at the first? The mama who killed her six month old was "jumping the gun."
And then she ties together antidepressant use and vaccines in a clever turn of phrase:
"As it stands, psychiatry runs the prescription racket like a casino without a croupier—they have no way to predict when someone’s about to take (out) the house. There’s no standard screening—also as with vaccines-- to identify which people on the drugs might be among the 1 to 8% who have serious or severe adverse cognitive reactions."
For a minute and a couple of paragraphs, she manages to sound reasonable, and then she blows it all to hell and back:
"There will always be people who view their injured children as disruptions to their lifestyles, or who view them as accessories, though I don’t believe that’s the root of most of these crimes. I think lies are at the root.
Lies that autism is hopeless and genetically inevitable; lies that tempt weak individuals to choose socially acceptable explanations of their children’s illnesses over their children’s welfare; lies that turn the public into passive bystanders as the epidemic gallops on, as families are deprived of any support, isolated and mischaracterized. Lies that our regulatory and health authorities and the healthcare industry have only our best interests at heart; that majority science is always gospel and infallible. Lies that the answers to this and all that ails us are going to come from those who caused the disaster in the first place—because if that ever happened, it would probably be an accident."
Not done with the hyperbole and the blaming of everyone and everything else, the writer then has to bring in Allison Singer, almost like they've created a formula for guest posters to follow.
"We can also treat each other carefully, remembering that not everyone is the picture of grace as they try to drag their children out of hell, and as almost everything they once believed in turns out to be toxic and false."
I don't even think Kim would know where to go with this. Sure, and we've seen that not everyone deals adaptively and positively. Some folks really deal badly with this. Ought to be reaching out with lifelines to folks, and for damn true, a fair number of folks do, hands out, ever ready to help, to show support. Listen here, though, folks thinking all the cockamamie ideas this lady's thrown out, well a fair heapin of it is what is false, and it's right hard to reach out a hand to folks who've decided the world's against em and everyone's conspiring to damage kids. There's a reason the AoAers are on the fringe with the truthers.
This lady goes on several more paragraphs, and it ain't a pretty sight to read, nosirree. She's waxes Obradovic for a moment with "the day we lost our twins—and the day we learned we might be able to bring them back."
I reckon for damn true when ya think of your kids as lost, dead to you, gone, ya've jumped one of them barriers is what I'm saying. I ain't at all sure ya can ever back up from that, either. It's there, done, for the world and someday your children to see. Ya think their autism rendered them gone. I know, gotcha, perception is stronger, and ifn ya see it that way, it drives everything else ya do.