The sad case of Andrea Yates

andrea yates.jpgWhile on the subject of Houston-based cases that are not reflecting well on the U.S. criminal justice system, the jury in the retrial of Andrea Yates — the suburban Houston mother and housewife who drowned her five young children in a bathtub in 2001 — was seated yesterday and opening arguments are scheduled to begin on Monday.
The Yates case is not Texas at its finest. Despite overwhelming medical evidence that Yates was severely mentally ill, suffering from post-partum depression and had been taken off the only medication that had ever helped her when she killed her children, the State of Texas still wants to put Yates in prison instead of a mental health facility for the rest of her life. Not surprisingly, prosecutors have never been able to offer any motive — much less a reasonable explanation — for why an otherwise attentive and loving mother would suddenly go nuclear on her young children and kill them.
But it gets worse. The state is retrying this case despite the fact that Yates’ first trial ended in a conviction that was subsequently overturned because the lead prosecution expert witness made the dubious link between Yates and an episode of the television show Law and Order in which a mother drowns her child. Now, it’s bad enough that State District Judge Belinda Hill ever allowed the jury to hear an expert make such a questionable reference to in the first place, but what’s worse is that the episode that the expert referred to was never even broadcast!
Moreover, it’s not as if this trial of Yates even involves the issue of incarceration versus freedom — even if successful, Yates’ insanity defense would result in her assignment to a secured psychiatric hospital, probably for the remainder of her life. And, from the looks of it, the prosecution and Judge Hill do not appear to be acting any more responsibly in the second Yates trial than they did in the first one. Last week, Judge Hill granted an inhumane prosecution request that Yates be incarcerated in prison during the retrial rather than in a mental health facility.
In short, despite the fact that there is no meaningful dispute regarding the nature and depth of Yates’ mental illness, the State insists upon punishing this feeble and tormented woman by imprisoning her for the rest of her life. Such a lack of prosecutorial discretion leaves a serious black mark on the Harris County District Attorney’s Office and the State of Texas criminal justice system, and it is not one that is easily erased.

One thought on “The sad case of Andrea Yates

  1. Astute observations.
    If Yates indeed suffers from a Bipolar Illness, or a Psychotic Depression, treatment may clear up symptoms. It is possible that if she is committed to a psychiatric hospital, and her symptoms are in remission, she could be released (with careful follow-up).
    Generally the persons who are found guilty but mentally ill, (or innocent by reason of insanity) spend exceedingly long times in a state hospital (which can be just as harrowing as jail). Nonetheless, how would the public perceive such a release (from a medical viewpoint it is well known that a treated person, no longer psychotic and delusional, is not a danger to self and others)?
    Did Yate’s lawyers argue insanity?
    As a psychiatrist I have seen hundreds of patients who were very dangerous when psychotic, but conversely very safe when treated. It is a very serious responsibility as a physician to discharge these patients, and thus the length of time they often spend in hospital.
    This points out one of the shames of our society – the misunderstanding and stigma of mental illness.
    The well publicized cases of ‘insanity’ generally never see the light of day out of a hospital. David Berkowitz (Son of Sam) being a good example.
    Some are occasionally released – like Larena Bobbitt who spent 3 months in a psych hospital. I guess in her case, she was not as ‘cut off’ from reality as others 🙂 .

Leave a Reply