Tragedies of Postpartum Psychosis Essay Example for Free

Tragedies of Postpartum Psychosis EssayTragedies of Postpartum Psychosis Ethical Decisions and Sentencing Postpartum stamp affects approximately ten to twenty-two percent of women and as many as somewhat eighty percent of women suffer from some sort of baby blues. Even so, the much more(prenominal) serious caper of postnatal psychosis only occurs in as few as unmatchable in every fin hundred births (Williams, 2002). Postpartum psychosis cigarette give catastrophic outcomes, desire in the encase of Andrea Yates. What should happen to women like Andrea?Prison, the terminal penalty or a mental institution? Ethical prints, such as postpartum psychosis abuses, are debated using various theories of ethics. Postpartum psychosis tends to amaze a rapid onset within the jump four weeks after giving birth, whereas postpartum depression has a slower onset occurring around weeks sise through twelve after childbirth (Williams, 2002). In postpartum psychosis, the symptoms in clude mood changes, delusional thoughts, paranoia and halluci res publicas. Symptoms passel intensify or lessen.Women suffering are often afraid to ask for help due to the paranoia and evil felt surround the disorder. Left to manage symptoms themselves, tragedies often occur as affected women committing suicide or infanticide. When such execrations occur, pot debate how to deal with the women accused. Being commit to a mental institution is one course of action for such women. The argument for this is that these women are in need of psychiatric treatment, that they are uneffective to distinguish between right or vituperate at the meter of act due to their modify view on reality.Andrea Yates, for example, acceptd that she had Satan inside her and that she was unable to raise the children properly because of it that they couldnt be deliver and were going to burn in hell (Roche, 2002). Andrea believed that her being evil was causing her children to non be harmless and that she needed to be executed. The only way for that to happen was for Andrea to kill her children. Women accused of such crimes can bilk the help they need in an institution, where they are unable to harm themselves or their children.These women always carry with them the villainy and guilt for what they have done, once they are no longer sick. Postpartum psychosis is a mental hindrance and should be treated as such. It would be a huge injustice to the affected women to be lay in prison, or worse yet sentenced to termination. The crimes that they commit, infanticide and the like, are unspeakable however it would non serve them or society well to have them locked up in prison and continue to suffer from this illness. If placed in a mental institution they may be rehabilitated into productive members of society once again.However there are opposing views on this subject. One of the opposing thoughts is that the crimes are so heinous that these women must leave payment for wha t they have done (Anonymous, 2008). Many believe that convicted women should be paying their debt to society from behind prison bars, that these women are a risk to society like any other murderer and should serve time accordingly. Complicating the situation are the callous women who commit such crimes and then use postpartum psychosis as a defense when they are not suffering from this illness.One example of uch would be Susan Smith, who lied about the slicing of her two young sons and then later claimed that she suffered from postpartum depression causing her to kill her children. Investigators on her case found that she was dating a man who wasnt ready for a ready-make family (Gibbs, Booth, Gregory, Monroe, Towle, 1994). Therefore, doubt is throw up in the minds of society and they see all infanticides as horrific crimes where justice must be sought-after(a) for the innocent victims. Committing capital offices such as the murder of children and infants are offenses that are el igible for the death penalty. payable to the appalling nature of the crimes committed many want to see the offender to be put to death instead of wasting tax-payer dollars to keep them in prison for life. This is just another way society seeks retri hardlyion for these horrid crimes. People believing that the women accused of these crimes are not really mentally ill may have a couple of different viewpoints for deciding their fates through sentencing. Viewpoints on sentencing convicted women to prison or the death penalty may depend on Kantian and cultural relativism theories of ethics.Kantian views on ethics assert on reason to apply categorical ethical principles (Waller,2008, pg. 21). In applying reason to the murdering of innocent children, ethically the convicted women belongs any in prison or sentenced to death. Kantian views believe in the golden rule do to others what you would have them do to you. Keeping that in mind then the killing of another person would bring upon p unishment to the accused. Kantian also believes that we are responsible for our actions, good or bad, and is a product of free get out (Caswell, 2006).In keeping with this view then, these women are morally responsible and choose, due to free will, to end their childrens life therefore they should be held accountable. Another theory that would support imprisonment or death penalty sentence, for non-believers of the women being truly mentally ill, would be cultural relativism. heathen relativism is defined as ethical judgments made relative to a given culture. Cultural relativism is basically the relativity of its societys values, and murder is wrong no matter who is the victim. specially when it involves innocent victims such as infants and children.Therefore, if the murdering of children is wrong then there should be someone held accountable for the crime. It is hard for society to imagine that a child could die at the pass of their own mother. Unfortunately, with the blood on t he mothers hands she is placed in front of the flak squad, so to speak, so that justice can be served for the children. Under cultural relativism then, anyone convicted of such a crime should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. But is this the right solution to the problem?Possibly taking on a more sympathetic view, such as care ethics and intuitionists, can help us in choosing the right sentencing for these women. People who believe in care ethics are more about caring for the person than for justice for the crime (Tong and Williams, 2009). Women committing these crimes need medical help more than they need to be placed behind bars and people looking at this from the care ethics viewpoint can see it this way. They are not blinded by the need for justice and have sympathy for not only the innocent victims, but also the accused. The accused are victims in many ways also.These women have been let done by the medical community and some by their families who have seen the sig ns and have not gotten them help before it had escalated into tragedy. conduct ethicists can see that there truly is a problem and by placing the woman behind bars or worse yet, sentencing them to death, there is a bigger tragedy occurring the act victimization of a mentally ill woman. Intuitionist feel they know what is the right thing to do, as in the Waller (2008) he told of Huck Finn debating over whether or not to unfreeze in his friend Jim, a slave owned by someone who had always been kind to him.Huck decided not to turn Jim in and let him go, knowing that ultimately slavery is wrong. This won over the fact that he was stealth Miz Watsons property by helping Jim escape. The same can be applied to the women that have committed crimes while suffering from postpartum psychosis. Intuitionists know that the act was wrong and should require retribution for their crimes. However, the bigger issue is identifying postpartum psychosis as a medical condition and treating the accused accordingly.In conclusion, I believe that people choosing not to recognize postpartum psychosis as a medical condition seek out more heartbreaking punishments for the crimes. In doing so, Kantian views and cultural relativism are two ways that they justify their beliefs on severe sentencing. Kantian views are very strict and absolute breaks a rule, you need to be punished accordingly. Cultural relativism is based on the societal ethics, break a societal rule punishment ensues. I believe this side of the debate just wants to see justice done for the innocent victims.Whereas care ethicists and intuitionists want justice, but they also want what is intrinsically right done. Sending the accused to prison or to death row, does not provide justice for the innocent victims, it would only add to the familys suffering and create more victims. Care ethicists look at taking care of the accused as opposed to being out for visit or justice. Intuitionists look at what they feel is the right de cision, and sending someone away for a crime that they committed when they were not in control of themselves does not feel morally correct to them.Referenceshttp//www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,218445,00.htmlhttp//plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2009/entries/feminism-ethics/