Wednesday, March 13, 2002

MAYBE MISOGYNIST: Surely Russell Yates was not in a legal sense an accomplice to the murder of his children, but I wonder whether he had an obligation to protect them from a psychotic and abusive mother. The first question asked when a father or stepfather is accused of abusing a child is always: "Where was her mother when this happened?" By all accounts Mr. Yates was very emotionally controlling, and went to great lengths to isolate his wife and family from other people -- insisted that the children be homeschooled, didn't believe in attending an organized church, not neighbor-friendly, etc. Is he guilty of murder? No. Could he have done something to protect his children? Maybe so.

No comments:

Related Posts with Thumbnails