Canberra's favourite mother has bail revoked

I did read the description. I still think it was a flippant comment.

It takes a large amount of preparation to enter society from your muckpit in order to purchase your drugs, so either she was getting it delivered (again requiring a large amount of preparation, but entering an altogether different alignment – possibly even prostitution/drug-induced slavery), or she was able to muster enough grey matter together in the correct personality in order to do that.

But its such a success that there was washing on the line.

I’m not making the obvious logic leap here that is so apparent to you.

Did you read the description of how she kept her house, Maelinar? Does it sound like someone with a sound mind did that?

Did she just do it out of spite?

Something that struck me as another flippant comment that was not challenged is if its such a success that there was washing hung out on the line, how on earth did this misfit obtain the acumen to be able to get out of the house, purchase her gear, get back home and get stoned higher than I can fly a kite ?

Oh that’s right, the drugs made her do it.

But its such a success that there was washing on the line.

1 + 1 just aren’t equalling 3 somehow, while I think its ok to acknowledge that she may have had serious issues, I don’t think its entirely appropriate to place the entire amount of the blame on either drugs or her mental stability.

S4anta said :

DMD,

I’d rather wait and see how god damn liberal you are when you are chasing one them down the street while they have your DVD player
tucked under their left arm.

Define liberal as you are using it in that sentence.

People have tried to help her though. Her friend is looking after her older two children. Her mum and sister did come over from NZ for the first incident, to look after the kids.

It just sounds like she can’t help herself.

Some close families have one druggie member, and despite everyone’s best efforts, if they keep on and on stuffing up there just isn’t much you can do.l

Interesting idea Peterh, but do you really think the parents should have the responsibility of taking care of her? Don’t get me wrong, I think that in some cases families are the most suitable people to get the situation sorted, but I also think we have created a society where family no longer has the same function it used to.

Instead of communicating around the dinner table, we now have TV meals where children don’t have the opportunity to engage in family life. I’m y-generation, and I used to hate going to stay with rellos who had children the same age as me, because we would spend the entire time locked in a bedroom with a telly and a mountain of DVDs, and there was almost no communication between family members. Fast forward 15 years, and those same parents now wonder why their children have almost nothing to do with them. Family used to be an extended body of people who were as close to each other as immediate family – these days, family is often used to describe a biological connection, and nothing more.

I would hope that if I was ‘Canberra’s favourite mother’, my parents would look after my children, but I certainly wouldn’t expect them to take on the responsibility of trying to rehabilitate me.

Deadmandrinking said :

Computers annoy me. Well, we seem to be agreeing on something about custodial sentences…

What’s your and VY’s take on what should happen to this woman in particular?

put her somewhere where she gets the chance to rehabilitate. Don’t put her back into an area where she will fall into the same trap -maybe send her to NZ with her parents, allowing for a stable environment may actually be beneficial for the kids, too.

DMD – I like the idea of setting up ‘mini-prisons’, which are effectively houses to which the crims would be confined in small groups of perhaps 3-4 people, with a couple of full time staff members. Thie idea is that we could rehabilitate them more effectively than if in a traditional prison environment (which does indeed produce hardened crooks), while still placing a barrier between them and the rest of the community. This idea would be to try to put people together who have similar sentence end dates, to give the group something to work towards.

Of course, the idea will need some refinement, in terms of both effectiveness and costing, but I’m sure that developing a sense of community and belonging while drug rehab and life skills learning is being delivered would be more humanly beneficial. Also, you could let charity and religious groups come and run programs for these people.

Leave them with mummy dearest to become even more ‘stuffed up”.

“…will love their mother just as much as any of us.”
What I meant here is as much as any of us love our mothers.
Just to clarify.

Ralph said :

Throw away the key. She doesn’t do well for the stereotype of the drug-addled welfare recipient, does she?

Unfortunately society has all the incentives to encourage these people to breed. Sounds like the kids would be much better off without her.

Good on you DMD, sticking up for all of society’s misfits, champ. Indeed she has a drug ‘illness’.

You clearly have all the authority on deciding who should be allowed to be a parent! And assume that if someone has a problem that they should be taken away from their children.
As if those kids don’t have enough problems, you believe that they should lose their mother to boot?!
Ignore the mother and where she fits in regards to the law. I think that she’s had too many chances too. But think for a second about her poor kids, who despite all the issues will undoubtedly love their mother just as much as any of us. Sure, she was refused bail for a reason. She has earned this.
But who the hell are you to say that her kids would be better off?!
Those poor guys are gonna be stuffed up because of this!
It shows a complete lack of humanity and compassion to be able to so flippantly disregard the emotions that these kids would be feeling.
Where do you come off deciding who is fit to parent?!

Send them both to NZ?

How about a Thunderdome? First match – Glenn Porritt vs Ainslie Mother

yEP – there needs to be another option.

It is no good just never sentencing anyone to gaol ‘becuase it just makes them worse’.

IF that is the case, then think of something else – don’t just keep letting them out.

Computers annoy me. Well, we seem to be agreeing on something about custodial sentences…

What’s your and VY’s take on what should happen to this woman in particular?

nope. does that to me too.

sh-t double post, the first one had an error, so I clicked stop, I thought that would have stopped it?

peterh said :

neanderthalsis said :

Deadmandrinking said :

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

Ummm, is this not what prison does? With the variety of educational programmes on offer, a fairly structured and disciplines lifestyle and in house work programmes it seems to me that we have this element covered.

And I would have thought that enforced incarceration in some facility where some mean and nasty authoritarian figure can harass and harangue petty crims into becoming a better person would be abhorrent to your morale code DMD?

if it was govt funded, and they took anyone who is an “addict”, I am there in a flash. stop smoking? you bet. drink again? never.

The problem is, the layout of prisons and the fact that they are locked in with bad people for a long period of time means a lot of these programs turn out to be ineffective as far as the numbers go.

My moral code states that if you’ve gotten yourself to a point where you need a kick up the arse, then so you should receive. But I don’t that all addicts should be just chucked in there (this goes into my drug legalization thing), just the ones who’s addictions begin to affect everyone else.

peterh said :

neanderthalsis said :

Deadmandrinking said :

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

Ummm, is this not what prison does? With the variety of educational programmes on offer, a fairly structured and disciplines lifestyle and in house work programmes it seems to me that we have this element covered.

And I would have thought that enforced incarceration in some facility where some mean and nasty authoritarian figure can harass and harangue petty crims into becoming a better person would be abhorrent to your morale code DMD?

if it was govt funded, and they took anyone who is an “addict”, I am there in a flash. stop smoking? you bet. drink again? never.

The problem is, the layout of prisons and the fact that they are locked in with bad people for a long period of time means a lot of these programs turn out to be ineffective as far as the numbers go.

My moral code states that if you’ve gotten yourself to a point where you need a kick up the arse, then so you should receive. But I don’t that all addicts should be just chucked in there (this goes into my drug legalization thing), just the ones who’s addictions begin to affect everyone else’s.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

But you need to remember that jails can become ’schools’ for criminals.

Something we agree on! I realise that jails are very tough and difficult places, but I’m sick of hearing how people who have committed crimes keep ‘going free’. I guess another model is called for here. Maybe home detention needs some serious thought, especially if we could get people into a home which isn’t their own and doesn’t have the same company and temptation to grab them…

You are learning, young Padawan.

(Is that how you spell it?)

neanderthalsis said :

Deadmandrinking said :

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

I’d even go further to say that I do support the idea of a ‘boot-camp’ or somewhere were prisoners can develop their education, discipline and a sound working ethic so they have other ways of going through life without crime

Ummm, is this not what prison does? With the variety of educational programmes on offer, a fairly structured and disciplines lifestyle and in house work programmes it seems to me that we have this element covered.

And I would have thought that enforced incarceration in some facility where some mean and nasty authoritarian figure can harass and harangue petty crims into becoming a better person would be abhorrent to your morale code DMD?

if it was govt funded, and they took anyone who is an “addict”, I am there in a flash. stop smoking? you bet. drink again? never.

But you need to remember that jails can become ’schools’ for criminals.

Something we agree on! I realise that jails are very tough and difficult places, but I’m sick of hearing how people who have committed crimes keep ‘going free’. I guess another model is called for here. Maybe home detention needs some serious thought, especially if we could get people into a home which isn’t their own and doesn’t have the same company and temptation to grab them…

Deadmandrinking said :

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

I’d even go further to say that I do support the idea of a ‘boot-camp’ or somewhere were prisoners can develop their education, discipline and a sound working ethic so they have other ways of going through life without crime

Ummm, is this not what prison does? With the variety of educational programmes on offer, a fairly structured and disciplines lifestyle and in house work programmes it seems to me that we have this element covered.

And I would have thought that enforced incarceration in some facility where some mean and nasty authoritarian figure can harass and harangue petty crims into becoming a better person would be abhorrent to your morale code DMD?

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

I understand that it isn’t a good outcome for those get caught in the prison system. But my question to you is how do we protect other members of society from criminal offenders? If criminals are locked away they CAN’T physically commit crimes on people out in society. If we let them out and put them in programs where they are essentially free, they can.

I understand what your saying too. But you need to remember that jails can become ‘schools’ for criminals. Longer sentences can reduce opportunities later in life…and I’m not saying that’s a bad thing just from the criminal’s perspective. Society will have to deal with these people at some point again. The encounter will be more damaging on society’s part too.

Jail can be an incredibly tough place. Despite some efforts, it has consistently proven not to be much of an effective source of rehabilitation – and rehabilitation is essential for any kind of criminal justice, I think, if your not going to lock people up for the rest of their lives for everything. You want to a) make sure offender never wants to go through this process again and b) they have a path and a mindset that won’t lead them through this process again.

The casual observer might see (a) as simple – make jail a place that you never want to go back to and increase the risks of going back there once on parole. Unfortunately for this theory, humans tend to be incredibly adaptable, especially when the sh-t has hit the fan. If their environments are tough, they’ll get tougher. If the get tougher, then they need tougher environments to keep going. I’ve heard many stories about prisoners committing crimes, bad crimes, just so they could get back inside – as they are so used to the prison world simply cannot function in the outside one. The problem here is that the crimes they will commit will usually be worse than your average first time offender with a drug problem. Jail should be for those who commit severely damaging or essentially evil crimes, such as murder, rape, major fraud and (well, I reckon) political fraud. Even then the facilities should be improved with a focus on inmate security and creating environments where the laws of the jungle don’t come into play. I’m very interested to see how the new ACT facility turns out.

(b) is also difficult. The reality is, there isn’t really any effective alternative to prison for repeat petty offenders in this country. Rehabs are not lock-in and mental facilities are really only for those who actually have serious mental issues. A lock-in rehab is a good start. I’d even go further to say that I do support the idea of a ‘boot-camp’ or somewhere were prisoners can develop their education, discipline and a sound working ethic so they have other ways of going through life without crime – that way society will benefit.

I will say, however, that this woman in particular does not fit into either category. Her actions are symptomatic of someone who needs care, more than anything else. It is obvious she has a lot of difficulty functioning in society. It would also be reasonable to assume her apathetic attitude may have evolved from similar attitudes being given to her. I think she should be in some kind of a hospital or care home until she can get back on her feet. For the children sake.

Whatsup said :

peterh said :

…if she needs help, and asks for it, it will be there.

Will it ? I thought this area is underfunded and short staffed. People who genuinely want help get lost in the crowd of whingers because there isn’t the resources to properly evaluate the gems from the gravel. I would like to be corrected here !

the new prison. not the act health system, oh, no.
the new prison will be able to assist her, if she really wants to be helped.

peterh said :

…if she needs help, and asks for it, it will be there.

Will it ? I thought this area is underfunded and short staffed. People who genuinely want help get lost in the crowd of whingers because there isn’t the resources to properly evaluate the gems from the gravel. I would like to be corrected here !

DMD: Well said. Sounds like you even got through a little.

I thought Amber Westin was Canberras’ mother of the year, or was she mother of the year for 2007?

Hey Johnboy, here is an idea for an online vote.

Mother of the year, Amber Westin, Rebecca (Edwards) Massey or “Ainslie Mother”.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

But my question to you is how do we protect other members of society from criminal offenders?

BAZOOKAS FOR ALL!

That still won’t work. That’ll only increase the numbers going back into the prison system, then going back out, then back in – turning what should have been, say, a three-year sentence into nearly a lifetime. You do not want a society who’s lives are being built by the prison system running around, and it’s unrealistic and immoral to just chuck everyone in there for a lifetime for everything.

I understand that it isn’t a good outcome for those get caught in the prison system. But my question to you is how do we protect other members of society from criminal offenders? If criminals are locked away they CAN’T physically commit crimes on people out in society. If we let them out and put them in programs where they are essentially free, they can.

Beserk Keyboard Warrior said :

All these bleeding hearts only make the matter worse by giving this bitch an excuse for behaving the way she does instead of confronting the real issues (e.g. personal willpower, selfishness). Compassion is great but it shouldn’t be wasted on people who clearly don’t deserve it.

Like Thumper says: “Some people are simply trash, They do not deserve to be in society, they will never be rehabilitated. Not ever. They don’t want to be. Simple really.”

no, I disagree. these people have fallen to the lowest. there are instances of people at this level who have managed to claw their way back into society and have become normal citizens, but it is their decision. And who says that with some drying out in a proper prison environment (ie one that is drug free) that she can’t get her life back on track?

of course, it will have to be a wait and see if she can get out of the grip of where she is now and improve herself. no-one can make her do this – she is the only one that has to make the decision. But, if she needs help, and asks for it, it will be there.

On the subject of drugs as I have said before, people should be free to do as they wish so long as they don’t bring direct harm onto others. We can clearly see in this case that she brought harm to her kids through neglect.

It is right that her kids have been removed from that situation and that she suffers the consequences of her neglect.

I hope that somewhere or some time in her life, she finds the help she needs.

Ralph said :

Unfortunately society Government has all the incentives to encourage these people to breed. Sounds like the kids would be much better off without her.

Fixed that up for you mate.

BigDave said :

Judging by some of the people I’ve seen living in that area, I wouldn’t be too surprised if we hear of a few more of these cases.

bigdave,

I work with clients who live “in that area” and I can tell you that you are judging a book by its cover.

no way.
there are pockets of people all over canberra who are in the same situation or worse – they just haven’t been identified by the act government as being an at risk candidate for child neglect, as they don’t have any.

the ones that do, will probably join the chorus of how bad this woman was, without a thought for where their kids are, what they are doing, and why the burglar alarm up the road keeps going off.

All these bleeding hearts only make the matter worse by giving this bitch an excuse for behaving the way she does instead of confronting the real issues (e.g. personal willpower, selfishness). Compassion is great but it shouldn’t be wasted on people who clearly don’t deserve it.

Like Thumper says: “Some people are simply trash, They do not deserve to be in society, they will never be rehabilitated. Not ever. They don’t want to be. Simple really.”

Oh come on Headbonius, I’m sure you have had a cackle at a not-even-craftily hidden insult on my behalf, I think it should be rigueur normale when talking to good old magic missiles.

DMD, we are refreshed and challeneged by your unique points of view. Your courage in sticking to your zany theories is admirable. Please fill us in on how socety would work without prison? Are you suggesting that the neglect this woman has shown her children should not be a criminal offence? Are you suggesting that people in the ACT receive long and unjust prison sentences?e you suggesting anyting at all?
I’d insult you, but JB would put me on the mod list and you’re not bright enough to notice.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

Correct, which is why we need to be smarter when releasing prisoners, which will include tighter controls and tougher parole conditions.

And I must add, your recently acquired attitude is a breath of fresh air 🙂

That still won’t work. That’ll only increase the numbers going back into the prison system, then going back out, then back in – turning what should have been, say, a three-year sentence into nearly a lifetime. You do not want a society who’s lives are being built by the prison system running around, and it’s unrealistic and immoral to just chuck everyone in there for a lifetime for everything.

If even one in 5 got off drugs and stayed off, the money invested in rehab would be money saved in future services – welfare/police/health/family benefits etc etc.

Rehab doesn’t have to be a touchy-feely option – it is just common sense to me. Unfortunately it’s not electorally trendy.

there are plenty more where she came from, she just happened to get caught at the same time as the one in S.A and the media jumped on it. I deal with families like this every single day and they are, (despite what the majority of middle class people in canberra think) everywhere. Its the kids that suffer, and unfortunately family services are under-resourced to cope with it.

Going to be short of professionals there Ralph.

Or did you mean dysfunctional drug addicts (as in this case)

Yes DMD, she certainly was ‘victimised’ by the media. Of course being a druggie not fit for being a mother in the first place had anything to do with the ‘witch hunt’. Does it ever occur to you that normal people, those who pay taxes and live responsibly, find this sort of behaviour offensive?

Indeed seepi, cradle to grave welfare funded her ‘lifestyle’ in the first place, lets waste putting more government money on rehab.

The answers here are pretty simple: less welfare; let charities sort people into the deserving and undeserving poor (not faceless bureacracies that dish money out with few questions, or checks); life sentences for drug pushers; and start locking drug addicts up for a long time.

Not true. As you said in the next comment, there is a high rate of re-offending. This affects the community. Jails can become breeding grounds for the harder criminals in society.

Correct, which is why we need to be smarter when releasing prisoners, which will include tighter controls and tougher parole conditions.

And I must add, your recently acquired attitude is a breath of fresh air 🙂

One thing we really need more of is rehab. We have minimal residential rehab facilities, and they are filled up with criminals who don’t want to be there, but are attending instead of gaol. But then they just check themselves out, as these places are not locked.

Then we have non-criminal junkies who are intermittently keen on rehab, but can’t ever access it, as it is full of court ordered crooks. And when the yuppie junkies do get in they often don’t last long, due to the scary crooks who populate the few rehab places there are.

We need a lock-up rehab, so that people like this woman have access to full rehab facilities if they so wish. And we need more places in the non locked rehab, so people have a chance to try to give up drugs before they end up in the court system.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

Jail has consistently proven to be a failure. It’s time we looked at other ways we can deal with addicts who begin affecting other people’s lives.

It’s only a failure from the perspective of the rehabilitation of the offender. In terms of protecting society from the ongoing actions of the offender it is very effective. I think we need to consider imprisonment more in terms of protecting society from those who choose to break the rules.

Of course, rehabilitation is important too, but to me, the ‘rights’ of the victim are more important than those of the offender.

Not true. As you said in the next comment, there is a high rate of re-offending. This affects the community. Jails can become breeding grounds for the harder criminals in society.

There are thousands of cases like this happening around Australia every year, C-man, it’s not possible to focus on them. I say that’s a good thing because it seems to me that when a case is put into the public arena, it becomes subject to one-sided judgments by people who see the world in black/white, right/wrong, ‘Oh my god, something is happening, quick, Mr Government, do something to make it go away!’ mentality. This subjects sensitive cases and the systems we have to unnecessary pressure and changes from various influential organizations and groups seeking public favor.

I do not believe the children should be in this woman’s custody. I think she needs care, rather than punishment, however, as it is clear she is in a mental state where she is not capable of functioning in society. Jail is a facility that does not provide the necessary assistance to get her back on track.

FYI, I have had things stolen from me by addicts (I presume) before.

Oh, and given the re-offend rate of jailbirds, maybe we need to relocate them and provide tighter controls once they’re on the outside.

Jail has consistently proven to be a failure. It’s time we looked at other ways we can deal with addicts who begin affecting other people’s lives.

It’s only a failure from the perspective of the rehabilitation of the offender. In terms of protecting society from the ongoing actions of the offender it is very effective. I think we need to consider imprisonment more in terms of protecting society from those who choose to break the rules.

Of course, rehabilitation is important too, but to me, the ‘rights’ of the victim are more important than those of the offender.

DMD – “I assume from the education perspective, they would be primarily concerned with the children, so they would have less insight into the mother’s situation and see her more as a source of harm to these children.”

Actually, that is the only important criteria because the children are the only people in this train wreck who don’t have a choice. Frankly the mother needs to demonstrate more then the capacity to hang washing on the line before she can be trusted back in society – let alone in a position of responsibility over children.

DMD, your argument that this woman is a victim of media persecution is ridiculous. If we lived in a truly just and humane society these types of issues would be a subject of media focus all the time. So the odds have finally caught up with her, hopefully soon enough to prevent permanent harm to the children. I strongly disagree that these types of issues should be brushed under the carpet – they should be completely exposed because that is the only way they will ever be effectively addressed. In any event, the specific woman in this case has not been identified in the media and under our current laws never will because there are children involved. That may be right and proper, but the behaviour and the measures taken to resolve it should always be exposed to public examination.

Going slightly off track here, does anyone know what happened to the one year old child that got set upon by two dogs back in early June? They arrested the child’s father so I heard. Never saw anything else about it.

Anyone?

DMD,

I’d rather wait and see how god damn liberal you are when you are chasing one them down the street while they have your DVD player
tucked under their left arm.

You probably won’t unless another child dies somewhere and makes the national news. It doesn’t mean there won’t be cases.

Judging by some of the people I’ve seen living in that area, I wouldn’t be too surprised if we hear of a few more of these cases.

Let’s say education. And that’s it.

Yeah, that’d give a certain angle, as much as the source through my mum would have another, considering where either interest lies. I assume from the education perspective, they would be primarily concerned with the children, so they would have less insight into the mother’s situation and see her more as a source of harm to these children. The source through my mother would have come through dealing with this woman’s situation, but might have been a little skewed by a primary professional concern for care and rehabilitation than justice for the children.

The case itself has several different angles.

I think the problem here is that this woman ended up in this situation at the wrong time. The media tends to feed the interest of the public, that’s how they get read, watched and talked about. At the time, we had a situation in Australia where children were dying as a result of neglect. A story like this, which does occur often in this country, came at the right time for the local media to get some spotlight. As a result, we have a situation, which really should be dealt with with all respects to privacy, especially as there are children involved, being tossed in open and all parties receiving pressure from uniformed parties and the public.

And BigDave, whilst hanging out the washing certainly isn’t a great leap – it’s at least an indication that the woman wasn’t the animal the media made her out to be. She’s still well below standard in terms of housekeeping, but it wasn’t like she wasn’t doing anything at all. Don’t believe everything you read, see and hear just because it comes from a respected media source. They feed the public interest too.

DMD, are you saying that hanging the washing out means you’ve turned a corner?

I happened to be talking to someone who has to deal with this woman at least once a week.

Take it from my friend, she is trash, serious trash. She doesn’t care about you, me, her kids, the police, the courts, anyone, not even the bleeding hearts who have been bending over backwards for the last 10 or so years trying to help her.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Some people are simply trash, They do not deserve to be in society, they will never be rehabilitated. Not ever. They don’t want to be. Simple really.

That is a fact.

Nothing more. Out.

She sounds like an addict. Guess she’ll be one for the rest of her life from what’s about to happen.

My mum knows some of the people that worked closely with her. She was saying, that while this woman has problems, there was some signs of her trying to fix herself up. The washing was out on the line, for one.

She just has some really serious issues. Probably mental as well. I don’t think the kids should be in her custody, but I don’t think she should be in jail. She should be in care.

The problem is, the media’s painted a different picture; the usual menace-to-society that your friend seems to be painting. Can you be more specific as to how your friend deals with her?

I’ll go with that Thumper.

Deadmandrinking said :

I just wasn’t listening to your poor attempts at sarcasm, mate.

Then why respond?

That’s it, you’re both on final warnings. Mod queue if you can’t figure out how to carry out a civil discourse. You’ve had more than enough prior warning.

Mælinar – *spoiler alert* I’ve seen S04E13 said :

But WMD, I noted that a changed prison environment would be more appropriate. In particular, I noted that convicted murderers should be let out on weekends to cheerily do their housework and help the children with their homework*, in an effort to counter the inconvenience of being in prison.

Since you are making a very botched attempt at reading with comprehension, frankly further conversation is quite pointless.

*embellished statement

I just wasn’t listening to your poor attempts at sarcasm, mate.

But WMD, I noted that a changed prison environment would be more appropriate. In particular, I noted that convicted murderers should be let out on weekends to cheerily do their housework and help the children with their homework*, in an effort to counter the inconvenience of being in prison.

Since you are making a very botched attempt at reading with comprehension, frankly further conversation is quite pointless.

*embellished statement

I would agree with DMD too. It’s just not worth the aggravation by disagreeing!

I would agree with DMD, sending people to prison or locking them up in remand is often ineffective in terms of rehabilitation – but it sure does make it difficult for the offender to commit further offences or victimise anyone else in society. Some people just cannot be ‘saved’ no matter how much we might like to pretend otherwise – gaol is the only place for them.

Th one prevalent thing I’m picking up from all these responses is a complete and utter lack of understanding of the variety of human psychology and conditioning that is encountered in our society. You do seem to live in very small worlds.

In the real world (the real, real one, Maelinar ;)), people come from a variety of backgrounds and have a variety of experiences which means they may not make the same choices as everyone else, therefore a range of different approaches should be applied when problems between people with different situations clash with the expectations of society in order to allow them to fit in.

Jail has consistently proven to be a failure. It’s time we looked at other ways we can deal with addicts who begin affecting other people’s lives. You know, if the drug itself was legalized or at least some indemnity to prosecution for drugs was given during some methods of rehabilitation, so the intake can be monitored while slowly helping her beat her dependence…it might just mean we wouldn’t be recycling these people through jails and public housing for the rest of their lives.

I also detest the fact that the media has jumped on this singular case and caused pressure by the usual mob of small-minded morons to just ‘lock her up and throw away the key’. There are thousands of cases like this around Australia. This one found it’s way into the hands of the media and police at a time where some more serious child neglect that had caused death had actually occurred. Coincidence?

If only she had been in Isabealla Plains on Monday evening

DMD – what would you do with her children while she spends the next 25 years addicted to meth? Get real. She has proven she cares nothing for her children and she should be removed from them.

Legalising drugs would certainly work. I also think convicted murderers get a hard rap compared to typical Carney offenders, they should be allowed out on weekends to assume a modicum of their ruined lives that the imposition of a prison sentence would naturally affect.

If it wasn’t illegal for the mother to be using meth then she would instead be at home, cheerily making school lunches and helping her kids with their homework

She would?? Hmmm, perhaps I need some :).

I think legalising drugs would fix problems like this. If it wasn’t illegal for the mother to be using meth then she would instead be at home, cheerily making school lunches and helping her kids with their homework.

Nice one Prius.

DMD on his crusade for the drug ‘addicted’ again. It’s a choice like any other. There are plenty of people to turn to for help in the ACT should she choose to ask for it.

The whole she’s using drugs to get away from other issues is a load of crapola as well. Plenty of people have those problems, plenty of people ask for help – others choose to go and get on the gear with complete disregard for those who are in their care.

Back in the hole for you mother of the year.

Angelina Jolie is apparently on the lookout for two Maori children to complete her trendy collection. Now if I could only remember where I put her number…

Throw away the key. She doesn’t do well for the stereotype of the drug-addled welfare recipient, does she?

Unfortunately society has all the incentives to encourage these people to breed. Sounds like the kids would be much better off without her.

Good on you DMD, sticking up for all of society’s misfits, champ. Indeed she has a drug ‘illness’.

illyria said :

DMD, beating your addiction because the magistrate told you so is probably as good a time as any.

If the chance of getting your kids back isn’t enough to make you do it, what do you reckon would be?

Beating addictions can be a slow process. That means you might still be using drugs, only less. God knows, she might have been seriously cutting down.

Also, whilst her children are victims, the reason they are victims is because of the mother’s meth addiction. Throwing her back in the pokey isn’t going to remove the inner problems she’s using the meth to run away from.

DMD, beating your addiction because the magistrate told you so is probably as good a time as any.

If the chance of getting your kids back isn’t enough to make you do it, what do you reckon would be?

It’s worth remembering that the ‘mother’ in question is not the victim here.

But having the magistrate bail you on the condition that you beat addiction is as good a wakeup call as you can have to get some help for your problem.

If she doesn’t, then she doesn’t, but the magistrate obviously prefers not to have such an addict on the loose and rightly locks her up.

It’s a win win.

Addiction isn’t something you can just beat because the magistrate told you so.

Something very Carney about this. Oh, hang on – he still keeps getting chances!

Ice Ice baby