Poor, poor woman

[Mookie81]

Complete lack of support and nowhere to turn.
A terrible deed but I feel so sorry for her.
And where the fuck was her ex? Living in Spain while she was driven to despair.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9186243/Olga-Freemans-friends-reveal-agony-trapped-flat-son-loved-dearly.html

Regardless of her diagnosis, it's pretty obvious to anyone that she's not a cold blooded evil killer.

www.racgp.org.au/afp/200603/200603keks.pdf

It doesn’t surprise me that some journalists think psychotic symptoms=psychosis that’s a common misunderstanding of the public. As can be seen clearly through this thread

GP educators think the same. Is this also a “common misunderstanding? I’m not a GP (another specialty) but I find the GP education series give a good overview of medical conditions.

From the article:

Acute psychosis is the presence of the mental state
where appreciation of reality is impaired, as evidenced by the presence of psychotic symptoms such as delusions, hallucinations, mood disturbance, and bizarre behaviour

So essentially, acute psychosis is diagnosed where there are psychotic symptoms.

Is the author who works at a Mental Health Research Institute at Victoria also wrong?

You also only need one psychotic symptom to be considered psychotic, according to the DSM-V.

The diagnostic criteria for Brief Psychotic disorder includes the presence of one or more psychotic symptoms of total duration less than one month.

I’m not saying that Olga had this but that the DSM-V characterises people with this disorder as “psychotic” even with just one symptom.

@nolongersurprised

You also only need one psychotic symptom to be considered psychotic, according to the DSM-V.

The diagnostic criteria for Brief Psychotic disorder includes the presence of one or more psychotic symptoms of total duration less than one month.

I’m not saying that Olga had this but that the DSM-V characterises people with this disorder as “psychotic” even with just one symptom.

Actually, the psychotic symptom must last from 1 day to 1 month. So any psychotic symptom lasting less than a full day, doesn’t meet the threshold.

As stated by the defence psychiatrist Dr Bird, she was experiencing a severe depressive episode with psychotic symptoms at the time (of the attack on Dylan). If her psychotic symptoms had lasted a full day, then she would have been diagnosed by him as having a Psychotic Disorder, and yes probably Brief Psychotic Disorder if she’d only had 1 symptom.

This wasn't available every week. When someone is prevented from sleeping, having the occasional 12 hours' respite in small sections leaving 156 hours unsupported is really a drop in the ocean.

@Neue.
I agree that 12hrs/wk is not much support. But I only brought it up because numerous posters kept repeating that Olga had “no support” whatsoever and was “alone 24/7” with Dylan and so on. It was repeated over and over with later posters taking earlier posters word for it. I was just trying to set the record straight as 12hrs/week is not a lot of support, but neither is it no support at all.

Do you have a source for not every week? The one I read stated that during lockdown the carer support Olga received dropped to 12hrs/week and was given every week:

“Edita Surpickaja had noticed that the defendant had been struggling to met Dylan's care needs for the last year as he became older and bigger and more difficult to care for. Around six months ago Dylan's behavior had become especially challenging. Dylan had attended a special school for five days per week but during the lock-down had not been able to attend school. The burden of care had fallen on the defendant with assistance from Ms Surpickaja.”

“Ms Surpickaja had only been able to offer that assistance for around 12 hours per week and had noticed a decline in the defendant's mental health. The defendant had sought assistance from the local council, but Ms Surpickaja would tell the police, had received none.”
meaww.com/ex-wife-of-celebrity-photographer-confessed-suffocating-her-son-after-suffering-mental-breakdown

@nolongersurprised

www.racgp.org.au/afp/200603/200603keks.pdf

It doesn’t surprise me that some journalists think psychotic symptoms=psychosis that’s a common misunderstanding of the public. As can be seen clearly through this thread

GP educators think the same. Is this also a “common misunderstanding? I’m not a GP (another specialty) but I find the GP education series give a good overview of medical conditions.

From the article:

Acute psychosis is the presence of the mental state
where appreciation of reality is impaired, as evidenced by the presence of psychotic symptoms such as delusions, hallucinations, mood disturbance, and bizarre behaviour

So essentially, acute psychosis is diagnosed where there are psychotic symptoms.

Is the author who works at a Mental Health Research Institute at Victoria also wrong?

I’m not sure why you are trying to diagnose Olga yourself using an article about acute psychosis? It wasn’t written by any Dr who had examined Olga. My point has purely been to uphold the diagnosis of Dr Bird, the defense psychiatrist, who did examine and assess Olga and stated that she was having a “severe depressive episode with psychotic symptoms”. I am sure Dr Bird is aware of acute psychotic episodes and if he thought she were experiencing that at the time of the attack, he would have said that in his diagnosis instead of saying “severe depressive episode with psychotic symptoms”. I think Dr Bird knows better than you or I or some random article on psychosis.

@formerbabe

Regardless of her diagnosis, it's pretty obvious to anyone that she's not a cold blooded evil killer.

Yes that is true. I have sympathy for Olga and her situation, have said so since my first post. I just like to stick to facts regarding her diagnosed mental state at the time. It’s somewhat important to me as I have a Psychotic Disorder and there is a common belief that this makes me and others like me more likely to snap and kill people. Statistically, this is not the case. And this is similar to saying a woman killed a person, when it was a man identifying as a woman being logged as killings by a woman. Everyone is saying that this killing was by a “psychotic” woman, when that’s not what she was diagnosed with and the Dr that assessed her even stated she was not psychotic and doesn’t have a psychotic disorder. This manslaughter of a child, should therefore not be counted as a death caused by psychosis.

Do you have a source for not every week? The one I read stated that during lockdown the carer support Olga received dropped to 12hrs/week and was given every week:

As I've stated above, I have some personal knowledge of the family.

It’s somewhat important to me as I have a Psychotic Disorder and there is a common belief that this makes me and others like me more likely to snap and kill people.

It's important to YOU? Olgas experiences have nothing to do with YOUR experiences. You are individuals in your own right. You have no knowledge, no insight, no understanding of her situation other than what's been printed in a tabloid newspaper. We can all see for ourselves what Dr. Bloody Bird said! Jesus fucking christ THIS is what you are (continually ) posting about?

@Belladonna123 I think that’s unfair. It’s important to me that people disabled by autism and severe communication difficulties are not likened to animals or presented as impossible to live with. If course challenging stereotypes is important and of course those damaged by those stereotypes are going to firmly state the truth. I would imagine those with direct experience of many of the issues highlighted in this case feel the same way.

@5zeds

Of course you are right. Absolutely.

However the thread is and should be about Olga Freeman and her son Dylan. Not derailed by pedantic dissections of what she might or might not have been labelled with. It's tragic enough.

Or to bloody argue about her receiving 12 hours support!

If your defence for killing your child is a mh condition brought on by lack of support then surely mh/support are relevant. I personally was far less enthralled by the absent father bashing but understand for some that is key.

I think saying she didn’t kill him “in cold blood” confuses the picture. This wasn’t (I hope) a rage filled killing but a deluded one. It was thought about (drugs before, gagging after) rather than an impulsive moment. I feel so very sorry for the little boy.

@unmarkedbythat

The mother was ill, why anybody is criticising her for one moment is beyond me.

I honestly think it comes from fear. The fear that in the same situation, faced with the same unbearable stressors and the same lack of help or hope, they too would break and do the unimaginable. If we paint the people who do these things as evil, the problem is sited in them and we do not have to fear that we too might do something terrible in terrible circumstances. And neither do we have to do the hard work of insisting society recognises what it does to its most vulnerable and how for all the nice words and shiny posters, people with additional needs and their carers are appallingly ill served.

Very insightful post

Many of the questions which people on this thread have about the mother's condition may be answered when sentencing takes place. The judge will have all the psychiatric and other information in front of them when they make their decision about culpability.

Manslaughter is not a free pass. The mother is still considered culpable. The question is how culpable. A separate question is who else is culpable in this poor child's death.

'I haven't done X so I have no sympathy for someone who did' - surely people have a bit more empathy and understanding than this? I've never committed suicide, however I can see how a horrible combination of external circumstances and mental distress could lead to this. The woman was clearly suffering from a disabling psychotic illness and under extreme stress to boot. She'll be punished and punish herself for her actions for the rest of her life.

I don’t think anyone has been painting the mother as evil? It came across more as assumed saintliness (this is often the role of the mother of disabled children).

Manslaughter is not a free pass. The mother is still considered culpable. The question is how culpable. A separate question is who else is culpable in this poor child's death. I think this is true.

I am sure Dr Bird is aware of acute psychotic episodes and if he thought she were experiencing that at the time of the attack, he would have said that in his diagnosis instead of saying “severe depressive episode with psychotic symptoms”. I think Dr Bird knows better than you or I or some random article on psychosis

You can be diagnosed as having a psychotic disorder with one psychotic symptom. Therefore people with psychotic symptoms are psychotic. They are synonymous terms.

If her psychotic symptoms had lasted a full day, then she would have been diagnosed by him as having a Psychotic Disorder, and yes probably Brief Psychotic Disorder if she’d only had 1 symptom

No, he couldn’t, because by definition symptoms of psychosis have to be present for a less than month, and with an acute presentation timeframes will be unclear.

Everyone is saying that this killing was by a “psychotic” woman, when that’s not what she was diagnosed with and the Dr that assessed her even stated she was not psychotic and doesn’t have a psychotic disorder. This manslaughter of a child, should therefore not be counted as a death caused by psychosis

I think this statement highlights your confusion.

There is not a single DSV-5 psychotic disorder that can be made after an initial meeting with an acutely unwell patient (without a thorough collateral history). They are all dependent on timeframes and a careful history of symptoms.

So it’s not relevant that she wasn’t diagnosed with a psychotic disorder at the time of presentation. Psychiatrists don’t tend to rush these diagnoses. She may have been subsequently.

The reports say that she has “psychotic symptoms”. Psychiatric articles on acute psychosis say that it is defined by patients who have psychotic symptoms. Do you have your own, unique definition where acute psychosis isn’t synonymous with having acute psychotic symptoms. Could you link to it?

@5zeds

If your defence for killing your child is a mh condition brought on by lack of support then surely mh/support are relevant. I personally was far less enthralled by the absent father bashing but understand for some that is key.

I think saying she didn’t kill him “in cold blood” confuses the picture. This wasn’t (I hope) a rage filled killing but a deluded one. It was thought about (drugs before, gagging after) rather than an impulsive moment. I feel so very sorry for the little boy.

@5zeds

Nobody official is saying it was solely due to lack of support though. I am sure it was a contributing factor but to what extent, nobody may ever know.
The plea is diminished responsibility, which does not mean she was 100% not culpable. The woman is in a secure forensic unit, I think one needs to be mindful to try and assign motive to a severely mentally ill person.

^ aaah, I meant to say “not to assign motive”.

If it was planned it was due to her impaired, acutely psychotic state though. From the link:

In the week leading up to the killing, Freeman had spoken about saving the world and being the Messiah. In a voice recording she had said: 'This is my job: To sacrifice my beloved child to create a balance in this world.'

Its deeply sinister to offer sympathy to a woman who murdered her child in horrible circumstances, my mother, with my severely disabled sister, back in the bad old days when you got 0 help or support, didn't murder my sister.
i know its not intentional but its implies that disabled lives can be considered secondary to the inconvenience they cause, which is wrong. all lives are valuable!. there is no such this as lesser murder in a case like this.

@staydazzling, Olga Freeman did not murder her child. I wish people would stop making this misleading claim.

@staydazzling. its implies that disabled lives can be considered secondary to the inconvenience they cause, which is wrong. all lives are valuable!. there is no such this as lesser murder in a case like this.

I understand your point and why you make it. But you're failing to distinguish two things here:

1. The crime itself - causing an unlawful death. This can never be "lesser" because the victim is disabled. Like you say, all lives are valuable. The horror of Dylan's death is not "lesser" in any way because he was disabled. Dylan's life was no less valuable because he was disabled.

2. The culpability for the crime. Here, circumstances can be relevant. For example, if someone killed a disabled person because they disliked disabled people, that would be a hate crime against the victim. Not only would the culpability not be "lesser", it would actually be greater. By contrast, where caring for a disabled family member adversely affects the mental health of the perpetrator to such a degree that it causes them to have a mental breakdown, the disability is relevant. Not because it is an "inconvenience" in any way or makes a life less valuable but because there is a causal connection between the burden of caring which the disability required and the mental breakdown suffered by the perpetrator of the crime which means they are less culpable.