Sally Clarke has died....

[ZZMum]

Poor poor woman... how awful for her family after all they went thru...

OH i see. No, I believe in it for sure. I rather think that makes me a lunatic too though, doesnt it?

Although I think there are some that are more insane than others, shall we say.....

Psycho gives empty eyed stare

i think it was the anti depressants TC criticized but he is probably against everything from psychologists to throat lozenges. I kind of agree with vvv though...

sophable.....

LOL ruty. What he said was:
"I've never agreed with psychiatry, ever. Before I was a Scientologist I never agreed with psychiatry. And when I started studying the history of psychiatry, I understood more and more why I didn't believe in psychology."

The interview with Matt Lauer was, er, interesting. Here if you're interested .

I think he's quite litigious, so I am NOT going to suggest he is an utter fruitloop. No sirree, not me

'She's dead. The babies are dead. That's it. Innocent or guilty. It is all over.'

It's hardly over for the loved ones she left behind - like her husband.

Imagine if someone dismissed what happened to your family so casually?

How would you feel if you were her husband? If it were your sister, daughter, auntie?

So death cancels it all out? Makes it all go away?

What a way to reason!

Hell, whole families are being wiped out in Iraq because of disgusting abuse of power.

Does the exonerate the perpetrators?

'Yes psycho, and I firmly believe that all psychologists are in fact lunatics '

Yeah, I can say I'm with ya there .

I'm confused...do you think I'm Sophable VVQ??

Also you seem to think that all psychologists are loons and people such as Tom C who dismiss them are loons...who are the sane ones.....??

< this is flippant as I can't be arsed to debate today...do not attempt to drag me in (please), I have LOTS to do>

i think perhaps the argument would go that psychologists, like everyone else, can have flawed personalities. It is just a bit more dangerous when flawed personalities find themselves in positions of power over other people, and don't see quite how flawed their personalities are. When it comes to something like Munchausens by Proxy i think these factors can come into play a bit too dangerously. It is one thing to be rather neurotic about one's health, or rather neurotic about one's children's health, and another completely to be deliberately harming your children for the strangest claim at all - 'attention'. I find your assertion that many doctors and psychologists having seen elements of Munchausens by Proxy in many parents really worrying. Because i think a number of doctors and psychologists have a 'god' syndrome [of course there are many superb docs/psychs that don't] and a Munchausens by proxy theory would suit them down to the ground. I am very glad that those kind of personalities in the medical profession will now have to be checked. [sorry!]

No, expat, I didn't mean that at all - I meant that raking over the whys and wherefores in pedantic arguement were not going to do anything.

And of course I know that when someone close dies that it is not all over for those left behidn. I am hardly partying.

I am not up to scratch with this namechanging lark.

I have changed names and thoght I was posting under other one.

Easy to figure out who I am.

Agree there have to be very stringent checks, clarity and utmost professionalism at all times.

Agree with all you say, except I didn't say 'many' (that would raise serious alarm bells) just 'at some point in professional lives' thereby suggesting very rarely (or meant to.)

and when these cases do come up professionals should act only on clear evidence and not on some sort of 'professional experitse' which in reality is just their own hunch or prejudice.(as some such as RM seemed to)

But I stand by my statement that these cases do rarely come up where you feel that the issues are less about the childs needs (health or psychological) and more about the parents own psychological issues.

I have never been involved in any cases however where thes 'feelings' have been acted upon or aired publically as evidence is raely availbvale.

Damn damn damn I have things to do.

who are ya, who are ya who are ya???

aol are you spohable?? I'm confused.

No. I am not. But I recently lost someone very precious.

I'm afraid I'm more confused, and worried I've unintentionally caused offence.

Sincere apologies if I have.

No offence taken.

Sophable is lovely; I don't mind being mistaken for her, even mid heated discussion!

Hello AOL! How're you & yours?

NOw I am lost on namechanges? Pray reveal yourself....

I thought this article about Sally was very poignant.

appalling and so sad.

AOL. I don't really know you that well really. We've spoken on a couple of threads under your previous name. I'm LilRedWG or LRWG.

I knew when I first heard about this case that she was innocent. It was so obvious they wanted to get her for being a middle class lawyer - it's a nice easy victim. I was so angry when she was found guilty. The interesting thing was that she was struck off by the Law Society. It broke its own rules - if you commit a serious crime you are struck off. So the Law Soceity believed she was innocent.

What I want to know is how the prosecution lawyers got away with withholding evidence. Nothing seems to have been done about that.

I feel so sorry for her and her family. Give a donation to a SIDS charity and lets hope this never happens again.