School Shooting at CT Elementary School

[ArfinGreebly]

Does the answer lie in the SAT scores trend?

[SteveS]

psych studies, in terms of teaching, pertain more to you understanding what's going on in the minds of the avg kid in the grade group you teach. Can that aid you in manipulating them. Possibly. But the bigger question becomes, will you use this power for good or evil? 

 

Oh great. Now the secret is out. Just don tell him about the secret handshake.

Seriously, IIRC, teachers took developmental psych and maybe one other class. They mostly learned about how children process information and learn. They didn't take anything about diagnosing. Those classes are graduate level.

I can't say that I ever learned anything that would seriously help me in manipulating people.

[Doggy Daddy]

I can't say that I ever learned anything that would seriously help me in manipulating people.

You saying that makes me feel better. 

[SteveS]

You saying that makes me feel better. 

All part of my plan.

 

[Hawkmoon]

New information suggests (as in ... not yet confirmed) that Mrs. Lanza had reached the end of her ability to handle her son, and had applied to a court (probate, presumably) for a writ of conservatorship preparatory to having him involuntarily institutionalized. The son/shooter apparently found out about this. The theory is that he decided his mother cared more about the kids in the school than she did about him, and so he set out to get revenge.

It is, at this stage, only a theory, but IMHO it's probably a good one if it can be confirmed that Nancy had applied for conservatorship (or that her son might have had reason to believe she had). From his perspective, he would have felt betrayed by his mother. He would have (probably) felt he had no way out. If he did nothing, he would be institutionalized. If he acted out in some angry but insignificant way ... he would still be institutionalized. He was (in his mind) looking at a dead-end street no matter what he did, so why NOT take out his betraying mother and as many of the kids he felt had replaced him in her affections ... and then just off himself once the game reached checkmate?

I'm thinking it makes sense.

And IF it holds up, it means all this talk about gun regulation doesn't mean diddly. What do we have here? We have a freakin' genius who wants to destroy the kids in the school. Let's remember that Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris set two 20-pound propane bombs at Columbine. Miraculously, they didn't go off, or (according to the investigators at the scene) the death toll would have been in the hundreds rather than in the teens. So if Adam Lanza, boy genius who hates his mother and the school, can't use a gun to extract his revenge ... he's certainly smart enough to construct a bomb that WILL detonate on command.

Once again -- the problem is not the guns, the problem is the people who would attack a school and kill small children. If this theory holds up, I would say the problem is that Nancy Lanza waited too long to do something about Adam, and didn't act decisively (or circumspectly) enough when she did finally decide to do something.

[SteveS]

It can be exceedingly difficult to get help for some people and most states don't make it easy to institutionalize people (which is a good thing). While she may have waited too long, it is also possible that she was doing the best she could under the circumstances.

[MillCreek]

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/18/15994142-family-newtown-boys-favorite-teacher-died-cradling-him-in-her-arms?lite

I just about wept upon reading this.

[seeker_two]

It can be exceedingly difficult to get help for some people and most states don't make it easy to institutionalize people (which is a good thing). While she may have waited too long, it is also possible that she was doing the best she could under the circumstances.

This.....when seconds count, effective mental health treatment is months away....

[SteveS]

This.....when seconds count, effective mental health treatment is months away....

I worked for the county back in the early 2000's and after a decade of budget cuts, we had 2 clinicians in the children and families unit.  Two.  For the entire county.  There were a few other private providers, but if you didn't have the cash (or insurance with mental health coverage), you were SOL.

I don't know what it is like in CT, but here there are fewer and fewer facilities that do long term in-patient mental health care.

[Hawkmoon]

I worked for the county back in the early 2000's and after a decade of budget cuts, we had 2 clinicians in the children and families unit.  Two.  For the entire county.  There were a few other private providers, but if you didn't have the cash (or insurance with mental health coverage), you were SOL.

I don't know what it is like in CT, but here there are fewer and fewer facilities that do long term in-patient mental health care.

Connecticut has enough private facilities that a family with an income at the Lanza's level would be able to find a facility. The problem seems to be (again, if that story proves to be correct) that Mrs. Lanza didn't institutionalize Adam while he was a minor. Once he hit eighteen it became a totally different ball game.

[SteveS]

Connecticut has enough private facilities that a family with an income at the Lanza's level would be able to find a facility. The problem seems to be (again, if that story proves to be correct) that Mrs. Lanza didn't institutionalize Adam while he was a minor. Once he hit eighteen it became a totally different ball game.

I agree, but it is easy to say what she should have done, after the fact. 

[Tallpine]

Connecticut has enough private facilities that a family with an income at the Lanza's level would be able to find a facility. The problem seems to be (again, if that story proves to be correct) that Mrs. Lanza didn't institutionalize Adam while he was a minor. Once he hit eighteen it became a totally different ball game.

Kids tend to develop (or display) a whole bunch of new problems between age 18-22 

[ArfinGreebly]

Yes.

That's why we don't let them vote until they're 25.

[Tallpine]

Yes.

That's why we don't let them vote until they're 25.

Just speaking from experience ... :(

[ArfinGreebly]

Just speaking from experience ... :(

Just so.

And now you understand the real reason for lowering the voting age to 18.  The whole "old enough to die for our country, should be old enough to vote" crap was nothing more than an emotional smokescreen.

When you're courting the emotional vote, you want your electorate to be as young as you can possibly get away with.

You will recall that there have been occasional efforts to bring the voting age down even more -- to 16, or even 14.

I, personally, would be fine with raising the voting age to 25.  Or even 30.

Now that I think on it, I recall that I even wrote this up over on the C2 wiki more than ten years ago.

[Hawkmoon]

I agree, but it is easy to say what she should have done, after the fact. 

Absolutely. It has been said that hindsight is 20/20. Sadly, Mrs. Lanza doesn't get a Mulligan.

[Hawkmoon]

Kids tend to develop (or display) a whole bunch of new problems between age 18-22 

Yeah, but it has already been reported by people who babysat for this kid when he was younger that Mrs. Lanza told the sitters to never turn their back on him -- to not even go to the bathroom.

The kid had more issues than just Asperger's. It is laudable on one level that the mother tried to deal with it, but on another level it's tragic that she couldn't deal with it, and waited a couple of years too long to acknowledge that.

[freakazoid]

The whole "old enough to die for our country, should be old enough to vote" crap was nothing more than an emotional smokescreen.

Not to thread drift, because that is not what we are about here on APS , but I'm going to have to disagree with you on that.

[Fly320s]

Yeah, but it has already been reported by people who babysat for this kid when he was younger that Mrs. Lanza told the sitters to never turn their back on him -- to not even go to the bathroom.

The kid had more issues than just Asperger's. It is laudable on one level that the mother tried to deal with it, but on another level it's tragic that she couldn't deal with it, and waited a couple of years too long to acknowledge that.

Where is/was Mr Lanza?

[MillCreek]

^^^ The Lanzas divorced back in 2008, and I believe he is a corporate executive in the NYC area.  The divorce mediator in their case commented on how united they were in caring for their son.  Mr. Lanza was paying something like $ 13,000 per month in alimony, which allowed Mrs. Lanza to stay home full time and care for their son.

[Hawkmoon]

Where is/was Mr Lanza?

Divorced from Mrs. Lanza since 2008 (or was it 2009?), remarried and living down-state in Stamford.

Reason given for the divorce was "irreconcilable differences," which is boilerplate for no-fault divorces in Connecticut. The reporter who first informed Mr. Lanza that his son had been involved in a school shooting described Mr. Lanza's reaction as shocked. I don't recall the exact words used, but it struck me that he did NOT seem to be indicating "surprise." Having said in a previous post that I should stop engaging in speculation, I will now go on to speculate that son Adam and what to do with son Adam may well have been the driving force behind the divorce. Three or four years ago Adam would have been 16 or 17 -- rapidly approaching the age beyond which the parents could not -- as parents -- have him institutionalized without a court order. Remember, we're talking about a kid for whom babysitters were told "Never turn your back on him." (Gotta wonder how they ever found babysitters.) What would YOU have done?

So perhaps the break-up of the marriage was an irreconcilable difference of opinion as to what to do and how to deal with Adam. Mommy insisted she didn't want him institutionalized, so Daddy finally said, "Okay, if that's the way you want it ... you deal with it. I'm out of here."

Purely speculation.

[wmenorr67]

Divorced from Mrs. Lanza since 2008 (or was it 2009?), remarried and living down-state in Stamford.

Reason given for the divorce was "irreconcilable differences," which is boilerplate for no-fault divorces in Connecticut. The reporter who first informed Mr. Lanza that his son had been involved in a school shooting described Mr. Lanza's reaction as shocked. I don't recall the exact words used, but it struck me that he did NOT seem to be indicating "surprise." Having said in a previous post that I should stop engaging in speculation, I will now go on to speculate that son Adam and what to do with son Adam may well have been the driving force behind the divorce. Three or four years ago Adam would have been 16 or 17 -- rapidly approaching the age beyond which the parents could not -- as parents -- have him institutionalized without a court order. Remember, we're talking about a kid for whom babysitters were told "Never turn your back on him." (Gotta wonder how they ever found babysitters.) What would YOU have done?

So perhaps the break-up of the marriage was an irreconcilable difference of opinion as to what to do and how to deal with Adam. Mommy insisted she didn't want him institutionalized, so Daddy finally said, "Okay, if that's the way you want it ... you deal with it. I'm out of here."

Purely speculation.

Now you put that with the speculation that Mommy was getting ready to have sonny boy committed.

[Fitz]

Just so.

And now you understand the real reason for lowering the voting age to 18.  The whole "old enough to die for our country, should be old enough to vote" crap was nothing more than an emotional smokescreen.

When you're courting the emotional vote, you want your electorate to be as young as you can possibly get away with.

You will recall that there have been occasional efforts to bring the voting age down even more -- to 16, or even 14.

I, personally, would be fine with raising the voting age to 25.  Or even 30.

Now that I think on it, I recall that I even wrote this up over on the C2 wiki more than ten years ago.

Well I, for one, would have been real gorram pissed off if folks wouldn't let me vote after soaking up IEDs and taking AK fire from jihadis for 18 months

>:-(

[kgbsquirrel]

Well I, for one, would have been real gorram pissed off if folks wouldn't let me vote after soaking up IEDs and taking AK fire from jihadis for 18 months

>:-(

Apparently responsible enough to be behind the wheel of 1.5 billion dollars worth of ship and responsible for the safety of 3000 people, but not responsible enough to have a beer.    That's a whole 'nother can of worms though.

[seeker_two]

Well I, for one, would have been real gorram pissed off if folks wouldn't let me vote after soaking up IEDs and taking AK fire from jihadis for 18 months

>:-(

OK.....voting age at 25 unless you are active-duty or honorably discharged military....