"parents wouldn't do this"

PS

Do NOT go to Ogrish.com if you are easily upset or have a weak stomach

 

BobC

I don't have to go to Ogris to find these stories. There are enough in my daily paper.

Like the monster who, not once but twice in 5 years, took a newborn baby, put it in a five-gallon bucket, and had her moron husband fill the bucket with Quikrete.

 

Lurker is that pic under your name one of F. Lee Bailey on that glorious day when he was led away in handcuffs? I was filled with religious ecstacy that day!

 

BobC

No, that's not Flea Bailey. It's Dr. Richard Illes, the cardiothoracic surgeon who is currently on trial in my town for shooting his wife in the back and killing her as she stood talking on the telephone in her kitchen.

Read all about it on the Illes forum.

 

Woman arrested for stabbing 18-month-old daughter, leaving her for dead

Philly mom charged with stabbing baby daughter

PHILADELPHIA (AP) — A woman repeatedly stabbed her 11/2-year-old daughter and left her with a steak knife lodged in her back in a snow-covered schoolyard, where she was found alive Monday, police said.
...snip

Bystanders found Shytaisia sitting upright in a snow bank in a west Philadelphia schoolyard with the 4-inch knife in her back early Monday and flagged down police, Darby said.
...snip

The victim was taken to Children's Hospital of Philadelphia with two stab wounds to the abdomen and one to the back, and was treated for "hypothermia issues," Darby said. Temperatures in the city were hovering around 20 when the little girl was found.

Shytaisia was in critical but stable condition after undergoing surgery.

http://www.courttv.com/news/2004/0127/stabbed_ap.html

 

Heartbreaking, JR

All those who still say parents (with no official history of abusing their kids, even) wouldn't do such a thing. It's total BS, and I'm sick of seeing the stupidity of those who say it wouldn't happen.

A baby - my God, what is wrong with these people? What did this 18 month old do to deserve to be stabbed several times by her mother? I'm sorry, I can't muster up any kind of mercy for this mother or any other monster who unleashes her anger on her child this way. Stabbing a defenseless baby, dammitall.

Give that baby to me.

 

I can't believe people like this exist!!

I agree WY, give that baby to someone who deserves her.


I have been doing some research about parents who kill their kids and figured it would be relevant to post here, this first article was found @:
www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_819923.html?menu

'Law change needed to catch parents who kill'

A change in the law is needed because many parents who kill their children are getting away with murder, claims the Law Commission

They warn a widely abused legal loophole means three out of four child killers go unpunished.

Under present law, when a youngster is killed while being cared for by both parents even if police believe one of the adults to be responsible both will go free if there is not enough evidence to prove which one actually inflicted the injuries.

So if both parents remain silent the prosecution find it difficult to prove in court who was the killer.

A parent still has a duty of care to the abused child, but again parents can simply use the defence that they did not know what was going on.

Many such cases, involving killings and serious harm, do not even got to court, according to the Law Commission.

Because of this, no prosecution is started in 61% of cases despite around three children each week under the age of 10 being killed or seriously injured, mostly by their parents.

The Law Commission's report recommends the creation of a new law and changes in court rules.

A new offence of failing to protect a child, which would carry a seven year sentence, is recommended.

This would be an offence where a person who has responsibility for a child would be liable if he or she was or ought to be aware the child was being harmed and did not take "reasonable steps" to prevent it.


Story filed: 16:06 Tuesday 16th September 2003

 

Pitying parents who kill is final indignity to child

Pitying parents who kill is final indignity to child
By Rosie Dimanno
Toronto Star
THERE CAN be nothing but revulsion for a man who takes his young son's life as well as his own.

No way to mitigate that wickedness, by exploring the state of Jeyabalan Balasingam's mind when he clutched 3-year-old Sajanthan to his chest and dropped in front of an oncoming train at the Victoria Park subway station.

There are some things we're not meant to understand, I think, because to find reason in such madness is to impose a false sense of order, of logic, on to events born of mental and spiritual chaos.

Some deeds are so pitiless and grotesque, they are unworthy of cognitive examination.

But incomprehension cannot justify a clumsy form of absolution.

There is a feeling of helplessness in such events because a murder-suicide leaves no one behind from whom to exact justice, or vengeance, and I want some of the latter for adults who kill their children.

Instead, the suffering is borne only by those who will grieve for a lifetime, just as they will suffer the emotional conflict that must surely arise when the survivors - the spouses, siblings, relatives and friends - both love and hate the person who wrought all this pain.

And what if Jeyabalan Balasingam had somehow survived? His mental state would have been an exculpatory factor at any criminal trial, you can be sure of that.

In our society, those who murder their own kids become objects of such grand pity that their misdeeds become blunted and blurred; the killers are transformed into victims by skillful defence lawyers and mercenary psychiatric experts. We project our own anguish on to the accused, and give him - or her - the benefit of temporary insanity when nothing about their conduct meets the criteria except for the criminal act itself.

It's always the same when ``depression'' is given, hastily, higgledy-piggledy, as the explanation for such inexplicably evil behaviour. Balasingam was despondent, chronically depressed, had been refusing to take his medication in the last year, was unhappy in his arranged marriage, had money worries, was isolated as a Sri Lankan immigrant (but Canadian citizen) in a city where few health professionals spoke his language.

None of which rationalizes Balasingam's crime.

If anything, this man's situation illustrates how far we have come, in Toronto, in trying to bring treatment to the mentally troubled. Balasingam, despite cultural and language barriers, was under the care of a doctor. He was not left to cope on his own.

Yet he did such an obscene thing anyway.

There's a clinical term for Balasingam's crime. It's called altruistic filicide, a word so recently coined it doesn't appear yet in most medical dictionaries. But the mere fact such a term exists proves that the phenomenon is not so uncommon that it can't be categorized. In fact, it's more horrifically common than you might imagine.

In many cases, depending on culture and politics and ideology, it's even more forgivable.

Consider these local cases from recent years:


Three psychiatrists agreed Gabriela Babineau was depressed, anxious, disorganized and delusional when she smothered her child, 3-year-old Rossio Katherina Chaparro-Najar, in 1995. She was found not criminally responsible because, according to Mr. Justice David Watt, the 45-year-old woman lacked the capacity to know that her actions were morally wrong. Babineau was under the ``delusion'' her estranged husband had sexually assaulted the child. The day previous to the killing, she had received papers summoning her to court for a custody hearing.
Police found Babineau clinging to an eighth-floor balcony railing. But she was not so mentally disturbed that she actually jumped.



A crown prosecutor agreed with the defence submission that an Oakville woman was incapable of knowing her actions were morally wrong when she repeatedly stabbed her sleeping 6-year-old son in 1997. It was viewed as being a point in her favour that the woman had never before been known to abuse her children.


Rohini Maharaj, 33, was described by Brampton neighbours as a ``wonderful'' mother, even after she killed herself and her two young sons by carbon monoxide poisoning in the garage. Maharaj was depressed because of a marital separation and financial problems.
Disturbed parents set fire to their children, strangle them, poison them, shoot them, drown them. Yet their disassociative state is nearly always proffered as an extenuating circumstance. What a horrible epitaph for those trusting, murdered, innocents.

Only when an even more odious motivation is introduced at trial does an accused parent suffer the full wrath of community disgust and judicial punishment:


Susan Smith was sentenced to life in prison for strapping her two toddler sons into her car, then pushing it into a South Carolina lake. For nine days, Smith maintained a web of deceit wherein she made a nationally televised plea for the return of her children, after claiming they'd been taken by a black carjacker. Her trial was told Smith had drowned the boys after her new lover said they had no future together because he didn't want children.


Thomas Dewald of Chatham, sentenced to life in prison last year, with no possibility of parole until 2022, for drowning his two children - aged 10 and 12 - in the lake just outside his parents' cottage. A widower, Dewald had been told by a woman with whom he was obsessed that she could not get along with his daughter. In this case, Mr. Justice Gordon Thomson rejected a joint submission from the crown and the defence asking that Dewald be allowed to apply for parole after just 12 years, in part because it was unlikely the man would reoffend.
In Canada, in 1997, 64 children under the age of 12 were killed. Of those, 62 were killed by parents. Six in 10 of the victims were 5 years of age and under.
That year also saw a large increase in the number of mothers accused of killing their children. That figure nearly doubled, from 13 in 1996 to 25 in 1997.

Spare me compassion for parents who kill. Even those who do us the small favour of taking their own lives as well.

Rosie DiManno usually appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday. E-mail: dimanno@hotstar.net

 

Woman charged with burning daughter, locking her in cellar closet

WARNING: extremely graphic!

Wednesday, February 11, 2004 Posted: 7:50 AM EST (1250 GMT)


PITTSBURGH, Pennsylvania (AP) -- A woman was charged with beating her 7-year-old adopted daughter with a dog chain and keys, burning her wrists on a stove, dousing her naked body with bleach, then locking the girl inside a closet in a coal cellar with a burning furnace filter, police said.

The girl was apparently not injured by the fire, police said. She was in stable condition at Children's Hospital Tuesday night.

Debra Liberman, 50, was arraigned earlier in the day on charges including assault with a deadly weapon, attempted homicide, and arson with threat of death.
...snip

The girl told police the alleged abuse had occurred overnight.

Liberman's son is being cared for by another person, whom police didn't identify.

Liberman was jailed on $1 million bail. A preliminary hearing scheduled for February 20.



http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/Northeast/02/11/child.cellar.ap/index.html

 

Mother charged in 2 kids' drownings

Tribune staff reports
Published June 22, 2004, 3:27 PM CDT

A Northwest Side mother was charged today with the deaths of her two children, found drowned in a bathtub by firefighters called to their home to put out a kitchen fire.

Abby Grason, 23, of the 5600 block of West Carmen Avenue in the city's Jefferson Park neighborhood, allegedly admitted to investigators she killed her children "because they would not have a good life with her," police said at a news conference this afternoon to discuss the case.

Grason was charged with two counts of first-degree murder and arson after the Cook County medical examiner's office determined that Sandra and Isaac Younan, ages 4 and 2, died of drowning, and that their deaths were homicides, officials said.
...snip

Police said after killing her children about 5 a.m. Monday, Grason started a fire in a kitchen microwave oven by putting two aerosol cans in it. She then went next door to a neighbor, rang the bell and asked that someone call 911.

The woman was sitting outside her townhouse when firefighters arrived and allegedly did not tell them her children were in the home.

Firefighters extinguished the fire quickly. They then found the children face down in a tub in a second-floor bathroom.

Attempts to revive the children as they were taken to Our Lady of the Resurrection Medical Center proved unsuccessful. They were pronounced dead shortly after arriving at the hospital.

The children lived in the townhouse with their mother and maternal grandmother, police said. Their father lives in Arizona.
...snip


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-040622drown,1,7385956.story?coll=chi-news-hed

 

I meant to post this a while ago,

Mother convicted in vicious death of toddler
Failed to protect son from killer
Crown seeks 10-year sentence
BARBARA BROWN
TORSTAR NEWS SERVICE

HAMILTON—The crown will seek at least 10 years in penitentiary for a woman convicted of aiding and abetting a former boyfriend in the vicious beating death of her 14-month-old son.

Carmelita Willie gasped as the jury foreman pronounced her guilty yesterday of manslaughter. The jury deliberated about 10 hours over two days before finding the mother failed in her duty to protect baby Maliek from Carlos Clarke's brutality in September, 1997.

She began to weep when Justice Thomas Lofchik remanded her in custody until sentencing on June 23. Willie, 30, who worked as a personal-support worker at a retirement home, had been out on bail since shortly after she and Clarke were arrested in March, 1998. Clarke, also 30, is serving a life sentence with no chance of parole for 20 years after being convicted last year of Maliek's second-degree murder.

Maliek's skull was fractured in three places and he died of massive brain damage. The baby also had a severely fractured leg, a large gash and deep bruising to his face and his neck was a mass of excoriated skin and open lesions.

It appeared the child, who was immobile in a body cast, had been restrained by the neck with a ligature.

[BProsecutors do not believe Willie inflicted injuries on her child, but rather that she enabled and encouraged the abuse by not reporting Clarke to authorities and by deceiving home-care nurses and child-protection workers who were involved with the family.

"Maliek deserved to be protected and his mother let him down," said assistant crown attorney Anthony Leitch. "For this she is guilty of manslaughter."

Willie and Clark still face charges of aggravated assault on Willie's oldest child, then 2 years and 9 months old.

The boy, who is Clarke's biological son, was diagnosed with traumatic pancreatitis from an alleged blow to the abdomen. He spent 10 days in hospital shortly before Maliek was killed.

 

Baby badly battered

By CPHAMILTON -- A battered toddler suffered such traumatic brain injuries in the days leading up to his death that he would have been in a coma for 12 to 18 hours before his mother brought him to the hospital, a forensic pathologist testified yesterday.

Baby Maliek was not breathing and had no pulse when his 24-year-old mother carried him in a blanket into the emergency department at Hamilton General Hospital on Sept. 29, 1997. A team of doctors and nurses attempted to revive the 14-month-old child for more than 20 minutes but pronounced him dead at 6:51 p.m.

Maliek was in a body cast from chest to toe, having suffered a broken leg weeks earlier, and was covered in suspicious cuts, scrapes and bruises. Within 10 minutes of being pronounced dead, a doctor contacted the Children's Aid Society and the Hamilton police child-abuse branch.

Dr. Chitra Rao, who performed an autopsy the next morning, said the baby's skull was fractured in three places. Microscopic examination revealed the injuries to his skull and brain would have occurred within 12 to 18 hours of death.

Rao told a Superior Court jury that the boy, who would have been barely conscious if not completely comatose, suffered further injuries to his face and head just four to six hours before his death.

The woman's former boyfriend, Carlos Clarke, 29, has pleaded not guilty to Baby Maliek's first-degree murder. The unnamed mother is also charged with murder and will be tried later this year.

Mother on trial for baby's death
May 26, 2004

HAMILTON - A woman charged with manslaughter in her baby's death was more interested in protecting her boyfriend from police than her child, a Crown attorney charged yesterday.

Tony Leitch confronted Carmelita Willie in the witness box, accusing her of lying when she brought the lifeless body of 14-month-old Maliek to hospital on Sept. 29, 1997. At the time, Ms. Willie said her child had been in the care of a babysitter and that she hadn't seen her boyfriend in a week, the trial has heard.

But surveillance cameras showed Carlos Clarke enter the hospital. He was convicted of second-degree murder last year and is serving a life sentence.

 

Tue, June 22, 2004


Parents murdered 4 children

WARSAW, Poland -- A husband and wife were sentenced to life in prison yesterday for murdering their four children, whose mummified bodies were found in barrels at their family's apartment. The couple -- a 30-year-old man who has been identified only as Krzysztof N. and his 31-year-old wife, Jadwiga N. -- were charged after police in the city of Lodz found the barrels in a closet last year. They contained the bodies of five-year-old twin boys, killed about five years ago, and of two newborn babies.

The couple's remaining child, a 12-year-old girl, has been placed in an orphanage.

A district court in Lodz ruled that the couple had killed their children because they considered them a burden, giving one twin an overdose of sedatives, denying the other treatment for an illness and strangling one of the newborns. The court was unable to determine whether the other infant was born alive.

"You don't deserve the name of mother and father," said Judge Marek Chmiela.

 

One of the most argued points in the JonBenet Ramsey case are “Why would loving parents suddenly decide to murder their child?†In reality their thoughts are an unknown. However, their actions are well-documented.

That’s a fair question. Loving parents would not make such a decision. However, loving parents could very well be the source of an accident. The word murder enters into many articles. Some simply state that “JonBenet was found dead in the basement of her home. Her parents deny any involvementâ€. There is no proof that this was not an accident. As a matter of fact this is exactly what Henry Lee says:

"As I have indicated before in this case, the manner of this death is still a questionable issue," Lee said Friday. "Is it really a homicide or an accidental death? We really don't know." Dr. Henry Lee Source: http://www.longmontfyi.com/ramsey/storyDetail03.asp?ID=29

So if we are of the belief that the Ramseys are responsible for the cover up of an accidentally inflicted head injury to JonBenet we have to try to understand just how this went from the accidental initial injury and made the journey to the ransom note to the staging of JonBenet’s body to redirect the investigation away from themselves.

The claims of a media bias is in stark contrast to a willingness to appear on national tv; the claims of the desire to do everything in their power to help find their daughter’s killer is in stark contrast to the conditions and scripting of interviews; the secluded phone records, medical records, clothing; the finger pointing; the out and out lying about how active JonBenet was in the child pageants.

In reality we don’t know much at all about the history of the Ramseys, we do however have a record of their actions since JonBenet’s death.

However we do know that JonBenet suffered a severe blow to the back of her head. We do know that there was a ransom note that in itself reveals the most likely author. We do know that any absolute evidence belongs to the Ramsey’s themselves. We do know Patsy Ramsey’s history of education and participation in beauty contests. We do know some of Nedra Paugh’s personality. We do know some of John Ramsey’s history of being an analytical thinker, a man who built a multi-million dollar company which he started in his garage. We do know how he considered his marriage to Patsy as her being his Jacque Kennedy. We can concur from the records that John financially cared for his family, but left the child rearing and day-to-day decisions up to Patsy. We do know from Patsy’s own words that although John did not put a halt to the pageant life that he had some reservations about it. We know that Patsy was driven to perfection in all areas of her life, and that public perception was extremely important to her. We know that JonBenet became Patsy’s project.

Let’s journey from Patsy as a child and later influence. In order to understand her actions we need to understand her psyche. The quotes are from someone who has assisted me in coming to the understanding that conditional on Patsy’s environment as a child that Patsy could have indeed committed the acts upon JonBenet the night of her death. The crime scene and the post death actions further support this theory about Patsy’s psychology and personality.

Throughout all of this I have been able to find documentation of Patsy’ behavior that corresponds to the theorem.

* Nedra Paugh, Patsy’s mother, had little tolerance or understanding toward imperfection. She also showed intolerance for a child not being willing to participate in her (Nedra’s) plans.

*Pg. 191 PMPT
“Well Judith, we’re just getting JonBenet into a few pageants.â€

“Why would you do something like that?â€

“You know, she’s not too young to get started.â€

“and what if JonBenet isn’t willing?†I asked. “What if she said, ‘I’m not going to do it?’ How would you respond to that?â€

“Oh, Judith, we would never consider her saying no. We would tell JonBenet, ‘You must do it. You will be a Miss Pageant’ â€.
It was sort of eerie. A little scary. The inevitability of it-from grandmother to mother and now to daughter.
Judith Philips from PMPT

* Pg. 195-196 PMPT.
“Patsy was growing anxious about High Peaks, the school JonBenet & Burke were going to. There were children in some classes who would never be self-sufficient, physically handicapped, but they were being mainstreamed into the classroom. They have a right to be educated, but there were these other intelligent little boys and girls who were growing up to make a living, pay taxes, and they were sitting and waiting. The teacher told me her first obligation was to those handicapped children. And you just wonder how much time in the course of a day is spent on the children who need to be learning so that they can take their place in society. I know the teacher wanted to do more, but there was only one of her and an aide.â€
Nedra Paugh from PMPT

Who fit? Who was rejected? Why did they fit? Why were they rejected?

JonBenet took Patsy’s attention and Burke was left behind. (The Ramsey’s housekeeper/babysitter)

Judith Philips was told you are either with us or against us. (told to her by Barb Fernie)

The White’s were tossed aside. (although John denied this there is much documentation to the contrary)

Bill McReynolds was tossed aside and John & Patsy ridiculed his demeanor in their interviews with the police.(from the interviews in the NE book)

Patsy’s remarks about Fleet & Priscilla White and their children. (Patsy’s statements in the Police Files NE book)[/b]

I can produce the documentation for the above statements if someone feels it is necessary, however for the sake of brevity I only mention where I found the source.

*Additionally noted to me:

In the following statement keep in mind the content and length of the ransom note. Also keep in mind that the author of the note appeared to have the need to micro manage and overstate their case. They became the giver of pleasure and pain. I like you and I hate you all rolled into one. I like you but you made me do this. I like you but if something bad happens it’s not my fault, it is yours – you made me do it. I need to state this in words that John Ramsey will understand. I don’t know you but I know terms you would be familiar with and thus know that I am serious about my threats. I know you have $118,000.

Also keep in mind that many of the words and demands in the ransom note are the words and demands from movies and books that John Ramsey was familiar with.

* Additionally noted to me:

Keeping with the theme of the following statement, Patsy would have perceived that the ransom note would appear to be valid. Her penchant for drama, order and control come through. Her inability to assimilate the thinking of others would lead to this “War and Peace†of ransom notes. I have never read that Patsy expressed upon reflection that this note was extraordinary in style and content. The very thing that raised red flags to the police and a great many others did not have the same effect on Patsy.

(Lou Smit’s own statement that anyone is capable of murder given the right circumstances.)

 

cont.

Serious questions:
Why have many of their friends not come to their defense? Do they suspect something more happened than what the Ramseys were willing to tell the police?

Neither of the Ramseys treated this as a kidnapping:
John didn’t report the open window or the car in the alley.

Does anyone else find it just a little more than odd that on the one hand John feels "That entry place needs to be looked at," - there are officers upstairs dusting for fingerprints - YET "I didn’t look further after finding the open window, but I carefully close it before going back upstairs." - he didn't tell the officers about what he "discovered"? He keeps this bit of information to himself?

In my opinion the above statement says that John Ramsey knew that no kidnapping has occurred.

{*Additionally noted to me:

Quotes:“Everybody agrees that it was not a sophisticated killer who committed this crime,†Schiller says. “So by doing things wrong, they fashioned the perfect murder because all the wrong things are so confusing that it comes together and it’s very difficult to find out.

"This was a perfect murder by accident, not by design.â€
Lawrence Schiller Dateline interview October 12, 1999 Source: http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/10121999schillerondateline.htm

 

Cont.

I suppose to start out I think Patsy was on the brink of total exhaustion this night. She pushed herself to keep up the image of the strong, in control woman with the perfect children, husband, marriage. Although one of the arguments was that Patsy had never shown and predisposition for anger after reading some of the following I would suggest that she had a personality primed for reaching the edge. I do think it was absolutely an accident. And I do think that Patsy would never be able to let anyone know that she had caused such a horrible thing to happen. I think she had her own demons to fight, and the way the world perceived her was one of them. It's my opinion that she panicked and tried to cover up what she had done. The stigma of causing her child's death would have been something Patsy would never tollerate - so the cover-up - no one would ever know.

This is just one example of outsiders noticing that the children had a problem with bed wetting, yet Patsy would constantly refer to it as “not a problem†or “no big dealâ€. She would revert to her being a cancer survivor (again, bringing the topic back to herself).

I think Patsy was very intolerant of those she felt were not in her class, those who did not meet her idea of acceptable. I think she felt no qualms about trying to manipulate people, was condescending to those she didn’t feel were in her class and didn’t hesitate to turn on the Southern Belle charm and innocence to her advantage.

PMPT Page 195 – Did Nedra think JonBenet would have fought an intruder? The detectives asked. “I guarantee you†she replied.
195-196 – Nedra Paugh (Patsy’s mother)
Patsy was growing anxious about High Peaks, the school JonBenet and Burke were going to. There were children in some classes who would never be self-sufficient, physically handicapped, but they were being mainstreamed into the classroom. They have a right to be educated, but there were these other intelligent little boys and girls who were growing up to make a living, pay taxes, and they were sitting and waiting. The teacher told me her first obligation was to those handicapped children. And you wonder how much time in the course of a day is spent on the children who need to be learning so that they can take their place in society. I know the teacher wanted to do more, but there was only one of her and an aide.

Page 28-29 NE

TT: Okay. Patsy, are there any concerns in the neighborhood up there or have there been any concerns in the neighborhood up there…door to door salesman? Any of your neighbors talk about prowlers, anything like that over the last six months?
PR: Yeah, sometimes children, you know, like a, um, black children. I mean, they don’t look like they’re from my neighborhood or nothing, or look, you know like they’re from Denver and they have candy bars…

On Pages 24-25-26-27 NE
Detectives Steve Thomas & Tom Trujillo interview Patsy. They initially ask her to tell them a little about herself. Patsy has not problem recalling her many accomplishments.

It was all about her.

 

Very powerful reason for Patsy to not want to end up with one of "those" children if she accidentally injured her daughter.

 

Little, This is the truth and nothing but the truth!

 

Sue, It is a powerful reason for Patsy Ramsey to have made sure JonBenét wouldn't end up as a disabled child, because she could never have handled it; therefore she saw justification in ending JonBenét's life.

 

i have a disabled child and I have been the recipient of some of those "looks" from parents like Patsy. The looks full of pity, condescention and revulsion, like they are afraid somehow what is "wrong" with my child might rub off and "contaminate" their child. I can see Patsy rationalizing that JB would not want to live life like that.