GUILTY NY - Garnett Spears, 5, dies of salt poisoning, Chestnut Ridge, 23 Jan 2014

  • #121
With MBP, other than poisoning their children, do they parent as a normal person would? I guess I ask because from the pictures, it would appear there were moments of affection. This condition is so strange.

I am not an expert on MBP but am educated on it so take my opinion as only my opinion.... It seems that the relationship between the caretaker and cared for would be dysfunctional. That the caretaker needs the (often a child so I will use the term child for the proxy) child to need them, to be solely dependent on them. These folks seem to have real trouble with boundaries, and I am thinking that they probably isolate them to some degree to keep the story straight and protected. I imagine tactics that create distrust of others to make the child even more dependent on the caretaker would be used. These folks are very manipulative, good at lying to the extent they may be lost in so many lies they may lose touch with what is truth and is not. Not in the delusional psychotic way. But they have to convince everyone, including the child, of their lies so they would need to go full fledge into the story, like an actor playing a part. I am also guessing they have little ego strength, no real sense of identity, which is why they need to be seen as needed. And to be seen as a victim, for sympathy and to get things, help, attention, excuses, etc from others. I think they are always on the lookout for something bad to occur, that they "worry" a lot and the child learns the world is not safe, I am not safe, only my caretaker can save me. All my rambling thoughts for the moment, I may add more later as I think on this :)

ETA see I am already adding lol! I think they probably show and share tons of affection, like a young child who carries around a poor kitten. That toddler doesn't have empathy for the kitten, it feels good to "have" something that they can play with, snuggle, kiss, dress up in doll clothes, and to feel special.
 
  • #122
  • #123
With MBP, other than poisoning their children, do they parent as a normal person would? I guess I ask because from the pictures, it would appear there were moments of affection. This condition is so strange.

As a "survivor" of a MSP mom, I can say that the world in general sees a loving parent & THAT is the 2nd part of the victim nightmare!
 
  • #124
It is.

Unbelievable, unforgivable, and I hope it will send her to jail for the rest of her life.

Munchausen syndrome by proxy

Bookmark & Share Printer-friendly version



Munchausen syndrome by proxy is a form of child abuse in which a parent induces real or apparent symptoms of a disease in a child.



http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001555.htm

Yes!!! But I was actually talking about her slapping him as hard as she could and then "loving on him" the minute he started crying.

That's not even Muchausenish. Just pure physical abuse!
 
  • #125
Yes!!! But I was actually talking about her slapping him as hard as she could and then "loving on him" the minute he started crying.

That's not even Muchausenish. Just pure physical abuse!

Yes, yes, and yes, gitana (sorry if I misunderstood!).

Just plain meanness and selfishness and cruelty and prolly jealousy -- that's what so much of it is about, IMO -- she was just plain selfish/jealous. It's not all about her anymore & hasn't been since G was born. Two birds with one stone -- make him suffer (he deserves it, right, for being so sweet & cute), and as the worried, loving mother, she receives "poor thing" comments and so much attention.

This is just not even human.
 
  • #126
Most do so accidentally when they "go too far." They want to keep the child slice do they can use him or her some more.


Exactly! He was her ticket to attention, attention, attention, pats on the back, "Thinking of You" cards, etc., etc., etc.

And due to this, seems like there's no way for a M1 charge -- obviously they're not going with that charge -- I don't think she planned to kill him when he died, as many here have said.

And why something as cruel as excess salt intake???
 
  • #127
Exactly! He was her ticket to attention, attention, attention, pats on the back, "Thinking of You" cards, etc., etc., etc.

And due to this, seems like there's no way for a M1 charge -- obviously they're not going with that charge -- I don't think she planned to kill him when he died, as many here have said.

And why something as cruel as excess salt intake???
Mmmm, I don't know, he could've served his usefulness. She sounds alot like Casey Anthony- dump the child when they stop being convient or could tell somebody.
 
  • #128
I could see it either way also -- total accident or it was time to exercise more control and make a "clean getaway" with sympathizers still in her corner. Garnett was now 5. What if she were separated from him and they questioned him? How could she control what he might say, even accidentally? The prospect of having her own son's words used against her might have been enough if she felt the heat was turned up.
 
  • #129
Welcome and thank you :welcome:
I was also on TPN and had an NJ tube for one month and may expect the same again soon. Taste means nothing, I also had (TMI) uncontrollable diarrhoea when I was going through the same. It is not something to enter into without a lot of thought and desperation.
Then there is refeeding syndrome to cope with which can be fatal...

.
This woman has been on my radar for a while. Who would put a child through that? Beautiful boy I wish you could have lived your life as it was meant to be..

This is my first post on Websleuths, however, I've been a long-time lurker. And, like many who have posted before me, I have followed this case since first learning of Garnett Spears. What that little boy experienced in his short life is heartbreaking and there is no viable excuse for what Lacey Spears did to her child - munchausen syndrome by proxy or not. Child abuse is child abuse, murder is murder.

I finally decided to break my silence and post as I felt I could offer some perspective as to feeding tubes. I am not a parent, however, I am an individual who has experienced living with a feeding tube. I had a J tube (a tube that inserts through the abdomen into the jejunum - it lies in the small intestine) as well as a Corpak tube that functioned as an NJ tube (a tube inserted through the nose and then fed through the stomach and left to rest, again, in the jejunum). While the enteral feeding tubes I had were different from a G tube, which I believe Garnett had, the basic function and care remains the same.

Enteral feeding is necessary for many in order to maintain health and life. I am not in a position to determine whether Garnett required the feeding tube that he had. It is certainly suspicious with the information that we have now, but I do not find blame with the physicians who placed and monitored the tube. I can say, from experience, that doctors do not place feeding tubes unless there is a reason to do so. As an adult, I can speak on my behalf, provide an accurate medical history, and make medical records accessible so that the doctors providing my care can treat me effectively. I do believe that Lacey manufactured events and caused symptoms in Garnett that caused concern and therefore indicated that a feeding tube would be appropriate. In my opinion, the blame falls squarely on Lacey Spears. And, I make no bones about the fact that I hope she is prosecuted to the fullest extent and receives a punishment that fits the crime (although, this is a misnomer as no sentence would be adequate considering she took the life of another human being).

To speak to nutrition received through a feeding tube, it's not a simple process. While tube feeding is not difficult to maintain, proper nutrition can be. Manufactured nutrition is not equal to the nutrition we receive via eating by mouth. And, it is certainly not as pleasurable. While receiving enteral feeding, not only did I see a gastroenterologist and primary care physician on a regular basis, but I was also required to see a dietitian who helped ensure that I was maintaining my weight and receiving nutrition appropriate to my individual needs. At the same time, my GI doctor monitored my condition and determined that the feeding tube was still medically indicated. And, my primary care physician monitored all of my labs in addition to coordinating my care. It was very much a team effort and one hand always knew what the other was doing. I was an active member of that team. While Lacey certainly would have done the same in an effort to boost her status, I shudder to think about how she was manipulating such a delicate situation and my heart shatters when I think of the horrors Garnett endured.

I received my nutrition through a formula sold commercially and which required a prescription. To my knowledge, this is how most formulas are sold - with valid prescriptions. Although, I am not immune to the fact that individuals can purchase such products through other sources. And, there are less expensive preparations available without prescriptions, but, any good doctor would require a dietitian to be involved in the decision-making when choosing a formula. Continued medical management is key. I would say that the vast majority of individuals receiving nutrition through a tube use a commercial product. However, there are some who do puree fruits, vegetables, and other foods in order to use while tube feeding. However, the majority of individuals who do this do so in addition to a commercially available product. In order to achieve proper nutrition, one would need to be acutely aware of their vitamin and mineral needs in order to supplement the fruits and vegetables being used. It is not an easy process and should not be undertaken without close medical supervision. And, it shouldn't be done without the assistance of someone who can monitor labs, weight, and one's overall health.

I think it stands to mention that seasoning for taste is ridiculous. No feeding tube allows an individual to taste the food. Oh, how I wish it would. But, it doesn't happen. Nutrition through a tube is just that. It is for medical necessity, it is to keep one alive, but it is not for pleasure or taste.

The fact that Lacey took it upon herself to abuse her son in this way makes me sick. I have experienced the symptoms relating to electrolyte imbalances and it is a hell I do not wish on anyone. It can be excruciatingly painful and there were times that I'd wish to just go peacefully. I am grateful that my body fought to stay alive and I am immensely thankful to be here today. And, without a feeding tube (although, I did receive life-saving nutrition through a tube only 2 weeks ago and appreciate my doctors and the blessing it is to receive necessary medical care). However, knowing what that little boy experienced is nearly too much for me to handle.

Imagine, a whole life spent in and out of hospitals...due to a parent that took it upon herself to make him sick. Childhood illnesses are real and this is a slap in the face to parents who fight to keep their sick children alive. It is a slap in the face to the little ones who fight to stay alive. Garnett's pain was unnecessary. It was evil. May he rest in peace and may Lacey be forever burdened and haunted by what she did.
 
  • #130
She was presenting herself as Mother of The Year, like all these MSBP women do, a hero, deserving of awe and respect. What a great Mum.
 
  • #131
I could see it either way also -- total accident or it was time to exercise more control and make a "clean getaway" with sympathizers still in her corner. Garnett was now 5. What if she were separated from him and they questioned him? How could she control what he might say, even accidentally? The prospect of having her own son's words used against her might have been enough if she felt the heat was turned up.

She planned to harm him in order to improve her life. Whether she planned the death does not matter. She planned the harm which resulted in the death.
Basically it is worse because she did not kill him quick. She was torturing him for years. TORTURING him.
 
  • #132
She planned to harm him in order to improve her life. Whether she planned the death does not matter. She planned the harm which resulted in the death.
Basically it is worse because she did not kill him quick. She was torturing him for years. TORTURING him.

You're right -- I didn't clarify. By "total accident" I didn't mean she wasn't aware of what she was doing. She definitely was and any "accident" was a result of over overdoing it.

Truth is that in this particular case I lean more toward the idea that the pressure was on and perhaps she meticulously planned his death OR at minimum was far more callous toward the possibility of him dying-- because in her mind it would stop the questions and preserve her as this great martyr who had suffered so much loss and keep the attention on her.

I know I could be wrong, but she strikes me as MORE calculating than some other MBPs I've read about in the past.

JMO
 
  • #133
She planned to harm him in order to improve her life. Whether she planned the death does not matter. She planned the harm which resulted in the death.
Basically it is worse because she did not kill him quick. She was torturing him for years. TORTURING him.

A felony murder rule that covers child abuse would help here. Abuse of a child resulting in death whether the death is intentional or not should make a person eligible for murder one.
 
  • #134
A felony murder rule that covers child abuse would help here. Abuse of a child resulting in death whether the death is intentional or not should make a person eligible for murder one.

Agree. The Law needs to change.
 
  • #135
Very interesting. Goes to what we discussed upthread about initiating surveillance of a parent suspected of medical abuse, involving police, etc. Article is very critical of "mandated reporters" (health professionals), who suspected foul play, but "delayed" contacting police. These arguments are certain to be used in Lacey Spears' defense case, IMO.

8 days, 3 hospitals and no one saved Garnett Spears

http://www.lohud.com/story/news/2014/06/22/missed-diagnosis/11231141/
 
  • #136
Very interesting. Goes to what we discussed upthread about initiating surveillance of a parent suspected of medical abuse, involving police, etc. Article is very critical of "mandated reporters" (health professionals), who suspected foul play, but "delayed" contacting police. These arguments are certain to be used in Lacey Spears' defense case, IMO.



http://www.lohud.com/story/news/2014/06/22/missed-diagnosis/11231141/
From this article:
On the video, Garnett appears "healthy and normal" the day after he's admitted, Assistant District Attorney Doreen Lloyd said. Doctors tell Spears the next day that if all goes well, he'd soon be released.
"Immediately after that, this defendant continuously takes her child out of his hospital bed and into the bathroom," Lloyd said, noting that each time she's carrying a cup with liquid in it and the connector to his gastric tube.
Within minutes of returning to bed, the video shows Garnett flailing and retching in pain. She removes Garnett from the bed, sometimes when he couldn't even stand up by himself, and takes him to the bathroom, Lloyd said.
A source told The Journal News that the video also shows Spears sitting passively by Garnett's bed, watching as he retches and flails — until someone comes in the room. When that happens, she strokes his head and shoulders.

"The trips to bathroom coincide with evidence from EEG machine that Garnett goes from moderate to severe cerebral dysfunction and as that is going on this child's sodium level is going up," Lloyd said. His sodium level spiked from a normal level of 144 to a life-threatening 182.


BBM. OMG!!! This is why I think there should have been surveillance cameras in the bathroom, or she should have been barred from visiting him. I saw an episode of Forensic Files where the husband of a victim was suspected of continuing to try to poison her while she was in the hospital- bringing her milkshakes laced with poison, and the police barred him from visting.
 
  • #137
Hospital's child-abuse expert on records only after death

While doctors at Maria Fareri questioned Garnett's sodium level the minute he arrived from Nyack Hospital and flagged his mother, Lacey Spears, as one hospital staff should watch, it's not known if anyone contacted the medical center's own expert.

Canter's name appears in the chronology of Garnett's case laid out in his mother's indictment but only after he's brain dead. On Jan. 22, Canter is present when Westchester County police question Lacey Spears. The next day, the 5-year-old boy was removed from life support and declared dead.

http://www.lohud.com/story/news/2014/06/22/hospitals-child-abuse-expert-records-death/11231131/
 
  • #138
Munchausen's role in case of boy's death unknown

Prosecutors would be more likely to introduce evidence suggesting the disorder, but their hands may be tied unless the defense opens the door: To get a diagnosis, Spears would have to be examined, and prosecutors can't do that unilaterally.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...cey-spears-garnett-spear-boys-death/11247787/

There was a discussion on the Kate Parker threads similar to this. Years ago, the focus of the "diagnosis" was the parent, with the Munchausen By Proxy label. But child abuse experts now favor "medical abuse" as the preferred term in the child's records, as the diagnosis is CHILD centered, not PARENT centered. Basically, it doesn't "matter" whether the abuse is "regular medical abuse", child abuse in general, or as a consequence of MbPS.

Child abuse experts also feel that the doctors of the child need to focus on treating the child, and not diagnosing the parent (which should be left up to police and other authorities). A particular psychological/ personality disorder of the parent should not change the way medical abuse is viewed on the part of the child.

I found a few good references about this, and will go get them to post here.
 
  • #139
Here are some references for medical child abuse. Will copy the reference links in entirety, since not all readers have access to the Kate Parker threads (members only).

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community


Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community


And this is a powerpoint from the American Academy of Pediatrics for medical professionals who suspect medical child abuse. Note the repeated emphasis on the child, and that the parental motivation for the abuse is a matter for law enforcement and/ or adult psychiatry, and just should not be something the child's providers focus on. I also note that they favor abandoning the Munchausen By Proxy terminology in the records of children, in favor of "medical child abuse", because MbPS is a diagnosis that applies to the parent abuser, not the child. They also go to lengths to delineate abuse, versus neglect, versus assault. I think it's a very good powerpoint for those interested.

http://pediatrics.uchicago.edu/chief...Munchausen.pdf


A horrific case of ‘medical child abuse’

http://www.tdcaa.com/node/2871


Caregiver-Fabricated Illness in a Child: A Manifestation of Child Maltreatment

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/132/3/590.full

A Preliminary Screening Instrument for Early Detection of Medical Child Abuse

http://hosppeds.aappublications.org/content/3/1/39.full
 
  • #140
Garnett Spears had feeding tube most of his life

But in the hands of a parent medically abusing a child, it can become "an avenue for medical chaos," says Dr. Marc Feldman, an Alabama psychiatrist and Munchausen syndrome expert.

It's unclear why Garnett Spears had surgery as a baby to implant a gastric feeding tube that was still in place when he died in January at age 5.

His mother, Lacey Spears, told friends the child had "failure to thrive," a catch-all, quasi-medical term for children who don't eat enough.

But people who knew the youngster in Chestnut Ridge and at other points in his short life recall seeing Garnett eat with gusto.

The tubing and other supplies require a prescription. It is unclear who provided Lacey Spears with a prescription in the year that she lived in Rockland.

http://www.lohud.com/story/news/local/rockland/2014/03/24/garnett-spears-feeding-tube-life/6855849/

Well, maybe this doc prescribed the continued feeding tube and supplies? Yet another missed opportunity-- and I wonder under what kind of conditions this doc had "left the practice"?


The papers mention an unnamed gastroenterologist in Middletown who monitored Garnett's feeding tube but make no reference to Garnett, who still had the tube despite being able to eat by mouth, seeing him in that last week. Pediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology & Nutritition in Middletown confirmed that Dr. Ivan Darenkov treated Garnett but said he had since left the practice.

http://www.lohud.com/story/news/2014/06/22/missed-diagnosis/11231141/
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
89
Guests online
1,873
Total visitors
1,962

Forum statistics

Threads
632,349
Messages
18,625,084
Members
243,099
Latest member
Snoopy7
Back
Top