9-year-old charged with murder in 5 Illinois fire deaths

I'm not without compassion, although admittedly I don't deal with any similar issues personally. I'd just like to ask a "devil's advocate" kind of question: If the bolded is indeed the case, when does society require the protection of basically throwing away the key? There must be some point at which the potential risks outweigh the best interest of this child. Please give me your opinion.
No, I totally agree. That's what I mean,it's really a hopeless feeling when dealing with these types of situations and I don't know what that threshold is, but I think for the most part it's taboo to even speak like that, but then we're really accepting the harm to others. I don't know I think in an ideal situation where the best possible care/treatment would be guaranteed to be provided/required, money no issue, taken out of the home if necessary etc. then there's a chance of real healing with mental health issues, but unfortunately it's next to impossible for most families to get good, consistent quality care at all, let alone the rest. I don't know, there's no good answer and either way we're providing less than adequate care for the person with the mental health challenges and to society.
 
Sorry IM (professional)O there are no schizophrenic children. I’m not saying he doesn’t have some mental health issues, but that’s a ridiculous diagnosis for a 9 yr old.

I don't know what kind of professional you are, but childhood onset schizophrenia is absolutely a real diagnosis. One of my sons had a classmate with this diagnosis in his special education class when we lived in VA. He was 8. He is now 13 and according to his mom, they are considering an inpatient mental health facility for him at this time due to violent behaviors towards her (he has attacked her twice and smashed a window so far). He seemed like such a sweet kid most of the time. It's really sad. It is extremely rare to get this diagnosis so young, but it is totally a real thing.
 
@low-key That's not a picture of George Stinney, Jr. Maybe from the movie?
He was much shorter than the person in the chair.
As for the current child charged with murder, I agree.
Children shouldn't be held to this type of punishment.
 


I don't know what kind of professional you are, but childhood onset schizophrenia is absolutely a real diagnosis. One of my sons had a classmate with this diagnosis in his special education class when we lived in VA. He was 8. He is now 13 and according to his mom, they are considering an inpatient mental health facility for him at this time due to violent behaviors towards her (he has attacked her twice and smashed a window so far). He seemed like such a sweet kid most of the time. It's really sad. It is extremely rare to get this diagnosis so young, but it is totally a real thing.
Getting it as a diagnosis & really having it are 2 different things. There are many psychiatrists & other mental health prof who agree it’s not a proper dx in children.
 
I keep thinking about his mom. I can’t imagine how she is feeling. We all say we’d love our kids unconditionally, but would we really? He killed two of her children (his siblings), her mom (his grandma), her fiancée, and her niece (his cousin).

She just seems so indifferent when she says she called out to her kids sorry I can’t save you. She’s got to be on Valium or something. Awful, awful, awful.

No way on God's green earth could I have done that. I would have died trying to save my kids.
 
This is so horribly sad and I can't help but think of a few families I've known over the years who had children with mental health issues that involved being a danger to themselves and others, and in those cases trying to find people to help those children was the most ridiculously difficult thing. One had to move their entire family across the country to find someone willing to help them. One tried having a different family foster the child, until that family could no longer carry on due to the threat the child had become to them. :(

We have gone from one extreme to another as a society. There was a time, not terribly long ago, when children were institutionalized for things that today we'd never dream of sending a child to a live in facility due to; yet instead of finding a happy medium, we're at this extreme where parents, many with no medical training, are trying to raise children with severe health issues because they either cannot find a live-in facility for them, or they have no way to cover the costs of one. And even if they do find one and can cover it or get it covered by insurance, now society gives them flack for their decision, even if it is truly best for the child. It's a tragedy. For everyone involved--the children, their families, and in this case, innocent victims. My heart breaks for everyone involved in this sad, sad situation.
 


No way on God's green earth could I have done that. I would have died trying to save my kids.

That is the one thing she says that makes me question this woman. Most mothers would have died continuing to try and save their child. How many times have firefighters had to restrain a parent from going back into a burning building.

Was she home when the fire started? If she was, how did she get out and everyone else trapped?
 
CPS was involved with this family 13 times before, and there had been issues with this child with lighters and fire before, according to some other articles I've read on this story. I would think he would've been educated to their potential harm then. Seems like everyone but him and his mom were eliminated in the fire - I can't help but wonder if that was intentional on his part. I haven't seen his intention mentioned in any stories, but I would think investigators took that strongly into consideration over the past six months when deciding what charges to bring against him. Maybe we will hear more as this case evolves. I'm sensitive to this child's special needs, but my sympathies lie primarily with the victims.
 
Actually it is possible for him to have very early onset schizophrenia. It is rare but possible.

But either way he does need intensive psychiatric care. If he didn’t before the fire he definitely will now. But I would find it extremely sad if all that was done is that he is thrown in a hospital setting and fed drugs. He needs more than that. “Juvy” isn’t the answer. That will just make him worse in the long run.

As for the mom, I would assume shock and grief both for her family members that died and her living son. She still loves him and he is still her son. A parent loves a child unconditionally. But I am sure she is pulled and twisted with her emotions.

I am not trying to start a debate, but no way, no how to I believe every parent loves their child unconditionally. For the record, I am not speaking from my own personal relationship with my parents, but I am speaking in generalities.

There are plenty of people who have children they should never have and are ill equipped to deal with even minor challenges of child rearing. Anyone can have a child, unfortunately (in some cases).

This situation is way more complicated than an mother's unconditional love for their child.
 
As I understand it, schizophrenia is caused by an imbalance of certain neurotransmitters within a person's brain. Therefore, a child should be at risk of this horrible affliction? By definition, the subject would experience intrusive thoughts, sensations, delusions, negative symptoms and self harm. Did he ever mention someone telling him to burn the house down through lasers or telepathy?

Or, if not, perhaps the more flexible diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder? Or something else, such as Bipolar Disorder?

It seems that the issue here is the culpability of the child in question. He has done a wicked thing and probably needs psychiatric care. Forced hospitalisation is probably, in my mind, the obvious path to take. But HOW CULPABLE was he? I have no idea.
 
I am not trying to start a debate, but no way, no how to I believe every parent loves their child unconditionally. For the record, I am not speaking from my own personal relationship with my parents, but I am speaking in generalities.

There are plenty of people who have children they should never have and are ill equipped to deal with even minor challenges of child rearing. Anyone can have a child, unfortunately (in some cases).

This situation is way more complicated than an mother's unconditional love for their child.

Having a child does not make one a parent. Loving and caring for and raising a child does. So a parent—a true parent— that loves their child does so unconditionally. What kind of parent would put conditions on their love of their child? “ I will love you until you make a mistake”? Or “I will love you IF you are successful” OR “I will love you unless you have a mental illness or a learning disability”? Do any of those sound like a parent?

And yes of course this situation is way more complicated than how she lives her child. But I don’t question that statement from this mother. I do question the not being able to get to her other children and simply telling them that before they died. Something is off with her. She seems too detached.
 
Having a child does not make one a parent. Loving and caring for and raising a child does. So a parent—a true parent— that loves their child does so unconditionally. What kind of parent would put conditions on their love of their child? “ I will love you until you make a mistake”? Or “I will love you IF you are successful” OR “I will love you unless you have a mental illness or a learning disability”? Do any of those sound like a parent?

And yes of course this situation is way more complicated than how she lives her child. But I don’t question that statement from this mother. I do question the not being able to get to her other children and simply telling them that before they died. Something is off with her. She seems too detached.
I’m not sure what your point is here. There are plenty of parents that raise their kids who are indifferent to them at the least and plenty who do not love and/or absolutely put conditions on that “love” at the worst. They still go to work everyday, feed those kids, cloth them and take care of the basics because that’s what they’re supposed to do. That doesn’t equal love but it’s still “parenting.”

Unconditional love is trying to get to your kids in a fire no matter what. It’s also standing by your kid and trying to get help for him if he’s mentally ill. That she didn’t do one but appears to be doing the other might mean she’s standing by the kid because she‘s supposed to. Or maybe she loved him best. Or maybe she loved them all and is just plain worn out from trying to handle a seriously sick child and it affects her judgement and demeanor.

I’m with a PP who says we’ve gone to far in the opposite direction when it comes to helping the mentally ill. What do you do with a nine year old in this type of situation?
 
I’m not sure what your point is here. There are plenty of parents that raise their kids who are indifferent to them at the least and plenty who do not love and/or absolutely put conditions on that “love” at the worst. They still go to work everyday, feed those kids, cloth them and take care of the basics because that’s what they’re supposed to do. That doesn’t equal love but it’s still “parenting.”

Unconditional love is trying to get to your kids in a fire no matter what. It’s also standing by your kid and trying to get help for him if he’s mentally ill. That she didn’t do one but appears to be doing the other might mean she’s standing by the kid because she‘s supposed to. Or maybe she loved him best. Or maybe she loved them all and is just plain worn out from trying to handle a seriously sick child and it affects her judgement and demeanor.

I’m with a PP who says we’ve gone to far in the opposite direction when it comes to helping the mentally ill. What do you do with a nine year old in this type of situation?

What you describe does not describe a parent. It describes a caretaker. And some “parents” (legal definition) are caretakers, not parents. I was simply responding to the poster who was responding to me saying a mother loves her children unconditionally. So my “point” was just a response to what the other pp said. And that I would have never questioned her ability to still love her child even after this horrible thing he did. But the lack of emotion for her other children is puzzling.

I don’t know what the deal is with this mother. Something is off. Either she is truly unable to love her children, she loved one and not the others, she wanted out and this is it or something. A loving mother doesn’t just stand there and tell her children they can’t get to them. Perhaps she has some mental illness herself. And maybe what she is saying in the interview is just words and not how she feels at all.

Since he was recently diagnosed, it sounds like he was getting some help so she may have been trying to do that much. But as others have said many times, it a hard thing to do. As a parent, you want them to be helped but knowing they will never be “normal” is hard to come to terms with.

I do agree that we have gone too far the other way in helping the mentally ill. I don’t think this child can just receive outpatient care as he is a danger to himself and others. But simply pumping him with drugs isn’t the answer either. It’s a tragic situation.
 
Last edited:
What you describe does not describe a parent. It describes a caretaker. And some “parents” (legal definition) are caretakers, not parents. I was simply responding to the poster who was responding to me saying a mother loves her children unconditionally. So my “point” was just a response to what the other pp said. And that I would have never questioned her ability to still love her child even after this horrible thing he did. But the lack of emotion for her other children is puzzling.

I don’t know what the deal is with this mother. Something is off. Either she is truly unable to love her children, she loved one and not the others, she wanted out and this is it or something. A loving mother doesn’t just stand there and tell her children they can’t get to them. Perhaps she has some mental illness herself. And maybe what she is saying in the interview is just words and not how she feels at all.

Since he was recently diagnosed, it sounds like he was getting some help so she may have been trying to do that much. But as others have said many times, it a hard thing to do. As a parent, you want them to be helped but knowing they will never be “normal” is hard to come to terms with.

I do agree that we have gone too far the other way in helping the mentally ill. I don’t think this child can just receive outpatient care as he is a danger to himself and others. But simply pumping him with drugs isn’t the answer either. It’s a tragic situation.
But the person you quoted was saying not all parents are capable of unconditional love. You’re essentially saying the same thing and so am I. That’s where I’m confused.
 
No way on God's green earth could I have done that. I would have died trying to save my kids.
Thank G-d I have never been in that situation and I pray I never am, but it has always boggled my mind when kids die in fires and you find the parent got out. Nope, nope and NEVER. I would die before I left a burning house with my children inside.

ETA I mean no disrespect to anyone that has had this happen. I do know of at least one disser who lost her DD in a house fire. Like I said, I have never been in that situation, so I don't know what the outcome would be. But in my head right now, I would not be outside of that house unless all my kids were with me.
 
The mothers reaction, or lack of reaction, makes me wonder about a genetic component to all of this.
...I do agree that we have gone too far the other way in helping the mentally ill. I don’t think this child can just receive outpatient care as he is a danger to himself and others. But simply pumping him with drugs isn’t the answer either. It’s a tragic situation.
[/QUOTE]
It isn't the answer that's best for him. But for lack of any other options, it is sadly preferable to risking him hurting or killing others. :sad1:
 
...I do agree that we have gone too far the other way in helping the mentally ill. I don’t think this child can just receive outpatient care as he is a danger to himself and others. But simply pumping him with drugs isn’t the answer either. It’s a tragic situation.
It isn't the answer that's best for him. But for lack of any other options, it is sadly preferable to risking him hurting or killing others. :sad1:
[/QUOTE]

It’s such a tough place to be when you can’t access proper care. Because of my disease I can access doctors, tests, operations, all of it for ‘free’. Mental health should be treated the same way. Oh, you are bipolar, here’s your referral to a psychologist, no charge, just another doctor.

I don’t get why that’s so hard to figure out.
 
It’s such a tough place to be when you can’t access proper care. Because of my disease I can access doctors, tests, operations, all of it for ‘free’. Mental health should be treated the same way. Oh, you are bipolar, here’s your referral to a psychologist, no charge, just another doctor.

I don’t get why that’s so hard to figure out.
I would say it is like that "in theory" but the number of qualified professionals in the public system is so limited. I've often heard it said in discussions of our health-care system that access to a waiting list all too often substitutes for access to care. Psychological services are one of the few areas of medicine in Alberta that can legally be delivered on a private, for-fee basis and it must be much more lucrative because many practitioners opt to be in private practice. :(

Regarding the case we're discussing here, I must admit it hits close to home. The worst mass-murder in Calgary's history was perpetrated by a schizophrenic young adult 5 years ago. One of the victims was the son of my coworker. The perpetrator has just been granted unsupervised outings and is on the way to full release, even though it is acknowledged by everyone, including himself, that unmedicated, he will be a significant risk to reoffend.
https://edmontonjournal.com/news/crime/killer-matthew-de-grood-granted-unsupervised-outings
 
Last edited:
I would say it is like that "in theory" but the number of qualified professionals in the public system is so limited. I've often heard it said in discussions of our health-care system that access to a waiting list all too often substitutes for access to care. Psychological services are one of the few areas of medicine in Alberta that can legally be delivered on a private, for-fee basis and it must be much more lucrative because many practitioners opt to be in private practice. :(

Regarding the case we're discussing here, I must admit it hits close to home. The worst mass-murder in Calgary's history was perpetrated by a schizophrenic young adult 5 years ago. One of the victims was the son of my coworker. The perpetrator has just been granted unsupervised outings and is on the way to full release, even though it is acknowledged by everyone, including himself, that unmedicated, he will be a significant risk to reoffend.
https://edmontonjournal.com/news/crime/killer-matthew-de-grood-granted-unsupervised-outings

We had something similar here 11 years ago. A mentally ill man murdered a passenger on a Greyhound bus. I won’t go into all the details but it was horrific and gory. The suspect was declared mentally incompetent and was put in a treatment facility. He is now medicated and has been released. He changed his name and he lives in the city. It’s still a VERY hot topic here.

I do agree that part of the problem is a lack of resources. Waiting lists for psychologists and psychiatrists are six and seven months. The same goes for places that offer counselling on a sliding pay schedule.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!





Top