In Illinois, a trial for murder is presently
underway. Heather Lamie is accused of having caused the death in 2011 of her
4-year-old foster daughter, Kianna Rudesill (see www.pantagraph.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/live-tweets-from-the-heather-lamie-murder-trial/article_18c5d535-adc8-55a8-8890-fe3d5f3ea.html
and www.pantagraph.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/live-tweets-from-the-heather-lamie-murder-trial/articl_62bf4158-4fbb-5ff1-9900-7c7785c-16b76.html).
Kianna died of head injuries that according to medical experts could not have
been self-inflicted.
It appears that the defense will call as an expert
witness the pediatric forensic pathologist Janice Ophoven. Ophoven has become
known for her contributions to the defense of parents accused of killing
children. Her testimony shown at www.yorknewstimes.com/news/contracted-doctor-takes-stand-for-defense/article_7a631db0-66b411e2-8a43-001a4bcf887a.html
shows her arguments against a conclusion that a parent had nonaccidentally
killed a child. She gave similar arguments in the Yhip case in California and
the Trevor Smith case in Ontario, both to be found through Google. (The Yhip
case is of particular interest if you want to look at this background.)
Until recently, prosecutors and forensic examiners investigating
the causes of a child’s death had to work by reverse inference based on bruises
and other evidence, to consider how injuries might have come about and what
causes were most likely. The actual events leading up to the death, in the
previous days and hours, were known only to the accused-- if indeed to them. But today there is a new
source of information: the text messages sent and received by the accused
during the run-up to the time of death. These may be of much importance in
establishing what happened, and in the case of Kianna Rudesill’s death, they
appear to say much.
Heather Lamie and her husband Joshua texted to each
other about Kianna’s condition, expressing no sympathy about an injury the
child appeared to have. The texts included the admonition to respond to Kianna’s
being “out of control” by a simple expedient: “Beat her ___”.
Sad and telling as these texts may be, they open a
number of important questions. Did these people not understand that their texts
could be read later? Or, did they think that it was not important to hide what
they said, because they believed they were doing the right thing? If they
believed they were doing the right thing, why did they think so? Did they, like
the adoptive parents implicated in the death of Nathaniel Craver in York, PA in
2009, have contacts with people who would advise them that they must unbendingly
assert their authority over a foster child? Were they instructed that the child
was intentionally defying them by failing to comply, and that all methods were
acceptable in the fight to save her from herself?
I ask these—clearly speculative-- questions because of a specific text sent to
her husband by Heather Lamie. Referring to putting Kianna into the shower, she texted:
“Yes it is kind of cold but her brain needs as much stimulation as it can get.”
This statement has many implications beyond the obvious message of cruelty.
I think it is quite possible that Heather’s
treatment of Kianna was based on recommendations made by proponents of
Attachment Therapy, either directly or as passed along by would-be helpful
friends and neighbors. These recommendations often confuse social stimulation-- much needed by developing babies-- with sensory stimulation, and assume that
intense sensory stimulation of all kinds serves to force brain development.
Those making the recommendations also propose that all failures of children to satisfy
parents’ wishes are results of poor brain development. The “logical” conclusion
of these two assumptions is that sensory stimulation causes improved brain
development, improved brain development causes compliance with parents’ wishes,
and therefore sensory stimulation ranging from doing jumping jacks to cold
showers is beneficial. There is certainly no evidence to this effect, although
many occupational therapists and special educators persist in practices like
skin brushing because of their commitment to the connection between sensory
stimulation, brain changes, and improved behavior. (Interestingly, Jessica
Beagley, of hot sauce fame, also put her adopted Russian son in a cold shower
and videotaped this to send to “Dr. Phil”; she appears to have been surprised
that she was charged with child abuse. She claimed that the boy had Reactive Attachment
Disorder, suggesting that she might have been influenced by Attachment Therapy
beliefs.)
Heather’s and Joshua’s attitudes toward Kianna, as
shown in their texts, were also reminiscent of the views of Nancy Thomas, who
has become a spokesperson for Foster Cline and others of the authoritarian
Attachment Therapy school of thought. Thomas has recommended assuming that
children are lying about injuries, or that they have deliberately hurt
themselves in order to cause trouble for adult caregivers. When Kianna’s leg
was injured at home, her preschool teachers carried her from place to place
during the day. Joshua texted about this, ”If it hurts that bad she can go to
bed.” Thomas and other Attachment Therapy authors like Keith Reber have attributed
illnesses including vomiting to the intentional actions of children, and have
argued that showing sympathy to sick or hurt children is simply allowing
oneself to be manipulated and thereby making the children’s mental illness
worse. The Lamies may or may not have taken this belief straight from
Attachment Therapy, but instead may have shared it as part of the “old-fashioned”
way of dealing with children recounted
in many memoirs, especially of those who grew up in the Middle West or West of
the United States. Nevertheless, the possible association of their actions with
Attachment Therapy needs to be explored, and I hope the prosecutors will
realize this.
And what if the Lamies’ actions toward Kianna did indeed come from a caseworker or
therapist adherent of Attachment Therapy? The Lamies will have to take their
own responsibility for their actions, but their advisor (if there was one) will
not, unless a malpractice complaint is brought, and that is highly unlikely
until NASW and other professional organizations face up to their obligations in
matters of this kind.
Oct. 7, 2014: Heather Lamie has been convicted on two counts. No caseworker or therapist was charged.
Oct. 7, 2014: Heather Lamie has been convicted on two counts. No caseworker or therapist was charged.