Why Mothers Kill Analysis

Children are supposed to be able to depend on their parents and relatives for support and protection, as well as mothers and fathers being able to depend on agencies for protection and support when in need. In Why Mothers Kill by Michelle Oberman and Cheryl L. Meyer, the exact opposite happens to these broken families and children. Not only have the mothers failed to raise their children, but they have been incarcerated for killing them. The children of these mothers were not able to depend on their fathers and relatives due to the types of harm that could have been brought onto them, or the underlying factor that many of the mothers and their children were isolated. Mothers as well, could not depend on other people and provided agencies. They proved to be unsupportive when needed. Stories about why these parents and relatives are …show more content…
Nadine chose to not go to foster care as a little girl because she believed it was about money. Concluding long before motherhood, they believed that the organizations were not helpful to mothers and children (107). Nancy did take her newborn to the doctor for a checkup came as unusual because many of the women did not receive health care, if so it was at home care. Avoiding the doctor as seen in Vanessa’s story seemed to be popular among them. Vanessa avoided the health care system the first time because she hit her child and broke her arm. Then resetting it herself, she was reported to Child Protection Services and her baby was taken away. Regaining custody two years later her child died from an infection caused by a burn, in which Vanessa refused to take her to the doctor because she was scared to lose her daughter again (114). Agencies and organizations failed to protect these children, many of the women were investigated, but then failed to see the true risk