Friday, May 25, 2007

Are Federal "Advocates" Standing in the Way of Sane Mental Health Laws?

Psychiatrist Sally Satel has a thought provoking piece in The Weekly Standard entitled, "Sane Mental Health Laws?" Thanks to Bugs for pointing out the article:

The Virginia Tech massacre last month will surely prompt changes in commitment laws too. Virginia governor Timothy M. Kaine has created a panel to review events and issue recommendations. The governor's panel will join several other Virginia bodies already reviewing the state's mental health laws.

The most prominent is the Task Force on Civil Commitment. It was established six months ago by the chief justice of the Virginia Supreme Court to scrutinize the state's unusually narrow standard for committing someone to a psychiatric facility against their wishes. (A patient must be "imminently" dangerous--in short, clearly ready to kill himself or someone else--before a judge can mandate treatment.)

The task force proceedings are bitterly contentious. On one side are civil liberties lawyers and disgruntled patients who insist that lowering the "imminent" danger threshold would threaten individual rights. On the other side are psychiatrists caring for people with schizophrenia and bipolar illness and their relatives who have lived through the nightmare of not being able to get timely treatment for desperately ill loved ones.


The article tells about a case where a son is released from a mental hospital because of a patient advocacy group even though he had already assaulted his father but he was released anyway only to kill his mother with a hatchet two months later. Many of the readers here and others in society want to believe that oodles of slightly eccentric people are being rounded up in straitjackets to be warehoused at a hospital. This is so far from the truth, it is actually laughable. I have never met a patient who told me he or she was unfairly kept in a hospital but I have met and worked with many who cannot get the help they need or who have been released from treatment way too early. And what about the families of those mentally ill individuals who have been assaulted and are in fear for their lives or the lives of other family members. Do they have no rights at all? Apparently not.

46 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Many of the readers here and others in society want to believe that oodles of slightly eccentric people are being rounded up in straitjackets to be warehoused at a hospital. This is so far from the truth, it is actually laughable.

Actually, google "psychiatric" survivor" and start reading. If you want to laugh at them it doesn't reflect well on your alleged "empathy".

4:18 PM, May 25, 2007  
Blogger GeorgeH said...

I even knew a practicing psychologist who maintained his commitment was unfair and unwarranted.

I don't think it is society's or a family's place to ever lock someone up to protect them from themselves.
The right to exit this world is the most basic human right there is and no one is competent to judge another's decision on timing this most personal of choices.

Once you leave the standard of "an imminent danger to others" behind, where do you stop?

5:00 PM, May 25, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Where do you stop? Not at Alan Turing, damn them to hell.

6:01 PM, May 25, 2007  
Anonymous TMink said...

Lowering the standard below imminent harm certainly does pose a risk to individual liberties. And not lowering it ensures more deaths due to dangerous and/or helpless ill people remaining untreated.

This is a question of risk management, and the germain discussion acknowledges both risks.

Trey

7:15 PM, May 25, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In a good Libertarian world, we wouldn't have mental illness. If someone became a threat to those near them, the defender would pull out his .75 magnum pocket cannon, and blast them down.

Problem solved, and no one's rights were violated.

Back in the real world, its a good question. How to properly manage risk? I'm not a mental health pro so I'd be interested in hearing the perspectives of those who are on the right place to draw the line.

Tennwriter

7:35 PM, May 25, 2007  
Anonymous ess aye said...

I used to be the billing clerk in a psych hosptial in the SF bay area. Every morning there would be a small stack of intake sheets on my desk so I could start a financial file on the patient (93% were on medicaid or medicare).

The intake sheet had a brief history of the patient and I was really shocked to learn how many people there are out there walking around who have killed a family member (usually a parent).

Also common were assaults and arson.


I don't really think we'll ever be able to tell which patient is going to snap and kill their mom or shoot up a school.

I have a child who has had psychotic issues. He's 18 and I'm holding my breath. I don't want him locked up for no reason. But if I thought he was turning into a threat, could I get him help? And would I even be able to tell?

8:22 PM, May 25, 2007  
Anonymous Alison said...

Satel's comments on the Commitment taskforce in Virginia, of which I am a member, are completely inaccurate. There are only 2 people with experience as patients out of 22 members and no full time civil rights attorneys at all.

As to getting people committed, it's very easy in most parts of Virginia outside Fairfax county. There are very few places where Cho wouldn't have been inpatient committed and it's not clear why that happened except that if outpatient commitment hadn't been an option in the law he would have been inpatient committed.

If you have truly never met a psychiatric patient who complained about being kept unfairly, I suspect your clients aren't being honest with you for some reason and you may want to figure out what that is about. Or perhaps being a forensic psychologist, people are glad to be in the hospital rather than a prison? In non-forensic mental health, it's hard to not meet people who feel they were or are being kept too long in the hospital.

On the other hand, there are people who want to be in the hospital and can't get in at all or who are released much too early due to bad or no insurance or simply bad judgment on the part of psychiatric staff. Especially suicidal patients are likely to be released long before they want or are ready to be released in my observation and experience.

9:32 PM, May 25, 2007  
Anonymous Bugs said...

alison,
Interesting info about VA from someone who's in a position to know. Hope you can share some more.

Just to play devil's advocate - Isn't anyone who's been detained against their will likely to say it was unfair and that they were locked up too long? Their negative feelings about being incarcerated don't necessarily mean they shouldn't have been locked up. I think it might, however, call into question the treatment they received while in the system.

10:32 PM, May 25, 2007  
Anonymous CNS said...

I am a moderator on a forum for the mentally ill. After all this Cho business--well, people on the board are afraid to commit themselves, however much they may want to, for fear of rights being stripped from them. not necessarily 2nd Amendment rights--many of them are against firearms--but ANy rights at all.

And, one wonders how far commitment could be taken? I mean, I knew my fiancee was afraid of me--but I just found out that even my mother thought I was going to get physically violent before I got medicated. And now? No worries.

I should note: not only am I bipolar, but my fiancee has been dx'ed schizophreniform. Talk about stereotypical psychosis--she has asked me to hide the knives in the past.

The balance to strike is, I think, between those who want to commit themselves so they can get help and function in the larger world and those who very much need to be locked up for the safety of all. It's a delicate balance, and I have little trust of politicians or the general puiblic to make any rational or educated choices on the issue.

2:30 AM, May 26, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

bugs-

Just to play devil's advocate - Isn't anyone who's been detained against their will likely to say it was unfair and that they were locked up too long? Their negative feelings about being incarcerated don't necessarily mean they shouldn't have been locked up. I think it might, however, call into question the treatment they received while in the system.

The ones that were fraudulently or illegally committed will tell you that it was improper too. Without some objective fact-finding you won't know which is which.

3:36 AM, May 26, 2007  
Anonymous TMink said...

CNS wrote: "It's a delicate balance, and I have little trust of politicians or the general puiblic to make any rational or educated choices on the issue."

Agreed, and thanks for contributing to the discussion. Most of my fear is for those committed rather than the public at large. I think that self harm or being attacked is more of a risk than people with mental illness attacking others. But with recent developments, I understand your concerns with the public engaging in needless and harmful forced inpatient treatment, which is very close to incarceration.

Before your post, I had not really given that the weight it deserves. As preventing rare (but obviously horrible) mass murders was not my main concern , I failed to consider the backlash against ill people because of Cho's acts. My bad, and thanks for the assist in taking a more balanced view of the issue.

Trey

9:00 AM, May 26, 2007  
Blogger br549 said...

The subject is a powder keg, that's for sure.
All I know is personal experience. One case, one family. The result was bad for all involved, I believe. I guess it depends, among other things, on where you live (local laws pertaining to the situation and individuals' rights), who the doctors are, the institutions involved. Outside the family, no threats were made, or scary actions against others taken. As such, voluntary entry into treatment was acceptable to the law enforcement and medical powers that be. The result: "I feel better now, let me out." With nothing in the way of proof on camera, or eyewitness account, it was "she said", "they said". Crazy and stupid are mutually exclusive most of the time. The final recommendation from the professionals was, "You need to pack up your kids and move well away, not telling anyone else where you are going."
This, without any of the benefits of the witness protection program, to draw a parallel line and attempt to add a touch of humor.

It's not as simple as one person's rights ending where they infringe on others' rights. I had absolutely no say in the matter, but had to fork over all the money I had, and could scrape up, in order to help someone whose aim in life after "the snap" was my and my children's destruction. Had we not "disappeared" as recommended, odds are it could have ended up a Cho like scenario. Or I could have been forced at some time to do what was necessary to prevent harm to my children or myself. Something I can't even look in the face.

How do you use a broad pen to write law for such individual situations?
Whatever is cast in stone can't be just politically correct, or incorrect, dependent on where one stands. Actually, law / guidelines would seem to need to be written in pencil - and on the fly.

9:23 AM, May 26, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

CNS,
As I understood it, as BR459 says, if you commit yourself, you're allowed to leave at your own free will. Is this not the case nationwide?

Tennwriter

12:48 PM, May 26, 2007  
Blogger Maxine Weiss said...

I've met plenty of people who've been unfairly kept in mental hospitals.

(I think I need to get a new set of friends)

The point is...if all these "mentally ill" who commit crimes are hauled off to jail like they should be in the first place, you'd never have to worry about them being sprung like John Hinckley Jr.

The public is a lot safer if criminals would do their normal sentences, rather than go on a theraputic holiday via these nonsense "insanity defenses".

Shut down all these glorified Snakepits, just like President Reagan wanted.

7:28 PM, May 26, 2007  
Anonymous CNS said...

If you commit yourself, yes, you can leave. The problem being, those who commit themselves tend to either have a tough time getting in...or get kicked out due to space reasons. (My own hometown's psych ward shut down a few years ago--hard to commit oneself now, eh?)

2:55 AM, May 27, 2007  
Blogger Helen said...

Maxine,

It was Robert Kennedy who made the statement about the snakepits and John Kennedy who signed the Community Mental Health Centers Act of 1963 into law, nothing to do with Reagan.

6:55 AM, May 27, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

From br459's situation, the Baldwin-Bassinger-Ireland situation, my own experience (which I'm not ready to go into further in a public forum, sorry), a friend of mine's current messy divorce but all children are adults, the Andrea Yates and Mr Yates case, probably additional already public examples if I looked for them...

A law may need to allow for a lower standard if a showing can be made that minor children are at risk.

It gets especially difficult though if incidents are mostly verbal, such as the Baldwin-Bassinger couple are now stating is the case, versus at risk of passing the physical threshold. The physical threshold passage emay be intentional or a result of temp insanity hallucinations.

C

11:03 AM, May 27, 2007  
Anonymous jfrog said...

I have never met a patient who told me he or she was unfairly kept in a hospital

Don't almost all paranoid schizophrenics claim this?

This statement just seems off... I only have limited experience with mental patients, and at it seems that at least 80% or so claim to be the victim of a plot to put them in the hospital.

1:38 PM, May 27, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm not sure of anything except that it seems a lot harder to get mental health care than it was 30 years ago -- some of my extended family had to commit one of my great-aunts (as far as I know, it was against her will) in the 1960s, and it was no sweat: there was a sanitarium in their county (nowhere near their state capital, and saying their town is the fifth largest in their state is a bit like saying that Washington, DC is only a little smaller than the smallest US state,) given the general poverty in the family at the time I'm guessing finances weren't a serious hurdle, and to the extent that it's possible, my great-aunt has gotten treatment and, more importantly for her case, supervision, for the entirety of her adult life. Another relative was committed in the same facility for a short period (a year?) following a breakdown, but came right back to her family and lived normally after that.

Meanwhile, experience involving family and friends leads me to wonder just how crazy any of the rest of us would have to get before any serious help would even become available: the entire system seems geared towards stop-gap measures and waiting to figure out if you're really crazy or just sad.

9:52 AM, May 28, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think people have the right to be nuts. If they kill someone, then deal with them as a criminal. And if they are more likely to kill someone, well you can't really incriminate someone for what they are only likely to do.

I just can't see any way to justify locking people up because an authority figure says they are insane. It is a power that can too easily be abused.

4:50 PM, May 28, 2007  
Blogger br549 said...

Anon 4:50 P.M.

Then let them kill you. And the rest of us will deal with them as criminals at that time.

Much better to prevent a murder, bank robbery, grand theft, world war, than to solve one.

Mental illness brings such misery. Ineffable misery.

When someone you have known a quarter century snaps, you know it. When many professionals become involved because of this, and after the fact, who are being fooled (to a degree) by that same person, and never knew the before and after personality changes, you know that as well. As I said earlier, crazy and stupid are usually mutually exclusive. Those in "the system" learn how to play the game. If you learn to say what the professionals want to hear, the door swings open, and out you go.

Personality disorders (once called character flaws) and emotional disorders are different things. Some are more treatable than others. Some are not effectively treated at all yet. I will not take such a chance with my children's lives, or my own. No need to compound a tragedy. Or, be forced to possibly take out someone who at one time meant so much to you, and mothered your children.

And how do you write legislation for this? Each and every case is like no other, it seems.

6:51 AM, May 29, 2007  
Blogger Helen said...

anonymous 4:50:

Yes, people have the right to be "nuts" although you say that like they enjoy it. No one has the "right" to infringe the rights of others with their illness however. How flippant to say that the mentally ill can just kill someone and act as if no one should intervene. Would you say that to Andrea Yates prior to being left with her children? I wouldn't.

7:36 AM, May 29, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

People have the right to be emotionally "nuts", and it can be very very hard on those who were closest to them.

There is, so far, no way to know who will just stay emotionally weird and who/when/why goes physically threatening. Marie Osmond touched on chemical imbalance in her auto-biography. Is there any motivation in the mental health community to do statistically broad hormonal studies?

I personally went from low progesterone ("It'd take a miracle and drugs for you to get pregnant.") to surprise natural conception then the hormone swings of three pregnancies within 7 years. Is there any post-partum depression research that may find chemical suggestions to balance with the talk/personality therapy?

C.

10:35 AM, May 29, 2007  
Anonymous Bugs said...

Oh, people have the right to be nuts? Tell that to the folks at Virginia Tech.

11:31 AM, May 29, 2007  
Blogger br549 said...

Oh, now I see.

Hormone changes during pregnancy and after. I know they can be tough, with sad to dire endings sometimes. And they can raise hell with the individual suffering these raging hormones.

Although using my own family as the example, as it is the only situation I know enough about to speak of, I am trying to bring a situation to light, not just the affects on personal and individual lives. And it is on the personality disorder side, not the emotional disorder side I am speaking of.

If you are suffering from this, I truly feel for you, and hope you are getting well. If you ended up having a psychotic episode similar to that lady in Texas, you must understand, however, that if it were up to me, there is no way you'd be out on the street.

Does that make sense? I hope so.

12:52 PM, May 29, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How flippant to say that the mentally ill can just kill someone and act as if no one should intervene.

I was not trying to be flippant, and certainly if they were in the act of killing someone, there should be intervention.

But how can you take statistics that say mentally ill people are more likely to kill, and therefore should be locked up? It's ridiculous.

What if you had statistics that showed black people living in the inner city are more likely to kill? Should we lock up all black people in the inner cities?

I have a brother who is severely mentally ill and my family absolutely forced him into taking medication and into the mental health system. He resisted absolutely every single step. I wish he didn't, since he obviously has serious problems.... But what right does anyone have to force him???

If a mental person does not break the law, how in the world can you take away their civil liberties?

That's what I meant by "deal with it after they kill someone." Most of them won't kill someone... Just like most normal people won't. You can't just take away someone's rights because they are statistically more likely to commit a crime.

1:38 PM, May 29, 2007  
Anonymous Cousin Dave said...

In a previous thread, which I unfortunately never got back to, there was a statement made by an anon commenter of: "I'd rather see 10% of guilty people go free than see one innocent person locked up". I appreciate the sentiment, but I think it's a false choice. It's presented as the choice that allows for the most liberty, but I'm not convinced that that is true. There is no real liberty when good people reasonably fear for life and limb because a bunch of dangerous people are running around loose. Given the choice, I'd rather see a system that only allows, say, 0,001% of guilty people to go free while still assurning that no innocents are locked up.

Going back to what alison said, what we seem to have today is the worst of both extremes. Putting it in terms of the analogy above, 50% of guilty people are going free, and yet a lot of innocents are being locked up. There's a major overhaul needed. I would be interested in the possibility of something like a jury system for involuntary committments.

1:43 PM, May 29, 2007  
Anonymous Cousin Dave said...

anon 1:38: I think you're missing a point. We aren't talking about a person being locked up just because they belong to a certain statistical group. In most of these types of cases that I've looked at, the person in question has a long history of less serious offenses... making threats, simple assault, petty theft, DUI, drug charges, presenting false identification, prostitution, perjury, child abuse/neglect, forgery, fraud. In case you are wondering, I took the entire list above from the acts committed by one relative in my wife's family. Said relative has also three times that I know of committed acts of arson that results in tens of thousands of dollars of property damage. She is sociopathic and it is just a matter of time until she commits a murder, or (more likely in her case) solicits for a murder. And yet the system keeps letting her go, time after time after time after time. She has delusions of grandeur; as far as she is concened, she deserves far better than what life has given her; anything and anyone that she wants is rightfully hers, and she is within her rights to take any action whatsoever to get it. And if she can't have it, then obviously no one else can have it either, and so it must be destroyed. And she has acted on this premise, more than once.

1:54 PM, May 29, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This person's mental issues aren't as extreme as some of the ones being discussed above. There's a line in the article that seems to fit well though to this topic:
"I have also reached the conclusion that if I am doing what I am doing because I am an 'attention whore' then I really need to be committed. "


Good for her in recognizing her recent relationships are as much using her as helping her.

She's trying to reestablish some relationships with her family:
"I have sacrificed a 29 year marriage and have traveled for extended periods of time away from [my children] and my health has suffered and my hospital bills from last summer (when I almost died) are in collection because I have used all my energy [on an Obsessive-Compulsive cause]...

...I am going to take whatever I have left and go home. I am going to go home and be a mother to my surviving children and try to regain some of what I have lost. I will try to maintain and nurture some very positive relationships that I have found in the journey ... and try to repair some of the ones that have fallen apart since I began this single-minded crusade ...."


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/28/12530/1525

2:24 PM, May 29, 2007  
Anonymous ever and anon said...

making threats, simple assault, petty theft, DUI, drug charges, presenting false identification, prostitution, perjury, child abuse/neglect, forgery, fraud. In case you are wondering, I took the entire list above from the acts committed by one relative in my wife's family.

I am the same anon you were referring to.

My point is exactly that she should be locked up for those things! If you've actually done all that, there is no reason you should be running free.

My issue is with the possibility of saying this lady did all these things, then diagnosing her as "X." Then later diagnose person #2 as "X". And finally locking person #2 up because he/she might do what the lady in your example did.

How can such a thing be done without violating the 2nd person's civil liberties? What if the "diagnoser" is "X"? Who can say that he isn't? Should their be a supreme "diagnoser" who sits on a throne in our nation's capitol?

And now what if person #2 gets a DUI and steals a pack of cigarettes. Should they now be locked up because they more closely match your example's description??

3:18 PM, May 29, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just so folks don't worry: My post-partum depression is old history. I did some medication for awhile, but never the super strong stuff Yates was on. My kids were never hurt; they are all now school age.

I just feel comfortable enough that I've recovered to maybe start to talk about it a bit; if that would help others.

No worries here.
Best wishes to Cousin Dave...

C, 10:35 AM

3:24 PM, May 29, 2007  
Blogger br549 said...

C, 10:35 A.M.

What you suffered would be described as an emotional disorder - treatable, and though perhaps extended, temporary after all. I am very glad you are recovered and well. The brain is an organ, like kidneys, liver, pancreas, heart, skin. It can get sick, it can get well.

I have been speaking about personality disorders. Gary Gilmore, Hannibal Lector (spelling) type stuff. Sociopaths, child molesters (yes, I believe once a child molester, always a child molester) etc. Your "illness" being a major part of who you are, not just something you are suffering from.

One suffering this type illness - no, flaw - big difference - can drive a car as well as anyone, work a job, do complicated mathematics equations, build a better mouse trap, bake a cake, perhaps paint a beautiful landscape, maybe even double on sax. A person with many acquaintances even - yet no real close friends. Yet they are capable of such unspeakable, terrible things. Who, in their right mind, could harm a child? Travel the country for years, methodically picking people out and murdering them, then moving on to the next victim? Cho chained the doors from the inside, evidently intent on killing until he ran out of bullets.

These things are not "clinical depression" type treatable mental illness. And, I do not believe, are they temporary.

7:54 PM, May 29, 2007  
Anonymous Cousin Dave said...

So let me see if I can tie some things together from ever and anon (thanks for your reply), anon 10:35 (thanks for the best wishes), and br549. Part of the problem, as br549 points out, is that we're really talking about two different groups of people here. The one group suffers from mental disorders that may cause them to commit acts of violence. However, their illnesses are usually treatable. These people don't usually have a past history of criminal or abusive behavior. I agree with ever and anon's contention that we cannot pre-emptively lock these people up, unless they have made credible threats or actually tried to do something.

The other group consists of the schizophrenics (sp?) and sociopaths. The odds are near 100% that these people will commit violent acts in the future. The problem is: as ever and anon points out, they should generally already be locked up based on their past record -- but somehow or another, they always manage to slide until the commit the Big One. In Cho's case, I know just from the public reports of at least four offenses that he committed in the year or so before his rampage, and he got to slide on all of them. (1) He falsely answered questions on the ATF forms that he filled out to buy the guns. He got by with that because the data needed to cross-check his answers wasn't in the ATF computer system. (2) He committed arson in his dorm room. The university let that slide for some unexplained reason. (3) He used his cell phone camera to take upskirt pictures of female classmates, in class no less. The victims were too intimidated to take any action, and a professor who tried to stop it ran into a brick wall with the university administration. (4) He disregarded a court order to get counseling. He slid by on that one because the authorities had no mechanism for enforcing the order.

Y'know, having just written all that, I'm starting to think that at least part of the answer is in existing law. Cho was under a court order to get counseling, but he knew that he could disregard it without consequence. Had there been consequences, things might have been differet. Had the judge instructed Cho, "Failure to attend these sessions will constitute prima facie evidence of intent to commit violent acts", and had the county actually followed up on it, then Cho might not have had the chance he had.

Now, going back to ever and anon's concern, this still leaves the question of "who gets to decide"? And that's a tricky one, because it isn't like testing for AIDS -- we don't know enough about the illness yet to devise a test that will produce an answer conclusive enough to meet evidentary standards in court. I think the answer is two-fold: (1) base the diagnosis to a considerable extent on recent past behavior, where the person/persons (I still think it ought to be a jury system) making the determination has access to all pertinent records, and (2) use a ramp-up probationary system.

In #1, access to all records is vital because of the uncannyy ability of sociopaths in particular to game the system and slide out from under a lot of things that other people would be held responsible for. So, for example, the evaluators need to be able to see all arrest records, not just convictions. (The relative of which I spoke in my previous post was arrested for DUI in a rural central Alabama county two weeks ago. From the family, I learned that her blood alcohol was .17. This is at least the tenth time since I've known her that she has been arrested for DUI, including one in which she was at fault in an accident with injuries. According to Alabama law, she should be facing at least two years in jail. But somehow she convinced the country to reduce the charge to public drunkneness. She paid a $50 fine and walked free.)

However, since our screening system is still far from perfect, we need #2 to at least minimize the insult to the rights of the innocent people who will, inevitably, get sucked up in the system. Starting out with a kind of probation system, in which the accused is not locked up, but is required to attend outpatient treatment, is not ideal but still better than locking up an innocent person. Like I said before, failure to appear at the mandated counseling should be treated legally as prima facie evidence of intent. From there, you ramp it up. The counseling will, hopefully, screen out the innocent fairly quickly, so that the abridgement of their rights is minimized. It's not perfect, but it's probably no worse than the legal system treats innocent suspects and "persons of interest" in a criminal investigation.

10:38 AM, May 30, 2007  
Blogger br549 said...

Lastly, from - again - my personal experience, the professional answer to alleviate the possibilities, was for me and my kids to pack up and disappear - uprooting me from the home and hometown I loved, and my kids from the only home they have ever known, and loved. Because the perp had the right to be out and be free since the populace at large was never threatened, just the immediate family. And, it was our word against hers. Who believes a 10, 12 and 13 year old as viable witnesses? The lawyer she had (that I paid for) gave her good advice on how to beat the system.

Taking that to an extreme, were his situation known, Cho would have been the only student at VA Tech.

So, yeah, aside from the heartbreak and financial destruction the situation imposed, I continue to be mad as hell that the kids and I had to pay the price. It just doesn't make a particle of sense.

12:29 PM, May 30, 2007  
Blogger look said...

情趣用品,
性感睡衣,
免費視訊聊天,
視訊交友網,
美姬圖影,
情境坊歡愉用品,
花美姬情趣用品,
成人圖片,
臺灣情色網,
嘟嘟情人色網,
色情網站,
情境坊歡愉用品,
徵信,
徵信公司,
徵信,
外遇,
徵信,
徵信,
抓姦,
徵信,
外遇,
徵信,
徵信社,
徵信社,
抓姦,
徵信社,
徵信社,
徵信社,
,
,
整型,
視訊聊天,
視訊交友,
AV女優,
色情,
A片,
A片,
情趣用品,
情色,
A片,
色情影片,
情趣用品,
A片,
AV女優,
視訊聊天室,
聊天,
情趣用品,
情惑用品性易購,
情侶歡愉用品,
A片,
情趣,
情惑用品性易購,
辣妹視訊,
自慰套,
情侶歡愉用品,
寄情築園小遊戲,
aio交友愛情館,
美女視訊,
色情A片,
情趣用品,
徵信社,
情趣用品,
A片,
美女視訊,
色情A片,
AV女優,
A片,
辣妹視訊,
自慰套,
情侶歡愉用品,

1:11 PM, March 15, 2009  
Blogger selina said...

福~
「朵
語‧,最一件事,就。好,你西.........................................................................................................................................................................................

9:46 AM, March 16, 2009  
Blogger mmbox said...

本土成人貼圖站大台灣情色網台灣男人幫論壇A圖網嘟嘟成人電影網火辣春夢貼圖網情色貼圖俱樂部台灣成人電影絲襪美腿樂園18美女貼圖區柔情聊天網707網愛聊天室聯盟台北69色情貼圖區38女孩情色網台灣映像館波波成人情色網站美女成人貼圖區無碼貼圖力量色妹妹性愛貼圖區日本女優貼圖網日本美少女貼圖區亞洲風暴情色貼圖網哈啦聊天室美少女自拍貼圖辣妹成人情色網台北女孩情色網辣手貼圖情色網AV無碼女優影片男女情色寫真貼圖a片天使俱樂部萍水相逢遊戲區平水相逢遊戲區免費視訊交友90739免費視訊聊天辣妹視訊 - 影音聊天網080視訊聊天室日本美女肛交美女工廠貼圖區百分百貼圖區亞洲成人電影情色網台灣本土自拍貼圖網麻辣貼圖情色網好色客成人圖片貼圖區711成人AV貼圖區台灣美女貼圖區筱萱成人論壇咪咪情色貼圖區momokoko同學會視訊kk272視訊情色文學小站成人情色貼圖區嘟嘟成人網嘟嘟情人色網 - 貼圖區免費色情a片下載台灣情色論壇成人影片分享免費視訊聊天區微風 成人 論壇kiss文學區taiwankiss文學區

9:00 AM, March 22, 2009  
Blogger mmbox said...

2008真情寫真aa片免費看捷克論壇微風論壇大眾論壇plus論壇080視訊聊天室情色視訊交友90739美女交友-成人聊天室色情小說做愛成人圖片區豆豆色情聊天室080豆豆聊天室 小辣妹影音交友網台中情人聊天室桃園星願聊天室高雄網友聊天室新中台灣聊天室中部網友聊天室嘉義之光聊天室基隆海岸聊天室中壢網友聊天室南台灣聊天室南部聊坊聊天室台南不夜城聊天室南部網友聊天室屏東網友聊天室台南網友聊天室屏東聊坊聊天室雲林網友聊天室大學生BBS聊天室網路學院聊天室屏東夜語聊天室孤男寡女聊天室一網情深聊天室心靈饗宴聊天室流星花園聊天室食色男女色情聊天室真愛宣言交友聊天室情人皇朝聊天室上班族成人聊天室上班族f1影音視訊聊天室哈雷視訊聊天室080影音視訊聊天室38不夜城聊天室援交聊天室080080哈啦聊天室台北已婚聊天室已婚廣場聊天室 夢幻家族聊天室摸摸扣扣同學會聊天室520情色聊天室QQ成人交友聊天室免費視訊網愛聊天室愛情公寓免費聊天室拉子性愛聊天室柔情網友聊天室哈啦影音交友網哈啦影音視訊聊天室櫻井莉亞三點全露寫真集123上班族聊天室尋夢園上班族聊天室成人聊天室上班族080上班族聊天室6k聊天室粉紅豆豆聊天室080豆豆聊天網新豆豆聊天室080聊天室免費音樂試聽流行音樂試聽免費aa片試看免費a長片線上看色情貼影片免費a長片

9:00 AM, March 22, 2009  
Blogger nini said...

85cc免費影城 愛情公寓正妹牆川藏第一美女 成人影片 情色交友網 美女視訊 美女視訊 視訊情人高雄網 JP成人影城 383成人影城 aa片免費a片下載 a片線上看aa片免費看 ※a片線上試看※sex520免費影片※ aa片免費看 BT成人論壇 金瓶影片交流區 自拍美女聊天室 aa片免費a片下載 SEX520免費影片 免費a片 日本美女寫真集 sex520aa免費影片 sex520aa免費影片 BT成人網 Hotsee免費視訊交友 百分百貼影片區 SEX520免費影片 免費視訊聊天室 情人視訊高雄網 星光情色討論版 正妹牆 383成人影城 線上85cc免費影城 85cc免費影城 85cc免費影城 85cc免費影城 ※免費視訊聊天室※ ※免費視訊聊天室※ 免費視訊聊天室 85cc免費影片 85cc免費影片 080苗栗人聊天室 080苗栗人聊天室 080中部人聊天室 080中部人聊天室 免費a片下載 免費a片 AA片免費看 aa片免費看 aa片免費看 aa片免費看 aa片免費看 日本av女優影片 av女優 av女優無碼影城 av女優 av女優 百分百成人圖片 百分百成人圖片 視訊情人高雄網 電話交友 影音電話交友 絕色影城 絕色影城 夜未眠成人影城 夜未眠成人影城 色咪咪影片網 色咪咪影片網 色咪咪影片網 色咪咪影片網 色咪咪影片網 免費色咪咪貼影片 免費色咪咪貼影片 色情遊戲 色情遊戲 色情遊戲 色情遊戲 影音視訊交友網 視訊交友網 080視訊聊天室 ※免費視訊聊天室※ ※免費視訊聊天室※ 視訊聊天室 成人影音視訊聊天室 ut影音視訊聊天室 ※免費視訊聊天室※ 視訊ukiss聊天室視訊ukiss聊天室 視訊交友90739 視訊交友90739 情人視訊網 168視訊美女 168視訊美女 168視訊美女 視訊美女館 視訊美女館 免費視訊美女網 小高聊天室 小高聊天室 aio交友聊天室 aio交友聊天室 交友聊天室 交友聊天室 線上a片 線上a片 線上a片 線上a片 線上a片 免費線上a片 免費線上a片 嘟嘟成人網站 成人漫畫 情色文學 嘟嘟成人網 成人貼圖區 情色文學成人小說 微風成人區 情色貼圖區 免費視訊聊天 免費成人圖片區 愛情公寓 愛情公寓聊天室 寄情築園小遊戲 免費aa片線上看 aa片免費看 情色SXE聊天室 SEX情色遊戲 色情A片 免費下載 av女優 俱樂部 情色論壇 辣妹視訊 情色貼圖網 免費色情 聊天室 情人視訊聊天室 免費a片成人影城 免費a片-aa片免費看 0204貼圖區 SEX情色 交友聊天-線上免費 女優天堂 成人交友網 成人情色貼圖區 18禁 -女優王國 080視訊美女聊天室 080視訊聊天室 視訊交友90739 免費a片 aio 視訊交友網 成人影城-免費a片※免費視訊聊天※85cc免費影片日本線上免費a片 免費色咪咪影片免費色咪咪影片aaa片免費看影片aaa片免費看成人影城免費色咪咪影片

4:20 PM, April 05, 2009  
Blogger 123456 said...

广州托盘复合托盘食品托盘天津木托盘胶合板托盘蜂窝纸托盘塑木托盘熏蒸木托盘木制托盘广东塑料托盘钢托盘钢制托盘栈板塑料栈板木栈板垫仓板托盘包装求购托盘天津托盘温州托盘山东托盘北京托盘上海木托盘塑胶托盘卡板纸卡板塑料卡板手推车推车机场手推车好孩子手推车液压手推车超市手推车医用手推车康贝手推车不锈钢手推车平板车电动平板车老虎车静音手推车平板手推车小推车模具架置物架堆垛架巧固架整理架物料整理架挂板架整理柜零件柜零件整理柜文件整理柜仓储笼仓库笼料箱塑料箱钢制料箱货箱整理箱塑料整理箱周转箱塑料周转箱防静电周转箱求购周转箱物流箱物料盒零件盒塑料零件盒卡板箱周转筐塑料周转筐周转箩登高车物流台车台车密集架档案密集架文件柜办公文件柜北京文件柜广州文件柜上海文件柜南京文件柜深圳文件柜钢制文件柜铁皮文件柜档案柜文件柜厂底图柜档案柜鞋柜储物柜更衣柜防火防磁柜防磁柜防火防磁文件柜图书架资料柜工具柜

6:46 AM, April 13, 2009  
Blogger 天天看正妹 said...

免費視訊聊天 ut聊天室辣妹視訊UT影音視訊聊天室 吉澤明步QQ美女視訊秀 85cc免費影片aa影片下載城sex免費成人影片aaa片免費看短片美女視訊 sex383線上娛樂場av969 免費短片日本免費視訊aa影片下載城視訊網愛聊天室影音視訊交友 咆哮小老鼠分享論壇sex520免費影片aa免費影片下載城aio辣妺視訊 aio辣妹交友愛情館 jp成人影片aio交友愛情館馬子免費影片免費線上a片18成人85cc影城0204movie免費色咪咪視訊網pc交友s383視訊玩美女人34c高雄視訊聊天jp成人免費視訊辣妹 kk777視訊俱樂部xxxpandalive173影音視訊聊天室 sex520-卡通影片成人免費視訊 完美女人13060 免費視訊聊天sexy girl video movie辣妹妹影音視訊聊天室UT視訊美女交友視訊情色網百事無碼a片dvd線上aa片免費看18禁成人網ut聊天室kk俱樂部視訊激情網愛聊天 情人小魔女自拍卡通aa片免費看夜未眠成人影城aio性愛dvd辣妹影片直播拓網視訊交友視訊聊天室ggoo168論壇視訊辣妹love104影音live秀 美女show-live視訊情色yam交友辣妹妹影音視訊聊天室s383情色大網咖視訊aaa俱樂部台灣情色網無碼avdvdsexy diamond sex888入口Show-live視訊聊天室

8:57 PM, April 13, 2009  
Blogger 天天看正妹 said...

免費 a 片aaaaa片俱樂部影片aaaaa片俱樂部dodo豆豆聊天室sex520網路自拍美女聊天室天堂免費線上avdvd援交av080影片aa影片下載城aaa片免費看短片成人圖片區18成人avooogo2av免費影片sexdiy影城免費線上成人影片bonbonsex0951影片下載日本av女優sex888免費看影片免費視訊78論壇辣妹有約辣妹no31314視訊dudu sex免費影片avdvd情色影片免費色咪咪影片網av080免費試看日本美女寫真集辣妹脫衣麻將視訊聊天室性福免費影片分享日本美女寫真集,kk視訊aio交友愛情館免費成人美女視訊bt論壇色情自拍免費a片卡通tw 18 net卡通18美少女圖色情漫畫777美女小護士免費 aa 片試看百分百成人情色圖片a片免費觀賞sexy girls get fuckedsexy girl video movie情色文學成人小說sex888免費看eyny 伊莉論壇sexdiy影城自拍情色0204movie免費影片aio免費aa片試看s383情色大網咖sexy girl video movie草莓牛奶AV論壇台灣論壇18禁遊戲區環球辣妹聊天室 90691拓網aio交友愛情館拓網學生族視訊777美女 sex888影片分享區hi5 tv免費影片aa的滿18歲卡通影片sex383線上娛樂場sexdiy影城免費a片線上觀看真人美女辣妹鋼管脫衣秀比基尼辣妹一夜情視訊aio交友愛情館

8:57 PM, April 13, 2009  
Blogger 天天看正妹 said...

85cc免費影片85cc免費影片sex520免費影片免費 a 片85cc免費影片台灣論壇免費影片免費看 aa的滿18歲影片85cc免費影片線上觀賞免費A片線上免費a片觀看a片免費看小魔女免費影城A片-sex520aaa片免費看短片aaaaa片俱樂部sex888免費看影片sex520免費影片sex免費成人影片馬子免費影片免費線上a片成人圖片區18成人avooo520sex貼片區臺灣情色網線上免費a長片免費卡通影片線上觀看gogo2sex免費 a 片sex520免費影片援交av080影片免費線上avdvd免費 aa 片試看,成人影片分享後宮0204movie免費影片免費線上歐美A片觀看sex888影片分享區微風成人av論壇plus論壇自拍情色0204movie免費影片aaa片免費看短片免費色咪咪影片網aaaa彩虹頻道免費影片日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞85cc免費影城5278論壇倉井空免費a影片bbs x693 com sex888a片免費觀賞sexy girls get fucked吉澤明步彩虹頻道免費短片sex520-卡通影片台灣情色網無碼avdvdaaa影片下載城彩虹頻道免費影片 sex383線上娛樂場一本道 a片 東京熱情色影片彩虹成人avdvd洪爺影城高中生援交偷拍自拍限制級色情 片

8:57 PM, April 13, 2009  
Blogger 徵信 said...

外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇 外遇
外遇


外遇 外遇
外遇
外遇 外遇外遇
外遇

外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 ,
外遇 外遇 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇

外遇 外遇

外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿喜帖囍帖卡片外遇外遇 外遇 外遇外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇 外遇 外遇剖析 外遇調查 外遇案例 外遇諮詢 偷情 第三者外遇話題 外遇發洩 感情挽回 徵信社 外遇心態 外遇 通姦 通姦罪 外遇徵信社徵信社外遇 外遇 抓姦徵信協會徵信公司 包二奶 徵信社 徵信 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信 婚姻 婚前徵信 前科 個人資料 外遇 第三者 徵信社 偵探社 抓姦 偵探社 偵探社婚 偵探社 偵探社偵探家事服務家事服務家電維修家事服務家事服務家事服務家事服務家事服務持久持久持久持久持久持久持久離婚網頁設計徵信社徵信社徵信徵信社外遇離婚協議書劈腿持久持久持久持久持久劈腿剖析徵信徵信社外遇外遇外遇外遇徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信徵信社徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信公會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信公會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信公會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 徵信協會 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿 劈腿

2:44 AM, April 21, 2009  
Blogger 1314 said...

視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................

11:15 PM, May 19, 2009  
Blogger 1122 said...

919sex色片直播網919sex色片直播網940aa成人影院940aa成人影院919sex色片直播網919sex色片直播網視訊交友9073985cc免費影片85cc免費影片85cc免費影城85cc免費影城831成人831成人777美女dvd777美女dvd777成人777成人視訊交友9073977p2p影片網77p2p影片網77p2p

2:42 AM, June 08, 2009  

Post a Comment

<< Home