An Ohio mom, Deasia Watkins, was accused of beheading her three-month-old daughter. Although she pleaded insanity, she was found competent to stand trial for her daughter’s murder. Mental competency means a defendant understands what is going on and can participate in legal proceedings. This is different from a legal defense of insanity. An insanity defense refers to a defendant trying to prove she wasn’t mentally aware she committed a criminal act at the time if occurred because of a mental defect.
Watkins allegedly suffered from Postpartum Psychosis. It’s a rare and severe mental illness that affects about 1 in every 1,000 new mothers. Symptoms develop within two weeks after giving birth and involve:
- Feeling extremely irritated
- Having strange beliefs and delusions
- Having hallucinations
- Experiencing hyperactivity
- Experiencing an inability to sleep
- Having rapid mood swings
- Having a difficult time communicating with other people
In about five percent of cases, women suffering from this condition will kill their infants. Watkins was hospitalized after an incident at her home. She allegedly was screaming at the infant because she was crying loudly. After the incident, Watkins was hospitalized for three days and diagnosed with postpartum psychosis. She received medication to treat the condition.
Watkins and her daughter lived with the baby’s father. After Watkins left the hospital, she continued to live with the baby and Watkin’s boyfriend. She wasn’t allowed to be alone with the child at any time. Hamilton County Jobs and Family Services checked on the baby at least seven times while the baby was in the father’s care. The social worker recorded after each visit that the baby appeared healthy and in good condition.
However, the child was removed from the father’s home after a judge determined Watkins stopped taking her medication which treated her condition. She was also breastfeeding the baby, which was not allowed because of the medication she was taking. The three-month-old could not remain in her father’s care because he hadn’t formally established paternity and therefore didn’t have custody rights.
The baby was placed in an aunt’s care. According to the social service agency, the aunt was given instructions not to let Watkins or the father have any contact with the baby. They also couldn’t live in her home while the baby was in her care. In many cases of child abuse, a child protection order may be given to prevent the parent and child from having contact.
While in the aunt’s care, the social service agency checked on the baby twice. One meeting occurred at the aunt’s home. The second meeting happened at Jobs and Family Services offices. A couple of days after the second meeting, a 911 call was placed from the aunt’s home. A child discovered the baby’s severed head on the kitchen counter. The baby suffered multiple stab wounds and a broken arm. Watkins was found in bed covered in her baby’s blood.
Social services didn’t know at that time the aunt had allowed Watkins to move in with her. This violated the judge’s order. At the time of the incident, prosecutors didn’t foresee any charges being filed against the aunt.
Parental/Guardian Liability When the Child Is Murdered
The question in this case shouldn’t be whether Watkins committed murder, but whether the aunt committed a crime. The aunt was the baby’s legal guardian. A legal guardian has the legal authority to care for another person such as a minor child. As a guardian, she had the responsibility to protect the baby from known safety hazards. One of the biggest safety hazards was Watkins.
It seems unfair that the aunt does have any responsibility in the child’s death. Criminal negligence involves the type of conduct that grossly deviates from reasonable, normal standards of an ordinary person. Criminal negligence may include knowingly allowing a child to be in a dangerous condition.
Some might argue the aunt will suffer permanent punishment because of what happened. This is possible. No one who accepts the legal responsibility of another person’s child does so with the intent to harm. However, the fact remains that if it wasn’t for the aunt defying a judge’s order, the infant would be alive today.
Authored by Taelonnda Sewell, LegalMatch Legal Writer
Comments