"A Mothers Reckoning" - Thoughts?

What are your thoughts or things that stand out about sue klebolds book "A Mothers Reckoning" that you thought were interesting?

The whole book was interesting because this was the person who was with Dylan every single day. Hearing Sue describe Dylan's childhood, very last moments in that house as he was leaving that morning, hearing the very last thing he said to his mother was hard to read.

But her describing the aftermath of his actions was worse, that was when hindsight truly slapped the fuck out of Sue Klebold. I wouldn't want to be inside that woman's head for a second.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

The whole book was interesting because this was the person who was with Dylan every single day. Hearing Sue describe Dylan's childhood, very last moments in that house as he was leaving that morning, hearing the very last thing he said to his mother was hard to read.

But her describing the aftermath of his actions was worse, that was when hindsight truly slapped the fuck out of Sue Klebold. I wouldn't want to be inside that woman's head for a second.

I did feel a lot of parts she was pointing the finger at some people instead of saying that her son was apart of it

Kerea2244 wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

The whole book was interesting because this was the person who was with Dylan every single day. Hearing Sue describe Dylan's childhood, very last moments in that house as he was leaving that morning, hearing the very last thing he said to his mother was hard to read.

But her describing the aftermath of his actions was worse, that was when hindsight truly slapped the fuck out of Sue Klebold. I wouldn't want to be inside that woman's head for a second.

I did feel a lot of parts she was pointing the finger at some people instead of saying that her son was apart of it

True. Sue did try to lessen Dylan's involvement. This also could have been a coping mechanism on her part. I mean how hard would it be to realize much less admit that your child was capable of doing the things Dylan did?

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

The whole book was interesting because this was the person who was with Dylan every single day. Hearing Sue describe Dylan's childhood, very last moments in that house as he was leaving that morning, hearing the very last thing he said to his mother was hard to read.

But her describing the aftermath of his actions was worse, that was when hindsight truly slapped the fuck out of Sue Klebold. I wouldn't want to be inside that woman's head for a second.

Yes. She described the way Dylan said, "BYE", was kinda sarcastic and not at all sincere. She also noted how it was so early that it was still pitch black that morning. About 5:30am I think it was? Fuck....Eric & Dylan really prepped for that day. I imagine Dylan didn't sleep a wink that night? He can't have done? Eric either. They met up SUPER early. The whole thing absolutely fascinates me.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

Kerea2244 wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

The whole book was interesting because this was the person who was with Dylan every single day. Hearing Sue describe Dylan's childhood, very last moments in that house as he was leaving that morning, hearing the very last thing he said to his mother was hard to read.

But her describing the aftermath of his actions was worse, that was when hindsight truly slapped the fuck out of Sue Klebold. I wouldn't want to be inside that woman's head for a second.

I did feel a lot of parts she was pointing the finger at some people instead of saying that her son was apart of it

True. Sue did try to lessen Dylan's involvement. This also could have been a coping mechanism on her part. I mean how hard would it be to realize much less admit that your child was capable of doing the things Dylan did?

I guess that she just didn't want to believe Dylan was ever involved with the shooting and that he was a victim as well. But idk what goes through her head

Adzybear wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

The whole book was interesting because this was the person who was with Dylan every single day. Hearing Sue describe Dylan's childhood, very last moments in that house as he was leaving that morning, hearing the very last thing he said to his mother was hard to read.

But her describing the aftermath of his actions was worse, that was when hindsight truly slapped the fuck out of Sue Klebold. I wouldn't want to be inside that woman's head for a second.

Yes. She described the way Dylan said, "BYE", was kinda sarcastic and not at all sincere. She also noted how it was so early that it was still pitch black that morning. About 5:30am I think it was? Fuck....Eric & Dylan really prepped for that day. I imagine Dylan didn't sleep a wink that night? He can't have done? Eric either. They met up SUPER early. The whole thing absolutely fascinates me.

Yeah that does sound odd

I just read probably the best review of Sue's book that I have ever read. It's sympathetic yet points out a lot of the red flags that popped up and were minimized or explained away. I highly recommend everyone take the time to read it.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Kerea2244 wrote:

Adzybear wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

The whole book was interesting because this was the person who was with Dylan every single day. Hearing Sue describe Dylan's childhood, very last moments in that house as he was leaving that morning, hearing the very last thing he said to his mother was hard to read.

But her describing the aftermath of his actions was worse, that was when hindsight truly slapped the fuck out of Sue Klebold. I wouldn't want to be inside that woman's head for a second.

Yes. She described the way Dylan said, "BYE", was kinda sarcastic and not at all sincere. She also noted how it was so early that it was still pitch black that morning. About 5:30am I think it was? Fuck....Eric & Dylan really prepped for that day. I imagine Dylan didn't sleep a wink that night? He can't have done? Eric either. They met up SUPER early. The whole thing absolutely fascinates me.

Yeah that does sound odd

I doubt he slept as well.

I imagine Eric didn’t either but i do think he spent some quality time with Sparky....

It’s interesting that they met up probably by 6 AM and there is so much we don’t know about that morning

I often wonder what Dylan would have done if Tom tried to stop him that morning and wanted him
To skip school and talk to him

thelmar wrote:

I just read probably the best review of Sue's book  that I have ever read. It's sympathetic yet points out a lot of the red flags that popped up and were minimized or explained away. I highly recommend everyone take the time to read it.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

It's kind of hard to agree with finding things red flags in a pre-Columbine era. Nowadays, of course many of these things are red flags. Schools shootings were really just starting to become a thing when Columbine happened. Columbine was the first big one since Charles Whitman in the '60s. These things were easy then to push off as just being depression and anger. School shootings or the idea that one's child might commit one was not on everyone's mind before Columbine. These things didn't look like red flags for such a catastrophic event. They looked like a teenage boy who didn't know how to handle his anger or depression, not a teenage boy who would turn violent.

While I agree that Sue does try to pass off some of the blame in her books, perhaps as a coping mechanism because it is hard to admit your son is a killer, I think it's unfair to assume that Sue just passed off many red flags. It's easy now to say that if we were parents, we would recognize these red flags and deal with them appropriately. In a time before Colmbine, it's hard to say if any of us would even recognize these acts as red flags especially for violence. I have sympathy for Sue in that regard. We are all looking at these red flags in a post-Columbine (post-Virginia Tech, post- Sandy Hook, post- Stoneman Douglas) world where school shootings have become a more common violent outburst. Our views on mental health and the way we treat it have changed greatly since Columbine happened. It's very easy to say "If I was Sue Klebold, I would recognize these things as red flags," and say that we would do the right things, but in reality no one ever could have guessed that Columbine was even a thinkable event or that it would change history as we know it.

hvernon wrote:

It's kind of hard to agree with finding things red flags in a pre-Columbine era. Nowadays, of course many of these things are red flags. Schools shootings were really just starting to become a thing when Columbine happened. Columbine was the first big one since Charles Whitman in the '60s. These things were easy then to push off as just being depression and anger. School shootings or the idea that one's child might commit one was not on everyone's mind before Columbine. These things didn't look like red flags for such a catastrophic event. They looked like a teenage boy who didn't know how to handle his anger or depression, not a teenage boy who would turn violent.

While I agree that Sue does try to pass off some of the blame in her books, perhaps as a coping mechanism because it is hard to admit your son is a killer, I think it's unfair to assume that Sue just passed off many red flags. It's easy now to say that if we were parents, we would recognize these red flags and deal with them appropriately. In a time before Colmbine, it's hard to say if any of us would even recognize these acts as red flags especially for violence. I have sympathy for Sue in that regard. We are all looking at these red flags in a post-Columbine (post-Virginia Tech, post- Sandy Hook, post- Stoneman Douglas) world where school shootings have become a more common violent outburst. Our views on mental health and the way we treat it have changed greatly since Columbine happened. It's very easy to say "If I was Sue Klebold, I would recognize these things as red flags," and say that we would do the right things, but in reality no one ever could have guessed that Columbine was even a thinkable event or that it would change history as we know it.

I agree that hindsight is 20/20 and didn't mean to infer that Sue had necessarily done anything "wrong". Even today, post-Columbine, if a child shows signs like Dylan did, the chances that he/ she would grow up to commit mass murder is probably less than 1% (I pulled that out of the air, I truly have no idea but I'd guess it's infintesimal). But I think it highlights the ways in which parents tend to "hope for the best" when kids are showing concerning signs and it illustrates how even now, Sue doesn't recognize how some of her interactions with Dylan may have contributed to the way that he viewed the school, authorities, and other people. I think this helps her cope with things and goodness knows she deserves to find ways to deal with a tragedy that upended her entire life. But I think these examples also help serve as a lesson for the rest of us. How something that doesn't necessarily seem like a big deal might be and how by minimizing something we might, in fact, be sending the wrong message.

Although I respect her to the fullest, the thing that stuck with me the most was how much she blamed things on Eric. I cringed quite a lot at the painting Eric as a psycho and Dylan as the sad kid that was just corrupted by Eric. I feel they were both equal partners and both calculated as well as violent, so its hard for me to look passed it. I love that she is doing good in the world from something so tragic, and shes extremely brave.

I picked up the book at the bookstore a few weeks ago. Here in Italy it has been translated as "My Son". There have never been school shootings (or, for that matters, gun massacres) in Italy so I bought it mostly out of curiosity and wish of learning about a foreign country's problems.

It's a haunting read for sure, and one that is relevant to every parent and every child. Luckily, very few kids end up committing the monstrosity Dylan did - however, many, many boys and girls suffer from mental health issues that severely impair them, depriving them of that happiness they all deserve. By seeing an extreme case such as Dylan's, perhaps people can learn to recognize lesser, more harmless instances of mental health problems nearer to them. So this is why I think that Sue's book is important for everybody.

I believe that she is not to blame for her son's actions. She wasn't perfect, but none of us is, and what happened was completely unforeeseable. The blame for what Dylan did rests solely on Dylan. Even in the depth of his sickness he should have recognized that planning in cold blood the murder of hundreds of children was decidedly wrong, and that he needed serious help. He chose to go on with it, and must take the full blame.

I wish Eric's family would come out and speak, as well.

Mein Gott wrote:

I wish Eric's family would come out and speak, as well.

I wish the same. BUT it will probably never happen. They have kept silent for almost 20 years now. I don't see them breaking that streak anytime in the future. SO the ONLY thing we will ever hear from the Harris family will be when their 2003 court Depositions are released in 2027.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

Mein Gott wrote:

I wish Eric's family would come out and speak, as well.

I wish the same. BUT it will probably never happen. They have kept silent for almost 20 years now. I don't see them breaking that streak anytime in the future. SO the ONLY thing we will ever hear from the Harris family will be when their 2003 court Depositions are released in 2027.

Their only known interaction after 4/20 was with Tom Mauser and his wife. They said that they "would not survive" meeting the media.
Who knows what's at play behind this decision. I feel that the fact that their encouter with the Mausers was promptly leaked to the public has definitively buried whatever timid opening there might have been.

Mein Gott wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

Mein Gott wrote:

I wish Eric's family would come out and speak, as well.

I wish the same. BUT it will probably never happen. They have kept silent for almost 20 years now. I don't see them breaking that streak anytime in the future. SO the ONLY thing we will ever hear from the Harris family will be when their 2003 court Depositions are released in 2027.

Their only known interaction after 4/20 was with Tom Mauser and his wife. They said that they "would not survive" meeting the media.
Who knows what's at play behind this decision. I feel that the fact that their encouter with the Mausers was promptly leaked to the public has definitively buried whatever timid opening there might have been.

True. The Harris family was very private before Columbine, and became even more so afterwards.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

True. The Harris family was very private before Columbine, and became even more so afterwards.

I think that we should accept that their desire to be forgotten. We will likely never know how much they knew beforehand, although I suspect that they had either overlooked or plainly ignored red flags that were much bigger than what the Klebolds got. Come on, a gun shop calls you and says that your clips are ready and you do not follow up on that? Especially knowing what they knew about their son's anger issues.
Even their reaction when cops arrived at their home, on 4/20, trying to deny them access and immediately refusing to cooperate, is suspicious.

All of this will never mean that they had any clue that their son was going to commit mass murder, or that they are in any way guilty for what happened, but still it would be interesting to hear their side of the story, if not only to garner a major example of how psychopaths function in the family and what signs to look for, before things escalate out of control.

One of the things that definitively should be investigated further is Eric's therapist... I have googled his name and he has awful, horrendous customer reviews. Who knows, had Eric went to a good shrink he might have been medicated as he needed (i.e. heavily sedated) and perhaps with time he might have gotten better.

Mein Gott wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

True. The Harris family was very private before Columbine, and became even more so afterwards.

I think that we should accept that their desire to be forgotten. We will likely never know how much they knew beforehand, although I suspect that they had either overlooked or plainly ignored red flags that were much bigger than what the Klebolds got. Come on, a gun shop calls you and says that your clips are ready and you do not follow up on that? Especially knowing what they knew about their son's anger issues.
Even their reaction when cops arrived at their home, on 4/20, trying to deny them access and immediately refusing to cooperate, is suspicious.

All of this will never mean that they had any clue that their son was going to commit mass murder, or that they are in any way guilty for what happened, but still it would be interesting to hear their side of the story, if not only to garner a major example of how psychopaths function in the family and what signs to look for, before things escalate out of control.

One of the things that definitively should be investigated further is Eric's therapist... I have googled his name and he has awful, horrendous customer reviews. Who knows, had Eric went to a good shrink he might have been medicated as he needed (i.e. heavily sedated) and perhaps with time he might have gotten better.

Agreed on all points.

The way Wayne and Kathy reacted immediately following the attack was very strange and seemingly suspicious. This could be chalked up to extreme shock, possibly even denial of what was happening. I mean who wants to think their child capable of killing 13 people? I do think it likely that they did know something was going on with Eric. From the notes Wayne kept on Eric's behavior it's clear they were aware there were some issues. BUT with that being said, I highly doubt they ever thought Eric was going to plan a school bombing, kill 13 people with his buddy, and then commit suicide.

Also after their attorneys got involved they were advised not to talk out of fear that something they said would possibly make them liable and fair game in law suites from the victims. They wanted immunity,  but failed to get it. SO they decided to say nothing, and have pretty much stuck with that ever since.  While I do wish they would come forward and talk about everything in depth,  I also realize how hard it must be for them. They lost a child too, but they also lost what they thought their child was as well. So it's like Eric died twice, if that makes sense.

Also Dr. Albert is just a total asshole in my opinion. He refused to let Wayne and Kathy see Eric's case files/notes, etc. All they wanted was to try to figure out what had happened, what was going through Eric's head at that time, and he still denied their requests. He said that he was protecting Eric's privacy, I think he was likely protecting himself. Eric was dead, he couldn't care less about his privacy at that point. But if something in those files could have made the good Doctor look bad, or make people think he could have had knowledge that Eric was thinking about killing people, etc then he could have been held liable in court. I think the Doc decided to cover his ass and call it a day.

I agree.

I tend to get the feeling that Eric could have been pulled back easier than Dylan could have been. With proper treatment etc...

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

Mein Gott wrote:

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

True. The Harris family was very private before Columbine, and became even more so afterwards.

I think that we should accept that their desire to be forgotten. We will likely never know how much they knew beforehand, although I suspect that they had either overlooked or plainly ignored red flags that were much bigger than what the Klebolds got. Come on, a gun shop calls you and says that your clips are ready and you do not follow up on that? Especially knowing what they knew about their son's anger issues.
Even their reaction when cops arrived at their home, on 4/20, trying to deny them access and immediately refusing to cooperate, is suspicious.

All of this will never mean that they had any clue that their son was going to commit mass murder, or that they are in any way guilty for what happened, but still it would be interesting to hear their side of the story, if not only to garner a major example of how psychopaths function in the family and what signs to look for, before things escalate out of control.

One of the things that definitively should be investigated further is Eric's therapist... I have googled his name and he has awful, horrendous customer reviews. Who knows, had Eric went to a good shrink he might have been medicated as he needed (i.e. heavily sedated) and perhaps with time he might have gotten better.

Agreed on all points.

The way Wayne and Kathy reacted immediately following the attack was very strange and seemingly suspicious. This could be chalked up to extreme shock, possibly even denial of what was happening. I mean who wants to think their child capable of killing 13 people? I do think it likely that they did know something was going on with Eric. From the notes Wayne kept on Eric's behavior it's clear they were aware there were some issues. BUT with that being said, I highly doubt they ever thought Eric was going to plan a school bombing, kill 13 people with his buddy, and then commit suicide.

Also after their attorneys got involved they were advised not to talk out of fear that something they said would possibly make them liable and fair game in law suites from the victims. They wanted immunity,  but failed to get it. SO they decided to say nothing, and have pretty much stuck with that ever since.  While I do wish they would come forward and talk about everything in depth,  I also realize how hard it must be for them. They lost a child too, but they also lost what they thought their child was as well. So it's like Eric died twice, if that makes sense.

Also Dr. Albert is just a total asshole in my opinion. He refused to let Wayne and Kathy see Eric's case files/notes, etc. All they wanted was to try to figure out what had happened, what was going through Eric's head at that time, and he still denied their requests. He said that he was protecting Eric's privacy, I think he was likely protecting himself. Eric was dead, he couldn't care less about his privacy at that point. But if something in those files could have made the good Doctor look bad, or make people think he could have had knowledge that Eric was thinking about killing people, etc then he could have been held liable in court. I think the Doc decided to cover his ass and call it a day.

Also he was a minor up until about a week and a half before how could his parents not have been able to see his records? Shady.

ShadowedGoddess wrote:

Agreed on all points.

The way Wayne and Kathy reacted immediately following the attack was very strange and seemingly suspicious. This could be chalked up to extreme shock, possibly even denial of what was happening. I mean who wants to think their child capable of killing 13 people? I do think it likely that they did know something was going on with Eric. From the notes Wayne kept on Eric's behavior it's clear they were aware there were some issues. BUT with that being said, I highly doubt they ever thought Eric was going to plan a school bombing, kill 13 people with his buddy, and then commit suicide.

Also after their attorneys got involved they were advised not to talk out of fear that something they said would possibly make them liable and fair game in law suites from the victims. They wanted immunity,  but failed to get it. SO they decided to say nothing, and have pretty much stuck with that ever since.  While I do wish they would come forward and talk about everything in depth,  I also realize how hard it must be for them. They lost a child too, but they also lost what they thought their child was as well. So it's like Eric died twice, if that makes sense.

Also Dr. Albert is just a total asshole in my opinion. He refused to let Wayne and Kathy see Eric's case files/notes, etc. All they wanted was to try to figure out what had happened, what was going through Eric's head at that time, and he still denied their requests. He said that he was protecting Eric's privacy, I think he was likely protecting himself. Eric was dead, he couldn't care less about his privacy at that point. But if something in those files could have made the good Doctor look bad, or make people think he could have had knowledge that Eric was thinking about killing people, etc then he could have been held liable in court. I think the Doc decided to cover his ass and call it a day.

Yes, I fully agree that Eric's therapist should have been investigated much much closer. It's weird that the media chose to focus on stupid sh*t like videogames or music as instigating factors and not on the man who was entrusted with Eric's mental wellbeing.
Let me be clear on this: the terapist is a psychologist; Eric did not need a psychologist, but a psychiatrist, and a good one for that matter. Eric did not need to "sort out" things, or help in "realizing things", as he put it on his mental health self-assessment. Eric was affected by major psychiatric disorders that needed medical attention and if Albert had done his job, he should have referred Eric to a psychiatrist and not continue to treat him himself, as he simply did not have the "tools", so to speak, to help him. Albert even overstepped his field when he advised prescribing antidepressants to Eric, as it's not a psychologist's job to give drugs.

As for what treatment might have helped Eric, he would have likely been committed either voluntarily or involuntarily to a mental institution and be sedated for the time being. The boy was taking antidepressants, but he actually needed antipsychotics to quell his aggression; antidepressants might have made him worse, actually. After being rendered harmless to himself and others, he would have begun a life-long treatment of mental health rehabilitation and monitoring, who knows with what results.

Unfortunately we're talking about chronic disease, long-term conditions that are not easily solved by snapping of fingers...

Mein Gott wrote:

Let me be clear on this: the terapist is a psychologist; Eric did not need a psychologist, but a psychiatrist, and a good one for that matter.
Eric did not need to "sort out" things, or help in "realizing things", as he put it on his mental health self-assessment. Eric was affected by major psychiatric disorders that needed medical attention and if Albert had done his job, he should have referred Eric to a psychiatrist and not continue to treat him himself, as he simply did not have the "tools", so to speak, to help him.

Just to clarify: A Psychologist is a "mental therapist", while a psychiatrist is more of a "mental pharmaceut". The difference is mostly when it comes to chemical knowledge, psychiatrists are trained in-depth when it comes to drugs, but far less so when it comes to behavioral therapy. Psychologists vice-versa. It is an issue of a different specialization, not a "more-severe-cases" and "less-severe-cases" division.

An experienced psychologist can tackle very severe cases (which is why you also have psychologists in closed mental health facilities). I do not know Albert well enough to speak if he was up to the job or not. He does have poor reviews online, but reviews cannot always be trusted.

Mein Gott wrote:

Albert even overstepped his field when he advised prescribing antidepressants to Eric, as it's not a psychologist's job to give drugs.

It is true that medication is usually in the sphere of psychiatry. However, this really depends on the qualifications and formal trainign of the individual, this also may differ based on country.


My own opinion about this is as follows:
- Dr.Albert misdiagnosed Eric with OCD. This is because he misinterpreted Eric's violence fantasy as intrusive thoughts. Eric probably lead him to believe so.

Was this a gorss mistake? Not necessarily, as it is very hard to work with a patient who actively tries to mislead you and witholds his real experiences. Remember that Eric came to Albert as a troubled teen, not as a dangerous inmate. OCD is far more common in the population than psychopathy or even people with intentional sadistic fantasies.
I think Albert saw the symptoms, but attributed them to a far more statistically plausible cause which was OCD, this probably also expressed his previous experiences with teens who suffered OCD. He did not attribute the symptoms to a far less plausible (from a statistic viewpoint) cause like psychopathy.

So to sum it up: Albert made a mistake, but it seems he had good reasons to make this mistake. It does not seem to be a case of gross negligence or ignorance on his part.

Mein Gott wrote:

As for what treatment might have helped Eric, he would have likely been committed either voluntarily or involuntarily to a mental institution and be sedated for the time being. The boy was taking antidepressants, but he actually needed antipsychotics to quell his aggression; antidepressants might have made him worse, actually. After being rendered harmless to himself and others, he would have begun a life-long treatment of mental health rehabilitation and monitoring, who knows with what results.

While keeping him isolated from society would of course prevent the shooting, I very strongly doubt this would help Eric or get him "treated" in any way. People like Eric are usually quite resistant to any sort of therapy and there's no known medication for the disorder (if you can even call it a disorder, rather than a personality type).


DISCLAIMER: I studied psychology at University, but I did not work in this field and I am employed in a very different sector of the economy. I'm not claiming "professional" status here.

Sabratha wrote:

So to sum it up: Albert made a mistake, but it seems he had good reasons to make this mistake. It does not seem to be a case of gross negligence or ignorance on his part.

I think it would've really helped if he had released his notes/files about Eric. By withholding them it not only looks like he's got something to hide, it also means we're not really able to make a judgement call one way or the other on if he made a colossal fuck-up or not.

I think without full evidence we just don’t know. But I think he’s hiding something. But we don’t know if he was negligent or not because we haven’t seen the files

Sabratha wrote:

Mein Gott wrote:

Let me be clear on this: the terapist is a psychologist; Eric did not need a psychologist, but a psychiatrist, and a good one for that matter.
Eric did not need to "sort out" things, or help in "realizing things", as he put it on his mental health self-assessment. Eric was affected by major psychiatric disorders that needed medical attention and if Albert had done his job, he should have referred Eric to a psychiatrist and not continue to treat him himself, as he simply did not have the "tools", so to speak, to help him.

Just to clarify: A Psychologist is a "mental therapist", while a psychiatrist is more of a "mental pharmaceut". The difference is mostly when it comes to chemical knowledge, psychiatrists are trained in-depth when it comes to drugs, but far less so when it comes to behavioral therapy. Psychologists vice-versa. It is an issue of a different specialization, not a "more-severe-cases" and "less-severe-cases" division.

An experienced psychologist can tackle very severe cases (which is why you also have psychologists in closed mental health facilities). I do not know Albert well enough to speak if he was up to the job or not. He does have poor reviews online, but reviews cannot always be trusted.

Mein Gott wrote:

Albert even overstepped his field when he advised prescribing antidepressants to Eric, as it's not a psychologist's job to give drugs.

It is true that medication is usually in the sphere of psychiatry. However, this really depends on the qualifications and formal trainign of the individual, this also may differ based on country.


My own opinion about this is as follows:
- Dr.Albert misdiagnosed Eric with OCD. This is because he misinterpreted Eric's violence fantasy as intrusive thoughts. Eric probably lead him to believe so.

Was this a gorss mistake? Not necessarily, as it is very hard to work with a patient who actively tries to mislead you and witholds his real experiences. Remember that Eric came to Albert as a troubled teen, not as a dangerous inmate. OCD is far more common in the population than psychopathy or even people with intentional sadistic fantasies.
I think Albert saw the symptoms, but attributed them to a far more statistically plausible cause which was OCD, this probably also expressed his previous experiences with teens who suffered OCD. He did not attribute the symptoms to a far less plausible (from a statistic viewpoint) cause like psychopathy.

So to sum it up: Albert made a mistake, but it seems he had good reasons to make this mistake. It does not seem to be a case of gross negligence or ignorance on his part.

Mein Gott wrote:

As for what treatment might have helped Eric, he would have likely been committed either voluntarily or involuntarily to a mental institution and be sedated for the time being. The boy was taking antidepressants, but he actually needed antipsychotics to quell his aggression; antidepressants might have made him worse, actually. After being rendered harmless to himself and others, he would have begun a life-long treatment of mental health rehabilitation and monitoring, who knows with what results.

While keeping him isolated from society would of course prevent the shooting, I very strongly doubt this would help Eric or get him "treated" in any way. People like Eric are usually quite resistant to any sort of therapy and there's no known medication for the disorder (if you can even call it a disorder, rather than a personality type).


DISCLAIMER: I studied psychology at University, but I did not work in this field and I am employed in a very different sector of the economy. I'm not claiming "professional" status here.

Dear Sabratha, thanks for the opportunity of answering to your observations. I must preface that I'm Italian and currently in medical school so I can also claim some academic knowledge about psychiatry, although it's decidedly not my field of interest (I'm an intern in Thoracic Surgery). I do not know if the Italian and American health care systems work the same way in regard to psychology and psychiatry.

Over here, a psychiatrist is a medical doctor who can diagnose and treat psychiatric diseases. A psychologist who has further trained in psychotherapy, which is the application of psychological methods (usually through personal interaction) to help a patient modify their behavior and overcome their mental health issues, is known as a pyschotherapist. A psychiatrist can also be a psychotherapist, so can do everything a psychologist who has trained as a psychotherapist can, but can also prescribe drugs, run tests and generally do what doctors do.
When a patient is diagnosed with a mental disease, he or she is usually seen by a psychiatrist that will prescribe a treatment plan that will include drugs and a psychotherapy course, either with the psychiatrist him- or herself or with a psychologist-psychotherapist. Psychologists-psychotherapists can treat on their own those with mental health issues that do not qualify as mental health diseases; they can treat on their own a depressive mood, but not a case of major depressive disorder, which is the name of the medical disease, and must work together with a psychiatrist - or another physician, for example mild cases can be treated by the family doctor - who will take care of the "medical" side.

Provided it works the same way in the United States, Eric would have needed psychiatric treatment in the form of antipsychotics (i.e. hypnotics, drugs to down-regulate the brain function and suppress aggressivity). Had he been busted, for example by cops acting on the Browns' tip, he would have been no doubt been evalued as a danger to both himself and others.
In Italy, these kinds of individuals are then subjected to what is known as TSO, Mandatory Health Treatment, in which several authority figures (a judge, the mayor, a psychiatrist) all agree that a person is dangerous and prescribe a mandatory period of treatment in a psychiatric ward.

I don't know if it works differently in the United States. Again, Italy has a very unusual mental health system known as the Basaglia Law so I fully expect that there must be some differences.

Yes, I am very well aware that those with Eric's condition very hardly ever "heal". However, through a combination of medication and psychotherapy can usually at the very least be rendered harmless, as in so heavily sedated or closely monitored by mental health services that they cannot act on their aggressive impulses.
The objective of forced committment is not to keep a person away from society forever, but to execute acute-care treatments that would be impossible "in the community". For example, one like Eric would have been stayed until a new pharmaceutical therapy came into effect and he had been fully assessed by psychatrists, properly diagnosed and so on.

Learned a lot from that book. Much about suicide and what triggers it. Also just like Krabbe (we are but we arent psycho) Sue doesnt believe Dylan was the follower.
They had both different agenda's.

As one psychologist put it;

Eric Harris wanted as much destruction and deaths as possible, but he didnt care if that would be him included
Dylan Klebold wanted to die and he didnt care how many people would follow him

Also I have learned that for suicide to trigger there have to be 3 "ingredients". The first 2 everyone has once in awhile, but the 3rd one is essential for actually doing it;

1. Feelings of loneliness
2. Feelings of not contributing to the world, everything you do is worthless

>> that creates the DESIRE for suicide (but the nature of self sustainability still wins)

3. The suffering is so bad, you dont care if you die / are not afraid to die anymore.

>> this 3rd one creates the ABILITY for suicide.

And the difficulty (especially with teenagers) of getting the right signals.

Very interesting book, must read!

TheBigLebowski wrote:

2. Feelings of not contributing to the world, everything you do is worthless

Sounds alien.

Also, Dylan was clearly dissatisfied with what the world was offering to him and wanted to go to the better place.

Dylan was heavily motivated by desire to go to afterlife, which included finding his love.

Sabratha wrote:

Mein Gott wrote:

Let me be clear on this: the terapist is a psychologist; Eric did not need a psychologist, but a psychiatrist, and a good one for that matter.
Eric did not need to "sort out" things, or help in "realizing things", as he put it on his mental health self-assessment. Eric was affected by major psychiatric disorders that needed medical attention and if Albert had done his job, he should have referred Eric to a psychiatrist and not continue to treat him himself, as he simply did not have the "tools", so to speak, to help him.

Just to clarify: A Psychologist is a "mental therapist", while a psychiatrist is more of a "mental pharmaceut". The difference is mostly when it comes to chemical knowledge, psychiatrists are trained in-depth when it comes to drugs, but far less so when it comes to behavioral therapy. Psychologists vice-versa. It is an issue of a different specialization, not a "more-severe-cases" and "less-severe-cases" division.

An experienced psychologist can tackle very severe cases (which is why you also have psychologists in closed mental health facilities). I do not know Albert well enough to speak if he was up to the job or not. He does have poor reviews online, but reviews cannot always be trusted.

Mein Gott wrote:

Albert even overstepped his field when he advised prescribing antidepressants to Eric, as it's not a psychologist's job to give drugs.

It is true that medication is usually in the sphere of psychiatry. However, this really depends on the qualifications and formal trainign of the individual, this also may differ based on country.


My own opinion about this is as follows:
- Dr.Albert misdiagnosed Eric with OCD. This is because he misinterpreted Eric's violence fantasy as intrusive thoughts. Eric probably lead him to believe so.

Was this a gorss mistake? Not necessarily, as it is very hard to work with a patient who actively tries to mislead you and witholds his real experiences. Remember that Eric came to Albert as a troubled teen, not as a dangerous inmate. OCD is far more common in the population than psychopathy or even people with intentional sadistic fantasies.
I think Albert saw the symptoms, but attributed them to a far more statistically plausible cause which was OCD, this probably also expressed his previous experiences with teens who suffered OCD. He did not attribute the symptoms to a far less plausible (from a statistic viewpoint) cause like psychopathy.

So to sum it up: Albert made a mistake, but it seems he had good reasons to make this mistake. It does not seem to be a case of gross negligence or ignorance on his part.

The treatment was absolutely worthless since they did it without removing him from abusive environment.

Also, the treatment didn't include reconciliation with the society in form of awesome compensation for psychological liquidation, which also shows worthlessness of the entire system he was in.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], did you mention you had the audiobook of "A Mothers Reckoning". If so, are you able to share?

TaylorsMom wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], did you mention you had the audiobook of "A Mothers Reckoning". If so, are you able to share?

Yes! Sue’s reading of it is in Scribd and you can get it for free through the app.

I’m not sure if I can share it but I can see

TaylorsMom wrote:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], did you mention you had the audiobook of "A Mothers Reckoning". If so, are you able to share?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I love that avatar! Did you draw it yourself?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], I wish I could take credit for it, however I found it by doing a "Columbine memorial" search for a new avatar and I came across this gem!! It is called "wish you were here". I thought it was pretty easy to figure out who is who and whoever did draw this is extremely talented!!

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Aw, the title makes it even more bittersweet. That really is one of the coolest Columbine tributes I've ever seen. Very unique and, as you said, very good work. One can definitely tell who everyone is supposed to be even in cartoon form. I love it, even if you didn't draw it I'm glad that you chose it for others to see.