He killed the dog too? You don't hear that very often in a murder suicide.

What a loser!!!!

It makes me so upset to see people blaming her PTSD and calling her the killer. His own family has already commented it was he that did it, and said do not judge him by his final acts of violence. Really?. HE was the only one an autopsy was done on, and the others did not get any because they were murdered. He knew she was leaving him for good, so like we see all too often, if he could not have her and his family, then no one could. His final way of hurting her was to kill the kids, most likely in front of her, his sick act of revenge. If she was to leave the day before, he would have killed them then. So sad.

This unfortunate family was pushed beyond their emotional, physical, and financial limits by Big Pharma and the for profit insurance companies who threatened their baby's life from the time she was born.

There has to be a way to hold insurance accountable, and Big Pharma, for holding life saving drugs hostage for outrageous sums, if they are made available at all.

This family was doomed and indirectly killed by their insurance provider and the drug manufacturer that held their baby's life in their hands.

Get a grip. You don't have a clue about the cause of this meltdown. Waving a "big pharma" flag is laughable. Without that "evil", Willow would've died shortly after birth.

The wife's problems all started when she was struggling over getting the life-saving drugs through her insurance. She wrote a blog about it!!! Then she was treated for PTSD over her experiences with this very struggle.

An update on this story revealed that the husband and father killed his family due to his wife's plan to leave him. No mother who fought that hard to keep her child alive, would then kill all of her children simply due to your perceived "big bad pharma". In fact the father lost his job and if mom was also unemployed they would easily qualify for medicaid. At that point the insurance and drug cost would at least be temporarily moot.

The mom didn't kill the family.

Yes, that is what I said in the first sentence.

NO you said "no mother who fought that hard to keep her child alive would then kill all her children...."

Oh for God's sake. Your reading comprehension is appalling.

"An update on this story revealed that the husband and father killed his family due to his wife's plan to leave him. No mother who fought that hard to keep her child alive, would then kill all of her children simply due to your perceived "big bad pharma".

Get it? Not only did I state unequivocally that the murderer was the father/husband, I reinforced that the Mom would be have done following the battle to keep her alive.

Wow.

There are a multitude of reasons that go into a heinous act like this. It's not only the evil empires of insurance or pharmaceutical companies. It would be nice to think that it was that simple. The answer to the PTSD inducing battle to keep the child alive is the murder of all of them? As I said - without insurance or the medication, Willow would have died long ago. You seem to be willfully ignorant of that point. Let me guess - you don't believe in vaccination either.

You just don't get it. That's because it requires an ability for complex thought. Don't call people names or assume their positions on vaccines - it makes you look classless.

First, I did not call anyone names or assume your position on vaccines. It was a rhetorical question. Hence, the absence of a question mark. You meanwhile haven't addressed a single point, yet I am the one without critical thought? I "get it" because I've worked with critically ill children for 20 years. There is always a work around, a charity pool or a pharmaceutical company assistance program available for rare or orphan drugs. Which again negates your premise, even assuming the motivation and perpetrator weren't already known.

What on Earth are you talking about?
BIG Pharma... insurance?... you...
Forget it... that's just plain NUTS.

I disagree. I say someone else did it and arranged the scene to look like a murder-suicide.

You all are not rational. Guns to kill the rapists and robbers after you???? You lead a crazy life if you have to defend yourself, having them after you. Own it, you feel secure carrying a gun, and don't want your civil liberties taken. Everyone has an opinion till it happens to you

Controversial viewpoint, but I understand the reasoning. End of their rope, financial disaster, no light at the end of the tunnel, don't want to leave the other children to live with the aftermath, exit stage left. Efficient.

Yep! Ole Sky Daddy is just waiting to greet them with open arms. Right.

Those silly, silly sheeple.

The husband shot her because she was leaving him that day...

So often the case. Lost my best friend in 1970 for the very same reason, except he was leaving her. She told him she'd kill him if he tried to leave her, and the family pistol was missing. That should be enough warning for any man ... I'd have been on the next plane to New Zealand.

whoa sucks. sorry that happened.

The weird thing is killing the dog, though. It seems that either the killer was thinking that he or she was punishing the spouse by killing all of them in front of her/him, or the killer delusionally thought that they were taking them all off, en masse, to this fantasy "better place"?

this JERK wanted his wife to suffer and see all the dead pile up...

Another example of Right to bear arms. If guns are easily accessible, people will continue to kill. Especially when you see no alternative

Guns, shmuns ... a gun is just a TOOL. ANY tool will do if you want to kill someone. My thumbs work as well as anything. Grab a standard size Philips screwdriver and feel the tip. Now think what a wonderful weapon that is. I must have a dozen of those things around the house and barn, and we all have at least one of them. Then again, a ballpoint pen works too. The only difference with a gun is that it is noisier. Big deal.

To be fair, guns are a better tool than most.

And functional fixedness, guns are seen as tools to kill, even by gun rights defenders, so the first thing an irrational person will pick up is a gun. Guns are also personal. Bombs kill more people but guns let you watch people die up close, and stabbing is hard.

People default to guns. I like them, target shooting is fun and I see the benefit for self defense. But that's not what we use them for.

That is a stupid statement. If not for a gun, there would have been a knife..if not for a knife there would have been something else. Stop with that stupid nonsense. So, do you blame the spoon that feeds the fat? Or do you blame the car that a person drives drunk?

Emily: I agree, w Tom's comment. It's not stupid at all. Guns are dangerous, powerful weapons, w ONE sole purpose: To KILL: Animals or Humans. Maybe, a few of the Family Members, including the Dog, would have had more of a chance of ESCAPING, if it hadn't been for the weapon of choice, a GUN.

Ronie, you are sadly mistaken. Guns have many uses. The best use is for self defense, defense of family, defense of neighbors, and defense of country. And guns are used far more often to intimidate and warn than to kill. Other uses are hunting and target shooting, both admirable pursuits, though I personally prefer that hunting not be for trophies but for food only.

It's not the gun, Ronie, it's the person who uses it. Following your logic, we'd have to ban not only guns, but also cars, trucks, machetes, knives (even kitchen knives), screwdrivers, and so forth ad nauseam. And most importantly, if we are ever fully disarmed, we become totally VULNERABLE to criminals and to the evils of a totalitarian government.

See your history books for Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, Cuba under Castro, North Korea, Communist China, and, most recently, Britain, Australia, and Venezuela, where crime rates have rocketed since guns were confiscated.

See that's the thing, you say they have more uses than killing then say killing by listing defense. Either way it's killing.

You see guns as tools for killing. Heads up? So do other people.

I totally disagree w You. I am not mistaken. I stand by all my comments.

Why is a comment like that stupid? Why can't gun rights advocates just come to the table a little? I'm no gun control freak by any means. However, common sense dictates that with a knife most of the victims would have had a chance to escape. Guns are much faster. With that being said, these people would have easily qualified to carry guns....... as neither has an criminal history.

With a knife you'd have a chance to escape. You could line up the family on the couch for a family meeting and boom, boom, boom, take them all out with a gun, just that fast. Stabbing someone to death is more difficult and how do you plan to keep the rest of them there waiting their turn?

When someone crazy enough to even just think of killing their family wants to do something, they will. Gun, knife, hammer, car, the list can go on and on. People need to stop blaming guns and start putting blame where it really belongs. This man was out of his mind and there is no one else to blame here but him.

Then let's abolish all laws. If someone wants to rape, they'll find a way. Steal? They'll find a way.
If a knife, hammer, or car is just as lethal, why do you need a gun for self defense?

Here's a better question. Why do you need to formulate your posts with simple punctuation? A. To prevent the confusing and confounding use of a run on sentence?
B. To avoid negl the sixth grade lesson of utilizing subject / verb agreement?
C. To ensure that the basic English language is not abused by any moron with access to the World Wide Web?
D. All of the above?

Why do I need a gun? Uh, to defend from the rapists and people trying to rob me. If we abolish guns will the rapists and robbers go away? Don't think so.

Simply because I want one and I have the right to. Unfortunately, we don't need to abolish laws for people to rape, steal or kill. Laws are there for a reason, some choose to obey them and others choose not to.

So come and get them

December.

I'll buy the body bags.

Get a color that matches your skin tone. Yellow.

Wow, racist much? I'm not Asian.

Trump is calling you. Go and shake his hand. He's at penthouse 8635. Don't worry if he calls security on you. The bellman will let you in.

Hillary is calling you. She wants to clean out your vagina.

Yellow signifying cowardice as well as sallow skin. It's an interesting look into your hateful mind that you made the connection you did.