What bugs me here is the fact that the woman appears to be Christian, but the article never mentions her faith. What would the reporting be like if she was Muslim? Because it seems to me that when Christians do stupid s**t to hurt others, they're "clearly mentally unstable/ill/insert vaguely appropriate politically correct term here", but when members of certain other faith(s) do it, they're just religious zealots, pure evil that just wants to kill. Maybe it's just me, but I've been noticing this strange disparity for ... well, about a decade and a half now.
Also, a good question would be if people like the woman in the article can, ultimately, be helped. And, more importantly, what that help might imply in how to even define it. Can people like that be deprogrammed and if so, can they be happy in their new, non-religious or at least non-zealous state of mind?
I would agree that the reporting can be frustratingly lopsided in terms of calling out "Christians" who perpetrate such things. However, I believe there is a general undertone at the water coolers where most people seem to agree that there is no way a true Christian would do such a thing, especially on behalf of their Christian beliefs. Fellow Christians do not accept that God spoke to Andrea Yates, instead they consider her a nutjob. If not that, they tend to immediately project godless onto such a person.