My theory on what happened involves the list of medications that they so conveniently glossed over earlier on in the film.It sounded like Diane was talking nonsense and acting very erratically. This is exactly how people get when they take Ambien and still remain awake. She may have mistakenly taken an Ambien pill, thinking it was something else.After she took the Ambien, anything could have happened. It doesn't make sense that she was drinking, but if she were high on Ambien and then started drinking, this would make a lot more sense.Just my theory and I think it's the one that makes the most sense. It is the only think that can explain how erratic her behavior and how nonsensical her speech was. If you are on marijuana or booze, you are still of your right mind...it is just a little distorted. Ambien removes you from reality altogether and if you do not end up passing out, you will be doing and saying things that are out of your control.The drug tests didn't indicate anything because Ambien is in and out of your system so quickly that it would not be detected.

This is a quite simple tale that deeply and indirectly delves into how humans are prone to denial when in the face of staggering pain. Diane was a woman who rode her car against the traffic tide, hitting an oncoming car, killing herself, all the passengers in the met vehicle and a slew of her children. As the father struggles with the deaths, the news of Diane's intoxication are released: alcohol and THC. The documentary starts just half a year after the deaths occurred. To me, what "really happened" isn't the interesting stuff, but the denial is; seeing all of the people talk is the thing. It's the journey, not the goal, whatever that would be. Interesting but not well edited; could have been better if the reins were held tighter.

Well done film, but as others have mentioned, the Schuler family is less than forthcoming. The answer to why is fairly obvious...She developed severe pain from an abscessed tooth. I have had that and know how extremely painful that can be. It can look a a lot like your head hurts as the pain shoots thru your skull. She took whatever she had in the car in an attempt to ease the pain. She stopped at the gas station to try and find some pain killers but could not find any. Then she decided to use some pot she probably had kept in her purse in a further attempt to ease the pain. She probably felt she was responsible for the kids and didn't want to stop somewhere and hoped to just ride it out till she got home. But the pain and the vodka and the pot all mixed together and she became delusional and incoherent.Her husband probably feels if he admits to anything he will be open to lawsuits. It's obvious he has deep seated anger towards her but can't display it so he buries it deep inside, that will erupt one day.

I eagerly watched "Aunt Diane" because the story has troubled and fascinated me since it happened. As a psychotherapist (LCSW) and writer, I am often attracted to psychological events that are in some way out of the ordinary and involve something highly unexpected. In this case, besides the obvious emotional magnets, the hook is the seemingly straight-laced Super Mom who drives like a demon under the influence of not only alcohol, but pot too, and as a result, kills eight people, including herself. Really tragic, and begging for an explanation.Unfortunately, this documentary doesn't provide it, though it does give some good hints and clues. Watching this film confirmed what I have thought all along: the real criminal in this picture is not the female D. Schuler; rather, it's the male: Daniel. My theory prior to watching this was that Diane left the campground that morning angry. Was she consciously angry that Daniel got to drive off alone,(er,with the family dog) while she got to take the five kids for breakfast and then take the three girls home to her brother and sister-in-law's house? Maybe not, but then, as the documentary shines light on, Diane was bursting with a lot of unrealized and unexpressed anger, starting twenty seven years ago when, at the age of nine, her mother took off, leaving Diane (the only girl) in charge of her brothers and father.As Daniel's mother so aptly described, Diane had more of a third child in Daniel than a husband or partner. Perhaps Diane did what many of us unwittingly do so well: she chose a mate who helped to recreate her role in her original family. It's not wildly improbable to assume that beneath the facade of the happy, in-charge, in-control woman was someone who was seething with unexpressed frustration and anger, which in turn made her prone to psychosomatic problems, such as TMJ, which was alluded to (moving her jaw, pain near the ear) in the film, perhaps headaches, and/or other stress-related pains and bothersome conditions.One of these conditions likely caused her to stop and seek pain killers, and then, given their unavailability, had Diane turn to vodka and pot, to soothe both her physical and psychic pain. I highly doubt that Diane used these extensively on a regular basis, for, as her friends and relatives described, she functioned too well. She did, however, like to have them on hand, for emergencies such as how she felt that morning: incapacitated by both headache and rage.Another clue suggested by the film was when Jay Schuler casually mentions that Daniel never wanted kids. This is a big, red flag, suggesting to me that on all these happy, festive family events, not to mention in the family activities of their daily lives, Daniel was an unwilling participant. Yes, he was present and he did the perfunctory actions, but ultimately, in the end, he went off on his own (emotionally if not literally) leaving Diane with most of the work.The other enlightening thing that Jay Schuler said was when, about three quarters of the way through the film, she is seen throwing up her hands and talking about Daniel, saying, basically, what a pain-in-the-butt he could be, how he only went so far in a process and then essentially said he had had enough, and also, about his insensitivity toward both her and Bryan, his son. Out loud, I said, "Yeah, imagine how Diane must have felt." There are other psychological pieces which could be addressed but in another venue. As part of a film review, however, I think it's fair to say that the film contributed information which, for me, solidified the opinion I have had since that day two years ago: if there is a real villain in this story, it is Daniel. He is the passive aggressive, disturbed child-man who is not interested in the truth coming out about what happened because that would indict him. I think this is one of the reasons, at least, that the Hances declined participation in the film. Besides their own emotional reasons why they didn't want to appear in it, they may also not want to publicly state certain things, though given the legal actions that are currently taking place, I suspect the truth will soon be known.