Re: Daily Mail Debate: Is Leaving a Child Alone a Crime

by Brian Griffin 13.11.14 17:37

lj wrote:
margaret wrote:I just don't understand any persons mindset to leave children unattended like the Mccanns or people in this article. Worse still, l can't understand why they admit to it in print!

I've never met a parent like it thank God.
Worst even: one of the mothers who left her sick child alone, rolling in it's diarrhea, did not want to do the checks because it was so scary dark!

I still am of the firm opinion they should all be in jail and be scared for a while, as everyone of these little children must have been very scared.

Careful! Such a sentiment expressed could make you a 'hater' and a 'troll' and get you doorstepped from a Sky News muppet. Hang on...this wasn't about the McCanns, so you're safe.

In my opinion.

by tungsten tel 13.11.14 21:17

Was filling my car with diesel and saw a commotion on the forecourt . Bit of running around etc . Turns out a fella had left his toddler in the car while he paid his bill and couldn't get back in the car . He borrowed a hammer and put the side window through and picked up and hugged the young boy . Made me think about the parent /child bond . He could have waited for the RAC but wanted to make sure his boy was safe . Didn't search for their "missing 3 year old" my arse

by Smokeandmirrors 13.11.14 21:24

tungsten tel wrote:Was filling my car with diesel and saw a commotion on the forecourt . Bit of running around etc . Turns out a fella had left his toddler in the car while he paid his bill and couldn't get back in the car . He borrowed a hammer and put the side window through and picked up and hugged the young boy . Made me think about the parent /child bond . He could have waited for the RAC but wanted to make sure his boy was safe . Didn't search for their "missing 3 year old" my arse

Quite.

Any normal person also baulked when Gerry said it was like having dinner in your back garden. What normal person would want to be out of earshot of toddlers? The reason new parents end up sleep deprived is not just night feeds, but the instinct not to fall asleep or be in a position where you can't hear your child. To deliberately go out of the building and out of earshot is reprehensible, a rational person couldn't do it

by Joss 14.11.14 4:23

Brian Griffin wrote:
Joss wrote:
palm tree wrote:Absolutely unbelievable, disgustingly sick. Didn't want dinner interrupted by screaming toddlers :wtf2: so just let them scream home alone, as long as they can't hear or see them whilst enjoying their meal! Who the hell would agree with this?
IMO :bad:
And being they are doctors is even worse, What planet are these people from?
Ask David Icke!

It's not just leaving the kids though, is it? By their own admission, we've got a couple of doctors (i.e. university trained science/medical people) who let steak rot, sea bass 'juice' drip all over the car and leave shitty nappies in the boot for days (weeks?) on end. Are they really that unaware of how easily disease can spread from these things? What a dirty pair! In my opinion. Or was there another reason to make these claims? I knew a person studying food science at university and she said you wouldn't touch a lot of things if you could see how much bacteria developed in such a short time. I would have to assume the medically trained would know a lot about that too. And while we're on the subject, how old was Sean when he developed this gourmet penchant for sea bass in particular, and not just 'fish'? Convenient, that, isn't it?

All, in my opinion, of course.

Precisely. From everything that has been said and done by the McC's it seems to me there is a huge disconnect with reality. None of it makes any sense to a logical way of thinking, IMO.

by ultimaThule 14.11.14 6:00

Smokeandmirrors wrote:
tungsten tel wrote:Was filling my car with diesel and saw a commotion on the forecourt . Bit of running around etc . Turns out a fella had left his toddler in the car while he paid his bill and couldn't get back in the car . He borrowed a hammer and put the side window through and picked up and hugged the young boy . Made me think about the parent /child bond . He could have waited for the RAC but wanted to make sure his boy was safe . Didn't search for their "missing 3 year old" my arse

Quite.

Any normal person also baulked when Gerry said it was like having dinner in your back garden. What normal person would want to be out of earshot of toddlers? The reason new parents end up sleep deprived is not just night feeds, but the instinct not to fall asleep or be in a position where you can't hear your child. To deliberately go out of the building and out of earshot is reprehensible, a rational person couldn't do it

Should any normal person not have balked at that ludicrous statement, Smokeandmirrors, they surely would have done so when Gerry likened the disappearance of his firstborn to having exceeded his student overdraft... or when his dear sis Phil ~~yer boots~~ assured the waiting world that 'nothing of value was taken from the apartment', or when... continue ad infinitum.

Are these people human? confused

by sami 14.11.14 7:15

Joss wrote:Precisely. From everything that has been said and done by the McC's it seems to me there is a huge disconnect with reality. None of it makes any sense to a logical way of thinking, IMO.

Their attitude makes a lot of sense to me, if they are not tellng the truth about the children being left alone.

They have pretty much refused point blank to apologise for or acknowledge the fact that Madeleine's disappearance is as a result of them leaving her alone.

Whenever they are asked about this in interview there is something about their attitude and responses that screams an inability to just say sorry and admit wrong doing. They skirt around the issue and use back garden comparisons etc.

They cannot bring themselves to apologise for something they did not do, imo.

by Doug D 14.11.14 9:04

A new Lazzeri read to brighten up your breakfast:

‘within the bounds of responsible parenting?’

http://l-azzeri-lies-in-the-sun.com/The_Conversation.html

‘Madam – Bullshit!

Sir – Bullshit!’

by Bishop Brennan 14.11.14 9:18

sami wrote:

Their attitude makes a lot of sense to me, if they are not tellng the truth about the children being left alone.

They have pretty much refused point blank to apologise for or acknowledge the fact that Madeleine's disappearance is as a result of them leaving her alone.

Whenever they are asked about this in interview there is something about their attitude and responses that screams an inability to just say sorry and admit wrong doing. They skirt around the issue and use back garden comparisons etc.

They cannot bring themselves to apologise for something they did not do, imo.

IMO, right from the start, this was one of the most incriminating pieces of psychological 'evidence' against the parents. ANY parent in a situation such as that would be distraught with guilt and grief at what they had done. They would give not a jot for covering their backsides and claiming that it was "reasonable parenting". They would beat themselves up relentlessly in public and private for ever for the dreadful mistake that cost their daughter's life.

The McCann's inappropriate, immediate and continued attempt to defend their actions was the first clue to the watching world that something was wrong in this story. That impression simply grew with further investigation and became overwhelming when the dogs were called in.

My own view is that they were so worried about constructing the cover-up story that they had no resources left to 'fake' the correct emotional responses that would otherwise be automatic in a tragedy of this nature.

by Joss 14.11.14 11:51

sami wrote:
Joss wrote:Precisely. From everything that has been said and done by the McC's it seems to me there is a huge disconnect with reality. None of it makes any sense to a logical way of thinking, IMO.

Their attitude makes a lot of sense to me, if they are not tellng the truth about the children being left alone.

They have pretty much refused point blank to apologise for or acknowledge the fact that Madeleine's disappearance is as a result of them leaving her alone.

Whenever they are asked about this in interview there is something about their attitude and responses that screams an inability to just say sorry and admit wrong doing. They skirt around the issue and use back garden comparisons etc.

They cannot bring themselves to apologise for something they did not do, imo.

Yes i have read this theory about the children possibly not being left alone. I really don't know what to think about it other than if the children were not alone then who were they with, and then what would of happened to Madeleine??? Would the McC's really cover for someone else to that extent if Madeleine is in fact deceased? And if the children were not left alone then there definitely was no stranger abduction.
If they are as some think possibly psychopathic/narcissitic personality types, then that would explain their lack of seeing themselves as having done anything wrong in a situation of leaving little ones to fend for themselves.
And then what about the other members of the group who also left little ones alone in their apartments, or would that be another bunch of lies?

by Brian Griffin 14.11.14 16:08

Joss wrote:
Precisely. From everything that has been said and done by the McC's it seems to me there is a huge disconnect with reality. None of it makes any sense to a logical way of thinking, IMO.

And yet, nothing is ever called into question by the authorities, where they would be all over anyone else who made such claims or kept altering their stories to fit. If the McCanns said the sky was purple with yellow polka-dots that would go down as the truth.

In my opinion.

by Brian Griffin 14.11.14 16:15

sami wrote:Whenever they are asked about this in interview there is something about their attitude and responses that screams an inability to just say sorry and admit wrong doing. They skirt around the issue and use back garden comparisons etc.

Maybe if you have a £500,000 house, paid for in part by donations to the Madeleine Fund, it might just come with an obnoxiously oversized garden. titter

In my opinion.

by Joss 14.11.14 16:31

Brian Griffin wrote:
Joss wrote:
Precisely. From everything that has been said and done by the McC's it seems to me there is a huge disconnect with reality. None of it makes any sense to a logical way of thinking, IMO.
And yet, nothing is ever called into question by the authorities, where they would be all over anyone else who made such claims or kept altering their stories to fit. If the McCanns said the sky was purple with yellow polka-dots that would go down as the truth.

In my opinion.

I agree, it really all is very bizarre.

by kimHager 16.11.14 14:57

No you don't leave your child alone.Period. In the US children left in cars are the epitomy of bad parenting and poliece get called. Is leaving 3 toddlers alone in an apartment they dont know..in foreign country..responsible? What happened to their warped brains? You can never justify it and trying to shows your extreme ignorance in parenting. Any toddler can fall, light a lighter, drown in the toilet/ tub, get a knife by climbing, oh and dont forget prolly open jemmies shutters cuse kids are resourceful...too much so.

by Ashwarya 23.11.14 13:08

There is an article in the Sunday Times today about a father who left a toddler in the car outside a chemists while he popped in to get some "Calpol" (of all things!!) Not sure if it is worth posting a link as it is behind a paywall.

All five of his children were put on the at risk register, and the family had to fight for a year to get the father cleared in court.

Reading the comments I noticed the following gem:

David Roxburgh 5ptsStandardFeatured3 hours ago
The McCanns leave a child alone whilst on holiday and nothing is done. On saying this I do hope she is eventually found.

Rosa Ellis 5ptsStandard Featured1 hour ago @David Roxburgh The McCanns didn't break any law. And they were still on the premises. This whole story is about whether to bring in laws about leaving children unattended, or whether to leave it to parents' own judgement.

I wonder if this level of misinformation is common, that people think the sainted parents were dining in a hotel with the children in a room upstairs? If so, there is a lot of work still to do.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2846183/Father-left-sick-toddler-daughter-car-outside-chemist-ran-buy-Calpol-charged-NEGLECT-spend-year-trying-clear-name.html

by kimHager 23.11.14 13:19

The mccanns did break laws that is negligence resulting in the disappearance of their child.It happened repeatedly so it wasnt a quick pop into the grocer it was several hours each NIGHT .I know in the US the other children would have been taken by dcf so fast....i wonder if it was because they really did have a sitter each night? Why would MW cover for TM? Then ship certain nannys away right after?

I think the laws are only laws for certain ppl....most of us would be in the same boat as this father in the article.just my opinion

by The Wood beyond the Trees 23.11.14 23:24

If I walked around 80 paces up the lane from my house and looked back, I could see the front of my house, the front door, a few windows and the front garden. I could not see:-

- The electrical sockets
- The lamps
- The hob
- The cooker
- The shower/bath with scalding water
- The kettle/toaster etc
- The blister pack of 'sweeties' on the bedside table
- Any stairs or steps
- Bottles of alcohol or cleaning fluids
- The shaving kit
Etc Etc Etc Etc

I could not see the back door or any of the side windows or the rear windows, and I could not HEAR any sound coming from within my house. I would be completely unaware of anything that was happening within my house.

by Joss 24.11.14 1:15

The Wood beyond the Trees wrote:If I walked around 80 paces up the lane from my house and looked back, I could see the front of my house, the front door, a few windows and the front garden. I could not see:-

- The electrical sockets
- The lamps
- The hob
- The cooker
- The shower/bath with scalding water
- The kettle/toaster etc
- The blister pack of 'sweeties' on the bedside table
- Any stairs or steps
- Bottles of alcohol or cleaning fluids
- The shaving kit
Etc Etc Etc Etc

I could not see the back door or any of the side windows or the rear windows, and I could not HEAR any sound coming from within my house. I would be completely unaware of anything that was happening within my house.

Exactly, and that is why i think the McC's children were either sedated, or as some have theorised that they weren't really left alone at all. A big deciding factor for me in the children being sedated is that we are told the twins in amongst all the commotion in the apartment after it was discovered Madeleine was missing and they never woke up with all of that going on, and that Kate McC had to check for their breathing. Wouldn't a concerned parent in such a situation get the twins medically checked at the hospital for drugging after one of their kids was supposedly kidnapped, and as the McC's said themselves about someone else in their apartment drugging them.
Unless of course the Dr. parents were actually the ones responsible for drugging their kids?
I think there are so many lies and holes in these stories it really is hard to know what to believe in what did actually happen. And as G.McC said about confusion being good, or words to that effect, good for whom? The liars in this case? Poor Madeleine.

by Casey5 24.11.14 14:45

If the parents genuinely thought Madeleine had been abducted they would have either woken the twins and checked them to ensure they hadn't been sexually abused or rushed them to hospital to get checked over.
After all they immediately thought Madeleine had been abducted by paedophiles so why would they assume the twins were ok?
It's a great pity the PJ hadn't insisted the twins were taken to hospital and checked over, at the least it would have saved poor Kate from spending so much time seeing if they were breathing or not.

by suzyjohnson 29.11.14 10:06

I don't think leaving a child alone is necessarily a crime, I think it would depend entirely on the circumstances.

I do not think it is at all acceptable for a holiday group to leave their children unattended to go out for a meal (completely unnecessary to leave them, they were thinking only of themselves) They did not have a good view of the apartment from the restaurant, and they were checking, at best, every half an hour.

However, if you have a poorly child, who may be asleep, I think it would be reasonable to leave them in the car to collect a prescription. Obviously, it's more acceptable if the parent has chosen a chemist where they can see the child in the car, parked on a quiet road, chosen a chemist that is unlikely to be busy at that time of day, not left the car door open.

In the former situation the children were left in danger, anything could have happened to them. In the latter, it was probably kinder to the child to let them rest in the car.

In each situation the following criteria could be used -

1) Were the parents thinking of the child / the wider needs of the family or only of themselves?
2) Was it necessary to leave the child unattended?
3) Was there any reasonable alternative?
4) Was the child in greater danger,distress or discomfort as a result of the decision of the parent?
5) Was the child left for the shortest possible time?
6) What were the ages of the child / children?
7) What were the abilities of the child / children?

by mysterion 29.11.14 11:40

I think that it is a crime in the UK to leave a child in an unattended vehicle.

by suzyjohnson 29.11.14 13:33

mysterion wrote:I think that it is a crime in the UK to leave a child in an unattended vehicle.

But suppose you witnessed a hit and run, or a car accident, with your child asleep in their car seat in the back of your car? And you were the only witness. Would you leave the injured person lying alone on the road, or in a car? Or leave your car to reassure them help was on it's way? Would it be wise to wake a 2 year old and take them with you in these circumstances?

What about two children in the back of the car, say aged 9 and 6? Suppose you have run out of petrol and could see the garage a few yards ahead? Suppose your children were aged 11 and 3 and the 3 yr old was asleep?

Is there a difference between leaving your children in the car outside a petrol station (with a long queue to pay) and parking outside a chemist to collect a prescription? Because I've never seen anyone take the children out of the car to go and pay at a petrol station. In fact if you've a few children with you it might be extremely dangerous to do so.

by joyce1938 29.11.14 16:54

In news today there was a mother of 6 kids ,left to go to shops ,instead went to Australia to meet a chap she met on line ,the eldest was 14 years old ,he was left to care for the others . Now I would call that a crime ,but it seems it has been to court and mother not charged at all ,the background was looked into ,and it appears the kids are well cared for and doing well in school ,so that's the outcome ,now that really makes a lot of parents think ,Well that's o k then . can you believe it ? joyce1938

by **PeterMac** 29.11.14 17:10

Just as an interesting aside,
This issue is what TB, himself a qualified Social Worker, was talking about 7 YEARS ago, and if I remember correctly was one of, if not the original reason for the setting up of the Madeleine Foundation.

It has taken that long for the public and the MSM to realise that the issue is worth discussing.

by suzyjohnson 29.11.14 20:29

joyce1938 wrote:In news today there was a mother of 6 kids ,left to go to shops ,instead went to Australia to meet a chap she met on line ,the eldest was 14 years old ,he was left to care for the others . Now I would call that a crime ,but it seems it has been to court and mother not charged at all ,the background was looked into ,and it appears the kids are well cared for and doing well in school ,so that's the outcome ,now that really makes a lot of parents think ,Well that's o k then . can you believe it ? joyce1938

No Joyce, the mother was charged and taken to court, she was given a suspended sentence. She has also lost custody of the six children (she is expecting a seventh).

The eldest boy phoned his grandparents when his mother did not return from the shops (the following day) The grandparents then phoned the police. The grandparents collected them and now all six are living with them.

The defence had tried to argue that the children were not too badly affected by what the mother had done, after all they were doing well at school.

In spite of their mother it seems, and not because of.

by Brian Griffin 29.11.14 20:37

Ah, so if the kids doing well in school it's OK then. After all, they might end up as doctors...and we all know where that can lead...don't we? titter

In my opinion.

by waiting for justice 30.11.14 0:10

Just MO but I think comparing leaving kids in a car at a petrol station whilst paying and going out dining etc is absurd. I can think of 2 petrol stations I use where I have had to physically run between the car and the kiosk because it's so busy.
It would be very dangerous if parents were accessing the kiosk with young children in tow, especially at weekends.

I really think a common sense approach needs to be adopted here before it gets out of hand. There are some truly awful things going on in this country and I don't think calling police to forecourts where the parent would be back in their car and away before they've even left the station is the best use of resources.
Time would be better spent to get walking lanes put into garages to make it safer for all users.

I have never heard of a parent being charged with neglect for leaving their kids in a car on a forecourt whilst paying, I could be wrong though but if not, it would indicate it is not neglectful but the lesser of two evils when assessing risk of the situation. Forecourts are loaded with cameras and cars are loaded with security features.

by suzyjohnson 30.11.14 1:22

waiting for justice wrote:Just MO but I think comparing leaving kids in a car at a petrol station whilst paying and going out dining etc is absurd. I can think of 2 petrol stations I use where I have had to physically run between the car and the kiosk because it's so busy.
It would be very dangerous if parents were accessing the kiosk with young children in tow, especially at weekends.

I really think a common sense approach needs to be adopted here before it gets out of hand. There are some truly awful things going on in this country and I don't think calling police to forecourts where the parent would be back in their car and away before they've even left the station is the best use of resources.
Time would be better spent to get walking lanes put into garages to make it safer for all users.

I have never heard of a parent being charged with neglect for leaving their kids in a car on a forecourt whilst paying, I could be wrong though but if not, it would indicate it is not neglectful but the lesser of two evils when assessing risk of the situation. Forecourts are loaded with cameras and cars are loaded with security features.

Yes of course it's absurd to compare dining out to leaving children in the car at a petrol station, there's no comparison.

My comparison was between leaving the children in the car at a petrol station and leaving a child in a car outside a chemists while you collect a prescription. Not so much difference there, yet a father was charged with neglect for going to the chemist.

I agree with you it's not always safe to cross a petrol station forecourt, never mind with all your children in tow, and in the case of the chemist, it's kinder to let an ill child rest in the car. As you say that's not neglectful, it's sensible risk assessment. Not the same thing at all as going out for a meal and leaving your children unsupervised.