Children dying in hot cars - mistake or crime?

[neatfreak]

Date: 3/9/2009 7:32:26 PM
Author: packrat
As a parent, if I was made aware of a device for a car to help prevent kids being left in it, I'd be in line for one for each of our vehicles and anyone else who might have my kids w/them, like my parents. The device that was mentioned before, is that something that really is available?

Yes, they are. BUT as someone mentioned before do parents buy them generally? No. Because they think it will NEVER happen to them. It's that mentality that can be dangerous to kids IMO. If you think something will NEVER happen to you, you won't prepare yourself for the "what if."

 

[MissGotRocks]

Date: 3/9/2009 9:37:52 PM
Author: neatfreak

Date: 3/9/2009 7:32:26 PM
Author: packrat
As a parent, if I was made aware of a device for a car to help prevent kids being left in it, I'd be in line for one for each of our vehicles and anyone else who might have my kids w/them, like my parents. The device that was mentioned before, is that something that really is available?

Yes, they are. BUT as someone mentioned before do parents buy them generally? No. Because they think it will NEVER happen to them. It's that mentality that can be dangerous to kids IMO. If you think something will NEVER happen to you, you won't prepare yourself for the 'what if.'

Very much agree. You should never be too certain of your certainties.

 

[cara]

Date: 3/9/2009 8:50:31 PM
Author: vespergirl
I wanted to just say a couple of more things on this topic. First, once you are a parent, there is a deep, primal connection with the child that makes all mothers hyperaware of their children and the children's safety. It's not comparable to forgetting an item somewhere, or even making a mistake in surgery, as a doctor mentioned who previously posted. Those are items and work responsibilities, not children that you are physically and emotionally bonded to. I think that people on here who don't have kids who are posting don't understand the change that occurs in the brain chemistry when you become a parent, and how raising and protecting your children become your primary focus, to exclusion of everything else. It's biological and hormonal, and not at all the same as forgetting where you put your car keys or amputating the wrong foot.

This is interesting to me because I can't quite figure out what you are saying here. Does the physical and emotional bond between parent and child make a parent more or less culpable for their child's death? Should a well-meaning nanny who forgets a child in the car be held to a different legal standard than a well-meaning parent who commits the same mistake? You seem to be implying that the parent's mistake is worse, because its a violation of this deep bond between parent and child, yet in prosecutions of these incidents, juries are more likely to find non-parents guilty than parents. Maybe because the jurors are more likely to believe that a parent's mistake was completely unintentional, or that a parent would mentally punish themselves for their forgetfulness more than a babysitter would. But I want to make sure I understand - are you saying that forgetting your own child is worse because it is this violation of parent-child bond or is it that you find it harder to believe that any "good" parent would forget their child in this manner??

Maybe this is the heart of why we are disagreeing on this issue. You seem to say that something magic about the parent-child bond makes the parent's brain incapable of having the same kind of memory malfunctions that happen in other areas of life. I just don't know that the brain works that way. One of the key quotes in the article is from an expert who states, "The quality of prior parental care seems to be irrelevant.... The important factors that keep showing up involve a combination of stress, emotion, lack of sleep and change in routine, where the basal ganglia [lizard brain] is trying to do what it's supposed to do, and the conscious mind is too weakened to resist." I read this to say, if its possible to forget to go out of my way in the morning to drop off the dry cleaning, its possible to forget my sleeping child in the backseat. Way less likely I hope, due to the relative importance of child and dry cleaning, but impossible? Its a biological failing hardwired into our brains. Its hard to escape the limits of our own biology.

 

[lucyandroger]

Date: 3/9/2009 6:37:27 PM
Author: vespergirl
Well, if we''re going to stop investigating & prosecuting ''accidental'' crimes, then we should decriminalize child abuse - some people are too ignorant to properly raise kids, so when they accidentally kill them after fatal beatings or starving them, we should just assume that the guilt they feel once the child is dead is enough ''punishment.'' After all, children aren''t citizens with rights who deserve to have their preventable deaths investigated and prosecuted - they are just the parents chattel to do with what they wish - right? God knows if it was a nanny or other caregiver that mistakenly left a child in a car, they would be prosecuted. How about all of the pets that are left in cars and die? Their owners are prosecuted for animal cruelty. I believe that as a society, we owe our children at least the same justice that we owe animals, but I guess a lot of you don''t feel that way - instead we''ll just assume that all parents are going to feel bad about killing their kids, and suppose that''s punishment enough. Lyn Balfour, in the article says, I quote, ''I don''t feel I need to forgive myself,'' she says plainly, ''because what I did was not intentional.'' She doesn''t sound that broken up about it to me.

Nobody in this thread has made any such argument. First of all, no one said that we shouldn''t investigate the deaths of these children; the question was whether to prosecute the parents in such a case. Secondly, beatings and starvation are not accidental tragedies. No one in any way condoned parents beating or starving their children without punishment. And needless to say, no one came even close to claiming that children aren''t citizens with rights.

This is understandably an emotional topic for you to debate, but it really isn''t cool to act like anyone that disagrees with you is some sort of child-hating monster.

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 3/9/2009 7:52:26 PM
Author: vespergirl

Date: 3/9/2009 7:16:18 PM
Author: cara
There is also a WashingtonPost chat about the article here that especially has a bit about the problems in garnering convictions in these cases. Typically even to prove negligent homicide, you need to show ''callous disregard for human life'' in addition to negligence. So while the parents were clearly negligent, how did the unfortunate parents show conscious disregard for life if they didn''t realize there was any life at stake? ''Should have better memory'' just isn''t enough for a legal conviction. In contrast, with death that results from drunk or reckless driving, the driver typically made a conscious decision to drink or speed at some point that showed the necessary callous disregard for life. Hence those are crimes.

Vespergirl, to address your specific allegation that SAHM are less likely to do this, it is probably true because of the specifics involved but can''t we stop with the mommy wars? At some point, its repulsive. These parents loved their kids and were trying to do right by them and were devastated by their role in their child''s death. Is blaming them for not staying home with their kids really a proportionate response?

You are correct that a stay-at-home-parent would be less likely to forget their child in the car for 8 hours, simply because taking care of their kid is their day job! So they don''t usually drop their kid off at daycare, and in a typical day there would be 1000 times that you, a SAHM, would wonder where your kid is if your kid were still in the car. But the parent at the office has no reason to think about their kid when going about their day, and if they happen to think of their kid, imagines the kid is happily at day care because that''s where the kid is supposed to be during the day. Many times the parent even has a memory of dropping the kid off on the morning of the tragedy because their lizard brain put that memory there. Dropped kid off the previous 500 drives to work, must have dropped off kid this morning too. But there are other variants on the tragedy, so I''m sure that SAHMs are capable of it too if given the right combination of circumstances.

I don''t have kids, but I have made enough mistakes with driving on autopilot or doing other things by rote that I think I understand how it can happen. Just normally those mistakes don''t put anyone''s life at risk. Which is why its really important to advertise to parents that it *can* happen to anyone without appropriate safety procedures and tools in place, due to the lizard part of our human brains. If everyone thinks, ''oh it''ll never happen to me, I''m a good parent'' or ''those parents were monsters, I''m totally unlike them'' then this particular manner of child death is likely to continue to occur to a small number of unfortunate families. We are all human.

The reason that I brought up the SAHM question is because I noticed that all of these parents claimed to be distracted by work issues when these deaths occurred, and none of the parents listed in the article were full-time caregivers. I honestly feel that if you work full time, but you can''t focus on your kid for the mere 3 or 4 hours a day that you actually have to take care of them, then maybe you need to have a full-fime, live-in caregiver who is actually focused on the child''s welfare, whether that be a spouse, grandparent, nanny, whatever. TLH wrote a beautiful post urging parents to focus on their children during the time they have with them. If I were about to not see my kid for the next 8 or 9 hours while I was at work, I would certainly be paying attention to him during that precious commute time that I had my son with me. It''s very sad that these parents were too busy already being focused on work before they got there to notice where their children were. We have become a culture that''s so self-absorbed and work-obsessed that we can''t even focus on our kids during the commute to the day-care center, never mind for the first few most formative years of life until they start school. You mention that you''re sure that it could happen to a SAHM, but so far, all of the cases I read about involved working parents.

This is such malarky. It can happen to ANYONE, working or SAHM. The incident I mentioned happened to a woman who was not working and she was on a walk/jog when she talked on the cell phone and FORGOT about her kid for a second. It had to be more than a second for the stroller to make its way down to the river, because when she turned around, she thought the baby had been abducted. She was just too busy gabbing on the phone, which I bet ALL of us have done.

My friend, who is a SAHM actually said it''s harder to give 100% focus to the kid all day because she''s with her ALL day.

If you really think it can never happen to you - well, I honestly hope it never does.

 

[lucyandroger]

Date: 3/9/2009 8:50:31 PM
Author: vespergirl
I wanted to just say a couple of more things on this topic. First, once you are a parent, there is a deep, primal connection with the child that makes all mothers hyperaware of their children and the children's safety. It's not comparable to forgetting an item somewhere, or even making a mistake in surgery, as a doctor mentioned who previously posted. Those are items and work responsibilities, not children that you are physically and emotionally bonded to. I think that people on here who don't have kids who are posting don't understand the change that occurs in the brain chemistry when you become a parent, and how raising and protecting your children become your primary focus, to exclusion of everything else. It's biological and hormonal, and not at all the same as forgetting where you put your car keys or amputating the wrong foot.

And these people whose stories were told in the article were parents with a "deep, primal connection with the child." I don't really understand your point. It is easy for you to just attack these parents for their mistakes and claim that it could never happen to a decent parent. The harder thing to do would be to listen to their stories and realize that no parent is perfect and we have to make sure not to make such grave mistakes ourselves. These people agreed to contribute to the Washington Post article to help educate other parents.

You seem to think that this could never happen to a SAHM. Well even SAHM's can be distracted and have other things on their mind. Have you never heard of a SAHM who had a sick parent in the hospital or a SAHM running around doing last minute errands for a kid's bake sale or recital. My point is that attacking mothers for working is not the answer. Parents can be busy and/or distracted no matter what their occupation.

 

[basil]

It probably doesn''t happen to SAHPs as often because toting the baby around is part of the routine, not because the parent is more focused on the child. It would be like getting out of the car and leaving it running, or something equally as routinized. Just because you do it doesn''t mean you are thinking about it.

All of the cases happened when there was a change in routine. I bet it could happen to a SAHP if there was for some reason an additional child in the car that''s not normally there. It''s just rare enough that it has not actually occurred yet.

And anyway, amputating a wrong foot is entirely different than losing one''s keys. Though the "bond" with your patient is not the same as a bond with your own child, operating on a human is pretty different than carpentry. So cutting off a wrong foot is pretty different than cutting a wrong size board, too. But I guess you wouldn''t know if you''ve never done it.

 

[Miranda]

Oh gosh. What a horrible thing to think about. I can''t read the article either, but, based on everyone''s responses I will assume these people were all loving perents. Still, my first reaction was, "OF COURSE IT IS A CRIME!!!" Then I got to thinking. What about the parent who leaves the pool gate open and their child drowns? Is that a mistake or a crime?

There are no manuals that go with parenting. Our best tool is common sense. Just because you are a Rocket Scientist, doesn''t mean you have any! Yes, these parents are responsible for their actions, but, criminal...I don''t know...

 

[princesss]

This is a tough one.

My gut reaction was the say, "Crime!" Plain and simple. But I read the article and I''ve spent the better part of the day thinking about it.

I think crime necessitates intention. We do punish some things that are unintentional (vehicular manslaughter comes to mind), but to try this as murder doesn''t really work. Murder is a conscious decision. Manslaughter often occurs when somebody was doing something wrong (drinking, failing to observe right of way, running a red light). In this, the parents aren''t actively doing something wrong. Yes, leaving your child in the car is wrong, but in the cases in the article, they''re not doing it and thinking, "Oh, it''s just one drink/nobody''s around/I have a bigger car/whatever." Their brain has played some trick on them that makes them truly believe their child is not present. It''s more like falling asleep at the wheel.

But likening it to that is problematic for me as well. You see, I understand prosecuting for that. But there are other victims. By falling asleep at the wheel, you are risking somebody else''s family. There are other people that will have to live through this. But a parent forgetting their child in a car IS the living victim. Their child died, and they will have to live every single day knowing it was their fault. I feel like no justice would be done by pressing charges (if, after investigation, it is found that it was purely accidental). There is no way to find justice in this situation. There is no punishment greater than what the parent (again, in a truly accidental situation) will put themselves through. I cannot imagine anything worse than going through life knowing that your child should have been there and that it''s your fault they''re not there.

And as for the woman from Charlottesville being cold and compassionless? The woman must have to have an outer shell of steel to get herself through the day. I would crumble in her position. But she gets through her days, raises and loves another child, and tries to spread awareness about just how possible this situation is for anybody. She seems like she''s a woman full of love who has to find a way to be "herself" 12 hours a day, and then she can go home and break down again. She drives the same car her child died in. She''s punishing herself to an extreme.

Do I think she should? If I''m being honest, yes, I do. Because even though it can happen to anybody, I think she needs to remember she''s fallible. She has another chance, and for the safety of her child, she needs reminders. Maybe that''s cruel of me to think, because obviously she''ll never forget it, but I hope the gut churning feeling she gets when she looks at that car never goes away.

 

[OUpearlgirl]

I have a cousin who was backed over in the driveway by her father, and honestly, the pain that he is still going through (17 years later) is far worse punishment than anything the law could hand him.

I''m not a parent, and while I find it incredibly sad that a parent could be so distracted as to forget about their child, I believe it can happen to good, wonderful, loving parents. I personally do not find it to be a crime. I believe that losing a child, especially by something for which you are responsible, has to be the worst kind of hell that anyone could ever go through..

I''m also with the camp that thinks that parents should get off of their high horse and get the device that can alert them that their child is still in the car. I think any time someone says "that would NEVER happen to me" they are potentially setting themselves up for something like that to happen. When you are aware that you CAN make errors, you put things in place so that you do not.

 

[vespergirl]

Date: 3/9/2009 9:49:29 PM
Author: cara

Date: 3/9/2009 8:50:31 PM
Author: vespergirl
I wanted to just say a couple of more things on this topic. First, once you are a parent, there is a deep, primal connection with the child that makes all mothers hyperaware of their children and the children''s safety. It''s not comparable to forgetting an item somewhere, or even making a mistake in surgery, as a doctor mentioned who previously posted. Those are items and work responsibilities, not children that you are physically and emotionally bonded to. I think that people on here who don''t have kids who are posting don''t understand the change that occurs in the brain chemistry when you become a parent, and how raising and protecting your children become your primary focus, to exclusion of everything else. It''s biological and hormonal, and not at all the same as forgetting where you put your car keys or amputating the wrong foot.

This is interesting to me because I can''t quite figure out what you are saying here. Does the physical and emotional bond between parent and child make a parent more or less culpable for their child''s death? Should a well-meaning nanny who forgets a child in the car be held to a different legal standard than a well-meaning parent who commits the same mistake? You seem to be implying that the parent''s mistake is worse, because its a violation of this deep bond between parent and child, yet in prosecutions of these incidents, juries are more likely to find non-parents guilty than parents. Maybe because the jurors are more likely to believe that a parent''s mistake was completely unintentional, or that a parent would mentally punish themselves for their forgetfulness more than a babysitter would. But I want to make sure I understand - are you saying that forgetting your own child is worse because it is this violation of parent-child bond or is it that you find it harder to believe that any ''good'' parent would forget their child in this manner??

Maybe this is the heart of why we are disagreeing on this issue. You seem to say that something magic about the parent-child bond makes the parent''s brain incapable of having the same kind of memory malfunctions that happen in other areas of life. I just don''t know that the brain works that way. One of the key quotes in the article is from an expert who states, ''The quality of prior parental care seems to be irrelevant.... The important factors that keep showing up involve a combination of stress, emotion, lack of sleep and change in routine, where the basal ganglia [lizard brain] is trying to do what it''s supposed to do, and the conscious mind is too weakened to resist.'' I read this to say, if its possible to forget to go out of my way in the morning to drop off the dry cleaning, its possible to forget my sleeping child in the backseat. Way less likely I hope, due to the relative importance of child and dry cleaning, but impossible? Its a biological failing hardwired into our brains. Its hard to escape the limits of our own biology.

My point about the parent-child bond was intended for all of the non-parents on this website defending the parents in the article. I am pointing out that until you have children, you can''t realize what the bond feels like, so it doesn''t make sense to say, "Well, I forget things all the time, maybe I could forget my kid." Perhaps you think it''s the same if you don''t have kids, but it''s not until you have a child and find out that having a kid is more like having an extra appendage than a possession, then perhaps forgetting a child''s whereabouts would seem more unbelievable.

 

[vespergirl]

Date: 3/9/2009 10:08:40 PM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 3/9/2009 7:52:26 PM
Author: vespergirl

Date: 3/9/2009 7:16:18 PM
Author: cara
There is also a WashingtonPost chat about the article here that especially has a bit about the problems in garnering convictions in these cases. Typically even to prove negligent homicide, you need to show ''callous disregard for human life'' in addition to negligence. So while the parents were clearly negligent, how did the unfortunate parents show conscious disregard for life if they didn''t realize there was any life at stake? ''Should have better memory'' just isn''t enough for a legal conviction. In contrast, with death that results from drunk or reckless driving, the driver typically made a conscious decision to drink or speed at some point that showed the necessary callous disregard for life. Hence those are crimes.

Vespergirl, to address your specific allegation that SAHM are less likely to do this, it is probably true because of the specifics involved but can''t we stop with the mommy wars? At some point, its repulsive. These parents loved their kids and were trying to do right by them and were devastated by their role in their child''s death. Is blaming them for not staying home with their kids really a proportionate response?

You are correct that a stay-at-home-parent would be less likely to forget their child in the car for 8 hours, simply because taking care of their kid is their day job! So they don''t usually drop their kid off at daycare, and in a typical day there would be 1000 times that you, a SAHM, would wonder where your kid is if your kid were still in the car. But the parent at the office has no reason to think about their kid when going about their day, and if they happen to think of their kid, imagines the kid is happily at day care because that''s where the kid is supposed to be during the day. Many times the parent even has a memory of dropping the kid off on the morning of the tragedy because their lizard brain put that memory there. Dropped kid off the previous 500 drives to work, must have dropped off kid this morning too. But there are other variants on the tragedy, so I''m sure that SAHMs are capable of it too if given the right combination of circumstances.

I don''t have kids, but I have made enough mistakes with driving on autopilot or doing other things by rote that I think I understand how it can happen. Just normally those mistakes don''t put anyone''s life at risk. Which is why its really important to advertise to parents that it *can* happen to anyone without appropriate safety procedures and tools in place, due to the lizard part of our human brains. If everyone thinks, ''oh it''ll never happen to me, I''m a good parent'' or ''those parents were monsters, I''m totally unlike them'' then this particular manner of child death is likely to continue to occur to a small number of unfortunate families. We are all human.

The reason that I brought up the SAHM question is because I noticed that all of these parents claimed to be distracted by work issues when these deaths occurred, and none of the parents listed in the article were full-time caregivers. I honestly feel that if you work full time, but you can''t focus on your kid for the mere 3 or 4 hours a day that you actually have to take care of them, then maybe you need to have a full-fime, live-in caregiver who is actually focused on the child''s welfare, whether that be a spouse, grandparent, nanny, whatever. TLH wrote a beautiful post urging parents to focus on their children during the time they have with them. If I were about to not see my kid for the next 8 or 9 hours while I was at work, I would certainly be paying attention to him during that precious commute time that I had my son with me. It''s very sad that these parents were too busy already being focused on work before they got there to notice where their children were. We have become a culture that''s so self-absorbed and work-obsessed that we can''t even focus on our kids during the commute to the day-care center, never mind for the first few most formative years of life until they start school. You mention that you''re sure that it could happen to a SAHM, but so far, all of the cases I read about involved working parents.

This is such malarky. It can happen to ANYONE, working or SAHM. The incident I mentioned happened to a woman who was not working and she was on a walk/jog when she talked on the cell phone and FORGOT about her kid for a second. It had to be more than a second for the stroller to make its way down to the river, because when she turned around, she thought the baby had been abducted. She was just too busy gabbing on the phone, which I bet ALL of us have done.

My friend, who is a SAHM actually said it''s harder to give 100% focus to the kid all day because she''s with her ALL day.

If you really think it can never happen to you - well, I honestly hope it never does.

Perhaps it can, but according to the article, it hasn''t.

 

[vespergirl]

Date: 3/9/2009 10:23:57 PM
Author: lucyandroger

Date: 3/9/2009 8:50:31 PM
Author: vespergirl
I wanted to just say a couple of more things on this topic. First, once you are a parent, there is a deep, primal connection with the child that makes all mothers hyperaware of their children and the children''s safety. It''s not comparable to forgetting an item somewhere, or even making a mistake in surgery, as a doctor mentioned who previously posted. Those are items and work responsibilities, not children that you are physically and emotionally bonded to. I think that people on here who don''t have kids who are posting don''t understand the change that occurs in the brain chemistry when you become a parent, and how raising and protecting your children become your primary focus, to exclusion of everything else. It''s biological and hormonal, and not at all the same as forgetting where you put your car keys or amputating the wrong foot.

And these people whose stories were told in the article were parents with a ''deep, primal connection with the child.'' I don''t really understand your point. It is easy for you to just attack these parents for their mistakes and claim that it could never happen to a decent parent. The harder thing to do would be to listen to their stories and realize that no parent is perfect and we have to make sure not to make such grave mistakes ourselves. These people agreed to contribute to the Washington Post article to help educate other parents.

You seem to think that this could never happen to a SAHM. Well even SAHM''s can be distracted and have other things on their mind. Have you never heard of a SAHM who had a sick parent in the hospital or a SAHM running around doing last minute errands for a kid''s bake sale or recital. My point is that attacking mothers for working is not the answer. Parents can be busy and/or distracted no matter what their occupation.

Actually, no. The father who was primarily featured in the article had just recently adopted his little boy from Russia. I''m not an expert on adoption, but I''m assuming that the biological and hormonal changes of pregnancy and birth that make mothers ultra-protective of their children may not have occurred with a man who just recently adopted a little boy.

 

[vespergirl]

After reading so many replies in support of these negligent parents, it''s nice to know that people who don''t like their children, who would like to get rid of those annoying kids, now have a great legal loophole in which they can murder their kids and make it look like an accident.

I bet that Susan Smith wishes that she could have just left her boys in a hot, locked car, blamed it on that pesky "lizard brain", and then their murder would have looked like an accident, and she would never have been investigated or prosecuted. Plus, she would have gotten a really nice outpouring of public sympathy for the overworked poor mom with a bad memory, and most people would be too busy feeling sorry for her having to live with her guilt than for the poor children who were essentially boiled to death.

 

[MonkeyPie]

Date: 3/10/2009 9:48:59 AM
Author: vespergirl
After reading so many replies in support of these negligent parents, it''s nice to know that people who don''t like their children, who would like to get rid of those annoying kids, now have a great legal loophole in which they can murder their kids and make it look like an accident.


I bet that Susan Smith wishes that she could have just left her boys in a hot, locked car, blamed it on that pesky ''lizard brain'', and then their murder would have looked like an accident, and she would never have been investigated or prosecuted. Plus, she would have gotten a really nice outpouring of public sympathy for the overworked poor mom with a bad memory, and most people would be too busy feeling sorry for her having to live with her guilt than for the poor children who were essentially boiled to death.

This comment is more than a little ridiculous - no one ever said ANYTHING even remotely like this, no one even HINTED that the mothers were doing to get rid of their children. You''re getting a little out of line.

 

[neatfreak]

Date: 3/10/2009 9:48:59 AM
Author: vespergirl
After reading so many replies in support of these negligent parents, it's nice to know that people who don't like their children, who would like to get rid of those annoying kids, now have a great legal loophole in which they can murder their kids and make it look like an accident.


I bet that Susan Smith wishes that she could have just left her boys in a hot, locked car, blamed it on that pesky 'lizard brain', and then their murder would have looked like an accident, and she would never have been investigated or prosecuted. Plus, she would have gotten a really nice outpouring of public sympathy for the overworked poor mom with a bad memory, and most people would be too busy feeling sorry for her having to live with her guilt than for the poor children who were essentially boiled to death.

So now I don't like my children and want to get rid of them simply because I have a different viewpoint on this than you?

Get off your high horse. It's one thing to debate a topic and have different viewpoints on it. It's another thing to call everyone who disagrees with you a horrible parent.

 

[vespergirl]

Date: 3/10/2009 9:54:41 AM
Author: MonkeyPie

Date: 3/10/2009 9:48:59 AM
Author: vespergirl
After reading so many replies in support of these negligent parents, it''s nice to know that people who don''t like their children, who would like to get rid of those annoying kids, now have a great legal loophole in which they can murder their kids and make it look like an accident.


I bet that Susan Smith wishes that she could have just left her boys in a hot, locked car, blamed it on that pesky ''lizard brain'', and then their murder would have looked like an accident, and she would never have been investigated or prosecuted. Plus, she would have gotten a really nice outpouring of public sympathy for the overworked poor mom with a bad memory, and most people would be too busy feeling sorry for her having to live with her guilt than for the poor children who were essentially boiled to death.

This comment is more than a little ridiculous - no one ever said ANYTHING even remotely like this, no one even HINTED that the mothers were doing to get rid of their children. You''re getting a little out of line.

I never said that anyone said anything like this. I''m pointing out that lack of prosecution in these cases could lead to a legal precedent where people could take advantage of the sympathy given to these parents, and use that sympathy for their own sinister motives.

 

[vespergirl]

Date: 3/10/2009 10:03:05 AM
Author: neatfreak

Date: 3/10/2009 9:48:59 AM
Author: vespergirl
After reading so many replies in support of these negligent parents, it''s nice to know that people who don''t like their children, who would like to get rid of those annoying kids, now have a great legal loophole in which they can murder their kids and make it look like an accident.


I bet that Susan Smith wishes that she could have just left her boys in a hot, locked car, blamed it on that pesky ''lizard brain'', and then their murder would have looked like an accident, and she would never have been investigated or prosecuted. Plus, she would have gotten a really nice outpouring of public sympathy for the overworked poor mom with a bad memory, and most people would be too busy feeling sorry for her having to live with her guilt than for the poor children who were essentially boiled to death.

So now I don''t like my children and want to get rid of them simply because I have a different viewpoint on this than you?

Get off your high horse. It''s one thing to debate a topic and have different viewpoints on it. It''s another thing to call everyone who disagrees with you a horrible parent.

If you actually read through my posts, you would notice that I never once commented on any other poster''s parenting skills, or called anyone on here a horrible or bad parent. In fact, in your reply, you are actually personally attacking me for having a differing viewpoint.

My post is simply pointing out that lack of prosecution in these cases could serve to establish a legal precedent that would make it easy to for parents to kill their children in this manner with reduced possibility of prosecution.

 

[cara]

Date: 3/10/2009 9:48:59 AM
Author: vespergirl
After reading so many replies in support of these negligent parents, it''s nice to know that people who don''t like their children, who would like to get rid of those annoying kids, now have a great legal loophole in which they can murder their kids and make it look like an accident.

I bet that Susan Smith wishes that she could have just left her boys in a hot, locked car, blamed it on that pesky ''lizard brain'', and then their murder would have looked like an accident, and she would never have been investigated or prosecuted. Plus, she would have gotten a really nice outpouring of public sympathy for the overworked poor mom with a bad memory, and most people would be too busy feeling sorry for her having to live with her guilt than for the poor children who were essentially boiled to death.

Like many of your other arguments, this one is unfair. You keep equating these parents with other, different groups of people. The parents in this article did not intentionally kill their child, they did not intentionally molest their child, they did not molest their dog, they did not have a prior history of negligence or child abuse. The fact that some other parents might intentionally kill their child in this manner is irrelevant to whether or not a crime was committed in these cases.

The cases presented were all investigated by authorities. In about half the case, the prosecutor felt as you do that prosecution was warranted, in the other half the prosecutors felt the actions were tragic but not criminal. Of those that were prosecuted, it seems that most were not convicted, so juries did not unanimously arrive at your conclusion. That''s our system, imperfect as it is. Apparently the jurors were all child-haters or somehow saw that it might be possible for a loving parent to forget their child with tragic consequences, deep parental-child bond non-withstanding.

Even you admitted that these parents may not deserve jail time. Yet everyone on this thread agrees that sane parents that intentionally kill their children should be prosecuted, convicted, and jailed (or maybe executed, depending.) Different facts, different criminal liability, different punishments are appropriate. To keep mixing up intentional child murderers or intentional child abusers with this particular tragic group of people is an unfair, misleading approach to the discussion.

 

[partgypsy]

Date: 3/10/2009 9:37:52 AM
Author: vespergirl

Date: 3/9/2009 9:49:29 PM
Author: cara

Date: 3/9/2009 8:50:31 PM
Author: vespergirl
I wanted to just say a couple of more things on this topic. First, once you are a parent, there is a deep, primal connection with the child that makes all mothers hyperaware of their children and the children''s safety. It''s not comparable to forgetting an item somewhere, or even making a mistake in surgery, as a doctor mentioned who previously posted. Those are items and work responsibilities, not children that you are physically and emotionally bonded to. I think that people on here who don''t have kids who are posting don''t understand the change that occurs in the brain chemistry when you become a parent, and how raising and protecting your children become your primary focus, to exclusion of everything else. It''s biological and hormonal, and not at all the same as forgetting where you put your car keys or amputating the wrong foot.

This is interesting to me because I can''t quite figure out what you are saying here. Does the physical and emotional bond between parent and child make a parent more or less culpable for their child''s death? Should a well-meaning nanny who forgets a child in the car be held to a different legal standard than a well-meaning parent who commits the same mistake? You seem to be implying that the parent''s mistake is worse, because its a violation of this deep bond between parent and child, yet in prosecutions of these incidents, juries are more likely to find non-parents guilty than parents. Maybe because the jurors are more likely to believe that a parent''s mistake was completely unintentional, or that a parent would mentally punish themselves for their forgetfulness more than a babysitter would. But I want to make sure I understand - are you saying that forgetting your own child is worse because it is this violation of parent-child bond or is it that you find it harder to believe that any ''good'' parent would forget their child in this manner??

Maybe this is the heart of why we are disagreeing on this issue. You seem to say that something magic about the parent-child bond makes the parent''s brain incapable of having the same kind of memory malfunctions that happen in other areas of life. I just don''t know that the brain works that way. One of the key quotes in the article is from an expert who states, ''The quality of prior parental care seems to be irrelevant.... The important factors that keep showing up involve a combination of stress, emotion, lack of sleep and change in routine, where the basal ganglia [lizard brain] is trying to do what it''s supposed to do, and the conscious mind is too weakened to resist.'' I read this to say, if its possible to forget to go out of my way in the morning to drop off the dry cleaning, its possible to forget my sleeping child in the backseat. Way less likely I hope, due to the relative importance of child and dry cleaning, but impossible? Its a biological failing hardwired into our brains. Its hard to escape the limits of our own biology.

My point about the parent-child bond was intended for all of the non-parents on this website defending the parents in the article. I am pointing out that until you have children, you can''t realize what the bond feels like, so it doesn''t make sense to say, ''Well, I forget things all the time, maybe I could forget my kid.'' Perhaps you think it''s the same if you don''t have kids, but it''s not until you have a child and find out that having a kid is more like having an extra appendage than a possession, then perhaps forgetting a child''s whereabouts would seem more unbelievable.

You seem to be missing the fact that many of the people who are disagreeing with you are parents. You are verging on insulting when you make (disparaging) distinctions between SAHM and non-stay at home moms, or between biological versus adopted parents. Two people I know who have adopted are incredibly devoted to their children, one turning down a six figure career (after paying 25K for adoption fees) to spend more time with her child.

The point of the article was to highlight that this CAN happen even to people who think it cannot. The point is to try to prevent this from happening again, not to demonize. If you feel like this can never happen to you (or anyone you know), you haven''t learned anything from the article.

 

[lucyandroger]

Date: 3/10/2009 9:41:45 AM
Author: vespergirl

Date: 3/9/2009 10:23:57 PM
Author: lucyandroger

Date: 3/9/2009 8:50:31 PM
Author: vespergirl
I wanted to just say a couple of more things on this topic. First, once you are a parent, there is a deep, primal connection with the child that makes all mothers hyperaware of their children and the children''s safety. It''s not comparable to forgetting an item somewhere, or even making a mistake in surgery, as a doctor mentioned who previously posted. Those are items and work responsibilities, not children that you are physically and emotionally bonded to. I think that people on here who don''t have kids who are posting don''t understand the change that occurs in the brain chemistry when you become a parent, and how raising and protecting your children become your primary focus, to exclusion of everything else. It''s biological and hormonal, and not at all the same as forgetting where you put your car keys or amputating the wrong foot.

And these people whose stories were told in the article were parents with a ''deep, primal connection with the child.'' I don''t really understand your point. It is easy for you to just attack these parents for their mistakes and claim that it could never happen to a decent parent. The harder thing to do would be to listen to their stories and realize that no parent is perfect and we have to make sure not to make such grave mistakes ourselves. These people agreed to contribute to the Washington Post article to help educate other parents.

You seem to think that this could never happen to a SAHM. Well even SAHM''s can be distracted and have other things on their mind. Have you never heard of a SAHM who had a sick parent in the hospital or a SAHM running around doing last minute errands for a kid''s bake sale or recital. My point is that attacking mothers for working is not the answer. Parents can be busy and/or distracted no matter what their occupation.

Actually, no. The father who was primarily featured in the article had just recently adopted his little boy from Russia. I''m not an expert on adoption, but I''m assuming that the biological and hormonal changes of pregnancy and birth that make mothers ultra-protective of their children may not have occurred with a man who just recently adopted a little boy.

Did you read the entire article or just the first page? There were several parents featured in the article and the man you mentioned was the only one who was not a biological parent. Anyway, are you trying to say that adoptive parents can''t be "ultra-protective" parents because they didn''t go through the same hormonal changes as during a pregnancy? And does that mean that all fathers are worse parents?

Clearly, you must not have meant that but otherwise that response doesn''t seem to make much sense.

 

[lucyandroger]

Date: 3/10/2009 11:41:02 AM
Author: part gypsy

Date: 3/10/2009 9:37:52 AM
Author: vespergirl

Date: 3/9/2009 9:49:29 PM
Author: cara

Date: 3/9/2009 8:50:31 PM
Author: vespergirl
I wanted to just say a couple of more things on this topic. First, once you are a parent, there is a deep, primal connection with the child that makes all mothers hyperaware of their children and the children''s safety. It''s not comparable to forgetting an item somewhere, or even making a mistake in surgery, as a doctor mentioned who previously posted. Those are items and work responsibilities, not children that you are physically and emotionally bonded to. I think that people on here who don''t have kids who are posting don''t understand the change that occurs in the brain chemistry when you become a parent, and how raising and protecting your children become your primary focus, to exclusion of everything else. It''s biological and hormonal, and not at all the same as forgetting where you put your car keys or amputating the wrong foot.

This is interesting to me because I can''t quite figure out what you are saying here. Does the physical and emotional bond between parent and child make a parent more or less culpable for their child''s death? Should a well-meaning nanny who forgets a child in the car be held to a different legal standard than a well-meaning parent who commits the same mistake? You seem to be implying that the parent''s mistake is worse, because its a violation of this deep bond between parent and child, yet in prosecutions of these incidents, juries are more likely to find non-parents guilty than parents. Maybe because the jurors are more likely to believe that a parent''s mistake was completely unintentional, or that a parent would mentally punish themselves for their forgetfulness more than a babysitter would. But I want to make sure I understand - are you saying that forgetting your own child is worse because it is this violation of parent-child bond or is it that you find it harder to believe that any ''good'' parent would forget their child in this manner??

Maybe this is the heart of why we are disagreeing on this issue. You seem to say that something magic about the parent-child bond makes the parent''s brain incapable of having the same kind of memory malfunctions that happen in other areas of life. I just don''t know that the brain works that way. One of the key quotes in the article is from an expert who states, ''The quality of prior parental care seems to be irrelevant.... The important factors that keep showing up involve a combination of stress, emotion, lack of sleep and change in routine, where the basal ganglia [lizard brain] is trying to do what it''s supposed to do, and the conscious mind is too weakened to resist.'' I read this to say, if its possible to forget to go out of my way in the morning to drop off the dry cleaning, its possible to forget my sleeping child in the backseat. Way less likely I hope, due to the relative importance of child and dry cleaning, but impossible? Its a biological failing hardwired into our brains. Its hard to escape the limits of our own biology.

My point about the parent-child bond was intended for all of the non-parents on this website defending the parents in the article. I am pointing out that until you have children, you can''t realize what the bond feels like, so it doesn''t make sense to say, ''Well, I forget things all the time, maybe I could forget my kid.'' Perhaps you think it''s the same if you don''t have kids, but it''s not until you have a child and find out that having a kid is more like having an extra appendage than a possession, then perhaps forgetting a child''s whereabouts would seem more unbelievable.

You seem to be missing the fact that many of the people who are disagreeing with you are parents. You are verging on insulting when you make (disparaging) distinctions between SAHM and non-stay at home moms, or between biological versus adopted parents. Two people I know who have adopted are incredibly devoted to their children, one turning down a six figure career (after paying 25K for adoption fees) to spend more time with her child.

The point of the article was to highlight that this CAN happen even to people who think it cannot. The point is to try to prevent this from happening again, not to demonize. If you feel like this can never happen to you (or anyone you know), you haven''t learned anything from the article.

DITTO.

 

[poshpepper]

Date: 3/10/2009 11:41:02 AM
Author: part gypsy
The point is to try to prevent this from happening again, not to demonize. If you feel like this can never happen to you (or anyone you know), you haven''t learned anything from the article.

Even though I think leaving a child in a car to die (regardless of intent) is a crime, I completely agree with the above statement.

 

[dragonfly411]

Date: 3/9/2009 2:29:47 PM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 3/9/2009 2:09:10 PM

Author: dragonfly411

I definitely think that it should be a crime, and I''m sorry but a parent should not FORGET their child. This is not a swimming pool accident where the child wandered into the wrong area, this is not an incident of kidnap, or a child wandering away in a store and the parent not being able to find them. This is a parent loading their child into a vehicle, conciously, and FORGETTING THEM!!!! How do you FORGET YOUR CHILD????? If you are so completely absorbed in your job, and other parts of life, that you would forget your own child, then you are not in a point of your life to be a parent and you need to seriously reconsider your priorities. And I do think it''s a shame to try to consider this an accident. You don''t FORGET YOUR KIDS.

And are you a parent? Do you know what it''s like to be so sleep deprived that you don''t know which way is up? When I was on maternity leave (thus staying at home where my only focus was to take care of my kid), I made up a bottle for her. I use born free bottles which are composed of a bottle, a valve (which must be put together) and the nipple and nipple ring. All the pieces were right in front of me and I forgot to put in the valve. I gave my daughter the bottle and it took me awhile to notice the nipple was collapsed and something was wrong. I just was mentally not there. Not because I didn''t want to, but because I simply was not functioning properly.


And the number of times I lost track of counting to 4. Four scoops of formula go into her bottle. One, two, three..was that two or three? Damn. Throw out, rinse, repeat. It''s only counting to FOUR for god''s sake!!!


Being a new parent GETS you to a point in your life where you start forgetting things!!!


Like I said, PERSONALLY I don''t think I''d forget my child in the carseat. But as a parent, I can UNDERSTAND how it happens. Whether they should be charged with a crime, which is the original question...emotionally I would say no, but the fact is a life is gone due to someone else''s neglect. Someone died because of someone else, and in this country, I think we hold that person accountable.


Vespergirl, what about the story of the woman in Adelaide Australia who was talking on her cell phone by the River - when she turned around, the jogging stroller had rolled into the river and her 5 month old baby was dead. I''m not sure, but based on the age of the child, I believe she may have been a SAHM (plus in Oz they are allowed longer maternity leaves).

Tgal - While I do see your point and understand it , forgetting a piece of a bottle or forgetting how many scoops is one thing t me. Forgetting your child is something completely different. It is neglectful and absentminded. Again, if a person is SO COMPLETELY preoccupied with your job that you FORGET your child, then yes it is a crime to me. And We aren''t necessarily talking newborns here, what about at two years? three? Many of these children are toddlers in car seats whose parents after 3 years of raising them, forgot them. I''m sorry but to me it is a crime, it is neglectful and one should not be a parent if one''s job is going to be such a big priority that one forgets their child. I can''t imagine what those children were thinking as they died....

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 3/10/2009 12:12:15 PM
Author: dragonfly411

Date: 3/9/2009 2:29:47 PM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 3/9/2009 2:09:10 PM

Author: dragonfly411

I definitely think that it should be a crime, and I''m sorry but a parent should not FORGET their child. This is not a swimming pool accident where the child wandered into the wrong area, this is not an incident of kidnap, or a child wandering away in a store and the parent not being able to find them. This is a parent loading their child into a vehicle, conciously, and FORGETTING THEM!!!! How do you FORGET YOUR CHILD????? If you are so completely absorbed in your job, and other parts of life, that you would forget your own child, then you are not in a point of your life to be a parent and you need to seriously reconsider your priorities. And I do think it''s a shame to try to consider this an accident. You don''t FORGET YOUR KIDS.

And are you a parent? Do you know what it''s like to be so sleep deprived that you don''t know which way is up? When I was on maternity leave (thus staying at home where my only focus was to take care of my kid), I made up a bottle for her. I use born free bottles which are composed of a bottle, a valve (which must be put together) and the nipple and nipple ring. All the pieces were right in front of me and I forgot to put in the valve. I gave my daughter the bottle and it took me awhile to notice the nipple was collapsed and something was wrong. I just was mentally not there. Not because I didn''t want to, but because I simply was not functioning properly.


And the number of times I lost track of counting to 4. Four scoops of formula go into her bottle. One, two, three..was that two or three? Damn. Throw out, rinse, repeat. It''s only counting to FOUR for god''s sake!!!


Being a new parent GETS you to a point in your life where you start forgetting things!!!


Like I said, PERSONALLY I don''t think I''d forget my child in the carseat. But as a parent, I can UNDERSTAND how it happens. Whether they should be charged with a crime, which is the original question...emotionally I would say no, but the fact is a life is gone due to someone else''s neglect. Someone died because of someone else, and in this country, I think we hold that person accountable.


Vespergirl, what about the story of the woman in Adelaide Australia who was talking on her cell phone by the River - when she turned around, the jogging stroller had rolled into the river and her 5 month old baby was dead. I''m not sure, but based on the age of the child, I believe she may have been a SAHM (plus in Oz they are allowed longer maternity leaves).

Tgal - While I do see your point and understand it , forgetting a piece of a bottle or forgetting how many scoops is one thing t me. Forgetting your child is something completely different. It is neglectful and absentminded. Again, if a person is SO COMPLETELY preoccupied with your job that you FORGET your child, then yes it is a crime to me. And We aren''t necessarily talking newborns here, what about at two years? three? Many of these children are toddlers in car seats whose parents after 3 years of raising them, forgot them. I''m sorry but to me it is a crime, it is neglectful and one should not be a parent if one''s job is going to be such a big priority that one forgets their child. I can''t imagine what those children were thinking as they died....

Dragonfly, I''m obviously giving those examples about my forgetfulness personally. Since I haven''t killed my kid, I can''t attest to how forgetful I could potentially be. I know that they''re not in the same league. I''m just pointing out the fact that when you''re that sleep deprived, you can be a zombie.

You don''t have to be preoccupied with a job. I''ve pointed out the example a few times I mentioned above. THAT woman was not WORKING. THAT woman was too preoccupied with talking on her cell phone that she NEGLECTED to see that her kid was rolling down an embankment toward a river and ultimately his death.

As mentioned, the POINT people are trying to make is that it could happen to ANYONE. SAHMs, working moms, dads, grandparents (because a few months after the River Torrens tragedy, another 10 month old drowned when her grandmother lost the stroller to the river). If people on this thread REALLY don''t think it could happen to them, I daresay they are the type of parents who don''t think their kids are brats either.

 

[dragonfly411]

Tgal- I def don''t think you have to be preoccupied with a job, sorry if it seemed that way. But I do think that if you are in a stage in life where you cannot make that child''s life a top priority that you can remember their every move then maybe you should wait to have children until your life is more calm. To me, the mother neglecting her child while talking on the phone is equivalent to the parent who leaves a child in a car. It is neglect to me, either way. I understand that things happen and you can forget things, but to forget your child''s presence after you placed them in a car that morning is not excusable to me. One story I saw was the mother forgetting to go to her child''s school. If you load your child in and are taking them to school, how do you forget them?I Understand driving right by, but forgetting the child in the car the entire day whilst you are at work? That''s neglectful and complete absentmindedness to me. I def understand that tragedies and mistakes happen, and I am of the position that children who drown are terrible tragedies, because those take a fraction of a second, but to me forgetting the whereabouts of your child, and being absent enough to leave them in a car is just thoughtlessness and neglect to me. That would be like forgetting your baby is on the couch asleep and walking down to a neighbor''s for a few hours, or forgetting that your dog is locked in your car in 90 degree weather and hyperventilating. If people can be charged with neglect on that last one, then they certainly can with children too (and yes, it is charged as animal neglect in my state

but it''s also Florida where it stays molten hot)

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 3/10/2009 1:49:45 PM
Author: dragonfly411
Tgal- I def don''t think you have to be preoccupied with a job, sorry if it seemed that way. But I do think that if you are in a stage in life where you cannot make that child''s life a top priority that you can remember their every move then maybe you should wait to have children until your life is more calm. To me, the mother neglecting her child while talking on the phone is equivalent to the parent who leaves a child in a car. It is neglect to me, either way. I understand that things happen and you can forget things, but to forget your child''s presence after you placed them in a car that morning is not excusable to me. One story I saw was the mother forgetting to go to her child''s school. If you load your child in and are taking them to school, how do you forget them?I Understand driving right by, but forgetting the child in the car the entire day whilst you are at work? That''s neglectful and complete absentmindedness to me. I def understand that tragedies and mistakes happen, and I am of the position that children who drown are terrible tragedies, because those take a fraction of a second, but to me forgetting the whereabouts of your child, and being absent enough to leave them in a car is just thoughtlessness and neglect to me. That would be like forgetting your baby is on the couch asleep and walking down to a neighbor''s for a few hours, or forgetting that your dog is locked in your car in 90 degree weather and hyperventilating. If people can be charged with neglect on that last one, then they certainly can with children too (and yes, it is charged as animal neglect in my state

but it''s also Florida where it stays molten hot)

Dragonfly, I wasn''t referring to you with my point that it working mothers aren''t the only ones this could happen to. Vespergirl has repeatedly made the point that this wouldn''t happen to a SAHM.

Drowning in a pool may seem like a split second, but I reckon it takes a fair amount of forgetting and I think in some cases people don''t find the babies until some time after they are dead in the pool. We''re just talking degrees here. If the parent can be charged for the pool incident, then yes, they should be charged with the car incident. Why one and not the other?

I am, to some degree, playing devil''s advocate here. I personally cannot fathom myself doing this kind of stuff, but I do honestly believe it could happen to anyone. Realizing that is perhaps what will prevent it from happening to me.

I guess I''m too much of a realist in some ways. I believe my husband can cheat on me. I believe I can cheat on him. We both do everything we can to prevent it. And that''s the best we can do, whether it''s relationships or child rearing.

 

[steph72276]

I haven''t read all of the responses, so forgive me if I repeat anything. I have the most wonderful, caring mother ever and she told me about something that happened to her one day when I was a baby. She drove all the way to work one day (approximately 45 mins away) and realized she forgot to drop me off at the babysitter''s house and had to turn back around. Did she do this because she was a bad mom? No. It was a mistake made by a sleep-deprived mother trying to do everything she needed to do.
My son was one of those babies that immediately fell asleep as soon as we got in the car. I never forgot him, but I can see how it might possibly happen to someone not thinking clearly and especially out of their regular routine. If it was truly an accident, I don''t think prosecution would do anything to help the situation. I think the parent would already suffer enough punishment by the loss of their child.

 

[decodelighted]

Job job job ... LOL. Vesper, you seem pretty sure its just JOBS that lead to neglect. I''d bet most cellphone driving accidents aren''t job related ... just regular run-of-the-mill GOSSIP or LIFESTUFF. And the most chilling cases of child neglect I''ve read about involved people playing VIDEOGAMES or answering the door or shopping on line. All potential SAHM activities. As well as working parent activities. If you think it couldn''t happen to you, you''re one step closer to it happening. JMHO.

 

[vespergirl]

Date: 3/10/2009 1:58:12 PM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 3/10/2009 1:49:45 PM
Author: dragonfly411
Tgal- I def don''t think you have to be preoccupied with a job, sorry if it seemed that way. But I do think that if you are in a stage in life where you cannot make that child''s life a top priority that you can remember their every move then maybe you should wait to have children until your life is more calm. To me, the mother neglecting her child while talking on the phone is equivalent to the parent who leaves a child in a car. It is neglect to me, either way. I understand that things happen and you can forget things, but to forget your child''s presence after you placed them in a car that morning is not excusable to me. One story I saw was the mother forgetting to go to her child''s school. If you load your child in and are taking them to school, how do you forget them?I Understand driving right by, but forgetting the child in the car the entire day whilst you are at work? That''s neglectful and complete absentmindedness to me. I def understand that tragedies and mistakes happen, and I am of the position that children who drown are terrible tragedies, because those take a fraction of a second, but to me forgetting the whereabouts of your child, and being absent enough to leave them in a car is just thoughtlessness and neglect to me. That would be like forgetting your baby is on the couch asleep and walking down to a neighbor''s for a few hours, or forgetting that your dog is locked in your car in 90 degree weather and hyperventilating. If people can be charged with neglect on that last one, then they certainly can with children too (and yes, it is charged as animal neglect in my state

but it''s also Florida where it stays molten hot)

Dragonfly, I wasn''t referring to you with my point that it working mothers aren''t the only ones this could happen to. Vespergirl has repeatedly made the point that this wouldn''t happen to a SAHM.

Drowning in a pool may seem like a split second, but I reckon it takes a fair amount of forgetting and I think in some cases people don''t find the babies until some time after they are dead in the pool. We''re just talking degrees here. If the parent can be charged for the pool incident, then yes, they should be charged with the car incident. Why one and not the other?

I am, to some degree, playing devil''s advocate here. I personally cannot fathom myself doing this kind of stuff, but I do honestly believe it could happen to anyone. Realizing that is perhaps what will prevent it from happening to me.

I guess I''m too much of a realist in some ways. I believe my husband can cheat on me. I believe I can cheat on him. We both do everything we can to prevent it. And that''s the best we can do, whether it''s relationships or child rearing.

I never said that it wouldn''t, I said that according to the article, it has not. The author listed just about every other job under the sun, so if it had happened to a stay-at-home parent, I figure that he would have mentioned it.

As far as the woman you keep referring to who did not put the brake on the stroller, it is not illegal to leave the brake off a stroller. It is illegal to leave a child locked in a hot car.