Skip to comments.Couple Sues Child Care Website They Blame for Baby daughter’s Death
Posted on 08/16/2014 5:23:58 PM PDT by nickcarraway
A couple is suing the popular child care website Care.com for the death of their baby girl, according to HLN.
Prosecutors say 3-month-old Rylan Koopmeiners died of blunt force trauma on July 27, 2012, while under the care of Sarah Gumm, a nanny the girls parents found on Care.com.
(Excerpt) Read more at myfox8.com ...
Oy veh, this is like the third story I’ve heard about this site. By far the worst.
You gotta wonder about the parents though, if the woman is drinking, they didn’t catch wise to that? And the baby is only 3 months old, so, like how quickly did this nanny kill her?
What a dreadful story, do you see the little baby in the picture at the link, she is just so tiny, the man’s hands holding her almost span her entire torso.
What a shame, poor little girl!
I can see where they have a case. Care.com was supposed to conduct a background check and failed to vet the nanny properly.
Here’s a link from (where else?) The Daily Mail (just covering the stories the American media won’t cover) with more details and a pic. of the perp.
Furthermore, the parents paid care.com for the "premier" background check. They clearly did not perform even a basic background check.
The bottom line is that her Mother should have been home caring for her. I suspect both parents worked. What did they need to purchase so badly that they left their child with a stranger? Nothing.
Hey why not sue the phone company for listing her in the Yellow Pages?
Do you really believe what you posted? An agency — any agency — is supposed to be vouching for anyone it places in a client’s house. Stories like this convince me we can’t rely on agencies, but my reaction is not, “What did the parents expect?”
Because one doesn’t typically pay the phone company to conduct a background check on companies listed in the yellow pages?
So the agency should face no consequences for utterly failing to perform the background check that it was paid to conduct?
Would a background check show that this nanny murdered other babies? I doubt it.
No, but it would have revealed her history of DUIs and battery - history that seems particularly relevant in retrospect, given what happened to the child.
I’ll ask again - what consequences should the agency face for failing to conduct the background check that it was required by contract to conduct?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.