Posted on 10/31/2007 3:05:57 AM PDT by ShadowDancer
When are we going to stop making excuses and making others responsible for what should be our own responsibilities.
Thats a liberal and Hillary talking point. Make the government responsible for ...fill in the blank.
I will be responsible for my kids as should parents period.
Its not the daycare responsibility to make sure mommy gets Johnny to the place.
No. In the late 40's, the 50's, 60's, and into the 70's, the mothers were at home, caring for their children.
“When are parents going to stop dropping kids off at the baby barn and take care of them?”
Probably....never.
The poor kids are being dropped off, and when one of them is not dropped off, and the baby barn does not receive a call from the parent - then the baby barn needs to give the parent a call.
People can argue about daycare all they want, but a simple phone call can change the outcome of situations like these.
I’m not making excuses for anyone, I’m suggesting a simple thing as a phone call can make the difference in saving a kid’s life.
Sure - mom and dad shouldn’t forget about their kids, but if a simple phone call can prevent the poor thing from roasting, then I’m all for it.
Is it really too much to ask? A few moments to call and check.
Excellent point. These days, kids can't be in the front seat because of air bags and even in the back seat the safety jihadis insist on rear-facing seats for the youngest. You can't even look in the mirror to see how your kid is doing. It really is a prescription for accidents like this, a very small, but predictable number.
I strongly disagree. The care of the children is the parents' responsibility. What you're advocating is the sort of thing that some democrat will want to make a law forcing the daycare center to do and thus further reducing parental responsibility. (But but it's FOR THE CHILDREN)
I never suggested legislation.
Daycare centers can do this on their own initiative.
Parents SHOULD take responsibility, but unfortunately this woman is taking responsibility by being charged with a homiciede after her child already roasted.
It would be nice if she were only charged with endangerment because they found the infant before he died - and then authorities could make the decision about who gets custody.
I think it’s odd people wouldn’t want someone to check on a child’s safety.
What is the cost of doing this? And what is the benefit? How many kids are dropped in daycare every day in the USA? 1 million 2 million 3 million? I have no idea, but let's say 1% of the population so 3 million. Now let's say it realistically takes a minute per child (oh and what happens if the phone is busy or not answered?) that's 3 million minutes per day or 15 million minutes per week. That works out to 50,000 hours a week. Now let's suppos that daycare personnel are paid $10/hour to make the math easy. That's $500,000 per week or $26,000,000 a year. Now how many kids are cooked in cars because the parents forgot to take them to daycare? We can't count other occurrences just daycare, so what is it 3 - 5 a year?
So your idea would cost the economy $5.2 million to save one child. So the bleeding hearts out there will say "IF it saves one life it will be worth it. After all IT'S FOR THE CHILDREN" But of course they're wrong. That money represents lost opportunity cost (Can buy a lot of medical care for children for $26,000,000) Your idea just doesn't work.
See post 108 as to why I think that this is a bad idea.
Forgot. It obviously wasn’t important enough. I’m sure she didn’t forget to put on the right kind of bra for her job. And the lipstick.
Quite amazing.
We have an innocent child dead, left in a car for hours and a mother who forgot it.
Any adult that would do such a thing, like forgetting their own child, is beneath contempt, not much lower then those who would attempt to find ways to justify their criminal act.
One may forget to lock their door, or leave their lights on, they do not forget where they last left their own child.
Are you telling me it never would come to one's mind what their child is doing and then it would start nagging on them-did I drop him off at the day care center?
A child is the most important thing in a normal persons life, but it seems that some people think it as an inconvience to be forgotten as quickly as possible.
What we say about a mother who forgot to feed or give water to their child?
Agreed. Let’s hold off judgement here. If she went through the trouble of giving birth at 20 yrs old and having a 17 month old baby..taking care of it...obviously working a full time job...she most likely didn’t mean for this to happen.
If she was that selfish for her age she just would have had an abortion.
“Is it really too much to ask? A few moments to call and check.”
Yes it is. Since when should it be the responsibility of the day care to track down the parent to see if they are going to bring their kid? What next?
I would prefer the daycare put its attention to what it is supposed to be paying attention to ...the kids that ARE there.
Thats one of the things wrong today. Everyone thinks its everyone elses responsibility to do what they should be doing.
Okay. I think many of recognize your inability to cogently state your case, choosing instead to label everyone who disagrees with your characterization of this woman as a "monster" as being nearly as low, evil, criminal, and contemptible as you say she is. Nice touch.
But that is not the issue. Everyone can agree this is sad and tragic, except perhaps, you. You think this is a willful case of deliberate and evil murder.
The issue is that you want to brand someone a "monster" because they made a mistake through ignorance, stupidity, lack of mental acumen or selfishness.
The definition of "monster" that you wish to apply is: "An inhumanely cruel or wicked person".
You can look up any other of the multiple definitions for that word, but none of the others will apply in the context in which you are using it.
There are a lot of adjectives one might use to describe this woman, she may be stupid, promiscuous, selfish, uneducated or insensitive to the needs of others. She might even be cruel to other people for all we know.
But your use of the word "monster" defines her actions as deliberate, intentional, cruel, and evil.
That you somehow feel justified in passing that kind of judgement on another human being on the basis of a sketchy Fox News article (with no detail on her character, history or intent other than her job as a Hooters waitress) says a lot more about you as a human being than it does about her.
That is the issue in question.
You attacked someone who had called this person evil.
You were the one who began making the attacks because you felt that the woman 'should not be judged', after all, she may have had a bad day!
But that is not the issue. Everyone can agree this is sad and tragic, except perhaps, you. You think this is a willful case of deliberate and evil murder.
Tragic is an accident that can happen to anyone.
This is a crime, neglect of the worst kind.
The issue is that you want to brand someone a "monster" because they made a mistake through ignorance, stupidity, lack of mental acumen or selfishness.
I would label anyone a 'monster' who doesn't care for their own child and doesn't place that child first and foremost in their thoughts-espically when it results in the death of the child.
The definition of "monster" that you wish to apply is: "An inhumanely cruel or wicked person".
Yes, I think that fits quite well when your neglect results in the death of helpless child that is depending on you for its life.
You can look up any other of the multiple definitions for that word, but none of the others will apply in the context in which you are using it.
I think someone who allows their own child to sit in a car for hours and that child never even come into their mind is a monster, espically if when that person is the child's mother.
There are a lot of adjectives one might use to describe this woman, she may be stupid, promiscuous, selfish, uneducated or insensitive to the needs of others. She might even be cruel to other people for all we know.
My, I am sure some liberal defense attorney will make that same case for her, that she is all of the above, but what she did was not criminal.
So, a mother doesn't have any responsibilty to make sure that their child is safe.
But your use of the word "monster" defines her actions as deliberate, intentional, cruel, and evil.
LOL!
So, my denouncing her criminal neglect of a helpless infant is really evil, but she isn't.
Had she forgotten to feed the child or give it water for days, would that also be 'understandable' as well.
Please let some mother come on this thread and tell me that their infant children are always on their mind no matter what they are doing or how busy they get.
That you somehow feel justified in passing that kind of judgement on another human being on the basis of a sketchy Fox News article (with no detail on her character, history or intent other than her job as a Hooters waitress) says a lot more about you as a human being than it does about her.
I know these simple facts-the baby was left in the car for hours because the mother forgot about it.
That is all I need to know that what the mother did was the action of wicked and cruel person-a criminal act of neglect.
As for what she did for a living, I could care less, we just had a case of school teacher doing the same thing!
That is the issue in question.
The issue in question is you rushing to try to justify this vicious and cruel act and what does it say about your own moral standards of right and wrong.
That baby did not die by accident, it was left to die by someone who it depended on-it was a crime.
I listened to the local Fox Phoenix video. She is in jail on a charge of negligent homicide. The Phoenix police interviewed her friends and work associates who say she was bemoaning the fact that she had a child to take care of and wanted her independence back. Based on those statements she faces a murder charge vs. involuntary manslaughter.
Gee, why am I not surprised!
And you knew all that from the news report this morning, eh?
“The issue in question is you rushing to try to justify this vicious and cruel act and what does it say about your own moral standards of right and wrong.”
Where did I justify it? Please tell me where. If I were to justify it, I would have to say that it was OKAY what she did. My issue was with YOU jumping on this person on the basis of NO facts about the person or the situation whatsoever.
None. You are apparently the kind of person who gets a twisted kind of enjoyment out of this kind of thing. The Internet is full of your type.
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.