Can't afford a babysitter? Lock the child in the trunk!

And apparently, you only get probation if you do so!

The mind boggles.

Hell, they gave him a sleeping bag, a pillow, and a car battery. What the hell else does a 10-year old need? It was probably a soothing experience that reminded him of being in the womb–very therapeutic. :wink:

What was he supposed to do with a car battery? A flashlight, maybe. But a car battery?

Here, kid, play with this warped Tupperware lid.

He was seven, not 10. Maybe a car battery is a “baby toy” for a 10 year old?

Still, what the hell was the judge thinking? It’s okay to lock your child in a trunk or a closet as long as tests show they’re not psychologically damaged? So they could do it 11 times, but the 12th time would have scarred him for life?


It’s educational! What better way to teach a kid about electrochemistry then to lock him in an enclosed space with a lead-acid battery? Education is vitally important in todays fast-paced high-tech society!

What do you prefer to probation? Placing the kid into foster care perhaps. I think the concequence is fair and the battery remark is just bullshit reporting. Where else would you put the spare battery? Sheesh! They have no custody right now and are doing what required to gain back their parental rights. Asuming that this is a fair process then justice is served.

The garage? The floor of the backseat? Someplace where a 10 year old with no means of letting someone know that his skin is burning can’t potentially mess around with it and get sulphuric acid on himself?

I wonder if a sleeping bag, a pillow, and car battery can be used to get your way out of a locked trunk.

I’ll ask MacGuyver :smiley:

So, you advocate that poor parents who can’t afford a babysitter be allowed to use the trunk of a car while they go party?

Here’s a thought…can’t afford a babysitter? Stay home! So they can afford to go out to a bar but they can’t afford a babysitter?

Priorities are screwed up all over the place here.

Doh! 7 year old. Don’t know why I keep saying 10.

What?! They leave the DOG in the back seat and put the kid in the trunk?

Who are these people? Jeebus, we are an interesting species.

ITA that jail time just puts the kid at more risk via the foster care system.
How is this checked on, though?
Do they report back and say “we’ve upgraded to small closets, no more trunks for us!”

Judge:“excellent progress, keep up the good work…” ?

They are crap parents, suprise suprise. But the kid is doing fine so what do you think is best for him? Locking the parents up and taking permenant custody away is not going to help this kid. The situation right now is that the parents are working to gain the trust of the court. There is four years probation where they will be under a microscope with respect to their parenting. The boy stays with mommy and daddy and the parents very unlikely to offend again. This is the optimal solution.

Brendan Donovan, I agree that, given what little I know of the case, parole sounds appropriate. I was just taking issue with calling the car-battery bit bad reporting. Those things can be pretty dangerous.

We can hope. But what about the next bad parent? “Oh, I can get away with locking Johnny in the trunk while I get my nails done?”

The car could have been stolen. Someone could have rear-ended the car and seriously hurt or killed the child.

These “parents” showed horrible judgement, and perhaps, yes, this child would be better off in foster care. Remember, they didn’t do this once. They did this 11 times.

There not getting away with it. Being under the supervision of a parole officer and having to work 500 hours of community service isn’t going to be fun.

Where is Jr during those 500 hours?
I can’t believe that they would put the animal in the backseat and the kid in the trunk. Is the dog supposed to be company for the kid? Do these people live in their car?

I question the microscope that they are put under–with so many bad cases (that make this one mild–afterall, no physical harm came to the child–I’m not saying that it’s ok, I am just pointing out the scale of things)–how well are they going to be supervised?

Poor, poor, kid.

Would 14 days in jail be too much to ask?

If it ment both parents loosing their jobs and possibly their home, etc., then yes.

Maybe if it was a work release program, or something…

While I’m completely disgusted with what these people did, I must admit that it seems to me that leaving a child in the trunk *would * be safer than leaving them in the backseat. A kid can’t just open up the trunk and wander away the way they could from the backseat. Also, passing people with potentially sinister intentions can’t see an unattended vulnerable child who’s in a trunk the way they could one in the backseat. Not an endorsment of the act, of course, but I can see why a parent looking to leave their child in a car would choose the trunk.

NO. They put the kid in the trunk, 10 times, b/c if they put the DOG in the trunk, the DOG would bark and call attention to itself. The KID has either been told to not cry out, not use his voice, bullied or threatened so that he thinks this is normal. I brought up the dog to illustrate just how fucked these people are.

I see your point about the stray stranger danger shit–but do you really think that people who put their KID IN THE TRUNK OF A CAR 10 TIMES are worried about Jimmy’s safety? MAYBE a stranger or a cop would come along–and wonder where in hell the parents are and charge them with willful neglect! No chance of that, with just a dog in the back seat…

They treat the god damned animal better than they treat their own offspring. That is disgusting.

So, if that’s an issue, why not just take their child? Because they’re really really sorry? Give me a break. They didn’t show bad judgement. They showed it eleven times because partying in a bar was more important than their child’s welfare.

We go nuts when we see a dog locked in a hot car. Where’s the outrage for a child locked in a trunk because his parents would rather spend their money on booze than a babysitter?