Right. Good point. The parents have lost their one child, and will live with that for a long time, blaming themselves and each other. Studies show that after tragedies involving the loss of a child leads to higher levels of divorces. The loss of a child has been described as one of the worst things which a person can do.
But you must be right, it should not be enough that the parent will blame themself. They need to be publicly mocked and ridiculed for not keeping their child under 24 hour supervision. Good point. [/sarcasm.]
I don’t see that necessarily. Can you show were third-party caregivers are being sentenced more strictly? If you can point to anything more than a “seems to” then I can only suppose confirmation bias.
I’ve read many times about parents being held responsible for kids left in hot cars.
The last sentence says that the toddler disappeared after playing with his brother that night. I think it’s entirely possible that the brother helped him into the trunk, and then either the brother closed the trunk or an adult came along and closed the trunk. IF the brother did it (and I have no idea if he did or not) then it was probably not out of malice, but ignorance.
ETA: Normally I don’t use sarcasm in an argument, but you have had several opportunities to respond to the logical arguments but have ignored them, instead just keep repeating that “parents should be held responsible.” You aren’t showing how they are held to a lower standard, just asking that people accept your subjective views as reality.
I think it would be very possible for a 2 year old to pop the trunk and get in it. In fact, given the normal curiosity of a child they would have been shown the trunk release and allowed to operate it by their parents.
Do the words “let me do it”, “let me do it” sound familiar to anybody?
They lost a child! Just how “easily” do you think they are getting off?
So far, you have not provided a single bit of evidence that a non-parental care-giver whould have been treated more harshly than the parents in this case, (or than parents, in general). Until you actually demonstrate that parents are given some sort of free pass for neglect while other care-givers are held to a higher standard, there is no debate–just you harping on a belief that you have failed to demonstrate.
I feel the parents are negligent in leaving the child in the care of a seven-year old. I know they lost their child, but they were still negligent and really stupid for thinking a seven-year old sibling sibling could watch a two-year old. The parents told the police that the child “couldn’t possibly” have gotten in a locked car -even though the car keys were on site. The police started searching surrounding woods and fields. The parents should have checked the locked cars on their property from the start. The child may have been saved (even though the heat makes it seem unlikely- it was in the 90s that day).
A quick Google search brings up a few more negligence cases where the babysitter didn’t get off as easily as these parents:
The babysitter was away at a pharmacy when the child was hit.
The babysitter, a 28 year old adult, left a 10 month old infant in a bathtub without checking for over 40 minutes. Find a parent who is not charged for the same situation. (This hardly compares to a 2-year-old playing in his own yard with his brother.)
25 years is the potential maximum. get back to us when it is the actual sentence. In addition, from the same story:
So the parents are going to be investigated just for picking the wrong sitter.
Nothing you have posted provides evidence that parents are routinely treated more leniently than hired care-givers. (You have not even found examples of it happening once, although I am sure that it has happened on occasion.)
Your confirmation bias is hardly persuasive.
I’m guessing that you are not a parent, or if you are, that you have 24-hour hired help.
Most seven-year-olds are capable of watching younger siblings for short periods of time. This is done routinely throughout the world and from the beginnings of humans. Anthropologists show that this is the standard model of childcare in primitive cultures. In modern society, it is common for parents to allow children to play outside with older children watching the younger child.
Your argument is completely failing because you aren’t making any distinctions in what is an accident and what is negligence. There isn’t anything about this particular situation which automatically suggests that it was so dangerous that it required constant adult care.
The police say that they regret not searching the car. Shouldn’t they be held criminally liable as well? What is the distinction you are trying to make?
First, as they say about the plural of anecdotal evidence is not data, simply grabbing a few things off of google isn’t going to help.
Parents are routinely charged for some acts such as leaving children in hot cars. That should be expected. You claim that they receive “less time” but I simply cannot see this is being objectively measured, especially when the examples you are citing are all over the place. There are worlds of differences between what children of different ages are capable of, and then what constitutes negligence of the part of the caregiver.
I’m not gonna ridicule anyone, but when my son was 2 years old, the idea of letting him play outside without an adult or a teen who I knew to be a responsible person would have been unthinkable to me. At that age, you have to watch them every minute when they’re outdoors, and the 7 year old obviously lost sight of him long enough for the 2 year old to climb into the trunk and pull it shut.
This comes with the caveat that I only have one child, and haven’t faced the challenges of raising a larger family, but still.
My son is now 6, and I can’t see giving him responsibility for a younger child while playing - not now, not later this year, not next year. I think he’s more scatterbrained than the average 6 year old, but still, staying on task isn’t something kids that age are good at.
I don’t think there’s anything the parents did that should arise to the level of criminality, but I’m not comfortable with their choices.
It really depends on the individual kids, for how long of time and what’s around. I babysat the neighbor’s kids when I was 8. Not for long periods, but going to the park and such. Is the kid generally responsible or not? Can he or she be trusted?
It also depends on the two-year-old. Are they closer to three or just two. Strong willed or compliant.
Likewise, is the area fenced in or not, by a road, etc. Sure, you would never leave a toddler your front yard by a busy street. But the back yard would be different.
I’ve had my kids watched for very short periods by neighbor kids.
As you say, it doesn’t sound like it was wise, but it’s also not automatically in the same category as the baby sitter who left the baby in the bath unsupervised.
There simply isn’t enough information here to crucify the parents, which is what I was objecting to.