Says the Right Wing Nut Job who’s also probably protesting the children at the border trying to escape genocide in their own countries. (In case you’re wondering, I used to work with MBD and know his politics well.) If we don’t give a shit about each others’ children any more, we have Conservatives to thank for much of that mindset. We can also thank them for taking away funding for child care and other programs single mothers need. And a far-too-low minimum wage that working mothers can’t afford day care on.
So as much as I agree that it’s ridiculous what our society has turned into, dude needs to do some self-reflection before spouting off about it.
The thing you don’t seem to get is that we Americans don’t see this as merely a cultural thing. People aren’t just weirded out. They believe the baby is in eminent danger. It’s not helicopter parenting because the issue is not that the parent isn’t watching the child, but that the child is seen as being in danger from the cold.
The idea that you could just bundle up and be safe in subfreezing temperatures is not something I would believe just from being told by the person who has a vested interest in lying to me to get out of an arrest.
I have you guys telling me here, and I still have a difficult time believing it, especially since the baby’s face is exposed. The only way I can stand being out in even above freezing cold temps is to cover up as much of my face as possible. And even then I’m going to try to get inside as soon as possible. It hurts.
The issue to me seems not to be cultural, but that Danes are more acclimated to the cold.
Ohhhhkay. Is the idea of wearing warm clothes as protection from the cold that alien to you, though? I mean, I’m not saying you’re a delicate flower, but damn. You do realize that people live in North Dakota, right?
And given that this happened in MAY, I don’t think the cold was an issue. It certainly wasn’t in any of the articles I could find, with only one *editorial *mentioning cold and drinks as a reason. It was all about the child being left unattended, not about the parents escaping the cold. This is far more about people being unable to accurately assess risk, and getting others in trouble for their inability.
Allegedly not unattended. Allegedly being watched. Baby was in far more danger every time they crossed a street than from being snatched.
*Commissioner of the Administration for Children’s Services in 1997
Personally, I wouldn’t worry about the baby being snatched - I’d worry about some junkie stumbling into the carriage and knocking it over. Or hell, a bunch of businessmen knocking it over. I’ve lived in NYC. I’ve been a NY pedestrian, and I know how they move.
Exactly. I love New York, but I know that the moment you step outside, you gotta stay alert. I wouldn’t take a nap on a New York sidewalk - why should a baby?
True. There does seem to be a disconnect between the two ideas, as if they have nothing to do with each other:
Crimes affecting children is much lower than in “the past”
Parents are far more watchful than they were in “the past”
In addition, there seems to be a fair amount of confirmation bias - “I was left alone when I was 7, and nothing bad happened to me, so there - that proves my point!” I, too, was left alone with my siblings when I was that age. Is it OK for me to assume that my experience was universal? I was OK too… as long as you ignore the 2 broken arms, a brother who got himself stuck in a tree (and needed the fire department to get him down), the times we locked ourselves out of the house (and had to wait until a parent got home with the key), unattended bicycle injuries, etc. Other than that, the kids are all right! :rolleyes:
And since the discussion seems to be centered on a single incident that occurred seventeen years ago(!), I don’t understand why the New Yorkers are automatically presumed wrong in their cultural assumption while the Danish couple gets a pass. Sure, it’s OK in Copenhagen to leave swaddled babies outside in the cold weather. That’s fine. But it’s not OK to do that in NYC. That, too, is fine. On this issue, the cultures differ… but only one is derided.
That’s insane. That calls into question the idea that people can reach the age of majority at 18. If someone has to be under their parents’ watchful eye until 16, then shouldn’t we be raising the age of majority to like, 25?
So true. I suppose part of that is the Fun Inherent in Outrage-and-Contempt; many love that feeling they get when they scoff at the (supposed) Nanny State. (And the confirmation bias you reference plays an inevitable part in that orientation.)
The fact remains that Copenhagen and NYC differ in ways material to the wisdom of choosing to leave a baby outside a restaurant.
Scotland passes a law giving every child their own government-appointed professional guardian. This is the logical slippery slope of an overprotective society towards children. Since some parents can’t be trusted, all parents should be considered unfit. Guess what the next step after that is? Licensing requirements.
But never fear! Proponents assure citizens that parents don’t have to accept help or take advice from the professional guardian. there will never be any repercussions for disregarding the advice of the government-appointed professional. And if you believe that…