People who "forget" their babies in the car on a hot day

[MandaJo]

@Hamlet

Yes it is. And I think most people would agree that parents owe a duty of care to their child and that allowing a child to roast to death in a car is not what a reasonable and prudent person may do. Do you really think that, had it been a babysitter and not a parent who did these acts, that the parents shouldn’t be able to sue the babysitter for breaching their duty to care if they forget a kid and it dies in a horrible manner? For example. Or another. Or another

I honestly didn’t think that anyone would conclude that leaving your child to die in the back seat of a car on a hot day wasn’t, at the very least, negligent. Perhaps not reckless, perhaps not even criminal. But certainly negligent.

You don’t understand “let it slide”? OK, I guess I didn’t expect that either. I intended that term to mean that the responsibility of the actors should not go unmentioned and that in this thread, it was noticeably under-emphasized.

I think that what most people are saying is that in many cases these parents aren’t any more negligent than the average parent–it’s just that their mild negligence happened in a time and place where it had horrific consequences.

By analogy: lots and lots of people drive drunk all the time and never get caught, certainly never hurt people. Some drunk drivers manage to kill people. Obviously, the law can only punish the ones that it catches, but on a moral level, is the drunk driver who kills someone really more evil than the one that doesn’t? Or are they both equally evil, and some just get lucky and their evil decisions never lead to a bad outcome?

I’ve never left my kid in the car. But I’ve done stupid things. I forgot to buckle the top buckle on his car seat, once. Could have killed him. I’ve forgotten that I had water boiling on the back burner, and left him in the living room within easy reach of it while I went to the bathroom. Could have killed him. Just typing those two things makes me queasy. Given that, the take-away I have when I read these stories is not “Oh, those stupid parents”, but “Jesus Christ, thank god that’s not me. I have to be CAREFUL. I have to be EVEN MORE CAREFUL. Jesus Christ. I’ve been so lucky”. I agree that those parents are negligent. But by that standard, so am I. I’m a terrible fucking person, because I am not perfect, and my son needs perfect, deserves perfect, must have perfect. And that’s why your condemnation hits so hard–because it’s condemning me, too.

[JKellyMap]

@MandaJo

“I’ve been so lucky”. I agree that those parents are negligent. But by that standard, so am I. I’m a terrible fucking person, because I am not perfect, and my son needs perfect, deserves perfect, must have perfect. And that’s why your condemnation hits so hard–because it’s condemning me, too.

Very well put. I would just add (to Hamlet) – go ahead and “condemn” all of us, but don’t be so arrogant as to neglect to “condemn” yourself as well.

[Hamlet]

@MandaJo

I think that what most people are saying is that in many cases these parents aren’t any more negligent than the average parent–it’s just that their mild negligence happened in a time and place where it had horrific consequences.

That was my understanding too. That these parents were negligent … they fucked up. And it had horrible consequences.

@Manda Jo

By analogy: lots and lots of people drive drunk all the time and never get caught, certainly never hurt people. Some drunk drivers manage to kill people. Obviously, the law can only punish the ones that it catches, but on a moral level, is the drunk driver who kills someone really more evil than the one that doesn’t? Or are they both equally evil, and some just get lucky and their evil decisions never lead to a bad outcome?

I think the consequences of an action certainly influence the determination of badness of that action. I also think most people would agree.

@Manda Jo

I’ve never left my kid in the car. But I’ve done stupid things. I forgot to buckle the top buckle on his car seat, once. Could have killed him. I’ve forgotten that I had water boiling on the back burner, and left him in the living room within easy reach of it while I went to the bathroom. Could have killed him. Just typing those two things makes me queasy. Given that, the take-away I have when I read these stories is not “Oh, those stupid parents”, but “Jesus Christ, thank god that’s not me. I have to be CAREFUL. I have to be EVEN MORE CAREFUL. Jesus Christ. I’ve been so lucky”.

I agree with all of this too. All parents make mistakes. All parents are negligent at one time or another. And, for me, that fear of my own negligence could possible result in the death of one of my children makes me extra vigilant and hyper-protective.

But, and this is where I don’t seem to be making my point, I think the fact that everyone is negligent at some time or another does not lessen the negligence of the parents who leave their child in the back seat of a car to roast to death.

@Manda Jo

I agree that those parents are negligent. But by that standard, so am I. I’m a terrible fucking person, because I am not perfect, and my son needs perfect, deserves perfect, must have perfect. And that’s why your condemnation hits so hard–because it’s condemning me, too.

Which I think, in part, is why I have so many posters in this thread have been unwilling to engage me like you have, without name calling, and dealing with what I actually say. Thanks.

[Hamlet]

@JKellyMap

Very well put. I would just add (to Hamlet) – go ahead and “condemn” all of us, but don’t be so arrogant as to neglect to “condemn” yourself as well.

If I, God forbid, forget my child is in the back seat and because of that negligence, my child dies a horrible, tortured death, you can be absolutely certain that I will condemn myself, not just as much, but 1,000 times more than I have condemned the people who have done it before me.

[crucible]

any time a kid dies unexpectedly, we react with sadness and, even, horror. The agency of the death can be drowning in a pool, an unsecured firearm, unjustified trust in the family dog, lack of care when backing out the driveway, driving recklessly, exposure to a swarm of bees, etc. etc.

In almost every case of a child dying from an ‘accident’, there is some amount of adult error and negligence involved. Part of the reason these things happen is that they are, mercifully, relatively rare. People don’t think such things might happen to them. When danger is not recognized, our wits don’t help protect us or our kids.

Regardless of the infrequent nature of child deaths due to accidents (looked at on a ‘per million children’ basis), society often acts to reduce the likelihood of such occurrences. for example, anti suction devices on pool drain/return lines; back up cameras and radar-like sensors for cars; child proof caps on medicines…etc. (Hell, when my kids were little, we didn’t even have car seats…)

No safety features would ever be needed if parents were super vigilant all the time, would they?

One thing that sets kids forgotten in overheating cars apart is that the matter has no safety improvement that could help prevent forgetful parents letting the unthinkable happen.

A smart engineer, though, could likely devise a way to sound the car’s horn continuously if any seat belt in a car remained engaged 15 seconds after the key was removed from the ignition. Long enough to get the kid out, short enough that if you forget them, you won’t be far away when the car alerts you to a problem…

But, all that said, kids do die because parents are negligent. It would be fair to say that some very small percentage of those deaths were intentional, but I don’t expect we’ll ever be able to figure out which ones.

For all the unintentional mistakes and negligence…we can really only pity the remaining years of life of the parent responsible. We all make mistakes, yet, I can’t help saying that when one’s number one priority should be the welfare of one’s kids, mistakes leading to a child’s death are not easily forgiven by society, and rightfully so.

[wonky]

@Hamlet

If I, God forbid, forget my child is in the back seat and because of that negligence, my child dies a horrible, tortured death, you can be absolutely certain that I will condemn myself, not just as much, but 1,000 times more than I have condemned the people who have done it before me.

Wouldn’t it be better to work with human brains to see if we clever monkeys can figure out a solution that doesn’t require superhuman vigilance and/or good luck?

[suranyi]

@Bricker

Did you read Weingarten’s article?

I can tell you that it had a huge effect on my way of viewing these cases, and if you haven’t, I’d urge you to.

I probably don’t need to tell you that his article won the Pulitzer Prize for feature writing. Well deserved, in my opinion.

[kambuckta]

@jsgoddess

Wouldn’t it be better to work with human brains to see if we clever monkeys can figure out a solution that doesn’t require superhuman vigilance and/or good luck?

(From the article cited in previous posts):

For years, Fennell has been lobbying for a law requiring back-seat sensors in new cars, sensors that would sound an alarm if a child’s weight remained in the seat after the ignition is turned off. Last year, she almost succeeded. The 2008 Cameron Gulbransen Kids’ Transportation Safety Act – which requires safety improvements in power windows and in rear visibility, and protections against a child accidentally setting a car in motion – originally had a rear seat-sensor requirement, too. It never made the final bill; sponsors withdrew it, fearing they couldn’t get it past a powerful auto manufacturers’ lobby.

There are a few aftermarket products that alert a parent if a child remains in a car that has been turned off. These products are not huge sellers. They have likely run up against the same marketing problem that confronted three NASA engineers a few years ago.

In 2000, Chris Edwards, Terry Mack and Edward Modlin began to work on just such a product after one of their colleagues, Kevin Shelton, accidentally left his 9-month-old son to die in the parking lot of NASA Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va. The inventors patented a device with weight sensors and a keychain alarm. Based on aerospace technology, it was easy to use; it was relatively cheap, and it worked.

Janette Fennell had high hopes for this product: The dramatic narrative behind it, she felt, and the fact that it came from NASA, created a likelihood of widespread publicity and public acceptance.

That was five years ago. The device still isn’t on the shelves. The inventors could not find a commercial partner willing to manufacture it. One big problem was liability. If you made it, you could face enormous lawsuits if it malfunctioned and a child died. But another big problem was psychological: Marketing studies suggested it wouldn’t sell well.

The problem is this simple: People think this could never happen to them.

Read that last line again. And again.

[Mangetout]

@Penfeather

They both have ribs, frequently get wet, and fold easily for storage.

The most significant commonality is that we use the same flawed meat brain to keep track of either.

[Weedy]

@Hamlet

If I, God forbid, forget my child is in the back seat and because of that negligence, my child dies a horrible, tortured death, you can be absolutely certain that I will condemn myself, not just as much, but 1,000 times more than I have condemned the people who have done it before me.

What will that achieve?

I mean, I am sure you will, but it is a completely pointless thing to do.

[JKellyMap]

@Hamlet

If I, God forbid, forget my child is in the back seat and because of that negligence, my child dies a horrible, tortured death, you can be absolutely certain that I will condemn myself, not just as much, but 1,000 times more than I have condemned the people who have done it before me.

But that’s just the point. The day it (God forbids) happens to you or any of us, is not a day we are being more negligent than any other day (in the “human brain” sense of the term “negligent,” not the legal sense).

You can call it “negligent,” you can call it “Fred,” I don’t care. But whatever you call it, you are doing it right now, and so am I.

Or are you a robot? If so, my apologies, and (unlike the incident of a few weeks ago) I can safely say the Turing test has now been “passed”!

[kambuckta]

@Weedy

What will that achieve?

I mean, I am sure you will, but it is a completely pointless thing to do.

Self-recrimination isn’t designed to achieve anything, and is effectively pointless. But it’s what people, normal human beings do. An integral part of self-consciousness is self-reflection…and we are our own worst critics when we fuck up.

Which brings me back to the OP of this depressing thread. I wonder if she has any consciousness of what her words might mean? To claim that parents mostly leave their children in cars to die as a purposeful act is amazingly brazen. May I suggest that she lacks the fundamental insight to even consider that her words are a colossal affront to those who have had children die under such circumstances?

May I suggest she’s either trolling for attention*, brain damaged, or just a complete fucking cunt?

*Yes, I know I said earlier I didn’t think nearwildheaven was a troll, but given that she hasn’t been back to defend her erstwhile opinion, I’m now wavering on my position!

[Hamlet]

@jsgoddess

Wouldn’t it be better to work with human brains to see if we clever monkeys can figure out a solution that doesn’t require superhuman vigilance and/or good luck?

Of course it would.

[Frylock]

@Hamlet

You’re right. I haven’t understood. I had assumed that the “it could happen to anyone” and “it was a mistake”, and “parents screw up sometimes” was about every parent being negligent at one time or another, not that the actions of forgetting your child was in the back seat wasn’t negligent or that parents don’t have a duty to not forget their child.

I didn’t say or imply that parents don’t have a duty to not forget their child. Do you know what “second conjunct” means? Did you see that I carefully specified that this is the statement of yours that is false:

“…allowing a child to roast to death in a car is not what a reasonable and prudent person may do.”

Of course parents have a duty of care. But the quoted statement is false, and has no implication concerning duty of care. The fact is that a perfectly reasonable and prudent person might allow a child to roast to death in a car. This has been proven many times. We’ve presented our case, but you just keep reasserting this claim.

Let me come at this whole conversation from another tack.

Why, Hamlet, do you think it’s important to emphasize the parent’s responsibility in this thread? What is the outcome you’re hoping for in doing that?

[kambuckta]

@Hamlet

Of course it would.

But as my post (with included quote) above elucidates, one of the major problems faced by product developers is that they can’t get their innovative products into the market because PEOPLE THINK THEY’RE TOO BLOODY CLEVER to need them!!

[Hamlet]

Nevermind

[Hamlet]

@Frylock

I didn’t say or imply that parents don’t have a duty to not forget their child. Do you know what “second conjunct” means? Did you see that I carefully specified that this is the statement of yours that is false:

“…allowing a child to roast to death in a car is not what a reasonable and prudent person may do.”

Of course parents have a duty of care. But the quoted statement is false, and has no implication concerning duty of care. The fact is that a perfectly reasonable and prudent person might allow a child to roast to death in a car. This has been proven many times. We’ve presented our case, but you just keep reasserting this claim.

I’ve dealt with this before, it must not have sunk in with you. Forgetting your child is in your car for a long enough period of time for it to die of hyperthermia is clearly a mistake. The actions that led to that are negligent. I am not saying the parents are negligent all the time, or that they’re horrible parents all the time, I’m saying they were negligent for the actions the led to the death.

I think the very fact it only (thankfully) happens 40 times a year is evidence of that. If these actions were reasonable and prudent, it would be happening all the time to all the parents. The rarity of the event is a very good indication that it isn’t reasonable and prudent.

Compare it to other acts of negligence. Running a stop sign. Giving someone an overdose of medication. Leaving your loaded gun out where kids can play with it. Or make the person who left the kid in the car a babysitter instead of a parent, wouldn’t that be negligent too?

So I’m hoping we’ve reached a point of difference and I no longer have to beat this horse for you. You think leaving your kid in the car for hours isn’t negligence. I do. I think reasonable minds can differ.

So can we stop with the calling me an asshole now?

@Frylock

Let me come at this whole conversation from another tack.

Why, Hamlet, do you think it’s important to emphasize the parent’s responsibility in this thread? What is the outcome you’re hoping for in doing that?

It’s the fucking Pit on a damn message board. It’s about children dying in one of the most horrible ways imaginable. And I thought it was a viewpoint that was sorely underrepresented. So I said it. Seriously, what is the fucking problem?

[Frylock]

@Hamlet

I’ve dealt with this before, it must not have sunk in with you. Forgetting your child is in your car for a long enough period of time for it to die of hyperthermia is clearly a mistake. The actions that led to that are negligent. I am not saying the parents are negligent all the time, or that they’re horrible parents all the time, I’m saying they were negligent for the actions the led to the death.

I think the very fact it only (thankfully) happens 40 times a year is evidence of that. If these actions were reasonable and prudent, it would be happening all the time to all the parents. The rarity of the event is a very good indication that it isn’t reasonable and prudent.

That’s a non-sequiter. Reasonableness and prudency are traits of patterns of behavior, not traits of individual actions. A perfectly reasonable and prudent person may still make mistakes, and yet for all that still be perfectly reasonable and prudent, because reasonableness and prudency live at the level of behavior patterns, not specific actions.

What’s being discussed in this thread is literally a thing that happens to a person, not a thing that a person does. One can take reasonable and prudent actions to prevent it the best one can, but every now and then, lightening strikes. No amount of reasonableness or prudency can prevent it.

Compare it to other acts of negligence. Running a stop sign. Giving someone an overdose of medication. Leaving your loaded gun out where kids can play with it. Or make the person who left the kid in the car a babysitter instead of a parent, wouldn’t that be negligent too?

None of those are comparable to what we’re talking about! Those are all things a person can reasonobly be expected never to do. (Second one is a possible exception here.)

So can we stop with the calling me an asshole now? It’s the fucking Pit on a damn message board. It’s about children dying in one of the most horrible ways imaginable. And I thought it was a viewpoint that was sorely underrepresented. So I said it. Seriously, what is the fucking problem?

No problem, I’m trying to find out if there’s some account as to why you’re saying these things that doesn’t make you an asshole.

Why did you think it was important to voice an underrepresented opinion? What was the outcome you were hoping for?

[Hamlet]

@Frylock

No problem, I’m trying to find out if there’s some account as to why you’re saying these things that doesn’t make you an asshole.

I guess we can’t stop with the calling me an asshole then?

@Frylock

Why did you think it was important to voice an underrepresented opinion? What was the outcome you were hoping for?

Seriously? Do you not understand how message boards work and reasons for expressing an opinion? Are these things beyond your ken? The value of multiple ways of looking at things? The desire to state aloud the thoughts in your head? The connection of sharing opinions and difference. The self-righteousness of thinking you’re right? Think about all the reasons you’ve posted in this thread, especially the ones calling me names, and think about why you posted them. Those reasons were likely in my mind too, and coming more and more to the forefront every day?

Now, are you done with your pretend psychoanalysis/attempt to continue insulting me, but more subtle stuff, or shall I just write you off too?

[Frylock]

I don’t know how the fact that it’s the pit is supposed to be relevant here. I don’t know how that is supposed to illuminate your motivations for me.

I don’t agree that you’re being reasonable about this, and in fact I think you’re evincing an attitude that is dangerous, in the sense of it is the very same attitude that sometimes causes kids to be roasted alive in a car. That’s why I have been continuing the conversation–I actually think it is barely possible I might be saving a life. (No shit, I am not kidding.)

That’s the outcome I’m hoping for. I still don’t know what outcome you’re hoping for.