Halibut Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 I think most people who are criticising the McCanns are simply being fair and reasonable - the parents were grossly irresponsible, and should be held to account. I don't understand the people who aren't disgusted by their act of neglect. I think you're wrong to use the term 'grossly irresponsible'. It's my belief that they took a calculated risk, that would have ended up alright on maybe 999 out 1000 occasions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greybeard Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 Seems like a pretty good case to me. It might also be sour grapes. Who is Ms Marilyn Baker ? Has she had a bad experience at the hands of social services ? Would there be any justice in Leicestershire Social Services deciding the McCann's were unfit parents and placing their other children into care. There have been some scary stories recently about Social Services taking infants into care just to meet their 'adoption' targets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missmode Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 I think most people who are criticising the McCanns are simply being fair and reasonable - the parents were grossly irresponsible, and should be held to account. I don't understand the people who aren't disgusted by their act of neglect. As far as I'm aware, just because a wrongdoer feels bad about the consequences of their action, should they be let off scot-free? Should murderers be given the benefit of the doubt because they feel *awful* afterwards? Let the McCanns be investigated just the same as any other parent would be - why should they be immune? I agree too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purdyamos Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 I think you're wrong to use the term 'grossly irresponsible'. For children who are that young, I don't think it is wrong. This argument keeps going round in circles, I just wanted to point out that disapproving of their actions and wanting to see appropriate action taken along the lines of normal procedure, is not hysterical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted June 12, 2007 Share Posted June 12, 2007 For children who are that young, I don't think it is wrong. This argument keeps going round in circles, I just wanted to point out that disapproving of their actions and wanting to see appropriate action taken along the lines of normal procedure, is not hysterical. I didn't suggest anyone was being hysterical, but that the use of the term 'grossly irresponsible'' overstates the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 I think you're wrong to use the term 'grossly irresponsible'. It's my belief that they took a calculated risk, that would have ended up alright on maybe 999 out 1000 occasions. Crap. Being a parent of young children under 5 you never leave them unattended. Everyone knows that. It was grossly irresponsible. They've paid a heavy price personally but they are not the real victims - the missing child is the victim and everybody seems to be conveniently forgetting that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purdyamos Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 I didn't suggest anyone was being hysterical, but that the use of the term 'grossly irresponsible'' overstates the case. No, a previous poster used the word 'hysterical'. I quoted your post, but I then aimed my comments wider, in the context of the thread. Children that young are simply incapable of taking care of themselves in any meaningful way, whether it's using the bathroom, getting a drink or food, playing, wandering off, having an accident, never mind the (yes, tiny) risks of fire or kidnap. Especially considering they were in a foreign bed, even waking up from a bad dream and no-one being there is terrifying for a young child. Especially as they were not 'at home' and would have had no concept of what to do if something was amiss. The McCanns were not close by, the children's room was not in sight, and half an hour is not 'frequent' checking when it comes to any of the matters I mentioned above. If one of the kids started crying, they would not be heard and attended to. I'm not a parent but even I know that toddlers cannot look after themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solomon1 Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 Crap. Being a parent of young children under 5 you never leave them unattended. Everyone knows that. It was grossly irresponsible. They've paid a heavy price personally but they are not the real victims - the missing child is the victim and everybody seems to be conveniently forgetting that. i don't have kids, but if i did, short of surgically attaching said child to my head.....how is it possible to never leave one unattended exactly? i was watching some news feed earlier and couldn't understand why the parents of this kid felt they had to defend themselves at a time when they should be receiving love and support from people....not accusation. they have handled it all very well and been dignified in the face of such ignorance. incredible how totally self-righteous some people can be. i, personally, see no useful reason for this apart from perhaps attention-seeking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 i don't have kids, but if i did, short of surgically attaching said child to my head.....how is it possible to never leave one unattended exactly? i was watching some news feed earlier and couldn't understand why the parents of this kid felt they had to defend themselves at a time when they should be receiving love and support from people....not accusation. they have handled it all very well and been dignified in the face of such ignorance. incredible how totally self-righteous some people can be. i, personally, see no useful reason for this apart from perhaps attention-seeking. As for not leaving young children unattended the general rules are pretty easy. Keep them in sight. If you can't do that they should be in earshot in a safe location. When they're awake you're awake. If they wake up you want to be there asap. Safe means not being able to harm themselves or be harmed by others - it's clear the McCanns achieved neither of those on the fateful night. Nothing self-righteous about saying that because it's plain fact that you simply do not leave 3 under-fives 150m away out of sight and out of earshot behind an unlocked door and only check them every 30 minutes. Surely anybody can understand that. If you're calling me self-righteous I think you're on the wrong track. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purdyamos Posted June 13, 2007 Share Posted June 13, 2007 i don't have kids, but if i did, short of surgically attaching said child to my head.....how is it possible to never leave one unattended exactly? i was watching some news feed earlier and couldn't understand why the parents of this kid felt they had to defend themselves at a time when they should be receiving love and support from people....not accusation. they have handled it all very well and been dignified in the face of such ignorance. incredible how totally self-righteous some people can be. i, personally, see no useful reason for this apart from perhaps attention-seeking. Why would it be attention seeking? That, if anything, sounds to me like a 'hysterical' response. It's deeply insulting to those who have simply voiced an opinion to which they are entitled. Why is it 'ignorant' to state plainly that abandoning your toddlers where you can neither hear not see them is not right? Why have so many people abandoned their sense of reason? This thread is simply proving what I have always said about the nature of attitudes towards child safety regarding parental responsibility and the relative victimhood of children and parents. I'll say no more than that here, but I see nothing has changed within my living memory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.