# Leaving sleeping children in the car for under 3 minutes



## siobhang

Our au pair just came home in tears. It seems that she was out with the boys and wanted to take them to the playground, but didn't have any water or milk and she knew they'd be thirsty (they often have snacks after the playground).

So she stopped off at 7-11 to grab a bottle of water and a bottle of milk. When she parked, right outside the door, she realized the boys were asleep.

So she got out, locked the car door, walked the 20 feet to the 7-11 (with its huge windows so she could see there was no line) and went to buy the water/milk. It was, btw, 60 degrees outside and she parked in the shade. She could see the car while inside.

When she came out (total time inside was under 3 minutes), a woman she'd never seen before started yelling at her for leaving the boys in the car unattended and threatened to call the police, called her negligent, trying to harm the boys, etc.

Our au pair is from Brazil and leaving kids in the car is quite normal there. She was really shaken up by the experience - she didn't know what to say and felt quite attacked (especially not being the mom and not being a citizen), so she didn't defend herself - instead she quickly got in the car and drove away. She said she couldn't stop crying for a good 30 minutes and had to come home early because she was so upset.

My husband and I are appalled that a complete stranger would just attack her like that - if this woman had been really concerned, she could have approached her differently and expressed her worries - but instead, she attacked her and made all sorts of accusations.

Our au pair, btw, is an exceptionally responsible girl. She is 24, very honest, very good judgment, and is someone who I completely trust with the boys.

I am just so angry that this happened. It just strikes me as complete overkill to get so worked up over a stranger briefly leaving two sleeping kids in a locked car in a safe neighborhood when there is no danger of heat exhaustion or exposure.

Thoughts?


----------



## momto l&a

I would do the same as your au pair.


----------



## lerlerler

I, honestly, would have just driven off without the juice. I am not comfortable leaving my kids in the car for the 30 seconds it takes to carry one of them up the stairs (we live on the second floor) from the car if they are both sleeping. I've been known to ask a neighbor who is mowing the lawn to watch the car for me

That being said, if I saw two kids sleeping in a car, I'd watch the car until the guardian came back and mention to the grown-up that I am personally not comfortable leaving kids alone in a car, so I watched out for them....

This would probably creep out the guardian quite a bit and they may never leave the kids alone again which would be fine with me.

No need to scream


----------



## blessed

I think it's actually against the law in many states.

But it's hard to see the actual harm in the situation you described.


----------



## candiland

I personally think there is a happy medium in all things.

It used to be accepted and normal to be too laid back....... no car seats, swatting, yelling, spanking, kids running all over the neighborhood up to no good.

Now the pendulum has swung to the opposite extreme.... where common sense isn't allowed to dictate that there are some circumstances where the "rules" can bend a bit. Now we're seeing a generation of kids so overprotected they are like animals in cages afraid of their own shadows.

Poor girl. She must've felt awful.


----------



## wednesday

I'm sorry to hear your au pair was so traumatized. Sounds like the person who confronted her was over the top. The issue has been in the news so much recently that she probably just got all zealous about saving a life or something like that.


----------



## BoringTales

I'm with you. I've left my boys safely buckled in their seats to run into a gas station many times. If I can see the car at all times, it isn't too hot outside, and I'll only be a couple of minutes I have no issue with it. Here in my state it isn't illegal. It is illegal to leave kids in a running car. I'd never do that anyway though...


----------



## amandaleigh37

Personally I wouldn't do it...
I thought it was against the law?


----------



## mamajama

There's something of a moral panic about this particular issue these days and it's sounds like the yelling person is a part of that. I leave my kids in the car in front of 7-11 all the time in front of the doors/windows, locked in for a couple of minutes while I grab stuff. I simply cannot find a problem with that. I dare someone to try to yell at me over it.


----------



## aran

I'm going to have to disagree with the PPs and say that I think the au pair was just plain wrong to leave the kids alone. I would not have been comfortable if my nanny did that. I wouldn't worry about heat in the scenario you described, but about not being able to get to them quickly in case of an emergency, or mistakenly locking keys in the car, or one of the kids waking up and being scared and confused.

In my state it is illegal for licensed family daycare providers to leave a child unattended in a car... at all. I know that's not the same as an au pair, but the concept is the same.

If it were me, I'd wait until my boys woke up and go in all together (since we're going to the park anyhow... they need to wake up for that) or go through the Dunkin Doughnuts drive thru for water/milk, or I would have foregone the drinks.


----------



## nextcommercial

Depending on where you live, I wouldn't think twice about leaving kids in the car for a few minutes. In my area, I would never do it. But, I don't live in the kind of place you can do that.

I understand why she would feel like it is reasonable to leave them in the car for a few minutes.

Just explain to her that here in America, it isn't considered normal, and she should probably just go home if they are asleep.

I'm sorry she felt attacked. I wish people would say what they want to say with a little more compassion.


----------



## milkmamma

I personally never leave my boys in the car by themselves, even for a minute. Even though it is a pain in the tush to have to get them out of their car seats if I am just running in I still can't do it. What if that was the one time something unthinkable would happen.

The person who yelled at your Au Pair was in the wrong, who yells at strangers? Like a PP mentioned, I would watch the car to make sure they were ok although I don't think I would approach the person. It's my opinion that you don't leave your kids in the car...ever...that doesn't mean everyone needs to either agree with me or get yelled at.


----------



## Jessy1019

I don't think she did anything wrong.

The only reason I would never, personally, leave my kids in the car like that is because of people like the woman who attacked your au pair. I would be afraid of someone calling CPS on me or something else equally ludicrous but dangerous nonetheless.

Too many people today are paranoid and overprotective . . . not especially good for anyone, especially the kids.


----------



## ThreeBeans

Quote:


Originally Posted by *aran* 
I'm going to have to disagree with the PPs and say that I think the au pair was just plain wrong to leave the kids alone. I would not have been comfortable if my nanny did that. I wouldn't worry about heat in the scenario you described, but about not being able to get to them quickly in case of an emergency, or mistakenly locking keys in the car, or one of the kids waking up and being scared and confused.

In my state it is illegal for licensed family daycare providers to leave a child unattended in a car... at all. I know that's not the same as an au pair, but the concept is the same.

If it were me, I'd wait until my boys woke up and go in all together (since we're going to the park anyhow... they need to wake up for that) or go through the Dunkin Doughnuts drive thru for water/milk, or I would have foregone the drinks.

Ditto. Leaving the children was unnacceptable.


----------



## TranscendentalMom

I got chewed out for doing this one time. I live in a small town and this was actually on the outskirts in front of a place called the Country Deli. I ran in to grab and pay for my sandwiches which I had preordered... the car was locked with windows up (cool day) and came out and a woman yelled at me.

I've heard stories about kids being snatched when the car was running or left open. But I've never heard of an instance of someone breaking into a locked car and stealing the kids while the mother was right there in view. It seems safe to me to lock a car and run in somewhere. But again, I live in a pretty safe area. If I lived in a city or suburbs, I would feel more wierd about it but even that could be perception. Honestly, I worry more about someone yelling at me than anything happening to my kids.


----------



## beka1977

I have yelled at someone who left their kiddo alone in a car. I would rather have some adult feel righteous/sad/attacked/whatever than to have an innocent child hurt.

If I had been you I would have been outraged AT THE AU PAIR. I wouldn't allow her to watch my kids.







:


----------



## siobhang

Quote:


Originally Posted by *milkmamma* 
What if that was the one time something unthinkable would happen.

I guess I just cannot think what could happen to them?

They are strapped into their carseats and are asleep, so they aren't going anywhere. The car is locked, and in plain view of many people, so the likelihood of someone stealing the car (a 97 ford contour, so not valuable) or the kids (you ever try lifting a sleeping 4 year old out of a carseat quietly without anyone noticing?) is pretty darn low.

Sure, another car could hit the car, but that could happen at any time, au pair in the car or not, so not sure how her presence prevents it (in fact, being outside the car may help her get the kids out, vs if she were trapped in the car too).

I did hear once about a family where the kids got into some matches while mom was running an errand, but in my mind the problem there was leaving matches around small kids, and not leaving them in the car.

I don't meant to be snarky, but I am seriously puzzled by what unforeseen tragedy would be likely to occur in that time period that her presence would prevent?

Not to say that anyone should be comfortable with it if they aren't - but I am just trying to assess risk here, and the risk, honestly, to me seems very very low.


----------



## siobhang

Quote:


Originally Posted by *beka1977* 
I have yelled at someone who left their kiddo alone in a car. I would rather have some adult feel righteous/sad/attacked/whatever than to have an innocent child hurt.

If I had been you I would have been outraged AT THE AU PAIR. I wouldn't allow her to watch my kids.







:

well, since I have done it myself - run in to pay for gas, left my kid sleeping in the car in the carport (right next to the house), left my car for a few moments with the boys inside to get the paper or talk to a neighbor or get the phone, I clearly don't see an issue with it.

Again, we are not talking hours or even 10s of minutes. I wouldn't leave a child in a running car or in an unsafe neighborhood.

I guess I am not comfortable with the blanket belief that car=dangerous.


----------



## LilyGrace

If she realized the boys were asleep, continuing to the park was not a good idea.

Running into a store, for "just 3 minutes" is an even worse idea.

Running into a store, for "just 3 minutes", taking her eyes away from the window to grab the drinks, look in her wallet to pay, etc. is a HORRIBLE idea!

I would have done the same as the lady who yelled at her, honestly. With as many kids that are forgotten about in cars and have died in the past few years, it should be repeated constantly that we simply do not leave kids in the car alone.


----------



## carmel23

I think it is against the law here in California to leave children in a car and enter a store. It doesn't matter how long it takes you to go into the store and back to the car--it doesn't matter what the weather, etc. If I had seen the kids in the car, you would have a broken window--I wouldn't have hesitated to break the window and get the kids out.

I am sorry that your au pair was so frightened, but you should take this as an eye opener, and make sure she is familiar with all the laws and cultural customs of the US in relation to children.


----------



## Daffodil

Quote:


Originally Posted by *siobhang* 
I guess I am not comfortable with the blanket belief that car=dangerous.

Me neither. I think that belief is ridiculous and illogical. Sure, you can think of horrible things that could potentially happen while kids are left alone in a car for a few minutes, but aren't there just as many horrible things that could potentially happen if you get the kids out and take them in? A careless driver could hit a kid walking across the parking lot, or an armed robber could come into the store and start shooting, or someone could grab a kid and run away with him . . . Of course none of those things are likely enough to worry about, but I don't think they're any less likely than, say, the possibility of someone breaking into the car and trying to abduct a kid.


----------



## cappuccinosmom

Quote:

I guess I am not comfortable with the blanket belief that car=dangerous.
Especially if it is locked, everyone is strapped in and a sleep, it's cool, in a safe neighborhood and it's in full view for the all of 3 minutes that you're getting a drink for them.

It'd be far easier for someone to corner and carry off a child in a park.

I don't think the au pair did anything wrong, especially since in her country it is the norm. And I'm sure she'll never do it again, given the verbal abuse.







That is why I don't leave my kids in the car no matter how safe. I'm less worried about someone stealing the car, more worried about someone deciding to call CPS.


----------



## treqi

Again the fear our culture has instilled in us doen't allow adults to make a pretty harmless decision without being verbally ATTACKED and am appaled people here would have done the same thing I coud unserstand mentioning that you dont think its legal and she should look into that before she does it again but to rip her a new one is just plain wrong.


----------



## savithny

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Daffodil* 
Me neither. I think that belief is ridiculous and illogical. Sure, you can think of horrible things that could potentially happen while kids are left alone in a car for a few minutes, but aren't there just as many horrible things that could potentially happen if you get the kids out and take them in? A careless driver could hit a kid walking across the parking lot, or an armed robber could come into the store and start shooting, or someone could grab a kid and run away with him . . . Of course none of those things are likely enough to worry about, but I don't think they're any less likely than, say, the possibility of someone breaking into the car and trying to abduct a kid.

Yep. You're more likely to get killed by a car walking across a parking lot carrying a chiihld than your child is likely to be taken out of a locked car. And if someone wanted to steal a child, what's easier? Knocking you down and taking the child vs. having to break into a locked car?

I agree that there are times/places situations where its not appropriate, but to turn it into a blanket "you can't walk more than 10 feet from your car with kids in it" is hysteria in the other direction. I once had someone tell me that she wouldn't walk four parking spots down to a cart corral in the supermarket parking lot because that was "leaving your kids in the car." I just have to disagree and leave it there.


----------



## becoming

I wouldn't have yelled at her, but I wouldn't have approved of it, either.


----------



## beka1977

Quote:


Originally Posted by *siobhang* 
I guess I just cannot think what could happen to them?


That is why they call it the UNTHINKABLE.

If you google around you can find all kinds of stories: cars stolen, cars reposed, cars mistakenly reposed, accidents, kidnapping, injury, etc.

I am not saying that I cannot imagine a scenario where I would decide to leave my kid in the car. In a true emergency they may be safer in the car. However, running into the 7-11 to buy juice is not one of those cases. I value my kids, and their safety too much to chance anything.


----------



## LilyGrace

Quote:


Originally Posted by *treqi* 
Again the fear our culture has instilled in us doen't allow adults to make a pretty harmless decision without being verbally ATTACKED and am appaled people here would have done the same thing I coud unserstand mentioning that you dont think its legal and she should look into that before she does it again but to rip her a new one is just plain wrong.

Sorry. I wasn't thinking that neglect of children was harmless, and personally I wouldn't want to stand there with a stopwatch to determine of the adult was coming back soon and the degree of neglect involved. I'd rather jump the gun and try to protect the kids - option A being calling the police and letting them know that two kids were left in a car, and option B being dialing the cops, seeing the adult, and laying into her for being so careless - especially with someone else's kids.

At least one of the OP's kids is at the age where s/he could unbuckle if awake, and wander into the parking lot to look for this missing adult.


----------



## kaspar

the stranger shouldn't have yelled maybe, but the au pair was totally in the wrong, full stop. you do not leave kids alone in a car ever. completely aside from stranger-danger (which is totally overblown), there are so many cases where one kid unbuckles, or unbuckles the other kid, opens the windows, puts the care into neutral and it starts to roll...

in any case, she is paid to mind the children, and she wasn't minding them. it's just irresponsible.


----------



## dallaschildren

I think with better planning and foresight on the part of your au pair, she would not have had to choose between leaving your children in the car or waking them up to buy drinks.


----------



## Ruthla

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dallaschildren* 
I think with better planning and foresight on the part of your au pair, she would not have had to choose between leaving your children in the car or waking them up to buy drinks.











I never, ever, go out without taking water with me- and when I had little kids, I always had snacks AND drinks with me. If we finish the water, I refill the bottle(s) in a water fountain or public bathroom sink.

If I'd found myself out without drinks, I would have simply skipped the trip to the park and gone right home.


----------



## Ruthla

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cappuccinosmom* 
That is why I don't leave my kids in the car no matter how safe. I'm less worried about someone stealing the car, more worried about someone deciding to call CPS.

Unfortunately, that's my thinking as well.


----------



## LilyGrace

Just a head's up - it may soon become illegal in Virginia to leave children unattended for any length of time in a car. Legislation is pending in that state and 12 others to address this issue.


----------



## pigpokey

Quote:


Originally Posted by *beka1977* 
That is why they call it the UNTHINKABLE.

If you google around you can find all kinds of stories: cars stolen, cars reposed, cars mistakenly reposed, accidents, kidnapping, injury, etc.

I am not saying that I cannot imagine a scenario where I would decide to leave my kid in the car. In a true emergency they may be safer in the car. However, running into the 7-11 to buy juice is not one of those cases. I value my kids, and their safety too much to chance anything.

If someone's approach to life is all about the highly, highly unlikely, how do they justify leaving their house?

Won't raise my kids this way.


----------



## Maluhia

Your in Annanadale and you think 3 minutes is okay? Um, nope. This is Metro DC - even in the burbs we have crime. And that is just the issue I'd be 1st on, the safety of it (this week is cooler but a few weeks ago? 3 minutes could have = 160+ degrees)

In Hawaii there have been TWO carjackings from a similar 7-11 (huge window, 3 feet door to spaces, only five spaces) with sleeping children in the car in my lifetime. I've seen the faces of those distraught mothers - it would NEVER be worth it.


----------



## hipmummy

It is against the law in our state. I have actually had to cal the police many times on people for doing the same thing. Although I have never confronted the individuals. It may seem innocent but what if the line was long or there was a problem checking ou, or what if someone hit the parked car. You never know. I would go without the beverages Thank you. I was a nanny for fifteen years and never have I even considered leaving a child unattended in the car.


----------



## dubfam

Quote:


Originally Posted by *carmel23* 
If I had seen the kids in the car, you would have a broken window--I wouldn't have hesitated to break the window and get the kids out.


Are you serious??!!!!!







:

It was at 7-11!!! Obviously the person isn't going to be in there for hours, and it wasn't even hot outside!! How would you be justified in destroying another person's property like that??

Don't you think that it would be traumatizing for the kids to be woken up a raging, self appointed safety officer smashing their car window and taking them out of the vehicle???!!!

It is not illegal to leave your kid in the car for 3 minutes in front of 7-11 where I live...but you will get arrested or physically attacked if you break a persons car window and take their children out of the car. I think that is called breaking & entering and attempted kidnapping.

IMHO their is nothing wrong with the Au Pair leaving them for a couple minutes as long as the OP is okay with it.

This is one of the silliest threads I've seen here in a while.


----------



## pigpokey

Quote:


Originally Posted by *carmel23* 
If I had seen the kids in the car, you would have a broken window--I wouldn't have hesitated to break the window and get the kids out.

That would be criminal destruction of property, possibly kidnapping, would risk traumatizing the kids, and I just don't understand it. It's also a near complete waste of time and energy to protect other people's safe as houses children. We could fight for children's lives who are in actual danger. I understand the children of Darfur are suffering.

If there is no danger of climate issues and I want you to tell me why a stranger gets to pick that I can't choose some far-fetched risk for my children of being in the car rather than the far-fetched risk of being in or on the way to the 7-11 during, say, a holdup or mugging or a car careening through the lot and crashing into the plate glass window. What child is easier to snatch, the child following me out to the car or the child locked and buckled inside? Child snatchings are fantastically rare outside of the family.

I doubt anyone could defend criminal charge in that situation with "But your honor she left them in the car." Or the civil suit. Even if it's a misdemeanor for the mom to leave her kids in the car. Not unless there was some actual danger to protect the children from. Not the bogeyman, not what if clouds suddenly darkened the clear blue sky and a lightning strike felled the tree next to the car and crushed it. Actual danger.

If there's a law that says my babysitter has to be 12, and I leave my sleeping kids with a trusted 11 year old and cross the street for coffee, you are not allowed to break down my door and carry them to some place you choose.


----------



## dubfam

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LilyGrace* 

At least one of the OP's kids is at the age where s/he could unbuckle if awake, and wander into the parking lot to look for this missing adult.

My DS Is the same age as the OP's oldest and he cannot undo his car seat harness yet.
Also, the vehicle was in sight, so she could have returned if one of the children opened a door.

Lets start a thread about the dangers of going pee and leaving your children unattended in your house for 3 minutes, where you can't see them. I am sure there are many more things that could happen in that scenario, and I am sure that most of us do that at least occasionally.

Car does not equal danger!


----------



## bjorker

Quote:


Originally Posted by *candiland* 
I personally think there is a happy medium in all things.

It used to be accepted and normal to be too laid back....... no car seats, swatting, yelling, spanking, kids running all over the neighborhood up to no good.

Now the pendulum has swung to the opposite extreme.... where common sense isn't allowed to dictate that there are some circumstances where the "rules" can bend a bit. Now we're seeing a generation of kids so overprotected they are like animals in cages afraid of their own shadows.

Poor girl. She must've felt awful.

I tend to agree with this kind of thinking. I am VERY concerned about the state of fear in our society. That said, there are lots of awful people out there, and one has to be very careful and weigh the risks with the benefits in a situation like this. It's extra difficult to be from a different country with a different concept about what is appropriate and safe, but it's also necessary to know what's appropriate in the society she is now caring for children in. Personally, I am not passing any judgment over here. I don't see myself leaving dd in the car at a 7-11 while I ran in, but that doesn't mean that I necessarily think it's wrong-- especially if she really could see the car the entire time. Though I do think that'd still be too big of a risk for me to take. I do, however, think that the other woman was in the wrong for screaming at your au pair about it. There are much better ways to handle that concern.


----------



## pigpokey

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hipmummy* 
It may seem innocent but what if the line was long or there was a problem checking ou,

because they would run out of air? food? All the serious problems in the world and you are calling the police why?

Quote:

or what if someone hit the parked car. You never know.
Maybe we should pass a law that you cannot transport kids in automobiles period, because there might be a traffic accident.


----------



## applejuice

I see nothing wrong with what your au pair did.

I have seen people stand outside a car with a dog in it just to yell at the owner when they come out.







I got in trouble for running in to the bank with the same situation...no line, I could see the kids, cool day, windows cracked...still some busy body waited for me.

However, your au pair came to this country to work and she should know the laws as they apply to the care of children.


----------



## pigpokey

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dubfam* 
Lets start a thread about the dangers of going pee and leaving your children unattended in your house for 3 minutes, where you can't see them. I am sure there are many more things that could happen in that scenario, and I am sure that most of us do that at least occasionally.

Yes. My children are much more in-danger playing in my fairly childproofed house than being strapped in the car for 5 minutes alone.

BTW my kids are in bed alone. What if a car hits the house.


----------



## LilyGrace

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dubfam* 
My DS Is the same age as the OP's oldest and he cannot undo his car seat harness yet.
Also, the vehicle was in sight, so she could have returned if one of the children opened a door.

Lets start a thread about the dangers of going pee and leaving your children unattended in your house for 3 minutes, where you can't see them. I am sure there are many more things that could happen in that scenario, and I am sure that most of us do that at least occasionally.

Car does not equal danger!

My youngest could at 4yo - and yes, it was properly fitted.

We've had two children in the past few years being taken - 1 while the grandmother ran in to pay for gas. She saw the car. She saw the man take her grandchild. And she couldn't get there fast enough.

In my house, there are not moving vehicles, there are not strangers, and the kids are within my hearing range in any room.

Car does not equal danger. Neglect equals danger. Leaving two children unattended, out of hearing range, out of attention range, in a car where they can easily get out, remove the parking brake, be taken........that is neglectful. There is a reason why a quarter of the country has laws to protect kids in that situation, and why another quarter have laws pending.


----------



## dubfam

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LilyGrace* 
My youngest could at 4yo - and yes, it was properly fitted.

We've had two children in the past few years being taken - 1 while the grandmother ran in to pay for gas. She saw the car. She saw the man take her grandchild. And she couldn't get there fast enough.

In my house, there are not moving vehicles, there are not strangers, and the kids are within my hearing range in any room.

Car does not equal danger. Neglect equals danger. Leaving two children unattended, out of hearing range, out of attention range, in a car where they can easily get out, remove the parking brake, be taken........that is neglectful. There is a reason why a quarter of the country has laws to protect kids in that situation, and why another quarter have laws pending.

But how do you know they could get out? My son wouldn't be able to.

The child who was taken from the gas station...was it a LOCKED car?

In your house there are no moving vehicles, But any kid who can get out of the car seat and car could surely get out of the house and into the road. A stranger could break in, just the same as they can break in to your car. And there are many other things like a stove, I am sure there are heavy things to be toppled, they could open a window and fall out....and all of those things are probably fairly unlikely to happen but COULD happen.


----------



## aprildawn

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LilyGrace* 

In my house, there are not moving vehicles, there are not strangers, and the kids are within my hearing range in any room.


I wouldn't be so sure about that. You want to talk about the unthinkable?
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/loc...,7213938.story

OP - I agree with everyone who has said there's a tendency to overreact in these situations. I probably wouldn't have done it because of a fear (irrational?) something might happen. But I know my mom would have, and did, when I was a kid. She didn't leave us in a hot car in the summer while she shopped for a week's worth of groceries, but she would leave us while she paid for gas. Something is very wrong in our generation with this culture of fear pervading everything.


----------



## LilyGrace

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dubfam* 
But how do you know they could get out? My son wouldn't be able to.

The child who was taken from the gas station...was it a LOCKED car?

In your house there are no moving vehicles, But any kid who can get out of the car seat and car could surely get out of the house and into the road. A stranger could break in, just the same as they can break in to your car. And there are many other things like a stove, I am sure there are heavy things to be toppled, they could open a window and fall out....and all of those things are probably fairly unlikely to happen but COULD happen.


The more you neglect a child, the more you let things happen.

I am surprised that here on MDC, there are so many people who are perfectly fine with leaving children unattended in a vehicle. I really thought this board would be more about meeting our children's needs than mainstream boards. Attention is a need. I don't see how that is so overlooked in favor of parental convenience.


----------



## dubfam

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LilyGrace* 
The more you neglect a child, the more you let things happen.

I am surprised that here on MDC, there are so many people who are perfectly fine with leaving children unattended in a vehicle. I *really thought this board would be more about meeting our children's needs* than mainstream boards. Attention is a need. I don't see how that is so overlooked in favor of parental convenience.

because waking them up and dragging them into the store for 3 minutes is what they need.


----------



## hipmummy

Excuse me but it is good thing I called the police one of the persons because it was an ex Dh who was not even supposed to have his children and the Mother had no idea he was with them. The second one forgot the time and realized she had been in the store for over 20 minutes. This is in an urban area, not a small town.
Also my dh after ds's birth two days no sleep rear ended a car with a seven year old in and mom had been gone for over 10 minutes but had said she be back in 2!! Dh waited but the police came because someone else called about the fender bender.


----------



## hipmummy

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pigpokey* 
because they would run out of air? food? All the serious problems in the world and you are calling the police why?

Maybe we should pass a law that you cannot transport kids in automobiles period, because there might be a traffic accident.

Oh and another thing, I was left asleep in a car when I was five and when I awoke I put the car into reverse right into our neighbors fence. My mother was only gone two minutes to get her purse. You never know.......


----------



## Delta

Quote:

I am surprised that here on MDC, there are so many people who are perfectly fine with leaving children unattended in a vehicle. I really thought this board would be more about meeting our children's needs than mainstream boards. Attention is a need. I don't see how that is so overlooked in favor of parental convenience.
LOL. So much wrong with this statement.


----------



## dubfam

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hipmummy* 
Excuse me but it is good thing I called the police one of the persons because it was an ex Dh who was not even supposed to have his children and the Mother had no idea he was with them. The second one forgot the time and realized she had been in the store for over 20 minutes. This is in an urban area, not a small town.
Also my dh after ds's birth two days no sleep rear ended a car with a seven year old in and mom had been gone for over 10 minutes but had said she be back in 2!! Dh waited but the police came because someone else called about the fender bender.


Yes, but this was at 7-11

Who spends more than a couple minutes in 7-11?

I could understand if it were a grocery store or the mall. I would be likely to call the police in that situation...but at 7-11?

Do you really not see the difference?


----------



## Novella

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LilyGrace* 
There is a reason why a quarter of the country has laws to protect kids in that situation, and why another quarter have laws pending.

Agreed. But I don't think I'm thinking of the same reasons that you are!

I'm on board with the comments of others who think the au pair's actions were *entirely reasonable*. Life is dangerous, houses are dangerous, people die or are injured in all sorts of freaky ways. I think you have to be aware, reasonable, and moderate in your choices. It's easy to get caught up in all the fear mania that goes on.

Since no one else has mentioned it, I think part of the tendency for reactions like the screaming woman are what I think of as "The Lazy Samaritan":

I imagine many of us have day-dreamed about how we would react in an emergency situation: a car accident, a crime-in-progress, a fire, a health emergency, whatever. There is a small part of lots of us, I speculate, that wonders how we would behave in that situation: if we could help someone, how our efforts might be recognized.

There's a lot of people who would leap at the chance to "save" a kid or a dog in a car, but who would avert their eyes and keep on driving past a mugging/assault/tire-slashing. It's so easy to be a hero when there's no exertion required on your part and not likely any danger to you for intervening. This isn't entirely idle imaginings on my part. I've heard lots over the years of people recounting how they were too scared to do anything about a bad situation, and conversely (sometimes the same people!) how they interferred in a much more innocuous event.


----------



## dubfam

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hipmummy* 
Oh and another thing, I was left asleep in a car when I was five and when I awoke I put the car into reverse right into our neighbors fence. My mother was only gone two minutes to get her purse. You never know.......

And you lived to tell the story.

It sounds like you would advocate for someone calling the police on your mother in that situation?


----------



## punkrawkmama27

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lerlerler* 
I, honestly, would have just driven off without the juice. I am not comfortable leaving my kids in the car for the 30 seconds it takes to carry one of them up the stairs (we live on the second floor) from the car if they are both sleeping. I've been known to ask a neighbor who is mowing the lawn to watch the car for me

That being said, if I saw two kids sleeping in a car, I'd watch the car until the guardian came back and mention to the grown-up that I am personally not comfortable leaving kids alone in a car, so I watched out for them....

This would probably creep out the guardian quite a bit and they may never leave the kids alone again which would be fine with me.

No need to scream


Totally agree! At the preschool dd went to last year, moms would leave their little ones in the car so they didnt have to take them in to the school and waste time. If I saw someone leave a little one in the car, I would sit there and watch the car till mama came back, but I never said anything. On the other hand, even the coldest days and even though it was only right there, I still bundled up the two youngest. But I am a very paranoid mama, and think anything could happen.

I do agree that lady should have been more tactful, and not have yelled and made a scene. That is uncalled for.


----------



## carmel23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *savithny* 
Yep. You're more likely to get killed by a car walking across a parking lot carrying a chiihld than your child is likely to be taken out of a locked car. And if someone wanted to steal a child, what's easier? Knocking you down and taking the child vs. having to break into a locked car?

I agree that there are times/places situations where its not appropriate, but to turn it into a blanket "you can't walk more than 10 feet from your car with kids in it" is hysteria in the other direction. I once had someone tell me that she wouldn't walk four parking spots down to a cart corral in the supermarket parking lot because that was "leaving your kids in the car." I just have to disagree and leave it there.

the cart corral isn't inside a store.

the law is the law for a reason. There are carjackings even in those nice neighborhoods.

I think it is a good idea to follow the law of your state if you provide child care.








I wouldn't break the law while watching someone's kids. No matter how logical it seems at the time. Parks have drinking fountains.


----------



## dubfam

Quote:


Originally Posted by *carmel23* 
the cart corral isn't inside a store.

the law is the law for a reason. There are carjackings even in those nice neighborhoods.

I think it is a good idea to follow the law of your state if you provide child care.







I wouldn't break the law while watching someone's kids. No matter how logical it seems at the time. Parks have drinking fountains.

How many states have laws about this?


----------



## hipmummy

I would never call the police on someone in front of their home. The point I am trying to make is you never know what can happen.
And in Mass it is illegal. and frankly where the 7-11 in our area are located, most adults are afraid to go in alone and or stay in the car alone. So it may be a very different place where you live. There are stabbing near the 7-11 are most armed robberies take place there where we live. And all of this happens in broad day light.


----------



## mirthfulmum

Wow! I had no idea that a 3 minute 7-11 run could be so controversial.

I love my children to the ends of the universe and back. There is not a single thing in this world I wouldn't do for them to keep them healthy and safe. I am a dedicated AP mama and wear the label with pride. And I have left my almost 3 yo and 5 yo in the locked car approx 10 feet away as I ran to the bank machine. Judge away, but it does not make me any less of a mother and it in no way measures on any scale of neglect.

Thank you dubfam and pigpokey for keeping it sane.


----------



## candiland

There have been several children in our town alone who have been hit by cars as pedestrians.

Therefore, my kids aren't allowed to leave the house.

There is a far greater chance of them being hit by a car than by being carried out of my cool, locked van that is in plain view of me.

Actually, now that I think about it, I believe I will invest in a plastic bubble, as well. One that is kidnap-proof, fire-proof, dent-proof, germ-proof, and all-around the safest possible place my children can be. That way, nothing can go wrong. And that way, while my kids live totally overprotected because of my heightened sense of fear and endangerment, I will never be subject to any questioning in regards to my ability to protect my children and keep them safe.


----------



## candiland

And I, too, am shocked at what I am reading here on Mothering.

Mothering, to me, is the antithesis of self-righteous indignation. Yes, there are lots of very obvious black and white circumstances when it comes to parenting.... but when it comes to each individual family's choices and comfort levels in these grayer areas, Mothering is all about "to each their own, respect those choices."







And I would hope that is something we here at Mothering are modeling for our own children, as well.


----------



## ElliesMomma

sounds like the OP was fine with what the AP did. to each their own.
personally, i find a work around solution in situations like this. you can pay for gas at the pump with a credit card you pay off each month, or a debit card. you can get a bottle of water at mcdonalds drive thru, a bottle of milk, too. you can plan ahead with a small cooler in the car if it's going to be a long day.
heck, you can get ATM cash at drive thrus, too.
i'm not one to yell at other people for their choices. we can all do what we want to do, and we all pay consequences for our choices. for some, an unlucky few perhaps, the consequences can be severe, if unlikely or unthinkable. for others, the consequences can be a lifetime of paranoia, etc.
i'm probably in the latter group. i thought up a scenario and reason for not leaving kids alone in the car at 7-11: armed robberies at convenience stores happen so often it's cliche. if shots were fired and you were separated from your children, you have lost your opportunity to directly protect them.
there are risks we all have to take, and then there are unnecessary risks that are "options".
probably best to avoid the 7-11s altogether. their prices tend to be too high.


----------



## cycle

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mirthfulmum* 
Wow! I had no idea that a 3 minute 7-11 run could be so controversial.

I love my children to the ends of the universe and back. There is not a single thing in this world I wouldn't do for them to keep them healthy and safe. I am a dedicated AP mama and wear the label with pride. And I have left my almost 3 yo and 5 yo in the locked car approx 10 feet away as I ran to the bank machine. Judge away, but it does not make me any less of a mother and it in no way measures on any scale of neglect.

Thank you dubfam and pigpokey for keeping it sane.


I have done this many times too - as long as I can see the car and see my ds (wave to him, etc), but I don't know if I would leave him in while I ran into a store, even a 7-11 for a minute of two, it would depend. I wouldn't leave him while he was awake because he would want to go, asleep it would depend on where the store was, if I could see the car at ALL TIMES. Thats the only thing about it, if you go for a juice/water at 7-11 you don't have your eyes on the children and car the whole time. I'm not comfortable going in to pay for gas, I am so thankful for paying at the pump!

When my older brother and I were kids it was normal for my mom to leave us in the car at 7-11, with the car running







:. I put the car in reverse and we ended up in the middle of the road. I was about 2. Another time she left us in the driveway at my grandparents, again I put the car in drive this time, crashed into my grandpa's car.







Not quite sure why she didn't learn the first time....She wonders why she has never taken care of ds anywhere but in my home, and not very often.


----------



## Daffodil

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pigpokey* 
Maybe we should pass a law that you cannot transport kids in automobiles period, because there might be a traffic accident.

Yeah, the people who think kids should never, ever be left in cars even for a minute certainly ought to be in favor of that. Or at least, if they were thinking at all logically, along with never leaving their kids in the car, they would also avoid taking their kids on any car trip that was not absolutely necessary. After all, it's not worth risking their lives just to take them to a park. And of course they should avoid other crazy risks like living in a two-story house, or letting their kids ride bikes, or owning pets. (Google "killed by the family pet," if you think leaving a kid in the car for 3 minutes is more irresponsible than owning a pet. And no, I don't actually think owning a pet is irresponsible.)


----------



## sunflowers

I am actually surprised that anyone would consider leaving a sleeping child in a car to "run into the store". I often like to stop at convenience stores (aka WaWa







) to get coffee. I do it all of the time. Never have I left my dd in the car for even 3 minutes. Just not something I ever thought to do.

A short story... recently I stopped for coffee. I got a sleeping dd out of the car, went in and bought my coffee and back to the car I went. As I was strapping dd back in the woman sitting a car next to me actually commented how glad she was to see that I took her with me and didn't leave her in the car. I was very surprised at the suggestion and said I didn't know people did that. She said she sees it all of the time









It's always a bad idea to leave kids in the car. Even when they are asleep.

One question, if the au pair was watching the car so closely, didn't she see the woman loitering near the car? If she did, why wouldn't she have been alarmed by that? Clearly she wasn't really watching too closely or she saw possible danger (a stranger standing near the car) and still continued to purchase the drinks.


----------



## Daffodil

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ElliesMomma* 
i thought up a scenario and reason for not leaving kids alone in the car at 7-11: armed robberies at convenience stores happen so often it's cliche. if shots were fired and you were separated from your children, you have lost your opportunity to directly protect them.

If shots were being fired inside the store, wouldn't it be much safer for the kids to be outside in the car?


----------



## hipmummy

I thought we were all Ap mamas here. Why would an Nfl ap mama wanted to leave her babe in the car? How old were the OP's dc's. I think I need a little Background Info. I thought we were talking babes and toddlers.


----------



## hipmummy

I already figured it out almost 3 and almost two. IMHO no never the PP can make her own decisions for her and teh au pair. I still would not have done it my clients would have fired me or any other nanny.


----------



## dubfam

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hipmummy* 
I thought we were all Ap mamas here. Why would an Nfl ap mama wanted to leave her babe in the car?

BC they were asleep and it was a 3 minute trip with the vehicle in plain sight.
Why would an AP parent wake their children for that?


----------



## ElliesMomma

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Daffodil* 
If shots were being fired inside the store, wouldn't it be much safer for the kids to be outside in the car?

not necessarily, as they are alone and might not be aware enough of what's going on outside the car to know to duck, and, strapped in a carseat, physically unable to duck or move out of harms way at all. bullets go through glass windows. the point is that you would be physically separated from them and possibly unable to quickly get to them to protect them.


----------



## mamajama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunflowers* 
I am actually surprised that anyone would consider leaving a sleeping child in a car to "run into the store". I often like to stop at convenience stores (aka WaWa







) to get coffee. I do it all of the time. Never have I left my dd in the car for even 3 minutes. Just not something I ever thought to do.

A short story... recently I stopped for coffee. I got a sleeping dd out of the car, went in and bought my coffee and back to the car I went. As I was strapping dd back in the woman sitting a car next to me actually commented how glad she was to see that I took her with me and didn't leave her in the car. I was very surprised at the suggestion and said I didn't know people did that. She said she sees it all of the time









It's always a bad idea to leave kids in the car. Even when they are asleep.

One question, if the au pair was watching the car so closely, didn't she see the woman loitering near the car? If she did, why wouldn't she have been alarmed by that? Clearly she wasn't really watching too closely or she saw possible danger (a stranger standing near the car) and still continued to purchase the drinks.

It's a little trickier with more than one sleeping child.


----------



## Cloverlove

While I am generally OK with parents leaving their sleeping, buckled-up kids in a locked car for a short time, I would have MAJOR concerns if a paid caregiver did this. I don't think your au pair should have been verbally attacked, however I do think she showed a serious lapse in judgement. Maybe if the stop was absolutely necessary I could see it, but stopping at the store for water and milk before going to the park would be completely unacceptable to me. There were so many better choices she could have made in this scenario that it would be difficult for me to trust this person in the future.


----------



## dubfam

I was in a Plaid Pantry with my mom when I was 5 and a lady drove through the front of the store and came VERY close to running me over.

I just thought about that, or I would have mentioned it earlier.

I am sure that there are just as many freak things that could happen in the store (if not a lot more) as could happen in the car.


----------



## treqi

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LilyGrace* 
Sorry. I wasn't thinking that neglect of children was harmless, and personally I wouldn't want to stand there with a stopwatch to determine of the adult was coming back soon and the degree of neglect involved. I'd rather jump the gun and try to protect the kids - option A being calling the police and letting them know that two kids were left in a car, and option B being dialing the cops, seeing the adult, and laying into her for being so careless - especially with someone else's kids.

At least one of the OP's kids is at the age where s/he could unbuckle if awake, and wander into the parking lot to look for this missing adult.

Thank you for making my point you are a perfect example of the culture of fear.


----------



## mirthfulmum

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hipmummy* 
Why would an Nfl ap mama wanted to leave her babe in the car?

I am an AP mama.

While I wouldn't leave my 2 month old in the car for a second, awake or asleep. I've left my 2 year old for a minute or 2. Always in situations I've judged as safe. I live in a large urban city in Canada, there really aren't many drive-thru anythings here, I had no idea there were drive-thru ATMs.

Chances of my children being hurt/kidnapped while I run into a convienence store for 2 minutes while they're in plain site, probably about 0.0001%. Chances of my children wailing and moaning and tantrumming 'cause I woke them from sleep to drag them into convienince store, 100%.

How is 1 scenario more AP than another?


----------



## sunflowers

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamajama* 
It's a little trickier with more than one sleeping child.

True. I'm certain I wouldn't be stopping for a caffeine fix if I had two sleeping LOs in the car. I've got coffee at home, too









Quote:


Originally Posted by *treqi* 

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LilyGrace* 
At least one of the OP's kids is at the age where s/he could unbuckle if awake, and wander into the parking lot to look for this missing adult.

Thank you for making my point you are a perfect example of the culture of fear.

Actually, the scenerio LilyGrace describes is very real and not due to a culture of fear. I've seen several young kids- 4,5,6yo- wander into a convenience store looking for their moms or dads. It would not be unusual for that to happen. Would you allow your 4 or 5yo to get him/herself out of the car and go looking for you?

So it's now a culture of fear because we don't want our kids wandering around parking lots?


----------



## woobysma

Quote:


Originally Posted by *siobhang* 
I guess I just cannot think what could happen to them?

They are strapped into their carseats and are asleep, so they aren't going anywhere. The car is locked, and in plain view of many people, so the likelihood of someone stealing the car (a 97 ford contour, so not valuable) or the kids (you ever try lifting a sleeping 4 year old out of a carseat quietly without anyone noticing?) is pretty darn low.

Sure, another car could hit the car, but that could happen at any time, au pair in the car or not, so not sure how her presence prevents it (in fact, being outside the car may help her get the kids out, vs if she were trapped in the car too).

I did hear once about a family where the kids got into some matches while mom was running an errand, but in my mind the problem there was leaving matches around small kids, and not leaving them in the car.

I don't meant to be snarky, but I am seriously puzzled by what unforeseen tragedy would be likely to occur in that time period that her presence would prevent?

Not to say that anyone should be comfortable with it if they aren't - but I am just trying to assess risk here, and the risk, honestly, to me seems very very low.


I haven't read all the pages (although I'm pretty sure I know where they were going). I agree 100% with this, though.

I had a woman approach me in the grocery store parking lot the other day as I was about to go literally *3 parking spaces* to return the shopping cart with DS2 strapped in his seat & the car keys in my pocket. She made some comment about "you wouldn't want anyone stealing your car. You know how THEY can be"........ um, who is "they"? the invisible car thieving gremlins who are going to materialize next to my car, hot wire it and drive off in the 30 seconds it's going to take me to push this cart 15 feet?







: I mean, really? And if there were someone who was going to steal my car and child, what good am I really going to be able to do at 5'2" and 125 lbs? All I could do is scream for help, hit the panic button on the alarm and hope it scared them away.

That level of paranoia is baffling to me sometimes. Would I ever leave the kids in a running car? NO Would I leave the kids in the car if it was out of my line of sight? NO Would I leave the kids in a car for longer than a few minutes if I was in the midst of a custody battle with an ex who may have a key to my car? NO ........... that covers almost 100% of the child abductions.

The kids have a greater risk of being killed in a car accident on the way to the store! What's next, strangers yelling at me for driving with the kids?! It's statistically WAY more dangerous and could probably be avoided if I _really_ cared, right?







:


----------



## GalateaDunkel

It's not something I personally would ever do. Cart corral, parking meter, ATM, mailbox, sure. A lot of things like that would take 10 times as long and be 100 times more dangerous if you took the child out. My own kitchen, with the door to my private driveway open, to grab something before stepping right back out, sure. But not off to some other part of my house to do other stuff. And certainly not into another building to do business there, however briefly.. The story about the grandma who saw but couldn't do anything is on point. People always get accused of believing in the bogeyman when this subject comes up, but if you want to talk about unrealistic, imagining that a line of sight is adequate protection against violence certainly qualifies.

Considering the recently publicized deaths and what a horrible way it is to die, I really don't get the judgment towards those who would intervene. There's no two ways: either society is going to be vigilant about this or not. A bystander doesn't know the full situation and can't read the mind of the absent adult. All they see is an unattended child. I'm sorry your au pair was upset but I think the woman was basically in the right.

Water, juice and milk are available at any fast food drive thru and I would be skittish about having a newcomer who hasn't grasped such basic info on the way things are set up in this country driving my kids around a major metropolitan area.


----------



## veggiemomma

Well, we live in an extreme rural sprawl, and I must admit that I leave MY 2 sleeping LOs (age 2.5 and 3.5) in the car, and my cousin's baby (who is 1 yo) in the car sometimes when they are all asleep. I have even gone INSIDE the pet store once to pick up catfood. It wasn't hot outside, I locked the door. They were all strapped in and sound asleep. I timed it. I was literally in the pet store for 1.5 minutes. Should someone have called the police?

PPs have mentioned that the child care provider should have been more prepared, etc. Well, I am not perfect. Sometimes I forget to grab the water bottles out of the frigidaire. Sometimes I forget extra outfits and diapers. Sometimes I HAVE to buy catfood before I get home (cat is on a special diet and can not eat anything else or it leads to bloody stool all over my house (TMI?). Should I have waited in the car for an hour for them all to wake up on their own? Should I have awakened them all and dragged them all inside to pickup the bag and then dragged them all back outside and fastened them all in, all the while they would all be crying and tantruming from that point on throughout the rest of the day because they didn't finish their naps. I still think I made the right decision.

As far as with OP...I would have done what au pair did, but we live in a very small town and I always lock the car. I am fairly surprised that this thread is so heated. The kids were safe, regardless of all the what-if scenarious. Can't we just leave it at that? I mean, some people think that carrying a baby in a backpack is dangerous. Does that give them the right to call the police on us if they think our babies look sweaty or their little heads are bobbing up and down too much while we are walking? Should people be allowed to turn us in to the police if we allow our children to play in our own yards unattended?


----------



## PGTlatte

No I would not leave my kids in the car alone, awake or asleep, to go into a convenience store. I have unbuckled them both and hauled them in with me to buy one banana and a bottle of water. Yes it was a pain, but I felt it was the right thing to do. If they had been asleep I probably would have just skipped it. Going into a convenience store and making a purchase is too far for my comfort.

When I shop, I park as close as I can to the cart corrals so I don't have to go more than a few feet away from the car and can see it and them the entire time. If I have to park a long way from one, then we all take the cart over there together. When I take our dogs to the groomer, I park right in front of the door and hand their leashes over or pay just stepping inside the door, so I can not only see the car but the kids themselves the entire time and could be at the van in about two seconds if needed because I'm only about six feet away from it. Two days ago I took my glasses to be repaired (because I stepped on them). Both boys were asleep; so I parked right in front of the door, and did my business standing in the doorway; they were happy to come take my glasses, adjust them, bring them over to try on, take them back, etc until they were fixed; they totally understood I didn't want to come into the store and be more than a few feet from my car and have my kids out of sight.

There are many errands I need to run during the week that would be so much easier to accomplish if I didn't feel the need to take them in with me at every single stop. I wish I didn't feel it was necessary but I do. For me it's reallly not about what other people would think or what a police officer might do...I am just not comfortable having them out of my sight and unsupervised at this age, unless we are at home, and even then I am keeping an ear on them the entire time. Maybe when they are older I will feel differently, but for now, it feels right to keep them close and safe, even when it is more difficult for me.


----------



## hipmummy

Quote:


Originally Posted by *llp34* 
No I would not leave my kids in the car alone, awake or asleep, to go into a convenience store. I have unbuckled them both and hauled them in with me to buy one banana and a bottle of water. Yes it was a pain, but I felt it was the right thing to do. If they had been asleep I probably would have just skipped it. Going into a convenience store and making a purchase is too far for my comfort.

When I shop, I park as close as I can to the cart corrals so I don't have to go more than a few feet away from the car and can see it and them the entire time. If I have to park a long way from one, then we all take the cart over there together. When I take our dogs to the groomer, I park right in front of the door and hand their leashes over or pay just stepping inside the door, so I can not only see the car but the kids themselves the entire time and could be at the van in about two seconds if needed because I'm only about six feet away from it. Two days ago I took my glasses to be repaired (because I stepped on them). Both boys were asleep; so I parked right in front of the door, and did my business standing in the doorway; they were happy to come take my glasses, adjust them, bring them over to try on, take them back, etc until they were fixed; they totally understood I didn't want to come into the store and be more than a few feet from my car and have my kids out of sight.

There are many errands I need to run during the week that would be so much easier to accomplish if I didn't feel the need to take them in with me at every single stop. I wish I didn't feel it was necessary but I do. For me it's reallly not about what other people would think or what a police officer might do...I am just not comfortable having them out of my sight and unsupervised at this age, unless we are at home, and even then I am keeping an ear on them the entire time. Maybe when they are older I will feel differently, but for now, it feels right to keep them close and safe, even when it is more difficult for me.

Thank you, finally someone who is like minded. I don't care what other people think as well. I could never and will never leave my precious ds in the car alone...Never.....Ever...


----------



## chaoticzenmom

I have three children and I would NEVER leave them in a car while I run in anywhere for any amount of time. It's unacceptable and dangerous. I have gotten gas before and not been able to pay at the pump. I take all of my children into the gas station with me to pay, no matter if they are sleeping or whatever. I call the police immediately when I see a child in a car unattended and I've told a sitter or mom off before for leaving children in the car. It's irresponsible. I don't understand the mentality behind it and I think that you should tell your sitter to not take shortcuts with your children. If I can bring all three of my wild children into the gas station to pay, so can anyone else. It's inconvenient, yes, but so what.

I agree that she should have been told how unacceptabe it is to leave children in the car, even if you can see them from the window.
Lisa (mom to 3 wonderful children)


----------



## lovbeingamommy

:

In absolute agreement.


----------



## mamajama

wow!
This fear and paranoia thing is pretty over the top. That scares me more than anything! It takes the place of rationality in a lot of cases I think.


----------



## f&p'smama

I am sorry your au pair was yelled at. If the woman was concerned about your children, she certainly could have picked a gentler way to express it.

I have left my two awake 2-year olds in the car when I run into the dry cleaners to drop off my husband's shirts, or pick them up. I feel it's safer than bringing them with me. For one, I have at least one of my hands occupied with the shirts and therefore cannot hold two hands. My kids are runners and are far more likely to break away from me and dash into the parking lot, where cars move fairly quickly, than the car is to get broken in to/hit by a car/burst into flames. I sit in the car and wait until no one is at the counter so the errand will take probably less than 2 minutes, but I've never timed it. I don't do it if it's hot outside, I lock the car and I am about 10 steps away from them the whole time. We live in a very safe area. (My from line says San Francisco, but we've since moved to the 'burbs.)

I agree with PPs who are talking about moderation and using good judgment. I try not to let fear rule my life and think through the potential consequences of my actions and decide whether I can live with them.


----------



## chaoticzenmom

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Delta* 
LOL. So much wrong with this statement.

I disagree. There's so much wrong here, but assuming that parents who pride themselves on doing what's best for our children would leave their children in a car for what?....a coke? that's crazy. So much wrong with ThAT. What's so important that you just can't get it later when the children are asleep. I've had to cancel my plans many times because it was not feasible to bring them into the store with me. What's so important in a convenience store? Coke? Fried burritos?(ok, I love fried burritos, but still!)

Lisa


----------



## mamajama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisa49* 
What's so important in a convenience store? Coke? Fried burritos?(ok, I love fried burritos, but still!)

Lisa

beer, smokes, lottery tickets, and a quick shag if the cashier strikes my fancy.
kidding. Usually it's gas. The thing is, I don't see how it's a gamble any more than leaving the house is a gamble. I still love my kids. I promise.


----------



## chaoticzenmom

I've totally shagged in a convenience store once....but that's for another thread I suppose.


----------



## chaoticzenmom

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamajama* 
beer, smokes, lottery tickets, and a quick shag if the cashier strikes my fancy.
kidding. Usually it's gas. The thing is, I don't see how it's a gamble any more than leaving the house is a gamble. I still love my kids. I promise.









Ok, back to being serious....I promise. It's not about loving your children. It's about the pompousness of thinking that bad things only happen to other people. Once you've had something really bad happen to YOU, you don't get that luxury anymore. Yeah, leaving the house is dangerous and staying home is dangerous. But with that mentality, why even try? Why even bother to lock your doors at night? I've had people tell me "if someone really wants your kids, there's nothing you can do to stop them" to which I respond "well, maybe, but that doesn't mean that I have to make it easy for them." So, I could get into a wreck on the way to the store. That's an accident, but to me, leaving your children in a car is no accident. You just can't think that bad things won't happen to you. You don't have to live in fear, but don't live in denial either.
Lisa


----------



## dubfam

:







:







:







:







:







:







:







:







:


----------



## mamajama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisa49* 
Ok, back to being serious....I promise. It's not about loving your children. It's about the pompousness of thinking that bad things only happen to other people. Once you've had something really bad happen to YOU, you don't get that luxury anymore. Yeah, leaving the house is dangerous and staying home is dangerous. But with that mentality, why even try? Why even bother to lock your doors at night? I've had people tell me "if someone really wants your kids, there's nothing you can do to stop them" to which I respond "well, maybe, but that doesn't mean that I have to make it easy for them." So, I could get into a wreck on the way to the store. That's an accident, but to me, leaving your children in a car is no accident. You just can't think that bad things won't happen to you. You don't have to live in fear, but don't live in denial either.
Lisa

I've experienced bad things. I understand they happen to me and mine and to others and to everyone at one point or another in life. I refuse to lve in fear. I give you the point about locking the doors. touchè.







But I know that when I go into the store and my kids are in the locked car a few feet away from me within my view they are essentially as safe as houses. In fact, in my city there has never once been a car-jacking. Not once. But there have been plenty of armed robberies inside stores. So if I were to make mathamatical equations in my head based on the odds of Bad Scary Awful Things happening to myself or my kids (which is a method by which I vehemently refuse to live my life) every time I need to make a decision throughout my day, I would _still_ be better off leaving the kids in the car and, in fact, should be scolded for taking them into the store with me!
This is all rather circular


----------



## Britishmum

Quote:


Originally Posted by *carmel23* 
I think it is against the law here in California to leave children in a car and enter a store. It doesn't matter how long it takes you to go into the store and back to the car--it doesn't matter what the weather, etc. If I had seen the kids in the car, you would have a broken window--I wouldn't have hesitated to break the window and get the kids out.

I am sorry that your au pair was so frightened, but you should take this as an eye opener, and make sure she is familiar with all the laws and cultural customs of the US in relation to children.










I have had personal experience on this issue, and can say that not all police officers share the same paranoia about this issue as many members of the public. So the blanket 'it's against the law' argument is not necessarily a good one. I think you'd find that most police officers would take it on a case by case basis, and would not all share your conviction that this is a terrible crime.


----------



## woobysma

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamajama* 
The thing is, I don't see how it's a gamble any more than leaving the house is a gamble. I still love my kids. I promise.









This is my thought, too. In the world of risk assessment, heck even in the world of "what if?", I feel there are just as many horrible, unthinkable things that may happen while crossing a parking lot or driving on the freeway to grandma's house or playing in the backyard as there are leaving kids for brief moments in a locked car.
With my toddler, especially, I feel much more vulnerable taking him across a parking lot or into 7-11 than I do with him safely locked in the car. He bolts, he's too heavy to carry most times if I have anything else in my hands and he has a 3yo's sense of danger (read: practicaly none at all). I do take him into grocery stores or places where we'll be for extended lengths of time, of course, but if I'm going to be out of the car for a few moments, I usually leave him in his seat, buckled in, behind a couple tons of metal with child locks and the alarm on.
Screw the plastic bubble, we bought a 4-star safety rated sedan that's almost impossible to steal and came equipped with air-bags and an alarm, Heck, it's probably safer than our house, with the windows that are "locked" using 15cent wooden dowels from Home Depot and protected by a skittish yellow lab.


----------



## mamajama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *woobysma* 
Heck, it's probably safer than our house, with the windows that are "locked" using 15cent wooden dowels from Home Depot and protected by a skittish yellow lab.


----------



## dubfam

Quote:


Originally Posted by *woobysma* 
With my toddler, especially, I feel much more vulnerable taking him across a parking lot or into 7-11 than I do with him safely locked in the car. He bolts, he's too heavy to carry most times if I have anything else in my hands and he has a 3yo's sense of danger (read: practicaly none at all). I do take him into grocery stores or places where we'll be for extended lengths of time, of course, but if I'm going to be out of the car for a few moments, I usually leave him in his seat, buckled in, behind a couple tons of metal with child locks and the alarm on.
Screw the plastic bubble, we bought a 4-star safety rated sedan that's almost impossible to steal and came equipped with air-bags and an alarm, Heck, it's probably safer than our house, with the windows that are "locked" using 15cent wooden dowels from Home Depot and protected by a skittish yellow lab.










Well said.


----------



## chaoticzenmom

...and what happens when those armed robbers leave the store and need a getaway car? hmmm?

I remember a woman crying on the news once because her son was in the car outside of a gas station when someone decided to steal her car. She ran out and grabbed her son, but only enough to get him halfway out of the car. He was dragged down the street and killed as she watched. It does happen and her storyl freaked me out still does. Math or no math. I don't think it's safe. And what happens when your children wake up alone in the car? What do you tell them? "Don't open the door for anyone but me." And they sit there thinking that at any minute, someone might try to take them while they wait for you. Plus, you could have someone call the police on you and curse you about it. That in itself is inconvenient enough to just wake the kids and take them with you in order to avoid the crazies who choose to live in fear . Even if the cashier is hot and you need a shag....or a fried burrito.

Plus, even if I decide to take some kind of "risk" with children, I would be mad if a sitter took that same risk. I can't justify that, but that's just the way that I would feel.
Lisa


----------



## mamajama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisa49* 
...and what happens when those armed robbers leave the store and need a getaway car? hmmm?


I do not run my life in fear of armed robbers. But if they _walked_ to the store in order to rob it with the half-baked notion to drive off with a rusty old volvo station wagon full of dents with a tire that's always slightly flat, then I think they're probably at the callabre that I can, like, trip them on the way out of the store or something. Or maybe roundhouse kick them in the heads. There's about as much chance of me roundhouse kicking an armed robber at my local 7-11 to prevent him from using my volvo full of sleeping kids for a getaway car as there is for a piece of airplane fuselage to fall on my house right now. So I'm not going to wo-----------...


----------



## woobysma

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisa49* 
...and what happens when those armed robbers leave the store and need a getaway car? hmmm?

I remember a woman crying on the news once because her son was in the car outside of a gas station when someone decided to steal her car.

Almost ALL of these stories happen when someone leaves the car _running_. Leaving a child in a running, unlocked car is WAY crazy, imo. It can literally take moments for someone to jump in your car and take off, in that situation. It's totally different than leaving a child in a locked car. The simple act of taking your keys out and putting them in your pocket drops the risk of this down to almost nothing. Your child is probably safer in a locked car than he/she would be if you were in the car with them. Carjackings are almost impossible if the keys are 15 feet away and the car is locked.

(by the way, I just realized we live in the same neighborhood, I'm on the Eastside)

There was a story in Bothell a few years ago where a woman had left her infant sleeping in her SUV. The car was running because she wanted to keep the AC on. Someone stole her car while she was in picking up a pizza (or something like that). The police think the thief must not have realized there was a child in the car. They found the car a couple blocks away with the baby safely inside - the guy must have realized there was a child involved and ditched the car pronto. I'm sure plenty of people heard that story and thought "well, there you go, don't ever leave your kid in the car". My thought was "take the freaking keys with you and lock the doors when you go into Dominoes, people!"


----------



## woobysma

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamajama* 
I do not run my life in fear of armed robbers. But if they _walked_ to the store in order to rob it with the half-baked notion to drive off with a rusty old volvo station wagon full of dents with a tire that's always slightly flat, then I think they're probably at the callabre that I can, like, trip them on the way out of the store or something. Or maybe roundhouse kick them in the heads. There's about as much chance of me roundhouse kicking an armed robber at my local 7-11 to prevent him from using my volvo full of sleeping kids for a getaway car as there is for a piece of airplane fuselage to fall on my house right now. So I'm not going to wo-----------...

HOL-ee crap, I just about spit water all over my screen







True story - my DF came home the other day and told me that, while parked at a red light with his uncle, a 3 inch bolt DROPPED OUT OF THE SKY and hit the top of the Jeep! We still don't know exactly what happened, but I'm wearing my bike helmet everywhere lately.


----------



## mamajama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *woobysma* 
I'm wearing my bike helmet everywhere lately.

That's a great idea. I'm totally going to copy you.


----------



## woobysma

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamajama* 
That's a great idea. I'm totally going to copy you.

I'm telling you, it could save your life. It's late, I think the kids and I are going to get our helmets on and go sleep in the car.


----------



## oceanbaby

I have not read the replies.

I would never ever leave my kids in the car, but that is based more on paranoia than actual logic. The chances of something happening to them are very slim, probably less than getting hurt while being out of the car. But I still would not have done it.

And if I saw kids alone in a car, I would stand by it for a few minutes to see if anyone showed up. If after 3-5 minutes no one showed, I would call the police. Not to punish the person, but for safety issues, cuz I don't know what the story is.


----------



## PatchyMama

I think I am more shocked at all the "I am so shocked to see mothers at MDC saying__________________" than I am at the turn of this thread. Seriously, we go through this exact same discussion every 6 months I think LOL.

If I lived in the middle of nowhere my stance on this would be different than where I live now. Now, I live in vegas, its hot, its busy, and no I would never leave my kids alone in the car. Heck every government vehicle in this city (and many non government vehicles) have those "NEVER leave kids unattended in a car" stickers on them, you can't escape them here


----------



## bjorker

Quote:


Originally Posted by *woobysma* 
(by the way, I just realized we live in the same neighborhood, I'm on the Eastside)

There was a story in Bothell a few years ago where a woman had left her infant sleeping in her SUV. The car was running because she wanted to keep the AC on. Someone stole her car while she was in picking up a pizza (or something like that). The police think the thief must not have realized there was a child in the car. They found the car a couple blocks away with the baby safely inside - the guy must have realized there was a child involved and ditched the car pronto. I'm sure plenty of people heard that story and thought "well, there you go, don't ever leave your kid in the car". My thought was "take the freaking keys with you and lock the doors when you go into Dominoes, people!"

*waves* I'm in the north-end (da Lynnhood). I remember that story. There's a HUGE difference IMO between this story and that story, though. I would definitely say that leaving kids in a car that is unlocked and ESPECIALLY still running (AND out of view) is completely irresponsible.

While I'm on the fence about this, but don't really have a huge problem with it, there is something I just remembered reading about this exact situation. I can't remember where I read it, but it may have been here on MDC. Would you leave stacks of $100 bills sitting on your seat in a car while you ran in somewhere? Now, I do think that it's far more likely that a random person would break into a car to steal a wad of money rather than steal the car or break in to take the kids, but I do think that comparison still has a point.

Now, in my own personal experience, I have encountered far more craziness at my own house than anywhere in public. We recently had someone break into our landlord's trailer that is on our property, while dd and I were home. I also had a guy with a gun come around to the side of the house to find me on the deck (while dd was napping). He claimed to be an investigator and was looking for a former tenant, but showed me no credentials (but was more than happy to show me his gun) and acted suspicious. I called the police and he ended up being a bail bondsman, but it was still very scary. In that same time period, DP saw a bunch of cops walking a guy in handcuffs down our quiet residential road. We have no idea what that was about. Am I going to lock myself in the house 24/7? No. I'll admit that this example is a little bit of a stretch, but it definitely still applies. I refuse to live in fear. It's just not worth it, and there are far bigger things to worry about (car accidents and disease statistically being top of the list). Yes, I'm cautious when appropriate, but finding that fine line is crucial. I don't think that judgment in this situation is warranted. Whether or not you would do it is your own opinion based on your experiences and beliefs. Can't we just leave it at that?


----------



## crittersmom

Stories like this really make me wish that since we drive most places there should be more drive thru options available.It does make me nervous to leave my kids in the car to go to the ATM,put the cart away,unload groceries,get just a drink or use the bathroom.Its just me and the kids for months at a time sometimes and there is no family or neighbor to leave them with.When I was in VA there was a real dearth of drive thrus, most fast food places other than McD's (which none of my children will eat) were all sit down places.Drive thru ATMS are very hard to find.
Its great that there are more places taking credit cards now and its really great that more places have a place to put a baby while you use the restroom(the drive from WA to CA took alot of planning and that was just with 2 kids).
More Drive thrus and less yelling,maybe just hover to make sure everything is okay.


----------



## ananas

It's not something I would ever do, but I wouldn't yell at her, either.


----------



## pigpokey

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Britishmum* 
I have had personal experience on this issue, and can say that not all police officers share the same paranoia about this issue as many members of the public. So the blanket 'it's against the law' argument is not necessarily a good one. I think you'd find that most police officers would take it on a case by case basis, and would not all share your conviction that this is a terrible crime.

In my state, from what I recall, in response to the deaths in "car turned oven" cars, they passed a law that says that I can't leave my children in the car under unsafe conditions.


----------



## pigpokey

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisa49* 
I disagree. There's so much wrong here, but assuming that parents who pride themselves on doing what's best for our children would leave their children in a car for what?....a coke? that's crazy. So much wrong with ThAT. What's so important that you just can't get it later when the children are asleep.

I think you have forgotten mothers without co-parents.

I also remembered after I went to bed, what it was like to be on lifting restrictions with my 2 and 3 year olds while my insides healed from surgery. If the kids and I were out of the house and had any conflict, like my kids wanted to run in multiple directions, if there was no helpful person about, I literally had no alternative beyond destroying my surgery. It's not like I could take the pulling safely. One day my son got out, and wouldn't come back in while my daughter was in the livingroom unaware, and wanted to go down the street after his father. I sat there on the ground outside crying for a couple of minutes restraining my son until a stranger came by whom I could ask to carry my son inside.

I wonder if the people so critical of people leaving children in the car on brief errands under otherwise safe conditions, have considered that the mom may be on lifting restrictions, in chronic back pain, or actually disabled.


----------



## treqi

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunflowers* 
Actually, the scenerio LilyGrace describes is very real and not due to a culture of fear. I've seen several young kids- 4,5,6yo- wander into a convenience store looking for their moms or dads. It would not be unusual for that to happen. Would you allow your 4 or 5yo to get him/herself out of the car and go looking for you?


Child Safety Locks? They've been in cars since 1980 and are so simple to use.....


----------



## meowee

Cars are death traps for young children... I don't care how safe you think the circumstances are. A car in 60F, during daylight, even in shade, will heat up quickly. I would never leave a sleeping child in a car unless at least 2 doors were wide open and it was was 65F or below, and I was within eye and ear shot. Your au pair made a terrible mistake by locking the doors (and I assume no window was open). The nasty woman was right, I'm afraid.


----------



## pigpokey

Quote:


Originally Posted by *meowee* 
A car in 60F, during daylight, even in shade, will heat up quickly.

In shade as you state this is not factually correct. The heat has to come from somewhere. Ambient light isn't going to do it.

A car in 60F at high noon is going to heat up eventually but I'll tell you what, I'll go keep a temp log of my car the next time I pull into the driveway in the early afternoon and it's sixty. I'll get the kids in the house, roll up all the windows and chart the internal car temp.


----------



## TranscendentalMom

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamajama* 
It's a little trickier with more than one sleeping child.

EXACTLY. I never left my sleeping child in the car until I had my dd and I was driving ds to preschool and dd fell asleep everyday on the way. I left her napping in the locked car while I walked ds in. The mama congratulating herself for waking her sleeping child to get coffee has not yet had to carry a preschooler and a baby, diaper bag, books, papers etc etc thru a parking lot. I have a fear of kids getting hit in parking lots, getting more than one child (and never mind more than that!) in and out is always scary...it requires attention and free hands to make sure your toddler doesn't run off. To me it seemed safer to leave my baby who is safely stapped in where I can see her and give a free hand to walk ds in safely. Anyway, its not a black and white situation at all. I understand why the law is making it that way because there are some people without common sense and would push it too far.

Maybe some of the mamas on here live in dangerous areas? We live in a small town, we know our neighbors, I can't imagine being that paranoid. And the weather is almost always cool in the mountains so heat isn't usually an issue. Smash a window to "save" a child? Mama...you sound like a raving lunatic!

This thread reminds me of the Dr. Laura show. Smug, judgemental, irrational. I'd rather have a mother that left me sleeping in a locked car for a few minutes than a mother who was a self righteous zealot.


----------



## dubfam

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TranscendentalMom* 
Smash a window to "save" a child? Mama...you sound like a raving lunatic!

This thread reminds me of the Dr. Laura show. Smug, judgemental, irrational. I'd rather have a mother that left me sleeping in a locked car for a few minutes than a mother who was a self righteous zealot.

Exactly.


----------



## dubfam

*Quote:*


Originally Posted by *meowee* 
Cars are death traps for young children... I don't care how safe you think the circumstances are.

*Do you not put your children in cars?

I know that car accidents are one of the #1 causes of death for children in the US...is that what you mean by "Death Trap"?
*


----------



## sunflowers

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TranscendentalMom* 
EXACTLY. I never left my sleeping child in the car until I had my dd and I was driving ds to preschool and dd fell asleep everyday on the way. I left her napping in the locked car while I walked ds in. The mama congratulating herself for waking her sleeping child to get coffee has not yet had to carry a preschooler and a baby, diaper bag, books, papers etc etc thru a parking lot. I have a fear of kids getting hit in parking lots, getting more than one child (and never mind more than that!) in and out is always scary...it requires attention and free hands to make sure your toddler doesn't run off. To me it seemed safer to leave my baby who is safely stapped in where I can see her and give a free hand to walk ds in safely. Anyway, its not a black and white situation at all. I understand why the law is making it that way because there are some people without common sense and would push it too far.

Maybe some of the mamas on here live in dangerous areas? We live in a small town, we know our neighbors, I can't imagine being that paranoid. And the weather is almost always cool in the mountains so heat isn't usually an issue. Smash a window to "save" a child? Mama...you sound like a raving lunatic!

This thread reminds me of the Dr. Laura show. Smug, judgemental, irrational. I'd rather have a mother that left me sleeping in a locked car for a few minutes than a mother who was a self righteous zealot.

Um, the mama you're speaking of (me) has in fact had a small child, no partner, my own school things, his school things, his bag, and 12 dozen cookies baked for the Christmas cookie swap... I have no partner, either. It's all mommy all of the time.

Yeah. I never left my older child in the car alone while he was young, either. If you look at my siggy, I have a 15yo as well as a 2yo. This is my second time around. And I am in no way a self-righteous zealot. Car safety is something I am concerned about. The same way that some are very adament about infants sleeping on their backs.


----------



## Daffodil

Quote:


Originally Posted by *meowee* 
Cars are death traps for young children... I don't care how safe you think the circumstances are. A car in 60F, during daylight, even in shade, will heat up quickly. I would never leave a sleeping child in a car unless at least 2 doors were wide open and it was was 65F or below, and I was within eye and ear shot.

There's definitely something to be said for a "better safe than sorry" mentality on this. But there's also something to be said for common sense. Think of all the times YOU have waited in a car while someone ran into a store, without having the doors or even the windows open, and without worrying that you were about to die. If you're not sure whether the car is going to get too hot, it's better not to risk it, and it's probably good to assume the car will get hotter than you expect. But you don't have to take it so far that you disregard a lifetime of personal experience with what actually happens in cars that are parked for 5 minutes. If it was 60F and my car was in the shade and I was planning to wait in it with my kids, I wouldn't open the doors or windows and wouldn't even consider the possibility that we might get too hot. So why should I suddenly consider the car a death trap if I'm going to leave them alone? (Yes, of course I need to consider the possibility that the sun might come out, or that the line in the store might be longer than I expected, etc. etc.)


----------



## daniedb

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pigpokey* 
That would be criminal destruction of property, possibly kidnapping, would risk traumatizing the kids, and I just don't understand it. It's also a near complete waste of time and energy to protect other people's safe as houses children. We could fight for children's lives who are in actual danger. I understand the children of Darfur are suffering.

If there is no danger of climate issues and I want you to tell me why a stranger gets to pick that I can't choose some far-fetched risk for my children of being in the car rather than the far-fetched risk of being in or on the way to the 7-11 during, say, a holdup or mugging or a car careening through the lot and crashing into the plate glass window. What child is easier to snatch, the child following me out to the car or the child locked and buckled inside? Child snatchings are fantastically rare outside of the family.

I doubt anyone could defend criminal charge in that situation with "But your honor she left them in the car." Or the civil suit. Even if it's a misdemeanor for the mom to leave her kids in the car. Not unless there was some actual danger to protect the children from. Not the bogeyman, not what if clouds suddenly darkened the clear blue sky and a lightning strike felled the tree next to the car and crushed it. Actual danger.

If there's a law that says my babysitter has to be 12, and I leave my sleeping kids with a trusted 11 year old and cross the street for coffee, you are not allowed to break down my door and carry them to some place you choose.

I think I love you. Hey - where's your sig quote from? That's delightful.


----------



## katheek77

Well, chalk me up as a horrible neglectful mother.

Yesterday (and countless times before), I left my DD sleeping peacefully in her car seat, with windows down or a door open, while I unloaded groceries from the car. We live on the second floor of an apartment in a building with a "controlled access" front door (read, it locks autmoatically). Yep, it's easier for all of us for me to carry the groceries up while she sleeps right outsides. I'm a terrible mother.

I'm sooooo done with "stranger danger" and hypervigilence. Honestly, life happens, crappy things happen. Three days ago, I was walking from the library with DD in her carrier, and I tripped (on air, apparently) and fell, and DD smashed her head fairly hard, but, luckily, no real damage. In retrospect, maybe I shouldn't have walked to the library. Maybe I should have put her in the stroller instead of in the carrier. Maybe I should have driven the car to the library and then kept her in the car seat while I ran in. I mean, then she wouldn't have hit her head when I fell carrying her, right?


----------



## aprilushka

I think what the au pair did is reasonable. I don't do it when I'm going into a grocery store b/c typically that would involve more time and there aren't the kind of windows you describe, but I have left the kids within site distance in the car in the parking lot to go to the ATM when I knew temperature wouldn't be a problem. It's like "stranger danger" -- a few instances get so publicized the the risk gets completely blown out of proportion in the average media-watching person's mind.


----------



## Yooper

Has it really been 6 months already?

Oh yes, and right around post #60 we start in on the "you cannot possibly be AP or NFL if you do x, y, and z".......

Tee hee.

Sorry, I hate to be glib, but this is an issue that will never be resolved. It is one of those teeny tiny little differences among parents that really does not make much difference safety-wise (for every kidnapping from a parked car there is also the kid that got hit walking across the parking lot......) that we like to use to fling the words "negligent" and "paranoid" at each other.

That said, I have left my child in a car unattended. Never out of sight, car is always locked, and I lock the steering wheel to prevent the whole putting-the-car-in-reverse possibility....not that my 4yo can even get herself out of her seat yet anyway....... Returning videos, ATM machines, returning the cart to the cart-thing..... I have also done so in my driveway when I have had to run back into the house for something or in someone else's driveway to drop something of or pick something up. I live in a very safe area. I am not comfortable doing so if I have to go inside somewhere. That is where my personal comfort level drops off.

I would not be cool with what the OP's au pair did. But I would have made that clear on day one. However, I do not allow anyone to drive dd anywhere. That is my personal paranoia. I do not consider other's judgment calls and comfort levels that differ from mine to be irresponsible and WILL NOT call the cops on someone just to "teach them a lesson" unless it is clear neglect (hot day, gone forever, etc.....) I assume most parents love their children and are doing the best they can.

Now to move on to name-calling...... Anyone that ever puts their kid in a moving car at all are extreme risk-takers (far more dangerous than anything we choose to do with a parked car and kids), not NFL (the FUMES!!!!), and certainly not AP (you are suppose to be wearing your child 24/7)! So there


----------



## daniedb

Quote:


Originally Posted by *woobysma* 
I'm telling you, it could save your life. It's late, I think the kids and I are going to get our helmets on and go sleep in the car.

Okay, no, it's official, I love YOU.


----------



## daniedb

I have a number pad thingie on my door, so I can lock my car with H inside and leave it on. Does no one else have that? I haven't seen anyone say anything about that option. When returning the cart or something else that takes 42 nanoseconds, I will turn the car on to cool down and lock them in, buckled, and then unlock it using the pad. I won't go to the trouble of googling, but I would bet my right arm that the chances of them getting stolen out from under me while I return the cart at HEB 50 paces away (or even if I were to run into the convenience store to get a paper and could see them at all times, so 2 minutes?), is less than someone hitting us as we cross the street in the empty cart. Risks - gotta assess them and draw the line somewhere.


----------



## thismama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *momto l&a* 
I would do the same as your au pair.


















: I think the fear culture here is out of hand. I routinely leave my child in the car to get gas, run in the store, etc. As long as it's brief and I can see her, IMO it is not remotely a big deal.


----------



## Redifer

I think the only response I have here is: WOOOOOOWWW. Coming from a mom who has left sleeping children in the car to pay for gas.

Apparently most folks don't know how long it takes to slimjim and hotwire a car. This isn't a twenty-second endeavor. I would know. I was a "troubled teen", don't ask. DH, as well. Now, we have a professional slim-jim kit for his job (mechanic) where people often lock the keys in their car at drop-off.

It takes some time in order to pick a lock. And professional slimjim sets aren't cheap OR easy to come buy. Most use a wire hanger or another "made at home" knockoff. Best time I have ever gotten just to slimjim a lock was 6 minutes; and that's on OLDER model cars that don't have the theft prevention systems, such as barrier blocks at the bottom of the window, and rods that surround the lock cylinder.. making things a hell of a lot more complicated.

Now, let me help get you in the "criminal" frame of mind. People who can very quickly and easily get into a locked car are not just random carjackers. They are professionals. They aren't going to just drive around in a car with a GTA alert out on it. They're either boosters, who typically do NOT take anything that's not brand-spanking new and on the higher-end of black market value, OR they're grunts for your local chop shop.

Either way, whichever person you're looking at wants it fast, easy, with no deterrances and as little to no interest/curiosity/onlookers/witnesses. So, taking a car in the middle of a 7-11 parking lot in the afternoon with plenty of people/traffic around is HIGHLY unlikely.

Taking a car with KIDS in it is even more unlikely. That adds in an element of not only GTA, which is a pretty punishable offense, but kidnapping. Like I said prior, most criminals who are competent enough to steal a car want as little interference with the plan as possible. Two kids in a car is interference.

Now, people who take cars with kids IN them are scary people, but they're usually limited to: people who are INTENDING to snatch children, or people doped out of their minds or getting sloppy 'on the job' and don't notice there are children. Once again, people intending to snatch children don't usually want to draw undue attention toward themselves by breaking into a car in broad daylight in a crowded parking lot... too many witnesses.

Sometimes if one would really sit down and think about the LOGIC about the supposed situations that are "totally likely", most would find it makes NO sense.

I HAVE left my sleeping children in the car to hit up Getty (local gas station), which has CAMERAS aimed at the individual car pumps, and video monitors inside, which I just ask the attendant to switch over to my car. I don't feel COMFORTABLE leaving my kids in the car, but more due to nosy people who, in my opinion, are completely paranoid and who will usually flip their lid in the parking lot to feel "righteous" abotu something.


----------



## chinaKat

Recently my FIL left DD (3yo) in the car, sleeping, while he went into the library to return books (out of view of the car). He took the time to pick out another book and check it out. The windows were cracked but it was 84 degrees out. He had no idea why I was livid with him when I found out.

I wasn't so freaked about abduction (although of course it crossed my mind) as I was about the temps... and also, IF anybody had reported it I would have had CPS up my ass.

I do realize that there are plenty of times that it is safe to leave a child in the car but that sure wasn't one of them!

My rule of thumb is any time/place you'd feel comfortable leaving your purse and your engagement ring sitting on the front seat with the windows open, it's probably okay to leave your kid in the car, then, too.

Other than that, not such a great plan.


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Novella* 
There's a lot of people who would leap at the chance to "save" a kid or a dog in a car, but who would avert their eyes and keep on driving past a mugging/assault/tire-slashing. It's so easy to be a hero when there's no exertion required on your part and not likely any danger to you for intervening. This isn't entirely idle imaginings on my part. *I've heard lots over the years of people recounting how they were too scared to do anything about a bad situation, and conversely (sometimes the same people!) how they interferred in a much more innocuous event.*

(The bolding is mine.) This is an excellent point. I think the desire to do something heroic may be the motivation behind the choices many make to intrusively intervene in the lives of parents and children.

I'm boggled by the poster who said she'd break in the car windows and pull out the children! Maybe she needs to train as a paramedic or fireman, to get a legal outlet for her window-busting fantasies.

Oh, but then the "saving" would actually put her, _the savior_, at risk. I guess the only risk-free "saving" is the kind where you're really accomplishing nothing.

And I wouldn't choose to do what the au pair did -- but that's probably just related to my comfort-level with my neighborhood. I really think each parent needs to go with her own instincts on this issue.

I think this trust in our own instincts in caring for our own children, and our trust in the instincts of other parents in caring for _their_ children (or in choosing caregivers for their children), is at the very heart of AP.

I'm sorry that woman screamed at your au pair.







to her and to you, too. I guess she's getting dunked, head-first, into some of the more abrasive aspects of our culture.


----------



## veggiemomma

Quote:


Originally Posted by *woobysma* 
I'm telling you, it could save your life. It's late, I think the kids and I are going to get our helmets on and go sleep in the car.









Okay, slightly O/T

Last year, I read a news article that reported that France was trying to pass a law that says you MUST wear a safety helmet while operating ANY vehicle. Apparently the bicyclers and construction equipment operators are steamed that they have to wear helmets and people driving in cars don't.







: I hope I can find a metallic navy blue helmet to match my 1994 Buick (which, btw DOES have child safety locks)


----------



## GalateaDunkel

What bothers me about this particular thread is that the actual 'judgment' in play is judgment of the woman who dared to concern herself about an unattended child. I think one thing that should be clear from these threads is that the view that this is NOT a prudent action is widespread and persistent. Therefore you cannot reasonably expect never to get challenged by members of the public when they see you doing it.

What makes the irony especially rich is that you are implicitly relying on these other folks presence and awareness to deter the 'bogeyman' from actually showing up.

Criminals actually exist. One tried to strangle me to death with his bare hands when I was 9 years old. It is offensive to crime victims to refer to predators as 'the bogeyman', as though what happens on the rare occasion a bad guy does shoe up isn't real. I would also be at least a teeny bit concerned about the karmic potential of all this tough-gal 'what could happen?' swagger.

And BTW I recently made a radical lifestyle change in order to greatly reduce the amount of driving I have to do with my kid.


----------



## GuildJenn

Regardless of the whole would-you-or-wouldn't you bit, I just think the woman in question was rude.

There are plenty of polite ways to make the same point, if one really feels it needs to be made.

But then I'm Canadian. "I'm sorry, mr. carjacker, but would you mind if I retrieved my child first? Thanks. Have a good day."


----------



## kittywitty

Quote:


Originally Posted by *candiland* 
I personally think there is a happy medium in all things.

It used to be accepted and normal to be too laid back....... no car seats, swatting, yelling, spanking, kids running all over the neighborhood up to no good.

Now the pendulum has swung to the opposite extreme.... where common sense isn't allowed to dictate that there are some circumstances where the "rules" can bend a bit. Now we're seeing a generation of kids so overprotected they are like animals in cages afraid of their own shadows.

Poor girl. She must've felt awful.









:

I say it depends on the circumstances-ages of children, car locks, weather, time, where you are. If I was in my hometown, I wouldn't think twice about letting them sit in there for a minute while I ran in somewhere provided I could see them at all times and was close by.


----------



## chaoticzenmom

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bjorker* 
*waves* I'm in the north-end (da Lynnhood). I remember that story. There's a HUGE difference IMO between this story and that story, though. I would definitely say that leaving kids in a car that is unlocked and ESPECIALLY still running (AND out of view) is completely irresponsible.

While I'm on the fence about this, but don't really have a huge problem with it, there is something I just remembered reading about this exact situation. I can't remember where I read it, but it may have been here on MDC. Would you leave stacks of $100 bills sitting on your seat in a car while you ran in somewhere? Now, I do think that it's far more likely that a random person would break into a car to steal a wad of money rather than steal the car or break in to take the kids, but I do think that comparison still has a point.

Now, in my own personal experience, I have encountered far more craziness at my own house than anywhere in public. We recently had someone break into our landlord's trailer that is on our property, while dd and I were home. I also had a guy with a gun come around to the side of the house to find me on the deck (while dd was napping). He claimed to be an investigator and was looking for a former tenant, but showed me no credentials (but was more than happy to show me his gun) and acted suspicious. I called the police and he ended up being a bail bondsman, but it was still very scary. In that same time period, DP saw a bunch of cops walking a guy in handcuffs down our quiet residential road. We have no idea what that was about. Am I going to lock myself in the house 24/7? No. I'll admit that this example is a little bit of a stretch, but it definitely still applies. I refuse to live in fear. It's just not worth it, and there are far bigger things to worry about (car accidents and disease statistically being top of the list). Yes, I'm cautious when appropriate, but finding that fine line is crucial. I don't think that judgment in this situation is warranted. Whether or not you would do it is your own opinion based on your experiences and beliefs. Can't we just leave it at that?

Well, now that I admitted that I shagged in a convenience store....I can never meet either one of you







:







There was a bloody homeless guy sleeping in my backyard, drunk off of his butt a few weeks ago. I STILL will not leave my children in the car for a minute. And I'm in a suburban neighborhood in Mill Creek/Bothell. Want to talk about math and logic....Why do I make an effort to touch NOTHING in a bathroom, but then feel the need to wash my hands which means touching nastiness that I've avoided before that point just so I can appear to be clean to others when I leave? Really I think that I just soiled my hands on the sink. Sometimes the things that we do are just to avoid conflict. Even if I felt it were safe to leave the kids in the car for a minute, I would be surrounded by people who don't and any one of them could waste my time on a lecture or police report that would anger and humiliate me. It's easier to take the kids inside with me.
Lisa


----------



## chaoticzenmom

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TranscendentalMom* 
EXACTLY. I never left my sleeping child in the car until I had my dd and I was driving ds to preschool and dd fell asleep everyday on the way. I left her napping in the locked car while I walked ds in. The mama congratulating herself for waking her sleeping child to get coffee has not yet had to carry a preschooler and a baby, diaper bag, books, papers etc etc thru a parking lot. I have a fear of kids getting hit in parking lots, getting more than one child (and never mind more than that!) in and out is always scary...it requires attention and free hands to make sure your toddler doesn't run off. To me it seemed safer to leave my baby who is safely stapped in where I can see her and give a free hand to walk ds in safely. Anyway, its not a black and white situation at all. I understand why the law is making it that way because there are some people without common sense and would push it too far.

Maybe some of the mamas on here live in dangerous areas? We live in a small town, we know our neighbors, I can't imagine being that paranoid. And the weather is almost always cool in the mountains so heat isn't usually an issue. Smash a window to "save" a child? Mama...you sound like a raving lunatic!

This thread reminds me of the Dr. Laura show. Smug, judgemental, irrational. I'd rather have a mother that left me sleeping in a locked car for a few minutes than a mother who was a self righteous zealot.

I have 3 small children. There was a time when it was just us and I remember the dread that I would get when the gas machine pay thingy wouldn't work and traffic was too busy to dare risk trying to get to another gas station or when the fridge and pantry were empty and I had to get some food. At preschool, I would ask another mother to watch my car for a minute and I would do the same for them while we took our older children inside. You can't assume that we don't leave the kids in the car because it's truly less inconvenient for us. Now, true, I don't have medical issues that would make it impossible for me to handle multiple children. That's something I can't judge there.

I don't think I'd smash a window, not unless a child was covered in sweat or in a true panic and there was no other way. Those situations aren't really what we're talking about here though.
Lisa


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GalateaDunkel* 
What bothers me about this particular thread is that the actual 'judgment' in play is judgment of the woman who dared to concern herself about an unattended child.

It's just hard for me to understand the rage some people feel over *other* *parents'* choices. I'm pretty busy with my own children, and someday hope to be busy being a Grandma. I honestly don't have energy to fret because one of my friends feels comfortable letting her babe finish her nap in the car, and so on.

Thus I judge people who scream at complete strangers in parking-lots, as being in serious need of getting their own lives.

Quote:

What makes the irony especially rich is that you are implicitly relying on these other folks presence and awareness to deter the 'bogeyman' from actually showing up.
I don't rely on other people to protect my children, at least not in the sense that you mean. I DO tend to feel we're safer taking our walks in the daytime when others are out and about, too. I DO believe in safety in numbers -- and I guess that means I think the presence of other families makes parks and city streets a little safer than they are, say, late at night.

Quote:

Criminals actually exist. One tried to strangle me to death with his bare hands when I was 9 years old. It is offensive to crime victims to refer to predators as 'the bogeyman', as though what happens on the rare occasion a bad guy does shoe up isn't real.








What an awful thing to have happen to you as a 9yo little girl! I'm so sorry you had this experience! Criminals are definitely real in my neighborhood. Last winter my oldest (then 6) came downstairs, alone, to discover a man had forced open our dining-room window and was preparing to climb in.

She shouted, "What are you doing?!" and he took off running. I was relieved that he ran off rather than trying to overpower her, and relieved that she came down before he was actually in the house, at which point the outcome might have been very different.

The positive outcome was that we were made aware of how easy it was to force those windows from the outside, and corrected the situation, without having to endure an actual break-in.

It was naturally a long time before dd (or I) felt comfortable with her going downstairs on her own. She's just now getting to that place again, and we are letting her play downstairs when she wants to, by herself, rather than burdening her with our fears of what might happen.

Quote:

I would also be at least a teeny bit concerned about the karmic potential of all this tough-gal 'what could happen?' swagger.
I wouldn't necessarily call it a "tough-gal swagger": we all have different comfort levels when it comes to finding the right balance between protectiveness and helping our children feel good about exploring the world they live in.

Quote:

And BTW I recently made a radical lifestyle change in order to greatly reduce the amount of driving I have to do with my kid.
That's great! Minimizing driving probably does a lot more to ensure our children's safety, than many other precautions we might take.


----------



## Meg Murry.

I have not read all the posts, but I do say this: I do not think it was productive for the other woman to yell at your servant.

That said, I would have fired the au pair right then. No references. Period.

Sorry if it's the custom in Brazil. It's against the law in America. It's also against the law for very good reasons. I'm sure the other posters have done a fine and expressive job of explaining what those reasons are.


----------



## dubfam

I don;t think that it is against that law everywhere...


----------



## Meg Murry.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GalateaDunkel* 
What bothers me about this particular thread is that the actual 'judgment' in play is judgment of the woman who dared to concern herself about an unattended child. I think one thing that should be clear from these threads is that the view that this is NOT a prudent action is widespread and persistent. Therefore you cannot reasonably expect never to get challenged by members of the public when they see you doing it.

What makes the irony especially rich is that you are implicitly relying on these other folks presence and awareness to deter the 'bogeyman' from actually showing up.

Criminals actually exist. One tried to strangle me to death with his bare hands when I was 9 years old. It is offensive to crime victims to refer to predators as 'the bogeyman', as though what happens on the rare occasion a bad guy does shoe up isn't real. I would also be at least a teeny bit concerned about the karmic potential of all this tough-gal 'what could happen?' swagger.

And BTW I recently made a radical lifestyle change in order to greatly reduce the amount of driving I have to do with my kid.

I agree with you. I would say more, but I realized I genuinely have nothing but UAV-level criticism for the people who think it's at all appropriate to leave children unobserved and out of your control for something as frivolous as a convenience-store shopping trip. Every single park I've ever seen has drinking fountains. Second, there are these nifty American conveniences known as drive-thrus where one may order milk, juice, or water.

I have nothing but scorn for the idea that it is somehow more "natural" to be careless.


----------



## DaffyDaphne

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meg Murry.* 
That said, I would have fired the au pair right then. No references. Period.

Sorry if it's the custom in Brazil. It's against the law in America. It's also against the law for very good reasons. I'm sure the other posters have done a fine and expressive job of explaining what those reasons are.

FWIW, it's against the law in California , Connecticut , Florida , Illinois , Louisiana , Maryland, Nebraska , Nevada, Pennsylvania , Tennessee (Effective July 1, 2007), Texas , and Washington. It is not currently against the law in the other 38 states.


----------



## LilyGrace

Quote:


Originally Posted by *DaffyDaphne* 
FWIW, it's against the law in California , Connecticut , Florida , Illinois , Louisiana , Maryland, Nebraska , Nevada, Pennsylvania , Tennessee (Effective July 1, 2007), Texas , and Washington. It is not currently against the law in the other 38 states.

Kentucky and Missouri have laws that go into effect in case of injury, and legislation is pending in Alabama, Arizona, Hawaii, Iowa, Kansas, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, and Virginia.


----------



## karina5

Those of you saying it's against the law....there are lots of gray areas within that as well.


----------



## Nicole77

Quote:


Originally Posted by *candiland* 
I personally think there is a happy medium in all things.

It used to be accepted and normal to be too laid back....... no car seats, swatting, yelling, spanking, kids running all over the neighborhood up to no good.

Now the pendulum has swung to the opposite extreme.... where common sense isn't allowed to dictate that there are some circumstances where the "rules" can bend a bit. Now we're seeing a generation of kids so overprotected they are like animals in cages afraid of their own shadows.

Poor girl. She must've felt awful.









: For what it is worth I do versions of that same thing when I go to the dry cleaners, package store, bank, etc. If it is a big glass window and I can see them then I let them stay in the car (barring extreme heat of course). Sorry someone freaked out on her like that.


----------



## punkrawkmama27

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chinaKat* 
Recently my FIL left DD (3yo) in the car, sleeping, while he went into the library to return books (out of view of the car). He took the time to pick out another book and check it out. The windows were cracked but it was 84 degrees out. He had no idea why I was livid with him when I found out.

I wasn't so freaked about abduction (although of course it crossed my mind) as I was about the temps... and also, IF anybody had reported it I would have had CPS up my ass.

I do realize that there are plenty of times that it is safe to leave a child in the car but that sure wasn't one of them!

My rule of thumb is any time/place you'd feel comfortable leaving your purse and your engagement ring sitting on the front seat with the windows open, it's probably okay to leave your kid in the car, then, too.

Other than that, not such a great plan.

Yep! I was just thinking that when I went to Wal-mart today and accidently left my purse in the car (because I had to grab to dc out). If I wouldn't leave a purse in the car to run an errand, why would I leave my dc in there?

Also, I agree, even if there was a time when it appeared to be safe to leave your children in the car while you ran in somewhere, think of all the people out there who have their noses in everyone elses business, and would have no problem reporting you to the cops or cps. Its just better to play it safe these days.


----------



## dubfam

Quote:


Originally Posted by *punkrawkmama27* 
think of all the people out there who have their noses in everyone elses business, and would have no problem reporting you to the cops or cps. Its just better to play it safe these days.

But if it isn't illegal then there isn't anything to report.


----------



## BoringTales

Quote:


Originally Posted by *carmel23* 
I think it is against the law here in California to leave children in a car and enter a store. It doesn't matter how long it takes you to go into the store and back to the car--it doesn't matter what the weather, etc. If I had seen the kids in the car, you would have a broken window--I wouldn't have hesitated to break the window and get the kids out.

I am sorry that your au pair was so frightened, but you should take this as an eye opener, and make sure she is familiar with all the laws and cultural customs of the US in relation to children.










and you would have a bill for my broken window and also vandalism charges.


----------



## Naless

I have and will leave my children in the car when I deem it appropriate and support others decision to take thier DC out of the car at evey instance it doesn't make me or other parents better but different

If the OP did not have a problem with what the Au Pair did then their is no debate to be had if it is right or not to me the issue was about the self appointed child cop who felt it was her right to discipline the Au Pair. This person to me needs to be very careful in who they approach because if it would have been me she would have heard an earful from me


----------



## DaffyDaphne

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LilyGrace* 
Kentucky and Missouri have laws that go into effect in case of injury, and legislation is pending in Alabama, Arizona, Hawaii, Iowa, Kansas, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, and Virginia.

Yes, that's right, but the Ky and MO laws are basically punitive - iow, it's not against the law unless something bad happens (which isn't the case here). Pending legislation is just that, pending -- it is NOT against the law in those states as of now, so the PP was mistaken in saying the Au Pair broke the law.EDIT TO CORRECT: The Au Pair was in Virginia, where it is not against the law.


----------



## DaffyDaphne

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MissingMinnesota* 
and you would have a bill for my broken window and also vandalism charges.

Not to mention kidnapping charges.


----------



## madskye

I use my judgment. I've left DD in the car, in her carseat, right in front of the drycleaners while I picked up my drycleaning. Dry cleaners has two big windows and they always have their doors wide open. I keep my eye on the car and her in it while I am in there. When she figures out how to get of of the car seat, I won't do it anymore. I wouldn't do it if I thought the day were too hot, too cold, too sunny, if there were a strange person loitering in front, etc...

The post office is right next door, but they don't have big windows or an open door. So I always bring her in there with me. Again, I use my judgment.


----------



## mamazee

People who think sleeping kids in a locked car within view of the windows of a shop for a couple of minutes when the weather isn't hot are in danger need to read the book Protecting the Gift to get help them get a handle on where fear is really warranted. That is simply not a dangerous situation. Children are almost never kidnapped by strangers, and it wouldn't have happened if the car was locked anyway.


----------



## BoringTales

Quote:


Originally Posted by *DaffyDaphne* 
FWIW, it's against the law in California , Connecticut , Florida , Illinois , Louisiana , Maryland, Nebraska , Nevada, Pennsylvania , Tennessee (Effective July 1, 2007), Texas , and *Washington*. It is not currently against the law in the other 38 states.

In Washington it is illegal to leave a minor child in a RUNNING vehicle...

Quote:

Washington State Law 46.61.685

Leaving Children unattended in standing vehicle *with motor running*-Penalty.

It is unlawful for any person, while operating or in charge of a vehicle, to park or willfully allow such vehicle to stand upon a public highway or in a public place *with its motor running*, leaving a minor child or children under the age of sixteen years unattended in the vehicle.
Any person violating the provisions of this section is guilty of a misdemeanor. Upon a subsequent conviction for a violation of this section, the department shall revoke the operator's license of such person.
LINK

In Texas it is against the law to leave a child for more than 5 minutes.

Quote:

Texas State Law Codes 22

Leaving a Child in a Vehicle

(a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly leaves a child in a motor vehicle for *longer than five minutes,* knowing that the child is:
(1) younger than seven years of age; and
(2) not attended by and individual in the vehicle who is 14 years of age or older.

(b) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor.
** If the child is injured the charge is then child endangerment which is a felony. The penalties are six months to two years in jail and a fine up to $10,000.
California's law...

Quote:

California State Law SB 255

SB 255 (Speier)
Unattended Child in Motor Vehicle Act "Kaitlyn's Law"
California Vehicle Code Sections 15620, 15630, 15632

15620. (a) A parent, legal guardian, or other person responsible for a child who is 6 years of age or younger may not leave that child inside a motor vehicle without being subject to the supervision of a person who is 12 years of age or older, under either of the following circumstances:

*(1) Where there are conditions that present a significant risk to the child's health or safety.

(2) When the vehicle's engine is running or the vehicle's keys are in the ignition, or both.*
That's just a few of the states that you mentioned it was "illegal"...

Quote:


Originally Posted by *DaffyDaphne* 
Not to mention kidnapping charges.

No kidding...If she did that to my car though I'd 1) See her approaching my car and attempting to break the window 2)Assume she had ill intentions and would use whatever force necessary to get her away from my kids and my car.


----------



## DaffyDaphne

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MissingMinnesota* 
In Washington it is illegal to leave a minor child in a RUNNING vehicle...

LINK

In Texas it is against the law to leave a child for more than 5 minutes.

California's law...

That's just a few of the states that you mentioned it was "illegal"...

No kidding...If she did that to my car though I'd 1) See her approaching my car and attempting to break the window 2)Assume she had ill intentions and would use whatever force necessary to get her away from my kids and my car.

Thanks for doing that, I was being lazy in not qualifying!


----------



## woobysma

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bjorker* 
Now, in my own personal experience, I have encountered far more craziness at my own house than anywhere in public. We recently had someone break into our landlord's trailer that is on our property, while dd and I were home. I also had a guy with a gun come around to the side of the house to find me on the deck (while dd was napping). He claimed to be an investigator and was looking for a former tenant, but showed me no credentials (but was more than happy to show me his gun) and acted suspicious. I called the police and he ended up being a bail bondsman, but it was still very scary. In that same time period, DP saw a bunch of cops walking a guy in handcuffs down our quiet residential road. We have no idea what that was about.

MAN, I miss living in Lynnwood









Kidding - FLEE SOUTH SWEET MAMA, FLEE SOUTH!


----------



## 3boobykins

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meg Murry.* 
I have not read all the posts, but I do say this: I do not think it was productive for the other woman to yell at your servant.

That said, I would have fired the au pair right then. No references. Period.

Sorry if it's the custom in Brazil. It's against the law in America. It's also against the law for very good reasons. I'm sure the other posters have done a fine and expressive job of explaining what those reasons are.


It's not against the law in the state where the OP lives, so that's incorrect. I"m sure the au pair won't be doing this again, and now understands this cultural difference. And she won't do it again for fear of being yelled at, not because there aren't situations where it is safe.

So you would fire this young woman, who was excellent with your children, make your chldren go through the trauma of losing an important person in their lives to whom they've grown accustomed and probably love and feel attached to, and send this woman off in a strange country with no hope for future work as an au pair? No second chances, no kind requests to not repeat this situation, no helpful suggestions to use a fast-food drive through? I understand you would be protectiong your children, but I just don't understand this absolute coldness and lack of forgiveness for an honest mistake (which would not be considered a mistake by everyone, btw) based on cultural differences, not negligence.


----------



## jamsmama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *candiland* 
Now we're seeing a generation of kids so overprotected they are like animals in cages afraid of their own shadows.

I think that is what is happening here more than anything. I have found that "that" generation is the ones that would NEVER leave their kids in the car.

I had a friend from South Africa laugh at me because my DD car seat was RF. She said "Is that what THE LAW tells you to do?"

I had a similar experience as the OP. I ran into the corner market....could see my kids...plain sight and all. They were no more than a sidewalk's width away. The woman in the store said "did you know it's against the law to leave your kids in the car?" I said "Ummm...yeah, but they are right there in plain sight." I started to walk out and the mama bear in me wouldn't do it. I turned to her and said, "it's against THE LAW to go over 25 mph down main street, but I'll bet YOU do it, don't you?" She didn't know what to say........


----------



## jamsmama

The mama's who would NEVER leave their kids in the car would cringe if they came to my town. I think 90% of the moms here leave their kids in the car. I wouldn't have done it if I still lived in Orange County, CA, but I will here. It's purely circumstantial and all that good stuff.


----------



## justGina

My son wishes that I'd never left him alone in the car.


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dubfam* 
But if it isn't illegal then there isn't anything to report.

The thing is, a parental decision doesn't have to be illegal for CPS to stick their noses in. As an example, it's not illegal anywhere (and is even condoned by the AAP) to breastfeed a child for as long as both mother and child desire -- but that hasn't stopped CPS from getting involved in some cases of extended breastfeeding.

That's why it alarms me whenever anyone says they're quick to call CPS when they see parenting practices they don't agree with. Such a call can cause serious problems and stress for the family. I'm not saying it's that common for workers to come in and snatch the kids -- but stress comes with ALL forms of CPS intervention, even if it never comes down to the worst-case scenario.

Now, the police are another matter. As a pp mentioned, they're not as likely to get worked up or file a report on someone who hasn't clearly endangered their child.

I still wouldn't want a call made on ME, whether to the police or CPS. Which is why I started putting my toddler in shorts to play in the yard last summer, rather than letting her run naked like the summer before. I'd just started hearing too much about people being trigger-happy with their cell phones.


----------



## dubfam

Good point, Mammal mama

CPS intervention is VERY scary...


----------



## Sarahbunny

One time, I had my dd, my two pugs, my purse, diaper bag, starbucks, fist of cash (all kinds of currency!), a stack of magazines, and a handful of jelly beans and a bumbo, and I STILL managed to bring all into the 7-11. So there! The rest of you hardly measure up to that.










Seriously,I've left dd in the car before if I need to run into the gas station and can see the windows. I also leave her in the garage in the car if I forget something. And she is just as precious to me as your children are to you. I think we are all adults and can probably assess risk just fine.


----------



## Meg Murry.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *3boobykins* 
It's not against the law in the state where the OP lives, so that's incorrect. I"m sure the au pair won't be doing this again, and now understands this cultural difference. And she won't do it again for fear of being yelled at, not because there aren't situations where it is safe.

So you would fire this young woman, who was excellent with your children, make your chldren go through the trauma of losing an important person in their lives to whom they've grown accustomed and probably love and feel attached to, and send this woman off in a strange country with no hope for future work as an au pair? No second chances, no kind requests to not repeat this situation, no helpful suggestions to use a fast-food drive through? I understand you would be protectiong your children, but I just don't understand this absolute coldness and lack of forgiveness for an honest mistake (which would not be considered a mistake by everyone, btw) based on cultural differences, not negligence.

If she puts my child or children at risk by leaving them in a car unattended for anything except an unforeseeable emergency? Absolutely, I would fire her. And no, I am not particularly moved by the factor of being in a foreign country. Moving here, I presume, was her choice. If I am hiring a servant to be a paid substitute parent to my child, I expect that that person do so responsibly and exercise good judgment. That is why I am paying them. If she wishes to risk her own children's safety, that is her decision. If she risks my children's, I can no longer trust that her judgment is reliable and her decisions are responsible.


----------



## Sarahbunny

Oh, I should add that I wouldn't want an employee of mine making that decision regarding my children. I don't see it as a fireable offense to me, but i would talk to her about it and ask her that she not do it again. If you have the good relationship with her that the op apparently has, I think that would do it.


----------



## ThreeBeans

I should point out to the whiner mcwhinersons who are snarking, "oh, you'd have a bill for breaking a window and i'd press charges for kidnapping!"

What would actually happen if you took your eyes off your child long enough for a strange person to approach your car, look inside and see unattended children, see if they were awake/old enough to open the door, then hem and haw about what to do, then look around one last time to see if any adult was in the immediate area, then find something to smash in a window, then smash in said window, then remove children from unfamiliar carseats, is that the police would arrest you for child abandonment and would laugh at your attempted vandalism charges. As would any judge.


----------



## karina5

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meg Murry.* 
If she puts my child or children at risk by leaving them in a car unattended for anything except an unforeseeable emergency? Absolutely, I would fire her. And no, I am not particularly moved by the factor of being in a foreign country. Moving here, I presume, was her choice. If I am hiring a servant to be a paid substitute parent to my child, I expect that that person do so responsibly and exercise good judgment. That is why I am paying them. If she wishes to risk her own children's safety, that is her decision. If she risks my children's, I can no longer trust that her judgment is reliable and her decisions are responsible.


It's odd to me that you keep using the term "servant." It seems like a very demeaning word.


----------



## felix23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisa49* 
...and what happens when those armed robbers leave the store and need a getaway car? hmmm?

I'm not really worried about armed robbers at my tiny country store. The only time anyone has attempted to rob it, they were stopped quickly by all of the old men that hang around and carry their own guns.







I have left dd in the car to pay for gas (no pay at the pump here), but the car is always locked and off. Plus most of the time one of the old men come and talk to her, so I guess she is not really alone. I do realize that an armed robber could take out all of the armed men standing around, rob the store, then break into my car and use it to escape, but honestly, I think my dd is in more danger in our front yard from copperheads. We have found three so far, and these snakes are hard to spot. I guess I could refuse to let her play outside, but I don't live my life in fear. I am cautious, but not fearful of every unthinkable thing that might happen.


----------



## Meg Murry.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *karina5* 
It's odd to me that you keep using the term "servant." It seems like a very demeaning word.

Sorry, would you prefer "wage-encouraged nonfamilial child caregiver"?
I'm not fond of euphemisms. They disguise inequities.


----------



## the_lissa

What about employee?


----------



## chaoticzenmom

too OT to fit in here, actually...sorry to delete.
Lisa


----------



## Yooper

This discussion reminds me of a funny situation several years ago.....

We used to live WAY out in the country. The only store/gas station within 20 miles was this tiny little one pump store. It gets very "winter" here and although I know it is quite dangerous, most people would fill their gas tanks with the car still running. One night (pre-dd) dh and I were driving home from work. It was dark and very snowy. We were getting low on gas so dh pulled into this little store. We had not lived there long and did not know it was an unspoken rule that as soon as you filled your tank, you should pull up to free the pump for the next person, then go pay. So I am sitting in the car with it running at the pump while dh goes in to pay. I am not really paying attention to anything and all of a sudden some strange guy hops in the driver's seat and starts to drive. I FREAKED! I startled the poor guy half to death. He had not noticed that I was in the car (I was huddled down due to the cold) and was just pulling it forward to make room for his car at the pump. After having lived there a while, we found this was the custom. If someone left their car at the pump and was inside, it was OK to pull their car forward. What a shocker. I call it my little brush with "carjacking".

That store also had it's collection of little old men....but without guns I think. I too used to ask one of them to keep an eye on a sleeping dd when I went in to pay. Not everyone in the world is out to get you. Really.


----------



## Meg Murry.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *the_lissa* 
What about employee?

Servant is more precise in this context:

*Servant* 1. A personal or domestic attendant; one whose duty is to wait upon his master or mistress, *or do certain work in his or her household.* (The usual sense when no other is indicated by the context; sometimes with defining word, as domestic servant.)

*Employee* a. *A person employed for wages; = EMPLOYÉ, which it has now virtually superseded. b. (nonce-use.) Something that is employed.

Au pair Applied to an arrangement between two parties by which mutual domestic services are rendered formerly without consideration of money payment; esp. of a young girl learning the language of a foreign country while rendering certain services in return for hospitality. Also attrib. Hence as n., a person who is 'au pair'.

All of the following are from the Oxford English Dictionary, BTW. By definition, an au pair does not work for wages; ergo, she is not an employee, but a domestic servant.*


----------



## Meg Murry.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisa49* 
If you've ever worked trying to help illegal immigrants, especially live-in nanny's than you'd know that the term "servant" is probably more accurate







:
Lisa

This also factored into my choice generally, though I know nothing of how the OP treats her au pair specifically and I am assuming she treats her appropriately and well.


----------



## karina5

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meg Murry.* 
Sorry, would you prefer "wage-encouraged nonfamilial child caregiver"?
I'm not fond of euphemisms. They disguise inequities.


How about Nanny or Au Pair?

I don't think it's a euphemism&#8230;it just doesn't sound very respectful. There are lots of words we use that are more respectful than others. Most of us would say "person of color" instead of "colored person" and someone could argue that's a euphemism as well.


----------



## felix23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meg Murry.* 
Sorry, would you prefer "wage-encouraged nonfamilial child caregiver"?
I'm not fond of euphemisms. They disguise inequities.


What about child care provider?


----------



## chaoticzenmom

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meg Murry.* 
This also factored into my choice generally, though I know nothing of how the OP treats her au pair specifically and I am assuming she treats her appropriately and well.

ah, you got me before I deleted.....oops.


----------



## BoringTales

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ThreeBeans* 
I should point out to the whiner mcwhinersons who are snarking, "oh, you'd have a bill for breaking a window and i'd press charges for kidnapping!"

What would actually happen if you took your eyes off your child long enough for a strange person to approach your car, look inside and see unattended children, see if they were awake/old enough to open the door, then hem and haw about what to do, then look around one last time to see if any adult was in the immediate area, then find something to smash in a window, then smash in said window, then remove children from unfamiliar carseats, is that the police would arrest you for child abandonment and would laugh at your attempted vandalism charges. As would any judge.

If you are going to address someone, just do it. Passive aggressive snark is not attractive. Also, I though name calling was against the UA?

If you would've read my other post you would've noticed that I mentioned no one would get so far breaking a window, much less actually taking my kids out of their seats.

Also, because it is NOT illegal to leave my kids in a locked car in my view for a few minutes, and breaking a window and attempting to remove unknown kids from an unknown car where they are in no danger IS illegal, your assessment as to what a police officer and/or judge would do is laughable, at best.


----------



## mtiger

While I wouldn't have yelled at the au pair, I would certainly called the cops if she hadn't been out in short order. And let her know that.


----------



## ThreeBeans

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MissingMinnesota* 

Also, because it is NOT illegal to leave my kids in a locked car in my view for a few minutes, and breaking a window and attempting to remove unknown kids from an unknown car where they are in no danger IS illegal, your assessment as to what a police officer and/or judge would do is laughable, at best.

Methinks you don't know very much about child neglect laws. Let me explain it simply. Just because there is no law SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSING leaving children alone in the car does not mean it is not illegal to neglect children by leaving them unattended.

It is also not illegal to stick your child up a tree and leave it there for days on end whilst occasionally flinging nuts and berries at it and encouraging it to sip water off of the leaves, but it would still be considered child neglect. Which is illegal. Do you understand?


----------



## BoringTales

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ThreeBeans* 
Methinks you don't know very much about child neglect laws. Let me explain it simply. Just because there is no law SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSING leaving children alone in the car does not mean it is not illegal to neglect children by leaving them unattended.

It is also not illegal to stick your child up a tree and leave it there for days on end whilst occasionally flinging nuts and berries at it and encouraging it to sip water off of the leaves, but it would still be considered child neglect. Which is illegal. Do you understand?

There IS a law specifically addressing leaving children unattended in a car. Have you read ANY of my posts?

If running into a gas station with my locked car in full view for 3-5 minutes is classified as "neglect" I would hate to know what they consider taking a shower, or doing dishes while my kids play in the next room is.


----------



## dubfam

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ThreeBeans* 
Methinks you don't know very much about child neglect laws. Let me explain it simply. Just because there is no law SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSING leaving children alone in the car does not mean it is not illegal to neglect children by leaving them unattended.

It is also not illegal to stick your child up a tree and leave it there for days on end whilst occasionally flinging nuts and berries at it and encouraging it to sip water off of the leaves, but it would still be considered child neglect. Which is illegal. Do you understand?

Okay...but I don;t think that leaving your child in a car that is in plain sight for 2 minutes is viewed as neglect...at least not where I live.

And abandoning your child in a tree is illegal where I live. Maybe I just live in very rational city??


----------



## ThreeBeans

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dubfam* 

And abandoning your child in a tree is illegal where I live. Maybe I just live in very rational city??









They actually made a law about that?









I just realized there are two threads about the same subject. Suddenly I'm a lot less confused.


----------



## 3boobykins

This thread has kept me entertained this morning--and I should be pulling weeds right now--but there's no way this will ever be settled on these boards. Parents who would never leave their child(ren) in the car won't change their minds because of comments made here about fear, and those of us who feel comfortable with it in certain situations probably won't stop because someone else "would never under any circumstances." Not that it's not a fascinating discussion, but I highly doubt anyone is going to be convinced to "switch sides" here.

But I will probably keep reading...







But later, weeds await...


----------



## woobysma

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ThreeBeans* 
They actually made a law about that?









I just realized there are two threads about the same subject. Suddenly I'm a lot less confused.

oooohh! there's a tree-abandonment thread, too! Where is it?


----------



## dubfam

at woobysma


----------



## ThreeBeans

Quote:


Originally Posted by *woobysma* 
oooohh! there's a tree-abandonment thread, too! Where is it?

There is now.


----------



## woobysma

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ThreeBeans* 
There is now.









I'm so game, but I have to go pick up a carpet shampooer









Start it and I'll be back in a jiffy . Make sure you address the issue of being abandoned in fruit trees...... I say it's OK because there's food up there.

These would be ORGANIC fruit trees, if that makes any difference.


----------



## PGTlatte

When I was about 7 (that is 31 yrs ago, different times...), my mom took me on a group camping trip at a campground one weekend. Sunday morning as we and about 50 other families are leaving the campground, my mom decides she has to pee and parks the car, running, in the middle of the little road in front of the bathhouse, and runs in to pee while I wait in the running car. It was a narrow little road so nobody else could get by. I'm sitting in the front seat with my seatbelt on, and an annoyed man I do not know gets in the car and starts driving it. He pulled up the road a little to where there was space on the side where he could park it. He got out and told me "tell your mom not to block the road next time !" and leaves.

She came out of the bathroom, looked for the car. Found it, gets in, and asked me if I moved the car. No, I was seven and it was a huge Vista Cruiser - I could not possibly have seen over the hood or reached the pedals ! I told her some man moved it and was mad that she blocked the road. Her only concern - she was annoyed that people were "so impatient these days ". No concern whatsoever that some strange man could have driven me off to who knows where.

Different times huh ?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Yooper* 
So I am sitting in the car with it running at the pump while dh goes in to pay. I am not really paying attention to anything and all of a sudden some strange guy hops in the driver's seat and starts to drive. I FREAKED!


----------



## moondiapers

Quote:


Originally Posted by *amandaleigh37* 
Personally I wouldn't do it...
I thought it was against the law?

It's only against the law to leave children under a certain age UNSUPERVISED in a car. If she could see the car from where she was they were NOT unsupervised.


----------



## punkrawkmama27

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dubfam* 
But if it isn't illegal then there isn't anything to report.

It doesnt matter. I just read a thread on here about someone reporting a mother to CPS, and CPS responding because she is not in a "normal marriage" and CPS is investigating to see if she is a fit mother! And in some states it is against the law, or even if it isnt law enforcement can choose to do what they feel is right in certain situations:
http://www.lawlib.state.ma.us/2006/0...-car.htmldwhat

http://www.kidsandcars.org/incidents...idsinCars.html

http://www.ci.aliso-viejo.ca.us/files/kaitlins_law.pdf

Those appear to be laws that would make it illegal to leave a child under the age of 6 from being left unattended in a car.

Even if it is not illegal I still would not chance it.


----------



## punkrawkmama27

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mammal_mama* 
The thing is, a parental decision doesn't have to be illegal for CPS to stick their noses in. As an example, it's not illegal anywhere (and is even condoned by the AAP) to breastfeed a child for as long as both mother and child desire -- but that hasn't stopped CPS from getting involved in some cases of extended breastfeeding.

That's why it alarms me whenever anyone says they're quick to call CPS when they see parenting practices they don't agree with. Such a call can cause serious problems and stress for the family. I'm not saying it's that common for workers to come in and snatch the kids -- but stress comes with ALL forms of CPS intervention, even if it never comes down to the worst-case scenario.

Now, the police are another matter. As a pp mentioned, they're not as likely to get worked up or file a report on someone who hasn't clearly endangered their child.

I still wouldn't want a call made on ME, whether to the police or CPS. Which is why I started putting my toddler in shorts to play in the yard last summer, rather than letting her run naked like the summer before. I'd just started hearing too much about people being trigger-happy with their cell phones.


That is what I was getting at! All they need is 1 call, no matter if you are in the right or not, there are soooooo many people out there that are ready to call because if a mama is not doing what they feel is in the child's best interest then she is wrong and a horrible parent and should have her children taken away. People are so quick to pass judgement and to try to rescue a poor child, that all there needs to be is that one moment when a mama does go into the store and can still see her sleeping dc in the car, yet the stranger does not know that, they dont know how long she has been gone, they are ready to call. Then that poor mother has to deal with CPS watching her every move!

Also, I just want to say, I am not here to pass judgement on anyone! I am just here to post and learn more about mothering from other mothers, and to share expierences and get advice from other mamas. I never thought I would see so many nasty posts though, some of them are so demeaning!


----------



## 3boobykins

FACT: (regarding those posting to this thread)

The mamas here who would never leave a child in the car love their children to the moon and back infinite times.

The mamas here who would and have left their a child in the car while in sight love their children to the moon and back infinite times.

What we think is best in a given situation is not always the same, but the love is.


----------



## Trinitty

I wouldn't leave my kids in the car.

But then, I wouldn't allow a stranger to drive my kids around or take them to the park either, so, I realise that I'm a little more uptight than most people when it comes to that stuff.

Given that admitted uptightness, I do think there are some things that can happen to children while left in the car unattended.

Stranger abduction is actually the LAST worry on my list. This is an event that is extremely rare and over-blown on our infotainment news media.

*I would be worried about what the kids could do to themselves in the car.*

The child could get out of the seat and stand on the power window button on the armrest, hurting a limb.... that tragically happened to a toddler a few months back. Though, I realize that IS quite rare.

The one thing that I would be MOST concerned about is the toddler getting out of the seat and climbing into the front of the car. They could easily pull the car out of gear or release the emergency brake.

I DID THIS when I was three years old. My Dad was working on his truck in the yard (we lived on a plateau in the woods) and he ran into the house for TWO MINUTES to grab a tool he needed. In those two minutes I climbed into the truck, and "played car."

I grabbed the signal-light switcher on the left hand side and the gear shift on the right. I moved them up and down, pulling the gear shift into neutral or drive.... the truck was parked on a slight decline, and it rolled forward.... through the fence, and then end-over-end down the cliff. It got hung up on an old tree stump grill-down, box-up. The stump kept the truck from plummeting down a sheer drop into a canyon.

This all happened in under two minutes. I was luckily bounced under the dashboard on the first flip, so I wasn't bashed around much. I survived with only nine stitches on my head and a concussion.

I remember it vividly.

I did a similar thing as an adult a few years ago.

I drove a company SUV over to my FIL's shop to visit DH. I stopped in front of the building and got out. It was a standard and I accidentally parked it in neutral with the Emergency brake on. The E-brake failed, and the vehicle rolled backwards OUT of the driveway and across the street. Thankfully, no cars were coming, no children were walking behind it and no children were strapped in the car.

This was a mistake.

But, mistakes happen, accidents happen, that's why they are called accidents.

I wouldn't have yelled at this woman. Yelling rarely accomplishes anything. But, I would have waited by the car until she returned and told her that I was worried about the children because they were alone.

This question comes up every few months on MDC, and my opinion is the same each time.

Stranger abduction is way out there on the possibility spectrum, but, accidents do happen when children are left alone in vehicles.

Trin.


----------



## Aliviasmom

I've done it before, and I would do it again.

I will leave Alivia alone in my car outside my house to run in and grab something (whether she is sleeping or not). We live in a very safe neighborhood, and if someone drives by my house, it is either someone who lives in my house, our neighbor, or someone who is lost.

I will also run in and pay for gas (I DO use pay-at-the-pump whenever I can) or something similar IF I can see her at all times.


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *3boobykins* 
FACT: (regarding those posting to this thread)

The mamas here who would never leave a child in the car love their children to the moon and back infinite times.

The mamas here who would and have left their a child in the car while in sight love their children to the moon and back infinite times.

What we think is best in a given situation is not always the same, but the love is.

Very true. And in response to the pp who said neither group is going to force the other to change its ways: I agree, and that never was my goal in any of my posts about this.

I'm a firm believer in respecting each child's parents _as the parents of that child_. Rather than trying to persuade any parent to change her parenting, my goal on this thread has been to persuade people to re-think their roles as concerned citizens.

It's scary to me that so many are itching to call and report others when they disagree with their parenting. I've heard some advise (not on this thread) that it's not even our job to decide if a particular concern is reportable: whatever it is, just call it in, and let CPS sort it out. Very scary. I hope it never happens to you (general you).

I'd just like to see more of a basic attitude of respect toward parents, and a lessening of the current societal impulse to make everyone comply with our standards.


----------



## rainyday

Quote:


Originally Posted by *carmel23* 
It doesn't matter how long it takes you to go into the store and back to the car--it doesn't matter what the weather, etc. If I had seen the kids in the car, you would have a broken window--I wouldn't have hesitated to break the window and get the kids out.

I can certainly understand this if it's hot and sunny and you're worried about the kids. But what earthly reason other than out and out meanness could you possibly have for breaking someone's window and traumatizing the kids when the weather is not posing an overheating danger, as in the OP's situation? If you're concerned, then call the police and/or stand there and watch the kids to be sure they're okay until someone comes back - that would be the nice thing to do. I've tried but I can only come up with one single reason for breaking someone's window if the kids aren't in danger, and that reason is pure meanness.


----------



## PGTlatte

Our 4-yo DS and a 5-yo friend did this a month ago....in a new-model minivan in which it is supposedly not "possible" to get out of park without the keys in it.....but they did, and the van rolled back out of a driveway, across a street, and came to stop in the yard across the street.

Our 4-yo DS was playing at a friend's house while I made a quick trip to a store with our younger son . The friend's mom had assured me they would be playing in the basement and her DH would be keeping an eye on them. The DH said he let them go outside alone for "just a second" to get a toy that had been left in the van. Our DS says his friend "pulled the stick thing really hard with his strong muscles and made the van start driving". The boys went back into the house and didn't tell anyone what had happened. A few minutes later, a kid on a bike rang the doorbell and told the DH that their car was halfway in the street. The DH came running out, just as I drove around the corner on my way back there.

The friend's parents are up in arms that their van was able to be taken out of park by a 5-yo when there is supposed to be a safety feature that makes this "impossible". To me the larger issue is that the kids were allowed outside in an unfenced area unsupervised for ANY length of time, at a house on a busy corner, much less having access to an unlocked car. Obviously the DH wasn't paying much attention to what they were doing...they rolled a car across a street and he never noticed.

Needless to say, our DS is not allowed to play over there anymore unless DH or I stay because I don't believe they provide adequate supervision to keep him safe. When this friend wants to play now, I either invite him over here or take him to the park with us.

I also had a similar surprise ride in a car when I was about six. A friend who lived across the street and I were waiting in their car for her mom to come and and drive us to a swimming pool. My friend decided to take the car out of park. It rolled down their driveway, across the street, over our mailbox and stopped in our front bushes. Granted this was in the 70s before there were "safety features" meant to prevent this sort of thing. But I recently learned that those features aren't that trustworthy anyway.

Tragically, young children have actually died after closing electric windows around their necks by leaning on the window button while their heads were out the window. The new window buttons are supposed to be designed to prevent this from happening, but I would not be willing to trust my child's safety to this design change. Our kids LOVE to play with all the buttons in our van and I know it's possible for them to get hurt while doing this without supervision.

I don't believe it is safe to leave a young and mobile child alone with access to a car, running or not, even at home, trusting that the "safety features" will be enough to keep the child from being able to do anything dangerous. For me to feel they are safe, I don't want to be more than a few feet away and I want to be able to see everything they are doing and have most of my attention be on them.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Trinitty* 
The one thing that I would be MOST concerned about is the toddler getting out of the seat and climbing into the front of the car. They could easily pull the car out of gear or release the emergency brake.

I DID THIS when I was three years old.


----------



## aran

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Trinitty* 
Stranger abduction is actually the LAST worry on my list. This is an event that is extremely rare and over-blown on our infotainment news media.

*I would be worried about what the kids could do to themselves in the car.*

Thank you. Please don't assume that anyone here who wouldn't do this is thinking only about criminals.

BTW - (in contradiction to DaffyDaphne's list of states with laws on this) in Mass. there is a law against this _for paid childcare providers_. The law is cut and dry: "A caregiver must never leave a child unattended in a vehicle"


----------



## kittywitty

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rainyday* 
I can certainly understand this if it's hot and sunny and you're worried about the kids. But what earthly reason other than out and out meanness could you possibly have for breaking someone's window and traumatizing the kids when the weather is not posing an overheating danger, as in the OP's situation? If you're concerned, then call the police and/or stand there and watch the kids to be sure they're okay until someone comes back - that would be the nice thing to do. I've tried but I can only come up with one single reason for breaking someone's window if the kids aren't in danger, and that reason is pure meanness.









:

I got the car in reverse when I was about 7 and my mom was in the store. I don't think that my 2yo or my buckled in kids (now that you are supposed to wear a buckle!) would be able to do something like that in the minute it takes to jump out of the car with you in sight to do something quickly.


----------



## prothyraia

Okay, those stories might have me convinced. Those are reasonable, possible, actual dangers (not so much for an infant, so I'm still okay for awhile I guess







)
They make sense, unlike some of the other reasons that have been offered.


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rainyday* 
I've tried but I can only come up with one single reason for breaking someone's window if the kids aren't in danger, and that reason is pure meanness.

Exactly! Also, what if the children get injured by the broken glass?


----------



## bjorker

Quote:


Originally Posted by *woobysma* 
MAN, I miss living in Lynnwood









Kidding - FLEE SOUTH SWEET MAMA, FLEE SOUTH!

Aww, shucks. Hehe. How far South, exactly? I'd be more than happy to live within Seattle city limits if I could afford a house this nice there! We're in a 3bd 2ba rental, which is NOT something I can afford any further south.







Unless you're talking Olympia, or something. But we gotta stay within reasonable driving distance of token major software company, so this is about the cheapest it gets within that span. And, y'know, besides all the weirdness I just described in our neighbourhood recently, and all of our antisocial suburban neighbours, and the fact that there's not much to do around here-- it's not all that bad!









Hi. Off topic rambles, wee!


----------



## katheek77

Quote:


Originally Posted by *prothyraia* 
Okay, those stories might have me convinced. Those are reasonable, possible, actual dangers (not so much for an infant, so I'm still okay for awhile I guess







)
They make sense, unlike some of the other reasons that have been offered.

I think it's interesting that people are going on and on about how neglectful it is to leave a child in a car for three minutes for "convenience", yet no one thinks about the hundreds/thousands of miles a child spends in a car each year (a far more potentially dangerous situation) for "convenience".

I do it. It's much easier to just put Katie in the car, go do the shopping/errands/playgroup/etc. than to find someone to watch her in our home every time I need to go someplace. I toss my daughter into a potentially life-threatening situation every time we go somewhere in the car. It's not necessity; short of a true medical emergency, I probably could find *someone* to watch her. But, convenience wins out. Yet, as long as she's buckled into her car seat, no one flips out about it.

I think people really need to think about what neglect and child abandonment is, and think about when the tossing about of that word is warranted. I think the fear-mongering and self-righteousness is sorely misplaced, and, unfortunately, some family is going to suffer the effects of it.


----------



## mamazee

Electric windows don't work if the car is off and the keys aren't in it.


----------



## prothyraia

Quote:


Originally Posted by *katheek77* 
I think it's interesting that people are going on and on about how neglectful it is to leave a child in a car for three minutes for "convenience", yet no one thinks about the hundreds/thousands of miles a child spends in a car each year (a far more potentially dangerous situation) for "convenience".
....
I think people really need to think about what neglect and child abandonment is, and think about when the tossing about of that word is warranted. I think the fear-mongering and self-righteousness is sorely misplaced, and, unfortunately, some family is going to suffer the effects of it.


----------



## Rivka5

Quote:


Originally Posted by *meowee* 
Cars are death traps for young children... I don't care how safe you think the circumstances are. A car in 60F, during daylight, even in shade, will heat up quickly.

What is your evidence for this? Because it's certainly not true of _my_ car.


----------



## mamazee

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Rivka5* 
What is your evidence for this? Because it's certainly not true of _my_ car.

Not true here with mine either. In fact, that sounds pretty ridiculous. In the shade in 60 degrees? I bet it would be right around 60 degrees. In the sun? Probably a bit warmer but not too hot. In 2 to 3 minutes in the sun? Around 60 degrees.


----------



## cancat

once, my mom left us in the car to go to the post office and forgot to put the handbrake on...someone pulled up behind us, tapped the car a little, and my mom came out to a group of three people holding back the car from going into a busy intersection.

..so, nope I just wouldn't do it, which is why I do most errands on foot and live in a walking neighbourhood







:


----------



## TranscendentalMom

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Yooper* 
We used to live WAY out in the country. The only store/gas station within 20 miles was this tiny little one pump store. It gets very "winter" here and although I know it is quite dangerous, most people would fill their gas tanks with the car still running. One night (pre-dd) dh and I were driving home from work. It was dark and very snowy. We were getting low on gas so dh pulled into this little store. We had not lived there long and did not know it was an unspoken rule that as soon as you filled your tank, you should pull up to free the pump for the next person, then go pay. So I am sitting in the car with it running at the pump while dh goes in to pay. I am not really paying attention to anything and all of a sudden some strange guy hops in the driver's seat and starts to drive. I FREAKED! I startled the poor guy half to death. He had not noticed that I was in the car (I was huddled down due to the cold) and was just pulling it forward to make room for his car at the pump. After having lived there a while, we found this was the custom. If someone left their car at the pump and was inside, it was OK to pull their car forward. What a shocker. I call it my little brush with "carjacking".

Great story! I love it. Its not QUITE as quaint around here but people do stuff like that. Since I have had kids I have gotten quite forgetful and have left my wallet and cell phone in a variety of places...shopping carts, restaurants, the mall. Everytime, someone called me and returned it. One time someone even fed-exed my wallet to me (i left it at a rest stop in on a road trip...next state over) I mailed him a check to repay him for the fed ex and he never cashed it.


----------



## woobysma

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bjorker* 
Aww, shucks. Hehe. How far South, exactly? I'd be more than happy to live within Seattle city limits if I could afford a house this nice there! We're in a 3bd 2ba rental, which is NOT something I can afford any further south.







Unless you're talking Olympia, or something. But we gotta stay within reasonable driving distance of token major software company, so this is about the cheapest it gets within that span. And, y'know, besides all the weirdness I just described in our neighbourhood recently, and all of our antisocial suburban neighbours, and the fact that there's not much to do around here-- it's not all that bad!









Hi. Off topic rambles, wee!

HA! We're renting in Canyon Park. We can't really afford the houses here, either. Maybe in a couple years, but right now, it's just too much of a stetch. I don't want to be in a position where I might have to go back to work FT & buying a house would make that a likely scenario.
I lived in Lynnwood when DS1 was a baby and my apartment was... um, kind of scary (like where you find a pile of stems and seeds in the pantry left from the previous tenant and bail bondsmen come looking for people you don't know who used to live there.)
It was a creepy place. Glad you guys are in an OK neighborhood.

Absolutely NO leaving DS in the car in my neighborhood back then.


----------



## dubfam

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cancat* 
once, my mom left us in the car to go to the post office and forgot to put the handbrake on...someone pulled up behind us, tapped the car a little, and my mom came out to a group of three people holding back the car from going into a busy intersection.

..so, nope I just wouldn't do it, which is why I do most errands on foot and live in a walking neighbourhood







:

But if she would have been able to see the vehicle the situation would have been different.

ITA that if the vehicle is completely out of sight there are LOTS Of things that could happen. But if you can see the vehicle you can intervene in an emergency.


----------



## mcng

Can someone please enlighten me and tell me what are the dangerous thingss that could happen again, besides the armed robbers needing a get away car, the only examples given here are from puttin the car in reverse, eveyr car I've driven lately you have to have the ignition key on and your foot on the break to be able to move the shifting stick so those scenarios are out.


----------



## NotAMama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *karina5* 
It's odd to me that you keep using the term "servant." It seems like a very demeaning word.

Thank you for saying that. I am highly offended by Meg's continued usage of that word. 13 years ago, I was an _au pair_ and an accepted member of the family (I was practically begged to call the children's grandparents "Oma" and "Opa" as the children did). Although I did work for the family -- taking care of the most precious parts of their lives -- I was in NO WAY a servant.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meg Murry.* 
Sorry, would you prefer "wage-encouraged nonfamilial child caregiver"?
I'm not fond of euphemisms. They disguise inequities.

Hey, I got an idea . . . how about nanny or au pair? Both of those worked for me. And I never felt inequal when I lived there. Perhaps that is how you imagine YOU would treat someone in your employ, but it certainly was NOT the case with my loving, lovely Dutch family.

Oh, and how about some definition in return for yours. Here's the definition I found for _au pair_: au pair [ˌou ˈpə(r)] noun
a young person from abroad employed by a family to look after the children and help with the housework *in return for room, meals, pocket money* and an opportunity to learn the language

Wow . . . look at that . . . those were all the things I got while I au paired. Funny how we both can find definitions that fit our world views.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *3boobykins* 
FACT: (regarding those posting to this thread)

The mamas here who would never leave a child in the car love their children to the moon and back infinite times.

The mamas here who would and have left their a child in the car while in sight love their children to the moon and back infinite times.

What we think is best in a given situation is not always the same, but the love is.

Thank you for saying that. I was truly horrified and sickened by the smugness I perceived from the majority of the "I would never do it" crowd . . . as though they feel those who would do it must not love their children.


----------



## PGTlatte

Once I left both kids asleep in our van, in our garage, with the door down, no sun getting in anywhere, and the van doors shut, for just a couple minutes while I ran in the house to pee because I really had to go and thought if I started the whole process of waking them and getting them out of the van first I would not make it. It was about 70 outside, and about 70 in our garage, so I wasn't worried about it getting hot. I was really alarmed when I came back to the van after a very short time.......with no air circulating, the inside of the van got hot very quickly even on a 70 degree day with no sun involved and they were both starting to sweat. I won't do that again. If it had been a hotter day I think it could have been really dangerous.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamazee* 
Not true here with mine either. In fact, that sounds pretty ridiculous. In the shade in 60 degrees? I bet it would be right around 60 degrees. In the sun? Probably a bit warmer but not too hot. In 2 to 3 minutes in the sun? Around 60 degrees.


----------



## dubfam

I think it would get hotter in the garage than outside-since there isn't air circulating in the garage.

Also, 70 degrees is considerably warmer than 60


----------



## Needle in the Hay

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamazee* 
Electric windows don't work if the car is off and the keys aren't in it.

Maybe they won't work for _you_, but are just waiting for you to walk away from the car to try maiming your child. You never know, you just never know...


----------



## siobhang

OP here.

Wow, I didn't check this list for a couple of days and there are 210 posts... I haven't read anything past the first page so far. This should be... interesting ; )

Clearly this is a topic people feel a lot of passion about.


----------



## Missinnyc

Quote:

I think it's interesting that people are going on and on about how neglectful it is to leave a child in a car for three minutes for "convenience", yet no one thinks about the hundreds/thousands of miles a child spends in a car each year (a far more potentially dangerous situation) for "convenience".

I do it. It's much easier to just put Katie in the car, go do the shopping/errands/playgroup/etc. than to find someone to watch her in our home every time I need to go someplace. I toss my daughter into a potentially life-threatening situation every time we go somewhere in the car. It's not necessity; short of a true medical emergency, I probably could find *someone* to watch her. But, convenience wins out. Yet, as long as she's buckled into her car seat, no one flips out about it.

I think people really need to think about what neglect and child abandonment is, and think about when the tossing about of that word is warranted. I think the fear-mongering and self-righteousness is sorely misplaced, and, unfortunately, some family is going to suffer the effects of it.
This needs to be restated. The risk here is tiny. Our fears and worries need to be proportionate.


----------



## siobhang

Okay, I just read all the posts.

Some clarifications are in order:

1. our au pair does not normally leave the kids in the car - she does usually bring them in or go through a drive through. In this particular case, she thought the kids were awake, pulled into the parking lot of the 7-11 which is down the road from the park, and then realized the kids were asleep. She made a snap decision - since the parks around here do NOT always have water fountains (and the one she was going to doesn't have them) and she knew that as soon as they woke up they'd demand something to drink (she normaly brings stuff with her, but had run out earlier. since they had been out and about for a few hours already). Her first thought was how to get something for the kids that wouldn't upset them.

2. Neither our au pair nor I nor my husband think that leaving kids in the car is a *good* thing - it is a "avoid if you can" thing.

3. Our oldest cannot unlock his carseat - believe me, he has tried. I believe the car has child safety locks on the back seats. And the car is an automatic where you have to depress the braketo move it out of park. So I think the biggest danger there would be if he could suddenly learn to unlock his carseat straps (could happen) and climb into the front seat and then get out of the car. This to me is the most realistic danger.

4. This wasn't in Annandale, it was in fairfax. There is another 7-11 in annandale that both my au pair and I would never leave the kids alone in because there are a lot of day laborers hanging around the parking lot. While I intellectually know that 99% of them are just trying to get work to send home to their families, the entire vibe is threatening.

My biggest reason for posting wasn't really to justify whether leaving kids in the car for X minutes is safe or not - clearly there are some dangers and very strong opinions about it. My biggest reason was about the, in my opinion, inappropriate and over the top response by a complete stranger. I liked what a PP said about "lazy samaritan". I do suspect the woman who verbally attacked her was more interested in feeling superior and self-righteous than about actual concern for my kids. But I might just be feeling defensive ; )


----------



## JamesMama

Haven't read all the posts, but I do this all the time (okay, not ALL the time but when needed).

Only in MY town though...I live in an itty bitty town (population around 8,000) and once in a while I gotta get gas and don't have the bank card. If James is asleep I get gas, drive to the door, fill out the check, get out, take my keys, lock the doors, walk to the door, open it, take 5 steps into the gas station, toss my check on the counter say "$## in gas." and leave. I've cut in front of people...no one cares. It happens quite often in my town, the cashiers just set my check aside and ring it up when they can. Not a huge deal, IMO.

I'm sure I take MUCH bigger risks every day...Leaving him, sleeping or awake, in the car for 15 seconds isn't high on my 'risk scale'...

JMHO


----------



## lalaland42

Quote:


Originally Posted by *woobysma* 
There was a story in Bothell a few years ago where a woman had left her infant sleeping in her SUV. The car was running because she wanted to keep the AC on. Someone stole her car while she was in picking up a pizza (or something like that). The police think the thief must not have realized there was a child in the car. They found the car a couple blocks away with the baby safely inside - the guy must have realized there was a child involved and ditched the car pronto. I'm sure plenty of people heard that story and thought "well, there you go, don't ever leave your kid in the car". My thought was "take the freaking keys with you and lock the doors when you go into Dominoes, people!"

Actually it was a liquor store. The woman went in to buy a present for a friend or something. It happened when DD was a newborn and I remember thinking why-oh-why would she leave her baby in the car to go into a liquor store with the car running? It wasn't even that hot out.

You can count me in as a mom who would leave her sleeping child in a non-running car to return a cart or step up to an ATM. I don't leave her in the car when I go in somewhere but I wouldn't yell at anyone who does because that is right on my boundary of comfort.

To add my $.02 about the cart thing. Once I was taking the cart back with DD in it after I had loaded up the groceries. Sometimes my back goes out of whack and I have trouble carrying her so I sit her in the appropriate area of the cart. Someone almost backed over the cart. Now I _always_ leave her in a non-running car when I return the cart. Parking lots are dangerous for small people.


----------



## sunflowers

Quote:


Originally Posted by *NotAMama* 
I was truly horrified and sickened by the smugness I perceived from the majority of the "I would never do it" crowd . . . as though they feel those who would do it must not love their children.

Just as I am horrified







by the "there is no real danger" group trying to make those of us in the "I would never do it" group seem like loons and paraniod crazies that are raising a generation of kids that are afraid to walk out of their houses. Oh, and the fact that we are less inconveinenced than those that have 2 children. I guess having 2 kids makes it better to leave them unattended and they must clearly love children more because they have more children.


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunflowers* 
Just as I am horrified







by the "there is no real danger" group trying to make those of us in the "I would never do it" group seem like loons and paraniod crazies that are raising a generation of kids that are afraid to walk out of their houses.

Well, at least no one in the "there is no real danger" group has threatened to break in windows or call the cops on those they disagree with.

It doesn't horrify me that each mother has a different comfort-level: what horrifies me is the desire of some (those in the "I would never do it" group) to coerce others into doing it their way.

Some on this thread have even mentioned they'll avoid things they personally feel okay about, simply for fear of some meddling person getting the urge to call CPS.

The sad thing is, some of you probably see this fear as a wonderful tool for getting other parents to toe the line; you think it makes a better world for children, scrubbed clean of all the unpredictability and diversity that comes with living in a free society.







:


----------



## erin_d_a

i haven't read all the posts so sorry if I'm repeating something.

If I saw a child unattended in a car I would call the police. I don't care that a parent was just inside a store buying juice. I would call the police. furthermore I would jot down the license plate number and if I hate a camera take photos of the car and call Child Protective Services. I don't care if you are running into a store for thirty seconds, it is neglect and I think it is wrong under ALL circumstances. I have a friend who was abducted from her car when she was a kid while her mother ran into her house. Mom wasn't gone more than three minutes and the girl was gone for months, raped and tortured.

I have no doubt that the women who would do this love their children beyond measure, but I think this is a very poor parenting judgment call. There is a big difference between loving your children and making good parenting decisions, this does not seem like a good parenting decision to me.
My husband was a cop for a couple of years and when parents would do that where we were the children would be removed from the home for investigation of neglect and the parents would have to attend parenting classes for this.


----------



## applejuice

Where were all of you do-gooders when I grew up?

My mom left five children in a car and would go into a department store for hours. I was ten and her directions were to leave me in charge and hit the brake if the car rolled. She told me that I better watch the others or I would never forgive myself if something happened.

Yes, hours.

Thanks.


----------



## dubfam

Quote:


Originally Posted by *erin_d_a* 
i haven't read all the posts so sorry if I'm repeating something.

If I saw a child unattended in a car I would call the police. I don't care that a parent was just inside a store buying juice. I would call the police. furthermore I would jot down the license plate number and if I hate a camera take photos of the car and call Child Protective Services. I don't care if you are running into a store for thirty seconds, it is neglect and I think it is wrong under ALL circumstances. I have a friend who was abducted from her car when she was a kid while her mother ran into her house. Mom wasn't gone more than three minutes and the girl was gone for months, raped and tortured.

I have no doubt that the women who would do this love their children beyond measure, but I think this is a very poor parenting judgment call. There is a big difference between loving your children and making good parenting decisions, this does not seem like a good parenting decision to me.
*My husband was a cop for a couple of years and when parents would do that where we were the children would be removed from the home for investigation of neglect and the parents would have to attend parenting classes for this.*

Soooo...you would like to see CPS remove children from homes BC someone left them in a car for 30 seconds?

Have you ever heard of children being hurt in foster homes? Do you think that the kids will be traumatized by being removed?

Why in the world would you even THINK this is appropriate??!!

How is it neglect to leave a child in a car that you can see for 30 seconds?

IMO CPS here would




























if you tried to report something like that. There are actually a lot of kids in bad, neglectful homes here.

I am sure that kids who really are neglected wish that the worst thing happening to them was being left in the car for a minute while someone gets them juice!


----------



## dubfam

Quote:


Originally Posted by *applejuice* 
Where were all of you do-gooders when I grew up?

My mom left five children in a car and would go into a department store for hours. I was ten and her directions were to leave me in charge and hit the brake if the car rolled. She told me that I better watch the others or I would never forgive myself if something happened.

Yes, hours.

Thanks.


_That_ is neglect.


----------



## katheek77

Quote:


Originally Posted by *erin_d_a* 
i haven't read all the posts so sorry if I'm repeating something.

If I saw a child unattended in a car I would call the police. I don't care that a parent was just inside a store buying juice. I would call the police. furthermore I would jot down the license plate number and if I hate a camera take photos of the car and call Child Protective Services. I don't care if you are running into a store for thirty seconds, it is neglect and I think it is wrong under ALL circumstances. I have a friend who was abducted from her car when she was a kid while her mother ran into her house. Mom wasn't gone more than three minutes and the girl was gone for months, raped and tortured. .

And I know people who were kidnapped from their house/lawn, and there are cases of babies being snatched from their mother's arms and even wombs. These are the EXCEPTIONS, as is any child absuction,which is why they make the news. But, maybe we should all live in hermetically sealed bubbles.

Well, then, I guess I should just start calling CPS on everyone who doesn't go to their WBV on time, or giving their baby supplements, right? Because, according to the govt, THAT is also neglect...

"Medical neglect encompasses a parent or guardian's denial of or delay in seeking needed health care for a child as described below:

Delay in health care - Examples of a delay in health care include not getting appropriate preventive medical or dental care for a child...or not following medical recommendations"

http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/use...chaptertwo.cfm

However, I think most rational people on here would agree that there is, in most cases, no IMMINENT risk of serious harm from 1) not going to a WBV or 2) leaving a sleeping baby in a car for 2 minutes while you're 30 feet away.

A child is much more likely to be abused by a family member or friend than a stranger...should we take all children away from their families because of this? A child is more likely to be injured while RIDING in a car than sitting in a parked vehicle...should we make driving with a child illegal?

Honestly, if you don't want to leave your child in the car while you run inside to drop off a video, pick up a pizza, whatever, then DON'T. No one's forcing you to leave your child anywhere you don't feel comfortable. But to say you'd call the police b/c, OMG, there's a baby sleeping peacefully and her mother is THIRTY FEET AWAY, and so, that's NEGLECT, is ridiculous. If you're that concerned, wait a couple of minutes and see that mom does indeed come out (b/c, yeah, there are some crazies out there) and then move along.

I am just so SICK of people getting all busy-body and nosy and playing "false hero" when there are much more serious issues to address.


----------



## blessed

I also call the police anytime I see a child sleeping in a bedroom by themselves, without a parent present.

Because I knew of a child who was abducted out of her bedroom while her parents were sleeping in the next room.


----------



## Caroline248

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mcng* 
Can someone please enlighten me and tell me what are the dangerous thingss that could happen again, besides the armed robbers needing a get away car, the only examples given here are from puttin the car in reverse, eveyr car I've driven lately you have to have the ignition key on and your foot on the break to be able to move the shifting stick so those scenarios are out.


I said this in another post, but my son did do this. He was 2, so his foot could not possibly reach the brake, and the car came out of park and rolled. We have since tested it out and reasearched it, and it is a flaw on several minivans.

Not that I think leaving your kid in the car is neglect, but it DOES happen that safety equipment fails. I NEVER would have thought anything of it before he did it...now I only leave them if hte older kids are there to make sure he doesn't get ouf of his seat. (He can't yet, but you never know when he can...)


----------



## Meg Murry.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *NotAMama* 
Thank you for saying that. I am highly offended by Meg's continued usage of that word. 13 years ago, I was an _au pair_ and an accepted member of the family (I was practically begged to call the children's grandparents "Oma" and "Opa" as the children did). Although I did work for the family -- taking care of the most precious parts of their lives -- I was in NO WAY a servant.
Hey, I got an idea . . . how about nanny or au pair? Both of those worked for me. And I never felt inequal when I lived there. Perhaps that is how you imagine YOU would treat someone in your employ, but it certainly was NOT the case with my loving, lovely Dutch family.

Sorry, but I refuse to perpetuate the use of a euphemism whose primary purpose is to disguise from both master and servant the nature of the job being performed, the enormity of the economic disparity that goes with it, and the attendant powerlessness and frequent exploitation of this job. OBVIOUSLY not everyone is exploited -- and the same is true of other professions in which there is frequent exploitation, such as prostitution -- but exploitation, as other posters have pointed out, is fairly rampant.

I refuse to subscribe to a term that lends some air of artificial glamour to this profession. "Au pair" sounds adorably French, as if one went around in a starched black-and-white uniform carrying little hatboxes from Fauchon. "Nanny" has the lovely English glamour of Mary Poppins and makes one sound Earl Grey efficient. The reality for most servants is quite different.


----------



## the_lissa

Again, what about employee?

IME, teen aged employees of fast food chains are often horribly exploited, but I haven't heard anyone call them servants.


----------



## GranoLLLy-girl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *aran* 
I'm going to have to disagree with the PPs and say that I think the au pair was just plain wrong to leave the kids alone. I would not have been comfortable if my nanny did that. I wouldn't worry about heat in the scenario you described, but about not being able to get to them quickly in case of an emergency, or mistakenly locking keys in the car, or one of the kids waking up and being scared and confused.

In my state it is illegal for licensed family daycare providers to leave a child unattended in a car... at all. I know that's not the same as an au pair, but the concept is the same.

If it were me, I'd wait until my boys woke up and go in all together (since we're going to the park anyhow... they need to wake up for that) or go through the Dunkin Doughnuts drive thru for water/milk, or I would have foregone the drinks.

ITA. I would never leave my children unattended in the car. Period.


----------



## 3boobykins

Some of the posts on this thread are making me feel literally sick to my stomach and I am in tears. It makes me feel like dropping MDC from my favorites and never returning. This never happened when I first joined over six years ago. Yes, the forum was much, much smaller, but still...I think I will either take a long break, or stick with Yarn Crafts and Television for a long time, because this is ridiculous and a waste of energy.

I cannot fathom that someone would have a child taken away from a breastfeeding, co-sleeping, whole-food eating, non-vaxing, gentle-disciplining, homebirthing, babywearing home because of a two minute trip into a store with the locked car in full sight, and place children in a potentially abusive foster home on formula, junk food, lots of tv, and separation from parents for possibly a long time, not to mention being forced to stop cosleeping or extended bf when they were able to return. THAT is virtually guaranteed to do long-term damage. The odds of anything happening while leaving a child in the car in site, while I don't deny that there are SLIM risks involved, are almost zero.


----------



## mamazee

Almost all kidnapping and sexual abuse are done by people the family knows. There are very few people out there who would abduct a random child, and the chance of one of them being at the convenience store you stop at to pick up a juice for 2 minutes is incredibly slim. Then, even if that were to happen, the chance of them having the tools on them to open a locked door easily and quickly is extraordinarily slim. And then, if you have the car in your view, the chance of an attempted abduction being successful is basically nonexistent.

Statistically, a child is in more danger of being abducted with the mother than not because most abductors target women, not children, and certainly not babies. Your child is more likely to be "along for the ride" when you are abducted than to be taken from you when you aren't looking.

I only have one child so I don't leave her in the car when I run in a shop for a second. It just isn't an inconvenience to bring one kid into the store with me. But there is no way this it is a big deal. Particularly if it is a sleeping child who wouldn't mess with anything, and particularly if it is a baby who isn't able to undo his/her carseat. So long as it's only for two or three minutes, and so long as it isn't hot outside, and so long as the car is within view.

Your child is in more danger riding in the car to get to the convenience store than sitting in the car for a couple of minutes within your view when the car is locked and the weather is mild. Your child is in more danger pulling out of the convenience store.

I really think this kind of thing gives us an illusion of control over outside circumstances that we don't have. Being a mom is scary, and every minute feels delicate.

I want to again recommend the book Protecting the Gift by Gavin de Becker. He says in it that we lose our very valuable intuition of real danger when we worry about things that aren't dangerous.


----------



## siobhang

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meg Murry.* 
Sorry, but I refuse to perpetuate the use of a euphemism whose primary purpose is to disguise from both master and servant the nature of the job being performed, the enormity of the economic disparity that goes with it, and the attendant powerlessness and frequent exploitation of this job. OBVIOUSLY not everyone is exploited -- and the same is true of other professions in which there is frequent exploitation, such as prostitution -- but exploitation, as other posters have pointed out, is fairly rampant.

I refuse to subscribe to a term that lends some air of artificial glamour to this profession. "Au pair" sounds adorably French, as if one went around in a starched black-and-white uniform carrying little hatboxes from Fauchon. "Nanny" has the lovely English glamour of Mary Poppins and makes one sound Earl Grey efficient. The reality for most servants is quite different.

wow. um. wow.

Au pars are not nearly as powerless as a group as you seem to think. They are not in any way equivalent to the illegal nanny who lives in terror of being deported or the household servant whose passport and earnings are "held" by their employer to "keep safe".

One thing to remember is that most au pairs come from middle to upper middle class households in their own countries. They almost all have university educations and have strong family ties in their home country. None of the au pairs I met think of themselves nor define themselves as servants. In fact, most have had servants in their households in their home countries.

The au pair program is also a State Department program - meaning the au pairs have more protections in place than pretty much any other employed group in the US. The program staff must speak with the au pair once a month and if there is any hint of a problem, the counselor intervenes. The rules are explicit for host families related to number of hours worked, appropriate and inappropriate tasks, time off, etc.

but most importantly, the au pairs CAN LEAVE - they can leave at any time, find a new au pair host family, or get a plane ticket back home with little or no notice. And trust me, they do, all the time. In fact, our au pair is leaving early (unrelated to this incident) and there is nothing we can do to stop her, even though we are out several thousand dollars of program fee. We understand her reasons and respect them, but honestly, the idea that she is somehow exploited or not free is insane.

Sure there are power differentials, but, frankly, that is a fact of life - power is unequally distributed, especially related to employment and money. I do not have as much power as my clients I work for - does that mean I am a servant? Perhaps it does in your lexicon?

This situation is not even remotely similar to household servants who are at the mercy of their employers. I have done work in anti-trafficking, for God's sake. The difference is enormous and you do the literally millions of women and children who are exploited every day a huge disservice to conflate an employer/employee situation into one of automatic exploitation.


----------



## siobhang

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meg Murry.* 
Servant is more precise in this context:

*Servant* 1. A personal or domestic attendant; one whose duty is to wait upon his master or mistress, *or do certain work in his or her household.* (The usual sense when no other is indicated by the context; sometimes with defining word, as domestic servant.)

*Employee* a. *A person employed for wages; = EMPLOYÉ, which it has now virtually superseded. b. (nonce-use.) Something that is employed.

Au pair Applied to an arrangement between two parties by which mutual domestic services are rendered formerly without consideration of money payment; esp. of a young girl learning the language of a foreign country while rendering certain services in return for hospitality. Also attrib. Hence as n., a person who is 'au pair'.

All of the following are from the Oxford English Dictionary, BTW. By definition, an au pair does not work for wages; ergo, she is not an employee, but a domestic servant.
*
*
*
*
um, okay, so when my neighbor painted my front hall in exchange for me doing a website for him, he became my servant?

Au pairs do get paid a stipend (minimum $160 a week) plus $500 of educational benefit, plus room and board, in return for 45 hours of childcare a week. She isn't considered an employee for tax/visa purposes. However, from a power differential definition, there is no significant difference.*


----------



## blessed

Wow, I have a servant.

She'll be surprised to find out. She has a degree in child development and she calls herself dd's home teacher. She makes about the equivalent of an elementary public school teacher, including all benefits, to help manage our household and care for our daughter.

She left a managerial position at a local retail operation because she feels like this kind of work is her calling.

I don't know that she's appreciate her career choice being denigrated in that way.


----------



## Meg Murry.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *siobhang* 
wow. um. wow.

Au pars are not nearly as powerless as a group as you seem to think. They are not in any way equivalent to the illegal nanny who lives in terror of being deported or the household servant whose passport and earnings are "held" by their employer to "keep safe".

One thing to remember is that most au pairs come from middle to upper middle class households in their own countries. They almost all have university educations and have strong family ties in their home country. None of the au pairs I met think of themselves nor define themselves as servants. In fact, most have had servants in their households in their home countries.

But as I am sure you and most people here know, this situation you describe is little different from the condition of most upper-class servants throughout history. Consider the governess (the term du jour in the 19th century for a paid parental proxy). Often, a governess came from an upper middle-class family and was quite well-educated, but as with au pairs, they existed in a netherworld where their class and education placed them in a different category than, say, a scullery maid, but given their position as servants, they were clearly not members of the family nor on a par with actual family members.

I would also add, of course no servant _wants_ to define herself as a servant, because this would more clearly make evident exactly what the job was and make it far less palatable. Calling it a glamourous-sounding name is one factor in allowing the economic disparity to continue.

Quote:

The au pair program is also a State Department program - meaning the au pairs have more protections in place than pretty much any other employed group in the US. The program staff must speak with the au pair once a month and if there is any hint of a problem, the counselor intervenes. The rules are explicit for host families related to number of hours worked, appropriate and inappropriate tasks, time off, etc.
but most importantly, the au pairs CAN LEAVE - they can leave at any time, find a new au pair host family, or get a plane ticket back home with little or no notice. And trust me, they do, all the time. In fact, our au pair is leaving early (unrelated to this incident) and there is nothing we can do to stop her, even though we are out several thousand dollars of program fee. We understand her reasons and respect them, but honestly, the idea that she is somehow exploited or not free is insane.
The fact that she can leave is the difference between being a servant and being a slave.


----------



## woobysma

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lalaland42* 
Actually it was a liquor store.

Ah, I think you're right. I know the parking lot where it happened. The liquor store is right next to the pizza place.


----------



## katheek77

I guess I was a servant as well. I worked as a nanny for a few years AFTER teaching.

I made more hourly as a nanny, and had more free time, than I ever did as a teacher. (Which probably goes to show the sad state of salaries for teachers, but, I digress).

At one position I made EXACTLY as much as the mom I worked for. She was in a management program which was the step to becoming a regional manager, where she'd be making a lot more. In the meantime, she paid me the same as she got paid hourly (granted, she tried to get hours while her children were in school so she got SOME take-home pay, but, still).


----------



## Meg Murry.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *katheek77* 
I guess I was a servant as well. I worked as a nanny for a few years AFTER teaching.

I made more hourly as a nanny, and had more free time, than I ever did as a teacher. (Which probably goes to show the sad state of salaries for teachers, but, I digress).

And I bet you didn't have to grade any papers, either.


----------



## katheek77

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meg Murry.* 
But as I am sure you and most people here know, this situation you describe is little different from the condition of most upper-class servants throughout history. Consider the governess (the term du jour in the 19th century for a paid parental proxy). Often, a governess came from an upper middle-class family and was quite well-educated, but as with au pairs, they existed in a netherworld where their class and education placed them in a different category than, say, a scullery maid, but given their position as servants, they were clearly not members of the family nor on a par with actual family members.

I would also add, of course no servant _wants_ to define herself as a servant, because this would more clearly make evident exactly what the job was and make it far less palatable. Calling it a glamourous-sounding name is one factor in allowing the economic disparity to continue.

The fact that she can leave is the difference between being a servant and being a slave.


This is just silly. According to your definition any day care provider and any teacher is a servant, then, as well. And SAHMs (except for the family part). Maybe more so...SAHMs are often waaaay more UNable to leave than someone who is hired to work for the family.


----------



## Amylcd

...


----------



## sunflowers

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mammal_mama* 
Well, at least no one in the "there is no real danger" group has threatened to break in windows or call the cops on those they disagree with.

It doesn't horrify me that each mother has a different comfort-level: what horrifies me is the desire of some (those in the "I would never do it" group) to coerce others into doing it their way.

Some on this thread have even mentioned they'll avoid things they personally feel okay about, simply for fear of some meddling person getting the urge to call CPS.

The sad thing is, some of you probably see this fear as a wonderful tool for getting other parents to toe the line; you think it makes a better world for children, scrubbed clean of all the unpredictability and diversity that comes with living in a free society.







:

Granted, I missed a few posts because this thread has gotten a bit too long, but I only recall one person saying they would break into a car and *maybe* a few that said they might call the police or CPS. I certainly would do neither if a caretaker came to the car with in a few minutes. I would actually do the same thing if it were a pet in someone's car.

I know all about "toeing the line" and not daring to make a wrong move. I feel like I'm under the microscope 24/7 some weeks. One parenting decision that my ex doesn't agree with and I get "caught" could easily cause me to lose my children.

Trust me, I understand the constant pressure to be a perfect parent because there is someone hovering over me, lurking, waiting for a wrong move. And it's not CPS, unfortunately.


----------



## LilahsMama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *blessed* 
I think it's actually against the law in many states.

But it's hard to see the actual harm in the situation you described.

ITA


----------



## Meg Murry.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *katheek77* 
This is just silly. According to your definition any day care provider and any teacher is a servant, then, as well. And SAHMs (except for the family part). Maybe more so...SAHMs are often waaaay more UNable to leave than someone who is hired to work for the family.

If your day care provider lives with you or on your property as a "domestic employee," then yes.

A teacher is not directly paid by you, but by your tax money and therefore you are not directly that teacher's employer and do not have the power to fire or hire her or him.

Of course you think it's "silly" if you don't recognize the degree to which euphemisms perpetuate disempowerment, especially for women and minorities. I'm reminded of the scene in the film _Gone With the Wind_ in which Pork, an African-American valet, is requested to pick cotton. Tara has been spared by Sherman's march, but there are few people or servants available to pick the crop. Pork protests, saying, "But Miss Scarlett, we're _house_ _workers_!" The euphemism for "slave" helped keep Pork from realizing that he had to do what he was told, whatever that was.

But perhaps that's just "silly."

Or, to pick another example, many prostitutes don't like acknowledging a pimp is a pimp because that would make clear not only what they themselves are doing to make money, but how they are being exploited. I believe the preferred term is "boyfriend."

But perhaps that's just "silly.

Silly me!


----------



## katheek77

Then anyone who works for ANYONE else is a servant. An administrative assistant is the servant to the CEO. The dental hygientist (sp?) is a servant to the dentist. The chef is a servant to the restaurant owner. I guess unless you're CEO somewhere, you're a servant.









Equating a legally employed au pair, with all the protections and benefits afforded her, to a slave in the Deep South *is* just silly.


----------



## NotAMama

Yeah, I was SOOOOOO disempowered my year in Europe where I traveled more than ever in my life, learned a new language, learned a new culture, lived with a family who treated me like a beloved sister/grandchild, gave me practically anything I wanted. Wow, I never realized how bad I had it when I was with them.







:

So, now you are comparing au pairs and nannies to slaves and prostitutes. Jeez, I dread to imagine how such a person would be treated in your home should you ever need one.


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *katheek77* 
Honestly, if you don't want to leave your child in the car while you run inside to drop off a video, pick up a pizza, whatever, then DON'T. No one's forcing you to leave your child anywhere you don't feel comfortable. But to say you'd call the police b/c, OMG, there's a baby sleeping peacefully and her mother is THIRTY FEET AWAY, and so, that's NEGLECT, is ridiculous.

That's exactly what I've been trying to say, over and over. Let's each make our own parental choices, and back off and give other parents the space to make theirs.

Quote:

I am just so SICK of people getting all busy-body and nosy and playing "false hero" when there are much more serious issues to address.
Yes.


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunflowers* 
Trust me, I understand the constant pressure to be a perfect parent because there is someone hovering over me, lurking, waiting for a wrong move. And it's not CPS, unfortunately.









I'm sorry your ex is treating you this way.


----------



## mammal_mama

Webster's aside, I just think it sounds more respectful to call people employees rather than servants. And I don't see how it's inaccurate.

An employer has the power to hire and fire. I suppose most employees don't live with their employers -- but I don't see how even a shared residence would necessarily make the employee's job "demeaning."

And it doesn't sound like au pairs are coerced into doing jobs they weren't hired to do -- such as heading out to the fields to harvest cotton. I just don't see any similarity between au pairs and slaves.


----------



## Meg Murry.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *katheek77* 
Then anyone who works for ANYONE else is a servant. An administrative assistant is the servant to the CEO. The dental hygientist (sp?) is a servant to the dentist. The chef is a servant to the restaurant owner. I guess unless you're CEO somewhere, you're a servant.









Equating a legally employed au pair, with all the protections and benefits afforded her, to a slave in the Deep South *is* just silly.

I will quote the OED definition yet again:
1. A personal or _*domestic*_ attendant; one whose duty is to wait upon his master or mistress, or do certain work _in *his or her household*_. (The usual sense when no other is indicated by the context; sometimes with defining word, as domestic servant.)

Works in house = servant
Does not work in house = not a servant
Au pair = "nice word" for _servant_
House worker = "nice term" for _domestic slave_

Hope that helps.


----------



## chaoticzenmom

Quote:


Originally Posted by *woobysma* 
Ah, I think you're right. I know the parking lot where it happened. The liquor store is right next to the pizza place.

I probably never heard that story because I no longer watch the news. I haven't for years....well, since the Florida abduction of that 9yo girl. I can't handle the news. I'm much happier without it.

Lisa


----------



## North_Of_60

Quote:


Originally Posted by *katheek77* 
Honestly, if you don't want to leave your child in the car while you run inside to drop off a video, pick up a pizza, whatever, then DON'T. No one's forcing you to leave your child anywhere you don't feel comfortable. But to say you'd call the police b/c, OMG, there's a baby sleeping peacefully and her mother is THIRTY FEET AWAY, and so, that's NEGLECT, is ridiculous. If you're that concerned, wait a couple of minutes and see that mom does indeed come out (b/c, yeah, there are some crazies out there) and then move along.

And there are very few things I can think of off the top of my head that would cause a knee jerk "let's bring law enforcement into these people's lives" reaction from where I sit in the comfort of my dining room.

It's scary to me that so many people are ready and willing to call the police, to call CPS, to yell at parents, and even BREAK INTO CARS, based on something they have READ on the internet.







:


----------



## cottonwood

I think it's nuts how people act about this. Now, I personally wouldn't be comfortable with anyone else but me leaving my kids in the car... because it *is* a fine line sort of situation and I don't trust that anyone else would necessarily do exactly what I would do. But I am totally fine with leaving my kids in the car (not running of course) if they are in full view of me at all times, I can get to them quickly (within seconds) and it's not too warm out. I really don't see what could happen. If you trust someone else like you trust yourself... then I'm no one to judge.

Sorry your au pair was treated so rudely. Give her a hug for me, will you? Tell her us Americans are not all such paranoid, ugly people.


----------



## Meg Murry.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mammal_mama* 
Webster's aside, I just think it sounds more respectful to call people employees rather than servants. And I don't see how it's inaccurate.

Hopefully, I can explain. It is indeed more respectful, but it is inaccurate, and both are part of the same problem.
It is "respectful" to call a servant an au pair in the same way and for the same reason as it is "respectful" to call a slave a "house worker" in the context I cited from _GWTW_.

Both disguise and soften the realities to make them palpable -- even glamorous -- for the servant and for the mistress or master. It's the same logic that softens "firing" by calling it "reduction in force" or the logic that makes killing human beings palpable by calling it "termination of opposing troop forces." There are many examples of how we disguise unpleasant realities from ourselves in order to perpetuate those realities. I just don't want to cop to it because it helps to exploit people.


----------



## North_Of_60

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meg Murry.* 
Hopefully, I can explain. It is indeed more respectful, but it is inaccurate, and both are part of the same problem.

Are you against any private person/household hiring another person to do a job for them inside their house or on their property? Because if not, then I'm unclear of the "problem" that you think exists.


----------



## Meg Murry.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
Are you against any private person/household hiring another person to do a job for them inside their house or on their property? Because if not, then I'm unclear of the "problem" that you think exists.

Do you want to PM me? I've yanked this thread too OT as it is.


----------



## North_Of_60

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meg Murry.* 
Do you want to PM me? I've yanked this thread too OT as it is.

It appears that a lot of people are put off by your usage of the word servant, so perhaps this question is better answered publicly? You referred to using the word servant as contributing to "the problem".

What is the problem, and how does using the term au pair, or nanny, or professional domestic keeper, contribute to that problem? I get the distinct impression that the problem, as you it, is that you are simply against anyone but a parent being a primary caregiver, ie; _"hiring a servant to be a paid substitute parent to my child"_. I find that mindset disturbing, as do I'm sure the mama's who have to work and are left leaving their children with "paid substitute parents".

And please don't reference gone with the wind again. "House workers" of that era did not have government agencies advocating for them, nor did they receive any health benefits, or competitive wages and perks packages. They simply aren't comparable.


----------



## woobysma

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisa49* 
I probably never heard that story because I no longer watch the news. I haven't for years....well, since the Florida abduction of that 9yo girl. I can't handle the news. I'm much happier without it.

Lisa

This is my thought, too. I think the media skews our perception of risk to a huge extent and I'm much more calm without the constant scare tactics and flashpoints.

I LOVE public radio, but really never watch TV news programs. There are so very few topics that can be covered adequately in the 1-3 minutes that most news programs will devote to them that it seems like those programs do more damage than good, imo.


----------



## Meg Murry.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
It appears that a lot of people are put off by your usage of the word servant, so perhaps this question is better answered publicly? You referred to using the word servant as contributing to "the problem".

What is the problem, and how does using the term au pair, or nanny, or professional domestic keeper, contribute to that problem? And please don't reference gone with the wind again. "House workers" of that era did not have government agencies advocating for them, nor did they receive any health benefits, or competitive wages and perks packages. They simply aren't comparable.

Honestly, I have said the same thing several times. I don't know how to make it any simpler other than this. I apologize if this sounds condescending because I don't mean it to, but it's hard to walk the line between sounding non-condescending and communicating my point, which I guess I really have not been successful in doing. I did try, but I guess it didn't work. Here goes:

Euphemisms are bad.
Euphemisms are bad because they disguise realities that make us feel bad.
For instance, euphemisms make everyone feel nice and fuzzy inside about exploiting others or being exploited.
Euphemisms allow people to do bad things and feel good inside.
Euphemisms allow bad things to continue.
If things were called what they were, it would be harder for people to do bad things.

"Au pair" is one example of a euphemism
"House worker" is one example of a euphemism.
"Sex worker" is a euphemism.
"Reduction in employed forces" is a euphemism.
"Termination of opposed personnel" is a euphemism.
_Servant, slave, prostitute, firing_, and _killing_ are not euphemisms. For example, it is hard to fire someone. It is easier to reduce a workforce.

Women are more likely than men to be exploited.
Women are more likely to be paid less than what they deserve.
Women are less powerful in most societies than men are.
Women's jobs are held in less esteem.
Therefore, women's jobs such as "au pair," "nanny," "governess," "domestic child care worker," or other versions of "paid parental proxy" are more likely than the norm to be positions in which women are exploited.

Often, servants come from different countries. They may not speak the language well. They may feel uncomfortable in American society. They may not have friends or family here. They may not have any security other than their job as a servant. They are very likely to be exploited.

Calling your servant an "au pair" makes many people feel fancy and glamorous.
Calling oneself an "au pair" makes oneself feel fancy and glamorous.

In America, we have a complicated relationship with class and money.
We know that there are class differences and money differences.
However, if we are from the middle class, these subjects make us uncomfortable.
If we are from the middle class, we would much rather talk about politics or sex than our own money.
If we are from the middle class and become wealthy, our bank accounts change, but our baseline attitudes toward money take longer to adjust.
We are comfortable with the idea that we are all equal.
We feel uncomfortable calling a servant a servant and a master a master because this implies that we are not equal.
Because "au pair" is a euphemism that makes everyone feel glamorous, it is a term that rich people and servants both like.

However, I prefer to call things as they are.


----------



## MamaAllNatural

I hate that in our society fear and paranoia take the place of listening to your instincts and feeling out each situation. The only thing I'm worried about is some paranoid and self-righteous person calling the cops on me for nothing. For those who say they'd call the cops immediately if they saw a child in a car... what age of child? I mean, if it's hot out sure but if it's not, would you call on an 8 year old? A 6 year old? That's legal most places.

Quote:

but you will get arrested or physically attacked if you break a persons car window and take their children out of the car. I think that is called breaking & entering and attempted kidnapping.
Yeah, talk about a self-fulfilling prophecy. Only *you* become the one doing what you're so worried would happen!









Does anyone remember the thread like this from a couple years ago where a few different mothers said it was dangerous and irresponsible to go out of the car even to pump gas while your kids are inside!? OMG, I can't even go there.







s

I judge things by my gut feeling of each individual situation and it has kept me and my children very safe. I think it's important to listen to your instincts instead of relying on a set of rules.


----------



## the_lissa

I don't think sex worker is a euphemism for prostitute. I use it when discussing anyone who works in the sex industry, not just prostitution.

Again I don't see what is wrong with calling this woman an employee if you don't like au pair or nanny. I don't think employee is a euphemism.

Like I said, many minimum wage workers are exploited. I have never heard anyone call them servants though.


----------



## pigpokey

Quote:


Originally Posted by *llp34* 
Once I left both kids asleep in our van, in our garage, with the door down, no sun getting in anywhere, and the van doors shut, for just a couple minutes while I ran in the house to pee because I really had to go and thought if I started the whole process of waking them and getting them out of the van first I would not make it. It was about 70 outside, and about 70 in our garage, so I wasn't worried about it getting hot. I was really alarmed when I came back to the van after a very short time.......with no air circulating, the inside of the van got hot very quickly even on a 70 degree day with no sun involved and they were both starting to sweat. I won't do that again. If it had been a hotter day I think it could have been really dangerous.

The sun was not involved beating down on the garage?

Shade means shade outdoors, or in an open carport. Not a closed garage, which suffers from the same situation that causes cars to heat up in the first place. The garage got hot, your car got hot because it was now 85 degrees in your garage. For a car to heat up, it has to have a heat source. Otherwise why don't we all just live in cars outside when it gets cold in the winter?


----------



## North_Of_60

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meg Murry.* 
We feel uncomfortable calling a servant a servant and a master a master because this implies that we are not equal.

Bosses and employees are just as unequal, and when I am an employee it is not uncomfortable to acknowledge that.







I fail to see your point.

Are the words "boss" and "employee" euphemisms as well? What is the different between a child care worker who receives benefits and health insurance and works in a free standing building being employed by a corporation/propriety, and the same person who works in a private home? One, by your definition, is an employee, and the other a servant, the difference being their work environment?







:

I fail to understand how an au pair is being exploited, and how that is exacerbated by using the term au pair, as opposed to servant. Because au pairs are usually women? So anytime a profession is dominated by, but not limited to one sex, they are being exploited?


----------



## felix23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meg Murry.* 
Honestly, I have said the same thing several times. I don't know how to make it any simpler other than this. I apologize if this sounds condescending because I don't mean it to, but it's hard to walk the line between sounding non-condescending and communicating my point, which I guess I really have not been successful in doing. I did try, but I guess it didn't work. Here goes:

Euphemisms are bad.
Euphemisms are bad because they disguise realities that make us feel bad.
For instance, euphemisms make everyone feel nice and fuzzy inside about exploiting others or being exploited.
Euphemisms allow people to do bad things and feel good inside.
Euphemisms allow bad things to continue.
If things were called what they were, it would be harder for people to do bad things.

"Au pair" is one example of a euphemism
"House worker" is one example of a euphemism.
"Sex worker" is a euphemism.
"Reduction in employed forces" is a euphemism.
"Termination of opposed personnel" is a euphemism.
_Servant, slave, prostitute, firing_, and _killing_ are not euphemisms. For example, it is hard to fire someone. It is easier to reduce a workforce.

Women are more likely than men to be exploited.
Women are more likely to be paid less than what they deserve.
Women are less powerful in most societies than men are.
Women's jobs are held in less esteem.
Therefore, women's jobs such as "au pair," "nanny," "governess," "domestic child care worker," or other versions of "paid parental proxy" are more likely than the norm to be positions in which women are exploited.

Often, servants come from different countries. They may not speak the language well. They may feel uncomfortable in American society. They may not have friends or family here. They may not have any security other than their job as a servant. They are very likely to be exploited.

Calling your servant an "au pair" makes many people feel fancy and glamorous.
Calling oneself an "au pair" makes oneself feel fancy and glamorous.

In America, we have a complicated relationship with class and money.
We know that there are class differences and money differences.
However, if we are from the middle class, these subjects make us uncomfortable.
If we are from the middle class, we would much rather talk about politics or sex than our own money.
If we are from the middle class and become wealthy, our bank accounts change, but our baseline attitudes toward money take longer to adjust.
We are comfortable with the idea that we are all equal.
We feel uncomfortable calling a servant a servant and a master a master because this implies that we are not equal.
Because "au pair" is a euphemism that makes everyone feel glamorous, it is a term that rich people and servants both like.

However, I prefer to call things as they are.

I spent several summers caring for children in their parents' homes, and I considered myself a child care specialist. At that time I had one degree in Early Childhood Education (I now have another one in Educational Studies), so in no way was I exploited. The parents treated me as a professional, not just some servant. A child care provider is someone who the parents hire to care for their children either in or out of the home, why do you have a problem with this term? Why do you have such a hard time grasping that some people really enjoy and want to care for other people's children and that it is not a horrible job?


----------



## PGTlatte

No - our garage stays very cool even with the door down. It was not hotter in the garage. We pretty much keep the garage door closed all the time, and I visit our garage frequently each day because our diaper pails are in it, and our garage stays very cool even on hot days. The inside of the garage did not feel hot at all. It was much warmer in the van than in the garage.

I believe the heat source was my children. The van was sealed up and the heat they generated built up in it.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pigpokey* 
The sun was not involved beating down on the garage?

Shade means shade outdoors, or in an open carport. Not a closed garage, which suffers from the same situation that causes cars to heat up in the first place. The garage got hot, your car got hot because it was now 85 degrees in your garage. For a car to heat up, it has to have a heat source. Otherwise why don't we all just live in cars outside when it gets cold in the winter?


----------



## North_Of_60

Quote:


Originally Posted by *felix23* 
I spent several summers caring for children in their parents' homes, and I considered myself a child care specialist. At that time I had one degree in Early Childhood Education (I now have another one in Educational Studies), so in no way was I exploited.

I actually find it pretty derogatory to use the word servant to describe a profession that affords its employees the opportunity to be highly educated, and thus more then fairly compensated for their services in the form of competitive wages, benefits, and perks packages (many au pairs are given vehicles to drive, expense accounts, paid living expenses, etc). Most au pairs and nannies are treated better then the employees of Burger King and Walmart, but since those people work for corporations and not in private homes, they are employees and not servants.


----------



## mammal_mama

It sounds like many au pairs and nannies are better treated than many daycare workers. I also know someone who worked happily for many years as a housekeeper for a wealthy family. He had excellent pay and benefits, and owned his own home as well.

I don't think "servant" is a bad word in itself: it just has negative connotations in our society. So I'd rather call someone a housekeeper, cook, nanny, au pair, or employee than servant. Simply out of respect for the person, not my desire to "glamorize" what they're doing.

What is there that's inherently evil about a "reality" that one person chooses to clean people's houses, or care for their children, as a source of income -- and another person chooses to hire someone to do these things? I have a friend who enjoys cleaning houses, and she prefers this work over a typical 9 to 5 job because she can make more money in a shorter time, and can work the cleaning around her family responsibilities.

I suppose the "unpleasant reality" is the fact that some people have to work harder than others for a living, while some are in a position to hire out jobs that most of us have to do ourselves?


----------



## mcng

Quote:


Originally Posted by *blessed* 
I also call the police anytime I see a child sleeping in a bedroom by themselves, without a parent present.

Because I knew of a child who was abducted out of her bedroom while her parents were sleeping in the next room.

For a minute there I thought you were serious







, sarcasm in other languages takes a little more to understand


----------



## North_Of_60

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mammal_mama* 
I suppose the "unpleasant reality" is the fact that some people have to work harder than others for a living, while some are in a position to hire out jobs that most of us have to do ourselves?

Yeah, it sucks that some people are so stinking rich that they can have a private chef while I have to suffer in a hot kitchen every day, so let's demonize the whole dang thing and just call them servents. Never mind the fact that they spent 3 years at Le Cordon Blue.







:


----------



## NotAMama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
Yeah, it sucks that some people are so stinking rich that they can have a private chef while I have to suffer in a hot kitchen every day, so let's demonize the whole dang thing and just call them servents. Never mind the fact that they spent 3 years at Le Cordon Blue.







:

I think it's amusing that she refuses to listen to the people who have actually . . . oh, I don't know . . . BEEN THERE. I was an _au pair_. I was given room and board, two and a half days guaranteed off a week (many times, it was more), all the time I needed to travel, a very generous spending stipend, no questions asked time off when I wasn't feeling well, a set of adoring "grandparents" who felt it was their personal duty to constantly bring me little trinkets every time they came over, a "big brother" and "big sister" in the parents of the children I cared for who comforted me through homesickness and the death of a friend, four lovely children who thought I hung the moon. In other words, I was treated FAR BETTER as a live in domestic "servant" than I ever was in any other job I've ever worked.

In return, I cared for the children 4.5 days a week -- taking them to the park, preparing their meals, playing with them, teaching them English, kissing their boo-boos, hugging them and loving them.

I fail to see how I was exploited, and MegMurray seems to be unable to explain it to me.


----------



## kaspar

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mammal_mama* 
That's exactly what I've been trying to say, over and over. Let's each make our own parental choices, and back off and give other parents the space to make theirs.

it always amazes me how this philospohy applies to mamas who smoke while preg and leave their kids unattended in a car, but not to mamas who formula feed/cio/feed purees/use sposies/give babe his own room/use a stroller etc. etc. etc...


----------



## North_Of_60

Quote:


Originally Posted by *NotAMama* 
I fail to see how I was exploited, and MegMurray seems to be unable to explain it to me.

Nor has she explained what is inherently wrong with one person hiring another person to do private work. I asked above if she was against one person hiring another person to work for them in their house or on their property, and instead got a lesson in euphemisms.

I don't understand why using the euphemism "au pair" makes the profession more palpable, unless she is fundamentally against the idea of people hiring other people to work within their homes, especially in regards to "paid substitute parents".

What is so bad about hiring a person to care for your children that requires a euphemism to glorify it? That's what I want to know.


----------



## madskye

So, au pair and sex worker are euphemisms...I am wondering how you decide what is a euphemism and what's not?

I find this all pretty inane, to be honest. My cousin is an au pair, and getting her ECE degree, I think she'd be pretty appalled to be called "the servant"--and I'd be surprized if you would use that term to her face.

Not because she's tough or anything, but because if it actually had to come out of your mouth you might realize that it sounds totally whackdoodle!


----------



## North_Of_60

Quote:


Originally Posted by *madskye* 
My cousin is an au pair, and getting her ECE degree, I think she'd be pretty appalled to be called "the servant

Especially since au pair means "equal to".


----------



## veggiemomma

I am a "servant"...oh, wait, I mean, I am a Stay at Home Mom.









Whether you want to call them "servants" (







: ) or au pairs or nannies or purple crayons...whatever name you want to give them, they have extremely important and stressful jobs. Therefore, I don't understand why anyone would want to intentionally use a hurtful and demeaning word such as "servant" to describe the position they hold in a household. The ONLY reason you would use the term "servant" that I can see is if you did just want to be snarky and hurtful. Why all the hate?


----------



## North_Of_60

Quote:

No, The word "au pair," doesn't mean nanny at all. It is pronounced "o pair" in French, and means "on par" or equal, denoting living on an equal basis in a reciprocal, caring relationship between the host family and the young person.
http://www.euraupair.com/aupair-questions.htm

Quote:

Au pair is an anglicization of the French term "au pair," which means "on par" or "equal to..

An au pair shall be treated as an equal part of the family, not as a servant"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Au_pair

Quote:

The words "au pair" come from the French meaning 'at par', or 'equal to'. Taking this into consideration, the au pair is meant to be an equal part of the family and treated as a family member.
http://www.euroconnect.ca/gpage.html

Quote:

The word "au-pair" derives from the French expression "at par", which means "equal to" or "on equal terms". An Au-Pair comes to live as part of the family, and is treated as a family member
http://www.a1kidscare.com/html/childcareaupair.shtml

From the sounds of it, Meg is probably just not familiar with what au pairs are, so hopefully this clears it up. And live-in nannies that I know are also treated this way. The only thing that sets them apart is that they are not in this country on a contract or employment agreement.


----------



## siobhang

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
From the sounds of it, Meg is probably just not familiar with what au pairs are, so hopefully this clears it up.

Thank you for hunting down those definitions.

Meg, you wanna talk class, we can talk class. And you wanna talk definitions of words, we can. I didn't get my Masters in Anthropology of International development for nothing, I can tell you. ; )

First and foremost, your issue with euphemisms is that they hide uncomfortable truths. Well, while I agree that this is the role of euphemisms, there also has to be an uncomfortable truth to be hidden.

Yes, women, especially of lower economic class, are often exploited, and traditionally in the areas of domestic and sexual labor. However, you cannot then turn around and say THEREFORE ALL women who perform that sort of labor are ALWAYS exploited. It just isn't true, unless you completely disregard the disparities of choices, opportunities and personal freedoms in the huge range of situations. Class trumps gender, pretty much every time (there are some exceptions, but they are notable in themselves). It is when class and gender together meet that you are likely to find exploitation - and add in race/ethic/sexual minority status and you have a trifecta.

So let's define exploitation, shall we, and see whether au pairs - a legal visa definition, mind you - meet the requirements.

To define exploitation, from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploitation

Quote:

the term "exploitation" may carry two distinct meanings:

1. The act of utilizing something for any purpose. In this case, exploit is a synonym for use. _My note: I am assuming you are not using exploited to mean use - if so this is a completely pointless conversation_
2. *The act of utilizing something in an unjust, cruel or selfish manner for one's own advantage.* It is this meaning of exploitation which is discussed below.

*In political economy, economics, and sociology, exploitation involves a persistent social relationship in which certain persons are being mistreated or unfairly used for the benefit of others.* This corresponds to one ethical conception of exploitation, that is, the treatment of human beings as mere means to an end - or as mere "objects". In different terms, "exploitation" refers to the use of people as a resource, with little or no consideration of their well-being. This can take the following basic forms:

* taking something off a person or group that rightfully belongs to them
* short-changing people in trade
* directly or indirectly forcing somebody to work for you
* using somebody against his will, or without his consent or knowledge
* imposing an arbitrary differential treatment of people to the advantage of some and the disadvantage of others (as in ascriptive discrimination)

Or how about Allwords http://www.allwords.com/word-exploitation.html

Quote:

exploit
noun

1. An act or feat, especially a bold or daring one.
Thesaurus: accomplishment, achievement, feat, deed, adventure, stunt.
Form: exploits (usually)

verb exploited, exploiting

*1. To take unfair advantage of something or someone so as to achieve one's own aims.
Thesaurus: capitalize on, take advantage of, misuse, profit by, use, abuse, manipulate, cash in on.*

2. To make good use of something.

Bolding mine for emphasis.

Now, the critical definitional element is *unfair advantage*. The wikipedia definition includes elements of theft, coercion, and prejudicial treatment.

Now, in a situation where each party is getting something out of the deal, and helped define the terms of that deal - even if what they gain is unequal - AND have options to negotiate or find better deals for themselves - and ultimately, each party can walk away if they think they are getting a raw deal, there is no exploitation.

The exchange may not be *equal*. It may not be fair (however we define that word. But it isn't exploitation unless there is theft or coercion. My employer bills my hours out at twice what I take home in pay. Am I being exploited? No, because I have the right and the option to walk away at any time. This is the deal I have negotiated. If I want a better deal, I need to negotiate a better one, or walk away.

Note, not everyone has the same abilities to walk away - when working for the only employer in town or held hostage by health insurance or other elements, then yes, exploitation can occur. But it isn't automatic.

The au pair is getting a free place to live, free food, a visa to work in the US*, catastrophic health insurance, educational benefits, round trip plane tickets, and a stipend - all of which which we pay for. We get in return 45 hours of childcare a week, no more than 10 hours a day, with guaranteed 1.5 days off a week and 2 weeks a year minimum (our au pairs normally get 3 days off a week and 4-5 weeks off a year).

I am certain legal nannies negotiate themselves very good deals - and if they don't they should because in most markets, they really can. In my area, ANY nanny will earn between $10-$15 an hour. Advanced degree, experience, etc and the price goes up.

Don't get me wrong. Exploitation happens. And yes, women can be party to their own exploitation - it is a common way for women to give themselves the appearance of power they don't really have. But at the end of the day, it is all about power. When power dynamics are too unequal - where one party has no options to walk away - exploitation occurs.

Exploitation is a very real, and very serious situation. Lets not dilute it by throwing the term around too loosely at any situation that seems unequal.

Siobhan

*which is priceless - trust me, my dh came here on the H1B visa which are not available any more - if someone wants to live legally the US, even with a family member/marriage to a US citizen, it can take YEARS to process the visa - and without that family member, good luck with the lottery unless you are an exceptional citizen - i.e. nuclear physicists or international supermodel - oh, and it costs thousands of dollars in immigration lawyers fees. Hell, he was more a hostage to his employer on his H1B because they could fire him at any time and he'd be deported within a month. If we decide we don't like our au pair, she at least gets the opportunity to rematch with another family.


----------



## MommytoTwo

Quote:

The mama congratulating herself for waking her sleeping child to get coffee has not yet had to carry a preschooler and a baby, diaper bag, books, papers etc etc thru a parking lot.
Untrue. I am a mother of three small children and I dont leave one in the car because its a hassle to get them out. I do not live in a city where I would consider it safe to leave a kid in the car. I also remind myself of the idea that if I wouldnt leave a $50 bill on the dashboard, then I also wouldnt leave my children.

McDonalds drive throughs have juice water and milk. No need to run into a store for a quick drink. If we need something else we all get out of the car and go intot he grocery store and get it.


----------



## siobhang

dh just pointed out something really critical. Trade is almost always unequal. in fact, unequal perceived value is pretty much crucial for any trade to occur - what I have you want more than I want to keep it, and what you have I want more than your want to keep it. We work out a deal for a swap - the trade is mutually beneficial even if the arbitrary values are not equal.

For example I grow zuccinis. I have a Sh!t load of zuccinis this time of year. I am desperate to get rid of them. You like zuccini and want to take them off my hands. Normally zuccini would be a $1lb, but since I have so much zuccini, I sell them for $0.25 lb. WE BOTH WIN. You have not exploited me - I have sold my zuccini and cleared out my storage space, even if I didn't get the normal price for the zuccini.

This is because there is no such thing as real value - only perceived value. My friend knits beautiful scarves. She spends days on them - but can only sell them for under $40 a scarf. The perceived value of her scarves has nothing to do with the inputs (yarn, needles, time) and skill (exceptional - she won state a few years back).

However, if she were Madonna, and selling her scarves, they would go for boatloads of cash.

This understanding of trade, which does not include a need for the trade to be "equal", is crucial for really understanding exploitation and how it happens.


----------



## applejuice

siobhang, you know that wikipedia is not considered a reliable source of information, don't you, with your Master's Degree in Anthropology. Your professors would not have accepted that reference as valid for your thesis.


----------



## woobysma

Siobhan - you rock









(wanna do my Econ. homework for me?)


----------



## mamazee

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MommytoTwo* 
Untrue. I am a mother of three small children and I dont leave one in the car because its a hassle to get them out. I do not live in a city where I would consider it safe to leave a kid in the car. I also remind myself of the idea that if I wouldnt leave a $50 bill on the dashboard, then I also wouldnt leave my children.

McDonalds drive throughs have juice water and milk. No need to run into a store for a quick drink. If we need something else we all get out of the car and go intot he grocery store and get it.

It might depend on where you live. Here, most women leave their purses in their cars when they run in places. I usually do when I take my daughter to the park, and I keep the windows down so it doesn't get too hot in the car while she's playing. It just isn't a danger here. And there is my purse, sitting on the front seat with the windows down and the doors unlocked. I've never heard of anyone around here having their purses snatched out of their cars.

ETA: Also, there are many many many more thieves than kidnappers and pedophiles in the world. There's a good chance that someone interested in a $50 bill could walk by your car, though if the doors are locked and it's within view it wouldn't do them any good anyway. But very few people would be interested in someone else's baby. The chance of one of them just happening to be there when you're there is really slim. And, again, if the door is locked and the car is within view, they'd be out of luck regardless.


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kaspar* 
it always amazes me how this philospohy applies to mamas who smoke while preg and leave their kids unattended in a car, but not to mamas who formula feed/cio/feed purees/use sposies/give babe his own room/use a stroller etc. etc. etc...

Actually, to me it applies to ALL areas of parenting -- save situations where a child is being severely beaten, raped, molested, or deprived of food and basic needs.

I *would not* call police or CPS on a mama who formula feeds, does cry-it-out (though it makes me feel














, feeds purees, uses disposables (which I also use sometimes), gives a baby his own room, uses a stroller etc. etc. etc...

(I actually tried a stroller with my first before I got familiar with the sling; I ended up having to carry her and push the stroller for the walk home, which was harder than just carrying.







... and with both my daughters, by the time they were about 2 1/2 years old I found it too hard to wear them for long walks, and both enjoyed the stroller by this age.)

So, kaspar, I'm honestly not applying a double standard here: I believe there's a reason why other people's children are other people's children: God didn't intend for ME to parent them. I certainly have enough to do/think about parenting my own.


----------



## Canadianmommax3

http://www.kidsincars.org/index.html

so many tragedies, that could have been avoided.


----------



## dubfam

And so many fear based products to market!! There is some money to be made...

I don't see anything on that website that convinces me that it is dangerous to leave a child in the scenario like what is described in the OP.

I would like to see how many kids have died as a result of being left asleep, strapped into a car seat, in plain sight of the caregiver in a locked vehicle that is not running and does not have keys in it for less than 3 minutes. Because that is what we are talking about here. I just don't see what the big deal is!


----------



## blessed

There were cases in which the child got out of her seat and managed to get the car out of gear even though it wasn't running.

In some cases the parents were killed trying to stop the car from rolling away, and in some cases the child was killed by falling out an opened door and then being run over.

I agree, small risk. But reading those cases certainly made me think twice.


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Canadianmommax3* 
http://www.kidsincars.org/index.html

so many tragedies, that could have been avoided.









I believe it can be helpful to share information that helps parents make more informed choices about what's best for their families.

In my previous post, I said I wouldn't call police or CPS on someone just because I disagreed with her parenting choices. That doesn't mean I'd never share information that might increase the likelihood of children getting their mother's milk, being held rather than left to cry-it-out, and so on.

By sharing information, I'm not talking about telling people off: I'm talking about being available to aid other parents and help them get the resources they need.

I'm all for avoiding tragedy, and helping others to do the same. Of course, it's also a tragedy when people get killed in car accidents. As pp's have shared, lifestyle changes that help families avoid unnecessary car travel would save many children's lives.

Limiting car travel would probably avert more tragedy than a lot of other changes people could make. Yet I don't frown on parents who spend a lot of time driving their kids around in cars. I respect the fact that each parent, and each person, assesses risk differently. Vive la difference!


----------



## Caroline248

Quote:


Originally Posted by *blessed* 
There were cases in which the child got out of her seat and managed to get the car out of gear even though it wasn't running.

In some cases the parents were killed trying to stop the car from rolling away, and in some cases the child was killed by falling out an opened door and then being run over.

I agree, small risk. But reading those cases certainly made me think twice.


I have posted this twice, but since I am the ORIGINAL invisible poster...









6 months ago, I would have said "Yes, of course.".

The past May though, my son was one of "THOSE" kids that got the not-running car into gear (WITHOUT TURNING THE KEYS AND WITHOUT REACHING THE BRAKE PEDAL) and backed it out of the garage into the street. It slammed into a parked car. He was sitting in the front seat while I loaded the otehr kids in. I had no idea he could do that.

Thankfully, noone was hurt. But, the what if's.....

So, while I don't think there is anything really wrong with it, you should make sure yours isn't one of the minivans without the WORKING safety feature that keeps it in park without running. With my van (Ford Windstar) you can jiggle the gear shift hard enough to get it to slip out of gear.


----------



## ishereal

Given the situation and the fact that it was a 7-11, where she could see the kids and it was 60 degress out side, I don't see any harm in it. I think people are saying "no I would never do that" because of recent events with the poor kids dying in over heated cars.


----------



## Canadianmommax3

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dubfam* 
And so many fear based products to market!! There is some money to be made...

I don't see anything on that website that convinces me that it is dangerous to leave a child in the scenario like what is described in the OP.

I would like to see how many kids have died as a result of being left asleep, strapped into a car seat, in plain sight of the caregiver in a locked vehicle that is not running and does not have keys in it for less than 3 minutes. Because that is what we are talking about here. I just don't see what the big deal is!

I don't think these parents are trying to make money for themselves but to save other childrens lives.
"Q2: Who founded Kids In Cars?

A2: Terrill and Michele Struttmann founded Kids in Cars in 1999 after two toddlers, left unattended in a running vehicle, set it in motion and killed the Struttmann's 2-year-old son, Harrison. The Struttmanns have since devoted their lives to preventing similar accidents.

Q3: What is the goal of Kids In Cars?

A3: To save lives and reduce the number of serious injuries resulting from children being left alone in or around cars."

'


----------



## siobhang

Quote:


Originally Posted by *applejuice* 
siobhang, you know that wikipedia is not considered a reliable source of information, don't you, with your Master's Degree in Anthropology. Your professors would not have accepted that reference as valid for your thesis.

heh, interesting point. esp as that particular wikipedia article doesn't contain references.

however, since I am:

*not writing a master's thesis, I am posting on an internet board; and

* trying to establish a popularly understood definition of exploitation;

I think Wikipedia is not irrelevant - it being a popularly accepted source for every day usage. In fact, for the purposes of discovering "commonly held definitions by the general public", which is, of course, at the heart of Anthropology, Wikipedia is a wonderful source.

But if you want something more, um, academically meaty (to what end, I am not sure - are you questioning the definition of exploitation offered by Wikipedia? Or are you just nitpicking one citation and ignoring the rest of the argument - not a bad, albeit overused, rhetorical device, but I digress).

Quote:

American Heritage Dictionary
ex·ploi·ta·tion (ěk'sploi-tā'shən)
n.

1. The act of employing to the greatest possible advantage: exploitation of copper deposits.
2. Utilization of another person or group for selfish purposes: exploitation of unwary consumers.
3. An advertising or a publicity program.
Or how about from Merriam Webster

Quote:

Main Entry: 2ex·ploit
Pronunciation: ik-'sploit, 'ek-"
Function: transitive verb
1 : to make productive use of : UTILIZE <exploiting your talents> <exploit your opponent's weakness>
2 : to make use of meanly or unfairly for one's own advantage <exploiting migrant farm workers>
- ex·ploit·abil·i·ty /ik-"sploi-t&-'bi-l&-tE/ noun
- ex·ploit·able /-'sploi-t&-b&l/ adjective
- ex·ploit·er noun
Of course, to really understand the two definitions, one has to define "meanly or unfairly" or "selfish purposes" - or at least state how the action one dubs as "exploitation" meets those criteria.

And since the word exploitation can also mean "to use" (which is not inherently harmful), the onus is on the describer to show that the exploitation is in some way harmful to someone somewhere.

Otherwise, what exactly are we arguing about?


----------



## siobhang

Quote:


Originally Posted by *blessed* 
There were cases in which the child got out of her seat and managed to get the car out of gear even though it wasn't running.

In some cases the parents were killed trying to stop the car from rolling away, and in some cases the child was killed by falling out an opened door and then being run over.

I agree, small risk. But reading those cases certainly made me think twice.

to be completely honest, this possibility the only one I read about on this long thread that might be realistic. My kids love to play "driving". While right now they cannot get out of their carseats, if they learn (and they are clever monkeys, I can tell you) they can easily climb into the front seat, try to start the car or - most likely scenario - try to get out of the car. And having children under age 4 in a parking lot of a 7-11 unsupervised is a horrifying vision.


----------



## blessed

That's true.

Maybe it's surprising but I didn't see any reports of kids just exiting the car and then being hit in a parking lot, for instance. But that does seem like something to worry about.


----------



## PGTlatte

Yup, it happened to our DS too, about a month ago, as I described in a previous post here. It was our neighbor's 2005 Toyota Sienna, which is the exact same model and year as ours. It is supposed to be "impossible" to get it out of park without the keys in....but their 5-yo did it and both kids got a surprise ride across the street on a busy corner. Thank goodness they were not hit by a car coming around the corner.

I think the kidsincars website is excellent. BTW it is a non-profit group, so I do not believe they exist just to raise paranoia to market products. Looking through the incidents, I found it very interesting that many of the incidents involved children who had gotten into unlocked cars that were not running without anyone knowing they were in there.

Caroline248, do you know where I can check on other reports of minvans with this problem ? Toyota claimed this had not ever been reported with this van. I tried to yank our van out of park and couldn't do it.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Caroline248* 

The past May though, my son was one of "THOSE" kids that got the not-running car into gear (WITHOUT TURNING THE KEYS AND WITHOUT REACHING THE BRAKE PEDAL) and backed it out of the garage into the street. It slammed into a parked car. He was sitting in the front seat while I loaded the otehr kids in. I had no idea he could do that.

........ you should make sure yours isn't one of the minivans without the WORKING safety feature that keeps it in park without running. With my van (Ford Windstar) you can jiggle the gear shift hard enough to get it to slip out of gear.


----------



## LilyGrace

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dubfam* 
And so many fear based products to market!! There is some money to be made...

I don't see anything on that website that convinces me that it is dangerous to leave a child in the scenario like what is described in the OP.

I would like to see how many kids have died as a result of being left asleep, strapped into a car seat, in plain sight of the caregiver in a locked vehicle that is not running and does not have keys in it for less than 3 minutes. Because that is what we are talking about here. I just don't see what the big deal is!


I was reading one of the stories under "miscellaneous" that seemed to fit this. A 9mo, left alone in the car for under 4 minutes while her mom ran inside the grocery, became tangled in a carseat strap and strangled herself.

That seems to fit almost exactly within the scenario given.

Again, can see and is watching are two different things, and I wouldn't want to risk my child's life so needlessly or give myself a false sense of security that could come back to bite me in the butt.


----------



## mamazee

from the Kids In Cars website:

Quote:

More than 80 percent of these fatalities result from hot weather or back over accidents.

* Hot and cold weather: The temperature inside a car can reach deadly levels within minutes, even with the windows open a little. Heat exhaustion, hypothermia and even death can occur.
* Backing up: It's difficult for drivers to see small children when they back up. Cross-view mirrors and backup detection devices can help drivers see the rear of their vehicle.
So, in 2006 (last full year) there were 132 fatalities. Over 80 percent, or at least 106, were from the above scenarios, which aren't relevant in the situation above. Every other circumstance involving children playing in and around cars is included in the other 20 or so fatalities. That includes kids playing hide and seek and using the trunk to hide, kids being left in the car for a great deal of time and/or with the car running and/or being out of sight, older children (we were talking babies and toddlers) playing and actually trying to drive, etc. The risk of the scenario mentioned in the OP is pretty non-existent.

If you have a pool, a gun, or even cleaning supplies, stairs, or a stove, you have greater much great risks in your own home than the scenario in the OP.


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LilyGrace* 
Again, can see and is watching are two different things, and I wouldn't want to risk my child's life so needlessly or give myself a false sense of security that could come back to bite me in the butt.

And no one is saying you should do anything you're not comfortable with. Other parents just want the same respect and space to make their own decisions.

The scary thing is, couldn't the 9mo have also choked herself on her carseat strap while mom was driving and thought she was asleep? Aren't some children still rear-facing at this age? I'm not saying I'd feel comfortable leaving my baby to go into a grocery store -- but this seems like a case where something was wrong with the carseat strap, for her to be capable of strangling herself with it.

My girls are both forward-facing now, but this incident makes me realize I want to make very sure, for long car-trips, that there's nothing in reach that my toddler could choke herself with. Also if we have another baby, that baby would of course be rear-facing and this would definitely be a concern.


----------



## Glaciers&Fossils

Personally, I would not feel comfortable leaving my children in the car while I went into a convenience store but it does not sound as though the children in the OP were in harm's way. That poor au pair! I would be crying too if I got chewed out by a total stranger.









Quote:


Originally Posted by *mammal_mama* 
I believe there's a reason why other people's children are other people's children: God didn't intend for ME to parent them. I certainly have enough to do/think about parenting my own.

Good philosophy. I agree!


----------



## Missinnyc

Quote:

I also remind myself of the idea that if I wouldnt leave a $50 bill on the dashboard, then I also wouldnt leave my children.
This doesn't really hold water, though. I live in the most dangerous city in this country, IIRC, and I wouldn't leave change in my car, let alone a 50. Cars are broken into all the time for cigarettes.

But kids run up and down the street until 1am or later, and no one hurts them. It's just culturally ok for kids to have almost no supervision, and kids are kidnapped here less often than in a suburban area. I bet I could leave my kids sleeping on the porch every night for 2 weeks, and they'd be fine (before you call CPS, of course I'm not going to). Money is a more valuable commodity in many places and to many people than children. It's a rare person who want to harm children, but most people like money.


----------



## North_Of_60

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LilyGrace* 
I was reading one of the stories under "miscellaneous" that seemed to fit this. A 9mo, left alone in the car for under 4 minutes while her mom ran inside the grocery, became tangled in a carseat strap and strangled herself.

I'm trying to figure out how this could possibly happen. If my daughter is strapped in properly - snug fit with the shoulders straps where you can't pinch the slack in the shoulders, with the clip up high by the arm pits - there is no way she can _loosen_ the straps, which would require her to lean forward and depress the button between her feet. She just can't reach it. She is at an age where she *might* be able to unfasten the clip, but I have yet to see her do it, and she certainly wouldn't have been able to do it at 9 months. Furthermore, even if she did, she'd have to do some funky contortionist moves to be able to get her head into the straps and her body outside the shell of the seat to _strangle_ herself. If I take her out of her seat without lengthening the straps first, they are SHORT.

My conclusion was that she either had a faulty car seat, or she did not have her child properly buckle in, in which case this has ZERO to do with leaving the child alone, and everything to do with user-error. The child could have done the same thing while she was driving.


----------



## North_Of_60

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MissinNYC* 
This doesn't really hold water, though. I live in the most dangerous city in this country, IIRC, and I wouldn't leave change in my car, let alone a 50. Cars are broken into all the time for cigarettes.

Yeah, the criminal who _targets_ children and the criminal who _targets_ loose change, purses, and cigarettes, are totally different. The people who will punch out a window to steal a purse or cell phone are statistically not likely to deliberately kidnap a child.


----------



## LilyGrace

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
I'm trying to figure out how this could possibly happen. If my daughter is strapped in properly - snug fit with the shoulders straps where you can't pinch the slack in the shoulders, with the clip up high by the arm pits - there is no way she can _loosen_ the straps, which would require her to lean forward and depress the button between her feet. She just can't reach it. She is at an age where she *might* be able to unfasten the clip, but I have yet to see her do it, and she certainly wouldn't have been able to do it at 9 months. Furthermore, even if she did, she'd have to do some funky contortionist moves to be able to get her head into the straps and her body outside the shell of the seat to _strangle_ herself. If I take her out of her seat without lengthening the straps first, they are SHORT.

My conclusion was that she either had a faulty car seat, or she did not have her child properly buckle in, in which case this has ZERO to do with leaving the child alone, and everything to do with user-error. The child could have done the same thing while she was driving.

Or it could have been an unused tether strap. If the child had done the same thing while she was driving, there probably would have been noise - a wheezing at the least.


----------



## hipmummy

I cannot believe this is still going......


----------



## felix23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LilyGrace* 
I was reading one of the stories under "miscellaneous" that seemed to fit this. A 9mo, left alone in the car for under 4 minutes while her mom ran inside the grocery, became tangled in a carseat strap and strangled herself.

That seems to fit almost exactly within the scenario given.

Again, can see and is watching are two different things, and I wouldn't want to risk my child's life so needlessly or give myself a false sense of security that could come back to bite me in the butt.

I remember reading once in my local newspaper about a baby that got strangled in the carseat stap while the mom was driving. They were listening to a children's tape and she didn't hear her gasping. She also had the straps too loose on her carseat. Maybe we should make it illegal to listen to music in the car while with a child because of this one instance.







: Freak accidents can happen at any time and any place.


----------



## mlec

Quote:


Originally Posted by *candiland* 
I personally think there is a happy medium in all things.

Now the pendulum has swung to the opposite extreme.... where common sense isn't allowed to dictate that there are some circumstances where the "rules" can bend a bit. Now we're seeing a generation of kids so overprotected they are like animals in cages afraid of their own shadows.


----------



## ElliesMomma

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hipmummy* 
I cannot believe this is still going......

yeah, it's like people are trying to convince themselves they're right, by repeating the same points over and over...


----------



## DaffyDaphne

Oops


----------



## DaffyDaphne

Quote:


Originally Posted by *punkrawkmama27* 
It doesnt matter. I just read a thread on here about someone reporting a mother to CPS, and CPS responding because she is not in a "normal marriage" and CPS is investigating to see if she is a fit mother! And in some states it is against the law, or even if it isnt law enforcement can choose to do what they feel is right in certain situations:
http://www.lawlib.state.ma.us/2006/0...-car.htmldwhat

http://www.kidsandcars.org/incidents...idsinCars.html

http://www.ci.aliso-viejo.ca.us/files/kaitlins_law.pdf

Those appear to be laws that would make it illegal to leave a child under the age of 6 from being left unattended in a car.

Even if it is not illegal I still would not chance it.

Some things are facts, not opinions. It is a *fact* that it is NOT illegal in the majority of states in the union (and in most foreign countries) to leave a child in the car for a short amount of time (barring the heat issue). Where it is illegal it is because of *state* law, not *federal*, so that state's law does not transfer to any other jurisdiction. Because it's illegal in, say, California, need not concern the parent in North Carolina.


----------



## DaffyDaphne

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meg Murry.* 
Both disguise and soften the realities to make them *palpable* -- even glamorous -- for the servant and for the mistress or master.

I'm pretty sure you mean palatable.


----------



## 3boobykins

Quote:


Originally Posted by *felix23* 
I remember reading once in my local newspaper about a baby that got strangled in the carseat stap while the mom was driving. They were listening to a children's tape and she didn't hear her gasping. She also had the straps too loose on her carseat. Maybe we should make it illegal to listen to music in the car while with a child because of this one instance.







: Freak accidents can happen at any time and any place.

If these were the actual STRAPS that go over the baby's shoulders, they would have to be EXTREMELY loose for the baby to strangle. The current test for tightness is that they should not be able to be pinched together between thumb and finger. There is no way a baby could strangle in the straps if she was properly restrained.


----------



## pigpokey

What the Kids in Cars and law-seeking people need to understand is that kids have freak accidents in cars and outside of cars. By simply providing anecdotes and counts of the number of times a chidl has been hurt or hurt someone in a car, you cannot tell how many children would have been hurt or hurt someone else outside the car.


----------



## felix23

Quote:


Originally Posted by *3boobykins* 
If these were the actual STRAPS that go over the baby's shoulders, they would have to be EXTREMELY loose for the baby to strangle. The current test for tightness is that they should not be able to be pinched together between thumb and finger. There is no way a baby could strangle in the straps if she was properly restrained.

This was probably in the mid to late 80's that this happened. I don't remember any of the details on what type of straps they were, just that they were way too loose and the baby got caught in them. I just remember my parents talking about what a horrible tradgedy it was and making sure my baby sister's straps were tight enough. I agree with you, if your child is properly restrained, then you don't need to worry about them strangling in the straps. My dd is properly restrained and I make sure that there is nothing around that she could possible choke/strangle on, so I have no problem leaving her in a locked car on a mild day for less than three minutes while I pay for gas.


----------



## karina5

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meg Murry.* 
Hopefully, I can explain. It is indeed more respectful, but it is inaccurate, and both are part of the same problem.
It is "respectful" to call a servant an au pair in the same way and for the same reason as it is "respectful" to call a slave a "house worker" in the context I cited from _GWTW_.

Both disguise and soften the realities to make them palpable -- even glamorous -- for the servant and for the mistress or master. It's the same logic that softens "firing" by calling it "reduction in force" or the logic that makes killing human beings palpable by calling it "termination of opposing troop forces." There are many examples of how we disguise unpleasant realities from ourselves in order to perpetuate those realities. I just don't want to cop to it because it helps to exploit people.


I agree, of course, that exploiting people is wrong, but it seems that a person that continues to call someone a "servant" when that person is paid well, treated respectfully, has benefits, a college degree, is sort of the one being disrespectful to said "servant."


----------



## dubfam

It keeps Going and Going...Will this thread NEVER Die?? Is there anything that hasn't already been said?









Of course I keep participating so I guess I am part of the problem


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ElliesMomma* 
yeah, it's like people are trying to convince themselves they're right, by repeating the same points over and over...

Well, surely anyone who's not interested can just un-sub, right? There's no need to criticize others for still being interested.


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dubfam* 
It keeps Going and Going...Will this thread NEVER Die?? Is there anything that hasn't already been said?









Of course I keep participating so I guess I am part of the problem









Yeah, you and me both! I guess we just enjoy persuading ourselves, over and over, that we're right, huh?!


----------



## Ocean2

A month ago, I would have said what the OP stated occured was no big deal.
However, I ran in to get a few things in a town of only 5500 people leaving my 4 and 6 year old in the car. They were tired since we had played for an hour and a half at a botanical garden. So I said, 'alright, I'll be back in a minute."
I took my one year old out of her seat, went in, got my things, came out put my bag in the car and the baby and pulled out. A cop appeared and charged me with child endangerment. Seems a very elderly woman had seen me go in and called the police. The officer didn't get there until after I was already leaving.
There is no law in Ohio. I had no idea you could be charged with anything for running in for a few minutes. It was not hot, a mild Oct day and I locked my doors. I know it would have been more dangerous to get my 4 year old out. She was whining about having to walk more and obviously I can't carry a 1 and 4 year old and hold a 6 year old's hand.

So now if convicted, I will lose my Registered Nursing license and even though my husband and I have already completed foster parenting classes to adopt a foster child, some foster child will not have a home.

This has destroyed my life! I also AP, my baby who just turned one is still breastfeeding, I nursed my other 2 until they were 2.5 years old. So if convicted, I could be in jail for 6 months. I'm wondering if they allow breast pumps in jail? I have never been in trouble with the law, we don't smoke or drink or use drugs. We feed our kids an organic, vegetarian diet. I try to do everything I can to care for my kids. I had not started working yet, but was planning to and now, my college education was for nothing.

The prosecutor told me that if ever there was a case to dismissed, it was this one, but then stated, "but I don't dismiss cases." So he would rather ruin my entire life..

Anyhow, sorry to carry on. This just happened last week and I am still shocked and devastated.

So even though it is probably safer than taking your kids in, PLEASE take them in with you because you can be charged with a felony by leaving a kid in a car for a few minutes.


----------



## dubfam

That sounds like a VERY unusual situation.

One of the benefits to living in a big city is that the authorities have real problems on their hands, and would never worry about something as trivial as leaving your kid in the ca for a couple minutes. We don't even have the jail and courtroom resources to prosecute and jail the real criminals.

Also, how can they call it child endangerment if nothing happened and there is no law against it?

I guess it would have to do with being in a small town, where the cops etc are just sitting around waiting for something to do.


----------



## mammal_mama

Ocean 2, please come back to update us, won't you? I'm rooting for you: I'll be extremely shocked if anything like jail-time actually comes of this.

I'll also be shocked if you lose your nursing or foster-care license!


----------



## TCMoulton

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hipmummy* 
*Excuse me but it is good thing I called the police one of the persons because it was an ex Dh who was not even supposed to have his children and the Mother had no idea he was with them.* The second one forgot the time and realized she had been in the store for over 20 minutes. This is in an urban area, not a small town.
Also my dh after ds's birth two days no sleep rear ended a car with a seven year old in and mom had been gone for over 10 minutes but had said she be back in 2!! Dh waited but the police came because someone else called about the fender bender.


So we should call the police on all children left unattended in cars even for just a moment just in case the adult with the children is the non-custodial parent who just happens to be in the process of kidnapping his children? Give me a break.


----------



## Storm Bride

I've only read the first page...

I'd far rather leave my kids in a locked car, in my visual range, long enough to grab some milk than drag them out of the car and into a parking lot. Parking lots are way more dangerous than a locked car, especially to a small child who is too short for other drivers to see, but nobody thinks twice about taking kids into them. I leave dd in the van while I run ds2 into the house all the time...better that than take a chance on running out into the parking lot and getting hit by a car.

Of course, I'm sure the yelling stranger benefited the OP's children tremendously. I think that verbally lambasting the driver of the car the kids are in is the obvious way to make sure the kids are safe...or possibly...not??


----------



## Rylins mama

I dont see anything wrong with it butI dont know how Id feel about someone besides me leaving my baby in the car.

We live on a very small island in Alaska that has just been named a "Coast Guard town" so I have a few times gotten out of the car and locked it with my daughter sleeping to run and grab something. I dont think I would ever do it anywhere besides here but I dont know. The only way on and off this island is by ferry or plane and the crime rate here is pretty much at 0 so there really is nothing to worry about.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LilyGrace* 
I was reading one of the stories under "miscellaneous" that seemed to fit this. A 9mo, left alone in the car for under 4 minutes while her mom ran inside the grocery, became tangled in a carseat strap and strangled herself.

That seems to fit almost exactly within the scenario given.

Scary stuff, but...

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mammal_mama* 
The scary thing is, couldn't the 9mo have also choked herself on her carseat strap while mom was driving and thought she was asleep? Aren't some children still rear-facing at this age? I'm not saying I'd feel comfortable leaving my baby to go into a grocery store -- but this seems like a case where something was wrong with the carseat strap, for her to be capable of strangling herself with it.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
My conclusion was that she either had a faulty car seat, or she did not have her child properly buckle in, in which case this has ZERO to do with leaving the child alone, and everything to do with user-error. The child could have done the same thing while she was driving.

...this is also absolutely true.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LilyGrace* 
Or it could have been an unused tether strap. If the child had done the same thing while she was driving, there probably would have been noise - a wheezing at the least.

Maybe there would have been a noise. If the child is rear-facing, the mom wouldn't necessarily have known anything was wrong. My kids make noise all the time while I'm driving. If the child choked to death in under 4 minutes, then it could have easily happened while the mom was driving...and depending on the circumstances, there's absolutely no guarantee that the mom could have done anything about it. There are places where pulling over safely is nearly impossible. I'd guess that the most likely scenario would have been that the mom would have arrived at her destination and found her baby dead. Something went very wrong there.


----------



## rharr!

I don't know if any one has mentioned this,but, what if you have a freak accident while your child is locked in your car?

I once was about to lock dd in the car(in her seat) while I stepped 3 spots over to the cart spot. Then Irealised that if a car went out of control or a hole opened up or some other freak occurance happened, dd would be all alone in the car and no one would know to check for her








That is why I don't leave kids alone in a vehicle- ya just never know.


----------



## spedteacher30

there was a case recently near me where a cell phone charger left plugged into the cigarette lighter caught on fire, even though the car was turned off and the keys were not in the ignition.

for some strange reason, the van door was open while it sat in the driveway, and two little girls were playing in it.

One of them was airlifted to ICU.

I personally would not leave my child out of my sightline in a car.

I do leave him in the carseat while I check the mail or go to the ATM (pull up to the firelane next to the machine). I feel that there are times when the potential risk from standing that close to traffic (the mailbox) or possibly running off and into the street while I am endorsing a check are greater than the risk of being in the car, 5 steps away from me.


----------



## SillyLilStinkweed

Some people are just looking for it, I feel. I left dd's favorite toy in a small shoe store. I called and the woman said she would leave it on the counter by the cash register. I pulled up in the handicapped parking space right in front of the store, at the same time that another woman pulled up 2 spaces down. DD was crying and she saw me get out of my car and RUN in. The doors were propped open, and the store was small. I was about 15 feet from dd. I was in the store for only 10 SECONDS, and when I came out, she was standing beside my car, looking right in and gave me a dirty look. I think she was bored and just had her mind set on a situation that never really came about. I almost think she was bummed out that it wasn't worse, so that she could tell me off.

I'd do the same as well, but only because it was a 711, she could still see the car and was only gone for 30 seconds and only because it was 60 degrees out and she was parked in shade.


----------



## Ocean2

Hi,
Yes I will let you know the end result of this. I have contacted several lawyers who said that the police cannot prove anything. However, we don't have $10K or more to pay for a lawyer. The prosecuter said, 'I would NEVER leave my kids in a car for a few minutes." I wanted to ask, 'when did this become about personal opinion? I would NEVER circumcise my kids."
However, he was so rude and would not let me say anything. He attempted to belittle me and treat me like I was an idiot.
He did 'offer' a plea deal. He said they would reduce the charge to disorderly conduct, which the entire situation has NOTHING to do with that. He stated that ,"you just can't leave a 4 and 6 year old in a car, you just can't. You need to be punished in some way."
Prior to this instance, I would have never fathomed the possibility that I could be put in a position like this. I now realize how many persons slip through the cracks in our judicial system who are truly innocent.
The fact remains that obviously the prosecuter thinks this is a somewhat ridiculous case. He yelled at me at one point, "I just want to HEAR you say you were wrong." i think he needs this tidbit of info in order to 'get' me in court. I simply replied evenly, "I did not endanger my kids."

I agree that in larger cities, the police are doing important things! Any charge I have read about pertaining to a parent leaving a child in a car, the temperature has been hot and it's usually for at least 30 minutes and the police are there before the parent so they have 'proof'. None of these applied in my situation.

Anyhow, it's the Board of Nursing who would take my license. Any conviction of child endangerment in Ohio causes you to be unemployable (because it's a VERY serious charge). Plus I have spent my entire career (I'm only 28 though =) in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit which is with babies, so the charge would be even worse considering where I work.

If anyone would like to write this prosecuter, or call him and ask him to drop the charge, just e-mail me and I can give you his info. I need all the help I can get in this horrible situation!
take care!!


----------



## maya44

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meg Murry.* 
Sorry, but I refuse to perpetuate the use of a euphemism whose primary purpose is to disguise from both master and servant the nature of the job being performed, the enormity of the economic disparity that goes with it, and the attendant powerlessness and frequent exploitation of this job. OBVIOUSLY not everyone is exploited -- and the same is true of other professions in which there is frequent exploitation, such as prostitution -- but exploitation, as other posters have pointed out, is fairly rampant.

I refuse to subscribe to a term that lends some air of artificial glamour to this profession. "Au pair" sounds adorably French, as if one went around in a starched black-and-white uniform carrying little hatboxes from Fauchon. "Nanny" has the lovely English glamour of Mary Poppins and makes one sound Earl Grey efficient. The reality for most servants is quite different.

None of my au pairs had much "economic disparity" from us. Our Au Pairs were Students from upper middle class homes in Spain and (from an upper class home) in Mexico. Their parents were respecitively, Doctor, Lawyer, School Principal, Artist and Business Owner.

Like many young people they were in a work/study program. They were here to learn the language so that they could continue to pursue their profession as teachers/school administrators at the highest levels. (All of my Au Pairs were studying at the college level to be teachers)

They took college classes here (Which is REQUIRED UNDER FEDERAL LAW for all real au pairs) and babysat for my kids a few hours per day as part of the program. They recieved room and board, full health benefits and paid time off including vacations. They spent their time off at school or going out with friends.


----------



## dubfam

Quote:


Originally Posted by *spedteacher30* 
there was a case recently near me where a cell phone charger left plugged into the cigarette lighter caught on fire, even though the car was turned off and the keys were not in the ignition.

for some strange reason, the van door was open while it sat in the driveway, and two little girls were playing in it.

One of them was airlifted to ICU.


And I would imagine it took a lot more than three minutes for the van to be up in flames from an small electrical fire. You are talking about children playing, unsupervised in a vehicle.
Totally different from children sleeping in a vehicle that the adult is watching.


----------



## Zach'smom

Ocean2- It seems that since the death of the little girl left in the car in Clermont county ( we live in Ohio in the county next to Clermont) everyone around here is watching for people who have left children in the car. There are a lot of very angry people that the Mother wasn't charged with anything. I wouldn't leave a child of any age in a car for a second around here these days.


----------



## Ocean2

Zach'smom,
It was a very sad case about that little girl. She was 2 I believe. It's fine if the town where I live wants to slap me on the wrist and say don't do it again, even though I had no idea you could not leave a 4 and 6 y/o in a car for minutes. Obviously I would have never done so if I knew I was about to lose everything. It seems a bit ridiculous to me that they want to put me in jail, fine me $1000 and of course, like I mentioned, everything that I've worked for in my entire life will be gone. I'm sure it will be great for my children for me to have to go back to college right now and get another degree in something that I won't need a license for.
My husband and I are seriously considering moving back to California, where we moved to Ohio from just last year. In California, you can leave in kid in a car for a little bit if the car is not running or keys are not in a car or if the conditions won't harm the health of the child. If you violate these, they still aren't going to charge you with a felony, you get a $100 fine, but you aren't considered a 'criminal' like where I am currently.

I though it was logical to surmise that since Ohio does not have law, it wasn't illegal. Last Tuesday, I followed the California law to a 'T'.

Sigh....If the prosecutor won't drop it, then I will be on 'probation' for 6 months and have a 'record'. I'm afraid to nurse my baby in public now as well. She is one and we all know that one year olds constantly try to take the blanket off of their head. I can just see someone calling the police for "indecent exposure".

anyhow,take care,
Rachel


----------



## mamatoablessing

Ocean2 - I couldn't read this thread w/o offering hugs and support. I am so sorry this is happening to you. I would like to believe that prosecuters in ANY city have better and more important things to do than to pick on someone like you. Considering there is no law, specific to leaving your child unattended in a vehicle, I don't understand how you broke any law? Good luck and please keep us posted.


----------



## Ocean2

Thanks mama2ablessing,
it means alot to me that others don't think I'm a 'criminal'. When I was in court last week, I heard other cases since I was waiting (I asked for a continuance for more time so I go back next week), there were many people who had either a DUI or theft or whatever. Only one or 2 got jail time, the others were just fined. It seems so ridiculous to me that I am now a 'criminal'?
I am going to write the police dept and the prosecutor (since he would not let me talk and the person who hired the prosecutor to complain. This man was extremely rude! My husband said that a man sitting near him had a question for the prosecutor and was very rude to him as well. The man turned to the police officer who was overseeing everything and said, "Is he always this rude and mean to people?". I tried to tell the prosecutor that i could see the kids the entire time I was in line (which was the majority of the time) and he interupted yelling, "OH so your going to sit here and TELL me that you could see your car. Is that what you are going to say, COME ON!"

Even though there is no law, I was told that they consider it "child endangerment". The prosecutor told me that "what if a person hits your parked car?" Then said, "I know that is far fetched, but..." um, yeah, it is. Besides my kids were in their car seats and how fast can you go in a parking lot???
The police dept said, "what if your car blows up?" I suppose it is quite common for vehicles to spontaneously combust! I had the keys with me for goodness sakes!
Anyhow, my homebirth midwife is writing a letter as well and she has forwarded my e-mail to many people. So hopefully the prosecuter will see that many people are watching this case closely.
thanks for your support!
take care!


----------



## siobhang

Ocean2, you need a lawyer. I know it seems like a huge expense, but compared to losing your ability to practice your profession or the cost of going back to school to get a new one and the long term stigma of being considered a criminal, it is reasonable.

You should be getting one free if you cannot afford one, but really find a way to get a lawyer. This is ridiculous and a good lawyer can make sure a judge sees it that way.


----------



## Ocean2

Hi Siobhang,
I have contacted 2 lawyers and a magistrate that my aunt and uncle know (who works in the judicial system in my town) and ALL have told me that this is outrageous and I was not endangering my kids. My only concern is that if I pay 10 or 15 thousand dollars, what if I don't win? What if the judge decides that i need to be an "example"?
The prosecutor decided on Thursday that he would also let me have a 'plea bargain' on disorderly conduct instead. I have no idea how it correlates, but he said it is a lesser charge. Or he would do a diversion program for the child endangerment (because he realizes this is idiotic).

he stated that 'I realize that this wasn't as serious as most child endangerment, but you still must be punished. you just can't leave a 4 and 6 year old in a car. if I let you off, then I'll have to do it for everyone."

So I assume to help him justify himself, he so kindly 'offered' the diversion program. However, the board of nursing does not care about the diversion program, for my license I still must write any conviction regardless of a diversion program. Also, for a disorderly conduct, some boards of nursing are Ok, they might fine you extra or whatever some aren't. the Ohio board of nursing won't say whether they will let you or not. I've read that some will allow you to practice as an RN, but not an advanced practice RN. I had decided that when my kids are older (like youngest is in first grade) that I was going to get my masters to either be a nurse practitioner or nurse anesthetist. Plus, who knows in a few years if any boards of nursing will allow persons with a misdemeanor to practice at all. I might still be able to be an RN in california, but it would mean selling our house that we just purchased a year ago and moving 2500 miles away from family and friends again.

I have a friend who graduated from Standford law school a few years ago and she obviously thinks this is outrageous, but she also said that she finds no correlation with the disorderly conduct and child endangerment.

Anyhow, I am off to obtain a copy of the police report. I was told that this police officer is fairly new (obviously) and I want to be sure he wrote the facts correctly. If he didn't, I would assume this can be thrown out. For example, I know that he didn't see the kids alone in the car because I was out there before he arrived since I was inside for such a short time. If he writes that he saw the kids in the car or whatever, I will just acquire a copy of the security tape.
Anyhow,
I will see what I can find out and if I can find enough relatives to borrow $ if needed.
Take care!!!


----------



## BoringTales

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rharr!* 
I don't know if any one has mentioned this,but, what if you have a freak accident while your child is locked in your car?

I once was about to lock dd in the car(in her seat) while I stepped 3 spots over to the cart spot. Then Irealised that if a car went out of control or a hole opened up or some other freak occurance happened, dd would be all alone in the car and no one would know to check for her








That is why I don't leave kids alone in a vehicle- ya just never know.

Do you shower while there are no other adults in your home? What if you slipped and fell while in the shower? What if you had some kind of health emergency while alone with your kids. If you follow this line of thinking no one should ever be alone while in the care of children "just in case".

Freak accidents can occur at anytime...


----------



## 93085

Just adding my observation here...

For me the greatest danger in leaving kids alone in a car is not abduction or freak accidents, but interior temperature of the car. It is mysterious and frightening to me how quickly and how high the temperature inside of a car can rise, even on a cool day. For that reason, I don't dare leave my kids in a car with the windows closed, even if it's below freezing out, not even for a minute. And so because, with the windows open, they'd be more accessible to passersby than I'm comfortable with, that means that I pretty much don't leave them alone in the car. I'd skip the coffee, pay at the pump, go out of my way to go to a drive-through ATM. The only time I've "left" either kid in the car is when they're fast asleep and we're home and it's mild weather. Then I'll roll down the windows, park in the driveway, slip out of my seat and go relax on the porch about 20 feet away. Hmm, I guess I also leave them momentarily as I unload groceries into the house. Even then, the back hatch is open so they're getting plenty of fresh air.


----------



## Ocean2

Jescafa,
With humidity a car can heat up pretty quickly. In my instance, I knew it wouldn't heat up in less than 10 minutes because we had just gotten into the van that had been sitting in a parking lot at the gardens for an hour and a half and it was not hot. It was sitting in the sun as well. I had long pants on and a short sleeved shirt and I did not even turn the air on once we got in to head over to the store.
My son also had long pants on and the girls each wore a dress and had a jacket.

For anyone who is interested, I did obtain a copy of the Police Report and the officer stated, "They (the 4 and 6.5 year old) did not appear to be in distress, in fact they were smiling and looked happy."

OK, this just makes me more upset. I am glad that the cop didn't lie and was fair, but the fact that they had no evidence to charge me with???

Anyhow,
take care!!!


----------



## mammal_mama

I just have a feeling this is all going to be resolved (in your favor) way faster than you think. I DEFINITELY wouldn't do any kind of a plea bargain. You know, and everyone concerned knows, that you did nothing wrong. I hope the case is dropped before you have to go in debt for a lawyer -- but if not, I agree with Siobhang that it's worth the cost to keep your career and your good reputation.


----------



## mammal_mama

Oh, and maybe the judge just feels pressured to act like he takes these cases "seriously," because of the tragedy with the 2yo girl.


----------



## Steady101

Quote:


Originally Posted by *aran* 
I'm going to have to disagree with the PPs and say that I think the au pair was just plain wrong to leave the kids alone. I would not have been comfortable if my nanny did that. I wouldn't worry about heat in the scenario you described, but about not being able to get to them quickly in case of an emergency, or mistakenly locking keys in the car, or one of the kids waking up and being scared and confused.

In my state it is illegal for licensed family daycare providers to leave a child unattended in a car... at all. I know that's not the same as an au pair, but the concept is the same.

If it were me, I'd wait until my boys woke up and go in all together (since we're going to the park anyhow... they need to wake up for that) or go through the Dunkin Doughnuts drive thru for water/milk, or I would have foregone the drinks.

I agree. I would never leave my child in the car alone for any amount of time.


----------



## Ocean2

Mammal mama,
Thanks, I hope so. I haven't typed them yet, but I have written a letter to both the police chief and the prosecuter. No matter how this is resolved, I am going to write a letter to the prosecutor's superior for the extremely rude behavior he exhibited.

If he doesn't dismiss it, I may take the plea bargain. I'm just afraid, "what if" the judge decides to make an example of me. Then I will be worse off and will probably have to go to jail. I now understand COMPLETELY how innocent people end up in prision. It is so sad. As a law abiding citizen, I would have never comprehended myself to be in this situation. I also grew up in a very small town and many people left their small kids and babies in a car with the windows down. Since I have researched this topic extensively now I have found that in some states, you must be 14 to be home alone! 14!!!!! I was babysitting children aged 6 months when I was 12. I'm 28 that wasn't THAT long ago. It amazes me.

My parents (who are both teachers by the way) left me at home alone with my younger sister when I was 8 if they needed to go to the store briefly or something. I suppose nowadays, she would be arrested and myself and my siblings would be in CPS custody. It's ridiculous.

Another thing on the police report. When the witness called about the kids in my car, they guessed that they were both under the age of 4! My 6.5 year old is 4 feet tall. He's pretty tall for his height. I've never met a 3 year old who is 48 inches! My 4 year old is 42 inches tall. I'm guessing that since we require our kids to be in booster seats, she wrongly 'assumed' that they were under 4 since that is the 'law' in Ohio.
I suppose I could start calling the police on parents who don't have their children in a booster seat if they are over the age of 4!
I feel a bit better today and have even been able to eat a little better, I am so emaciated from not being able to eat from the stress.

Anyhow, keep praying, I know that God can and does make miracles!

Take care!!


----------



## Daffodil

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jescafa* 
It is mysterious and frightening to me how quickly and how high the temperature inside of a car can rise, even on a cool day. For that reason, I don't dare leave my kids in a car with the windows closed, even if it's below freezing out, not even for a minute.

I think a lot of people nowadays have this sense that a car can mysteriously and unexpectedly heat up to lethal temperatures within a few minutes, even in the shade, even if it's cold out. But the way a car heats up is really not so unpredictable as that, and there's no need to be quite so scared about it. Certainly it's true that a closed car can quickly become much warmer than the outside, especially in the sun, and certainly it's good to err on the side of caution if you're not sure how hot the car will get. But it's simply not possible for a car to get dangerously hot in a few minutes on a below-freezing day.


----------



## 93085

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Daffodil* 
I think a lot of people nowadays have this sense that a car can mysteriously and unexpectedly heat up to lethal temperatures within a few minutes, even in the shade, even if it's cold out. But the way a car heats up is really not so unpredictable as that, and there's no need to be quite so scared about it. Certainly it's true that a closed car can quickly become much warmer than the outside, especially in the sun, and certainly it's good to err on the side of caution if you're not sure how hot the car will get. But it's simply not possible for a car to get dangerously hot in a few minutes on a below-freezing day.

I get that, I really do--it's just that I personally don't know how to predict at what point it will become unsafe, so I just can't bring myself to take the risk. Kind of like drinking while pregnant--I know that a small amount is probably fine, and a large amount is definitely not fine, so for the most part (I admit to a few sips of wine last holiday season), I just don't do it. I didn't mean for my post to sound prescriptive; I was just explaining my own thought process and where I draw the line.


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jescafa* 
I get that, I really do--it's just that I personally don't know how to predict at what point it will become unsafe, so I just can't bring myself to take the risk. Kind of like drinking while pregnant--I know that a small amount is probably fine, and a large amount is definitely not fine, so for the most part (I admit to a few sips of wine last holiday season), I just don't do it. I didn't mean for my post to sound prescriptive; I was just explaining my own thought process and where I draw the line.

Right, but have you ever just sat in your car, balancing your checkbook or reading a letter, on a comfortable (not hot) day without opening a window? In that 2 minutes, has the car ever become dangerously hot, to the point where it could have killed you or even caused you discomfort?

I'm not saying you _should_ leave a sleeping child in the car for a minute, while you unload groceries or whatever, if that's not something you personally are comfortable with. I just have a problem with people presuming to make that call for other parents.

The sleeping child/grocery issue is something I've never personally had to deal with, since my dh enjoys shopping for groceries and does most or all of this while we have a baby or young toddler. But I'm aware that some mothers have to juggle a lot more than I do, and I don't think it's my place to criticize them.


----------



## 93085

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mammal_mama* 
Right, but have you ever just sat in your car, balancing your checkbook or reading a letter, on a comfortable (not hot) day without opening a window? In that 2 minutes, has the car ever become dangerously hot, to the point where it could have killed you or even caused you discomfort?

Yes, I do that all the time. I have no problem with letting them sleep in a parked car, windows open or shut, as long as I am in there to monitor the temp and make adjustments as necessary. I do realize that there are frequently times when the temp remains totally fine even with the windows closed, I'm just saying I'm not comfortable predicting that if I'm not in the car.

Quote:

I'm not saying you _should_ leave a sleeping child in the car for a minute, while you unload groceries or whatever, if that's not something you personally are comfortable with. I just have a problem with people presuming to make that call for other parents.
Actually, I said I do leave them in the car while I unload groceries, with the hatch open.







And I repeat, I didn't and don't mean to be prescriptive or critical about what anyone else does, I have just been talking about my own comfort level.


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jescafa* 
Actually, I said I do leave them in the car while I unload groceries, with the hatch open.







And I repeat, I didn't and don't mean to be prescriptive or critical about what anyone else does, I have just been talking about my own comfort level.

Oh, sorry, I guess I got your post mixed up with those who WERE being prescriptive and critical. Some things are beyond my comfort-level, too. I'm just a big believer in trusting the parents to be the parents. Sounds like you are, too.

And my stomach turns at the thought of going around parking lots, peering into windows, "just in case" someone left a child in a car. Or watching mothers like a hawk, with my cellphone at the ready. Yes, I realize this might save a life or two. But it seems so intrusive -- and actually seems to cause more suffering than it prevents, judging by what Ocean2 is now having to deal with.


----------



## mammal_mama

Oh, and some people will even go peer into a car, after they've seen a parent and children get out and go into a store, because of their extreme curiosity as to whether each child was really strapped into an appropriate carseat. I suppose this may inadvertently result in a life being saved, if the parent happened to unbuckle everyone else and forget the sleeping baby.

But still, I think it's more likely to cause problems (such as the outraged "good citizen" giving the parent a piece of her mind for not having the right carseat, and adding unpleasantness to that family's day) than it is to save a life.

Intrusiveness is just bad news in my book, even if it sometimes has a positive result.


----------



## 93085

Well, I think I mostly agree with you, but on the other hand, I could see myself lurking to make sure a parent returned and that kids weren't left in a closed-up car too long. I don't think I could bear it if I ended up reading about those kids in the paper the next day. I've never actually done this, and I certainly don't monitor parking lots looking for it, but I could see myself doing it just in the interest of being a good citizen.

There have been a couple of incidents in my town over the last few years in which parents simply forgot that their sleeping babies were in the car--a mistake anyone could make, IMHO. In both cases the children died--and I think the parents would have been grateful if a passerby had noticed what was going on and intervened.


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jescafa* 
Well, I think I mostly agree with you, but on the other hand, I could see myself lurking to make sure a parent returned and that kids weren't left in a closed-up car too long. I don't think I could bear it if I ended up reading about those kids in the paper the next day.

Oh, sure, if I happened to be aware of a sleeping baby/small child alone in a car, I'd definitely wait to make sure the parent came right back -- or run into the store or place of business to have the parent found/summoned if it was taking more than a few minutes.

Quote:

...I certainly don't monitor parking lots looking for it...
Me neither! I could just see the headlines: "Mother and two small children are hit by speeding car while checking parking-lot for endangered children." I've heard somewhere that quite a few accidents occur in parking-lots -- which is possibly why some parents prefer leaving their children in the car while walking a few yards to put away the shopping-cart.


----------



## DaffyDaphne

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rharr!* 
I don't know if any one has mentioned this,but, what if you have a freak accident while your child is locked in your car?

I once was about to lock dd in the car(in her seat) while I stepped 3 spots over to the cart spot. Then Irealised that if a car went out of control or a hole opened up or some other freak occurance happened, dd would be all alone in the car and no one would know to check for her








That is why I don't leave kids alone in a vehicle- ya just never know.

But, if the car went out of control and came to hit you in the parking lot and your children were with you, then THEY'D be hit too! The hole that opened up to swallow you would swallow them, too! This makes no sense to me, I'd rather my kids were locked in a cool, comfortable car than wiped out alongside me by a crazy driver.


----------



## VanessaS

Quote:

I've left my boys safely buckled in their seats to run into a gas station many times. If I can see the car at all times, it isn't too hot outside, and I'll only be a couple of minutes I have no issue with it.
Neither do I.

Quote:

Oh, and some people will even go peer into a car, after they've seen a parent and children get out and go into a store, because of their extreme curiosity as to whether each child was really strapped into an appropriate carseat.
Hmm... Did you know that more babies die every year from the effects of formula (720) than are saved by car seats (451)? And did you know that the infant mortality rate in the US is 5/1000 (out of developed countries, only Latvia is worse) due to a lack of universal health care coverage? Last year 60 children died from being left in a hot car. Those deaths are very tragic but I just wanted to put something in perspective...
Also remember that most of the children who died in the hot cars were there because their caretakers forgot about them or were off gambling or getting drunk. They did not run into 7-eleven for some milk on a cool day.


----------



## Ocean2

VanessaS,
That is what really gets me. Only a handful of children are killed from hyperthermia every year and it is from someone who leaves them whether by accident or intentionally for at least 45 minutes.
I suppose that since children 'have' been abducted from their bedrooms at night, then my children will have to sleep in my bedroom until they are 18 (just to be on the safe side of course).
I don't think leaving a kid in a car for 10 minutes on a cool day or whatever is evidence of 'substaintial' risk as stated in the child endangerment law.
I figure that now I shall have to call the police on any parent who does not require a bicycle helmet for their child when engaged in any activity on wheels. If I see an adult smoking near a minor, I will notify the police, if I see an obese child, then that parent should be charged, ect.
I have read that other countries aren't this psycho about everything. If we don't relocate to San Jose, we are considering leaving the country. My husband can work anywhere since he telecommuntes from home to his job in San Jose right now.
We love to travel as it is, so perhaps it would be a welcome change.


----------



## Storm Bride

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mammal_mama* 
I've heard somewhere that quite a few accidents occur in parking-lots -- which is possibly why some parents prefer leaving their children in the car while walking a few yards to put away the shopping-cart.

That's why I usually put the kids in the van before I return the cart. Before I got into late pregnancy, I would take them with me quite a bit. Now, it's really hard to chase them if they bolt and I can't carry them very far, either. I feel they're much safer spending a minute or two in the locked van than they are in the parking lot, where people are whipping around like lunatics, and backing out without checking for pedestrians (even if they could see my kids, which they couldn't). Maybe inside my minivan isn't the safest place...but it's safer than in front of someone else's minivan.


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ocean2* 
If we don't relocate to San Jose, we are considering leaving the country. My husband can work anywhere since he telecommuntes from home to his job in San Jose right now.
We love to travel as it is, so perhaps it would be a welcome change.

Oh, wow! That sounds like a total dream! Just think of all the really beautiful, low cost-of-living paradises you guys could live in. And you're absolutely right, it would be a welcome change and people focusing on day-to-day living aren't as likely to be into their neighbors' business.


----------



## geek_the_girl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ocean2* 
VanessaS,
That is what really gets me. Only a handful of children are killed from hyperthermia every year and it is from someone who leaves them whether by accident or intentionally for at least 45 minutes.
I suppose that since children 'have' been abducted from their bedrooms at night, then my children will have to sleep in my bedroom until they are 18 (just to be on the safe side of course).
I don't think leaving a kid in a car for 10 minutes on a cool day or whatever is evidence of 'substaintial' risk as stated in the child endangerment law.
I figure that now I shall have to call the police on any parent who does not require a bicycle helmet for their child when engaged in any activity on wheels. If I see an adult smoking near a minor, I will notify the police, if I see an obese child, then that parent should be charged, ect.
I have read that other countries aren't this psycho about everything. If we don't relocate to San Jose, we are considering leaving the country. My husband can work anywhere since he telecommuntes from home to his job in San Jose right now.
We love to travel as it is, so perhaps it would be a welcome change.

ITA with you. Our family is quite reclusive because we dont trust that many people. Everyone is too eager to get up in someone elses business.
Welcome to America-Land of Paranoia.


----------



## Marcee

While I would never leave my children in the car alone, I would also never attack some one for doing it. Talking to someone or giving advice in a kind caring way is one thing but a verbal attack never helps. If anything the message that you are trying to convey gets lost amid all the snark and venom.


----------



## Marcee

I was once seated in the middle seat of our van when my dh was going into the store. My oldest son went in with his dad. While waiting for them to comeback the other boys were getting pretty rambunctious and were bouncing around a bit. A couple of ladies came by and wrote down our license plate number then proceeded to call "Someone' Boy were they surprised when I stuck my head out the door and asked just what they thought they were doing. They hung up the phone quickly and all but ran to the store... Nosey Whack-jobs!!!

But you know where are all these concerned helpers when my kid pukes in the store or I have a flat tire... Funny they never offer to help then...


----------



## blastomom

Haven't made it through all the pages of posts here, but just wanted to say that I was pretty casual about the idea of leaving kids in the car while running in to pay for gas, etc. until I was home in Hawaii a couple of years ago when there was an AMBER alert issued for a baby who was missing--Mom had left baby in the car while she ran in to 7-11 "just for a second" and in the time it took her to pay for whatever, someone stole the truck with baby in it. Luckily a delivery driver found the truck and baby safely in it a few hours later, but that totally changed my mind about leaving kids in cars. This all happened in broad daylight with the truck parked right outside the front door of the 7-11 in full view of everyone.

I'm sorry your au pair was so shaken up (I spent a year as a "foreign" nanny when I was younger), but I would be sure to let her know never to leave the kids alone in the car again.


----------



## pigpokey

Quote:


Originally Posted by *blastomom* 
Haven't made it through all the pages of posts here, but just wanted to say that I was pretty casual about the idea of leaving kids in the car while running in to pay for gas, etc. until I was home in Hawaii a couple of years ago when there was an AMBER alert issued for a baby who was missing--Mom had left baby in the car while she ran in to 7-11 "just for a second" and in the time it took her to pay for whatever, someone stole the truck with baby in it. Luckily a delivery driver found the truck and baby safely in it a few hours later, but that totally changed my mind about leaving kids in cars. This all happened in broad daylight with the truck parked right outside the front door of the 7-11 in full view of everyone.

I'm sorry your au pair was so shaken up (I spent a year as a "foreign" nanny when I was younger), but I would be sure to let her know never to leave the kids alone in the car again.

I do not run my decision-making on anecdotal evidence, although I am influenced by certain traumas and am certainly not all the time completely logical and calculating with what will trigger me. However, this kind of decision making can lead to completely wrong behaviors risk-avoidance wise.


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Marcee* 
I was once seated in the middle seat of our van when my dh was going into the store. My oldest son went in with his dad. While waiting for them to comeback the other boys were getting pretty rambunctious and were bouncing around a bit. A couple of ladies came by and wrote down our license plate number then proceeded to call "Someone' Boy were they surprised when I stuck my head out the door and asked just what they thought they were doing. They hung up the phone quickly and all but ran to the store... Nosey Whack-jobs!!!

But you know where are all these concerned helpers when my kd pukes in the store or I have a flat tire... Funny they never offer to help then...

The fact is, it's just a heck-of-a-lot easier to lift your finger and dial a number, than it is to help out with a sick kid or a flat tire. And, sadly, some people will pat you on the back as if you're a big hero for meddling and calling.

Except that it'd be harder for me, because I'd be awake at night wondering if I'd just really messed things up for some family. The flat tire and the puking may be harder and more time-consuming to deal with at the time, but they're not likely to come back and bite you in the butt later.

Of course, the "Nosey Whack-jobs" probably stifle all guilt feelings (for when they unwittingly caused a problem where none existed before), by reminding themselves of their friend who called the cops and unknowingly saved a child from being kidnapped ... and they'll sigh and think, "Maybe next time I'll get to be the hero ... next time ... when and where can I find a next time?"

...And off they'll go, past all the puking kids and flat tires, in search of that elusive sleeping child ...


----------



## siobhang

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pigpokey* 
I do not run my decision-making on anecdotal evidence, although I am influenced by certain traumas and am certainly not all the time completely logical and calculating with what will trigger me. However, this kind of decision making can lead to completely wrong behaviors risk-avoidance wise.

ain't that the truth.

The purpose of statistics is to give us an impartial measurement of what real risks are.

Car accidents and drowning - common.

Kidnapping by strangers - rare.

Kidnapping children (i.e. not teenage girls) by strangers - very very rare.

Cars blowing up in the parking lot - very very rare.

Kids dying of heat in parked cars - rare.

Kids being hit by cars in parking lots - common.

I try to reduce risks to my kids in a myriad of ways. But when I need to decide what to focus on or weighing up different risks, I will try to use impartial statistics, combined with my own knowledge of the situation, to make the best decision possible.

I also have a few hot ticket issues where reason and logic go out the window - but I accept the fact I am not acting rationally in those cases.


----------



## VanessaS

Quote:

I have read that other countries aren't this psycho about everything.
That's true. I get made fun of a bit over here because of some of the more "strange but true" stories they get wind of about America. The all-time favorite is the warnings on candles (that they're flammable). The first time I got confronted about this I just laughed and said it must be an urban legend. I'd never heard anything so ridiculous. So the next time I was in the States, I checked out the candles. It's really true.







How embarrassing! Sometimes I just want to go







:

The German candles now carry the warning labels too.







: America exports EVERYTHING (even stupidity). Here's a great list of other stupid warning labels. Last week I noticed that my cream cheese has an ingredients list that says (in German, of course):

"Ingredients: milk, cultures. *May contain milk.* Caution: may contain trace elements of milk. May cause an allergic reaction in people with a milk allergy."







:

I agree that there should be more common sense and less sensation. And people should stop watching the evening news (that'll completely warp your sensibilities) every night. They feed off sensation, it's almost like a tabloid.

But I won't knock America too much. You're still more free there than anywhere else in the world. We're moving back to take advantage of that (homeschool my kids and build a house). Here are some freedoms that American's enjoy:

Freedom from want (I know y'all are going to say that there are poor Americans, too. But you don't know poverty until you've been to a third world country. Read this and believe it!)
Freedom from illness (Some people don't have coverage, I know. And we should definitely change that. But America still has the best health system in the world. You don't hear about Saudis flying to England to get treated, do you? And do you know how many Germans die in their hospitals every year just because they're dirty? They look clean on first sight but the doctor's usually don't bother wearing gloves when inspecting a patient and they rarely wash their hands. On the other hand, my Italian colleagues are amazed at what nice hospitals we have here. uke)
Freedom of education (Need I mention homeschooling? It's a felony here!)
Freedom of religion (We're Catholic but we went to a Pentecostal church near hear a few times. A really nice group. They are considered a "religious cult" here and are monitored by the government.)
Freedom from taxation (The tax levels in the States are fantastic! We lose about 80% of our income through taxation. They call it "steuer" (steering) here because they use it to control you. The best part is that they take away all of your money, waste it in the bereaucracy and then give a part back as a "gift".















All I've got to say is: *God bless America* and Where is my plane ticket?!! I am soooo there...


----------



## VanessaS

Just wanted to add that I hear a lot of anti-American flack over here. But whenever I tell someone I'm moving back they say, "You are so lucky. I wish I could move there!" And they do, in droves. America isn't the biggest immigration-target in the world for nothing, you know.


----------



## Ocean2

I guess I don't worry about everything because I don't watch the news. I'd rather not live my life super paranoid. The news also reflects those events which are "rare", otherwise, it wouldn't be news.

Yes, I am so sick of this nonsense, even though we just moved back to Ohio last year, we are seriously thinking of leaving when this school year is over. I have a friend who lives in St. Thomas, other than hurricanes, it'd be a great place to live!

I actually am physically sick too. I came down with Mastitis yesterday and had a killer headache and fever and today, added throwing up to the mix. Just what my body needs. I swear this ordeal is gonna kill me!

Anyhow, I talked with my pastor again today and he is rooting for me. He said it is just so arbitrary.
Thanks for your support!


----------



## Demeter9

The way my littles are, they are far far far more likely to get whapped by a careless driver. And still likely to get whapped by a careful driver.

I'll take my chances with a not running car, no keys, at the pump than hauling out three little children to walk across the gas station lot to the kiosk any day.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rharr!* 
I don't know if any one has mentioned this,but, what if you have a freak accident while your child is locked in your car?

I once was about to lock dd in the car(in her seat) while I stepped 3 spots over to the cart spot. Then Irealised that if a car went out of control or a hole opened up or some other freak occurance happened, dd would be all alone in the car and no one would know to check for her








That is why I don't leave kids alone in a vehicle- ya just never know.


----------



## VanessaS

Quote:

Mom had left baby in the car while she ran in to 7-11 "just for a second" and in the time it took her to pay for whatever, someone stole the truck with baby in it.
Couldn't you just use the steering wheel lock if you were worried about that? They're standard issue over here.


----------



## Ocean2

VanessaS,
I'll bet mom in this instance left her keys in the car or possibly left her car running. In my research the past 2 weeks of kids left in cars, I haven't found a singe case of a child who was taken from a locked parked vehicle. Most people that take cars aren't tryng to kidnap the child, it just so happens that the kids happens to be in there. They are looking for people who leave keys in ignition. When I get gas, I always take the keys out of the ignition and put them in my pocket, just in case.


----------



## VanessaS

Yes, that is wise. You never know who's watching...
This reminds me of Tsotsi.


----------



## Ocean2

Well for anyone following my saga...I haven't heard a thing from the prosecutor, I believe he probably didn't even read my letter. Tomorrow I go back to court. So we will see what happens. If he doesn't dismiss it, I am going to plead no contest to the disorderly conduct. It's ridiculous I know, however, I think the board of nursing will also see that it is ridiculous as well. I spoke with my friend who is a magistrate again and she said that she does not know the judges well enough to know whether they would drop the case or not. She thought that if I wanted to spend the time and money on a lawyer, then it would probably be dropped. Otherwise, she said that she would probably plead no contest to the DC charge. SHe told me that she thinks it is crazy that I was even given a ticket in the first place and it shows a complete lack of common sense. She even apologized for it, like it was her fault. She's been so helpful to me and I appreciate all of her support.

I think we will be returning to San Jose at the end of this school year if the case isn't dropped (which will hopefully give us enough time to finish remodeling our house and sell it). My mom is already crying about it. It makes me feel so guilty, she's a big reason of why we moved back. I am a people pleaser and it made me feel so badly when we lived in Cali knowing that she was miserable without us. However, I know that I am allowed to have my own life and I need to be happy too. San Jose is a beautiful, safe city and we were treated very well when we lived there. The health insurance that I carried was awesome, considering my husband is a type one diabetic. Not to mention being a veggie is accepted there, unlike Ohio (what do you mean you don't eat meat?!!!).

Thanks so much for your good well wishes and prayers. I will let you know the outcome tomorrow. I know that God can change the prosecutor's heart, so I am leaving it in his hands, I've done as much as I can.

Take care!!


----------



## DaffyDaphne

Best of luck!


----------



## Ocean2

Thanks!
Well, the prosecutor won't drop it, but says that he doesn't want me to lose my nursing license, so wants to be sure this won't cause it to be revoked. The board of nursing can't tell you yes it will or no it won't, they review everything individually, so have fun trying to figure that one out!

So I go back in a week. By that time, it will be a month since I was charged. Ugh...

This seems to never end, round and round it goes.
take care!!


----------



## Tigeresse

Another wish for good luck! This whole thing is crazy!







:


----------



## mamatoablessing

Best of luck, Ocean2. I'll be thinking about you!


----------



## mammal_mama

Yes, I'm still rooting for you -- but sorry for your mom! She couldn't relocate to San Jose with you?


----------



## meaghann

The au pair showed exceedingly poor judgment in two instances. First the children are left alone for several minutes which is apparently the point of this discussion. SECOND, it sounds like SHE DROVE AROUND HYSTERICAL AND CRYING with your children in the car! This would probably have made me more alarmed than the first offense.

(I have been in this situation once and just asked a stranger to buy the stuff for me and gave her some money.)


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *meaghann* 
The au pair showed exceedingly poor judgment in two instances. First the children are left alone for several minutes which is apparently the point of this discussion.

According to the OP, the children weren't out of the au pair's sight at any time. They were no more "alone" than if they were upstairs in the house when the au pair was downstairs.

Quote:

SECOND, it sounds like SHE DROVE AROUND HYSTERICAL AND CRYING with your children in the car! This would probably have made me more alarmed than the first offense.
I never read where the OP said the au pair was "driving around hysterical and crying." I don't know about you, but I can be shaken up by an incident, and still pull myself together enough to drive home. Then the first conversation I have can trigger the tears. That doesn't mean I was "hysterical" from the time of the incident until the moment when I saw the friend.

Quote:

(I have been in this situation once and just asked a stranger to buy the stuff for me and gave her some money.)
That's not a bad idea! It's all about frame of reference. From the au pair's frame of reference, she saw no danger that would require this kind of accommodation. Obviously you did, and there's nothing wrong with you doing what you did.

As an example, it's important to me to be able to hold my babies 'til they start expressing a desire to be put down, so I buy slings and develop skills that enable me to do housework with one hand during this time period, and put some things off 'til dh is home.

Another mom, who sees absolutely nothing wrong with setting a baby down (even letting Baby cry for a few moments), is likely to view all my efforts to hold the baby every minute as kind of ridiculous. We just have different frames of reference.


----------



## pigpokey

Quote:


Originally Posted by *meaghann* 
SECOND, it sounds like SHE DROVE AROUND HYSTERICAL AND CRYING with your children in the car! This would probably have made me more alarmed than the first offense.

I didn't see anything about her post that made me leap from "couldn't stop crying" to "HYSTERICAL AND CRYING". And weeping is A-OK in my book if the babysitter has cause to weep.


----------



## meaghann

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mammal_mama* 
According to the OP, the children weren't out of the au pair's sight at any time. They were no more "alone" than if they were upstairs in the house when the au pair was downstairs.

I would agree with you the scenarios are similar if the room were on wheels, were designed to move whether through a powertrain or inertia, and strangers had the ability to come within inches to view the child. A previous poster curiously remarked why if the au pair was so watchful, didn't the au pair see the hovering and obviously agitated stranger and become alarmed herself? This is a good question. As far as the negligible possibility of something bad happening within these 3 minutes, basically it did! A "fanatic" noticed what was going on and could not turn loose of her obsession with children. The "fanatic" found an outlet for her obsession through screaming. Fortunately the "fanatic" was a child advocate. What if it had simply been another kind of "fanatic" with another type of outlet?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mammal_mama* 
I never read where the OP said the au pair was "driving around hysterical and crying."

Ok neither did I but I this is what I did read:

Quote:


Originally Posted by *siobhang* 
quickly got in the car and drove away. She said she couldn't stop crying for a good 30 minutes and had to come home early because she was so upset.

It is a reasonable and not outlandish assumption that the young lady was very upset driving and crying. I would not want someone who is crying or weeping or sobbing or focused on their own pain to the point of tears in control of a car I'm in. I'm serious about this (not trying to mock the pain of the young Brazilian au pair).

The main problem with leaving a child for 3 minutes in a car to buy drinks at 7/11 and thinking it's okay, is that it makes one likely to do it again. The more often you leave a child alone for 3 minutes, the more often the child is left alone! So the key question is: How often does this happen? If I leave a child alone for 3 minutes every 3 minutes, would even the most forgiving amongst us see a problem with this?

If the screaming stranger succeeded at nothing else, she probably caused the young Brazilian to think twice before doing the same thing again ... in the US anyway. And if this lessens the frequency or cumulative number of minutes or hours of any child being left alone in a car, then some good came out of it.


----------



## Ocean2

Tigeresse, Mammal_mama, and Mamatoablessing,
Thanks for your support! The only 'good' thing so far is that the prosecutor is acting like he cares that I could lose my livlihood over this. I've been told that even if I keep my license, I will most likely be fined up to $500 (not counting the court fees and gov't fine) and may get a public reprimand meaning if a future employer checks out my license, there will be a notation beside it stating that I was convicted of something. This is so frustrating!

mamal_mama,
haha, I've told her to just move with us. However, she said she couldn't afford it since the cost of housing there is astronomical. That's the bad thing about us moving, we will definitely be paying for our house for a loooong time, whereas in OH, we could have had it paid off in about 5-7 years and we just bought it last year! Plus, my 2 siblings live in OH, so she doesn't want to leave them.

I contacted one of my RN friends whom I worked with in SJ on Friday. She said she's sure they would love to have me back and they always have openings, she was surprised about this as well. So I think if we decide to move back, I should be able to have my old job back (which I loved!).

Thanks all, take care!


----------



## Ocean2

:

Hi ladies,
Well, it's over.
At least going to court is over. The prosecutor said that he didn't receive a reply from the board of nursing so he would do a minor misdemeanor or he would go to trial for the child endangerment.

I was sick of everything. Sick of the heart palpitations, inability to sleep, I lost down to 105 lbs (and I'm 5'5") from the stress and not being able to eat. I felt like I was going to die. So I wanted it over and I plead no contest. I was not allowed to plead not guilty unless I went to trial.

This just makes me wonder if this was about the small town getting the $135 fine from me. Was this about money? I am in the process of finding out the legalities about my nursing license. When I called the Ohio board the woman kind of laughed and said, "yeah, IF you are convicted, then you have to send the documents in." She could see the ridiculousness of the situation, however, she is not the one who will determine my fate.

If they take my license, they are going to lose a really good nurse. Unlike some nurses in my department, I always picked up the babies when they cried. If my babies were asleep and another nurse had 2 crying babies, I would hold one of them. I know some moms let their kids cry it out. I never could, and I don't feel that a child in a medical setting will benefit from being allowed to cry it out. I loved my job. I loved my life. I feel like I've been raped of my good name, of my career and of my happiness.

I know this probably would not affect some people, but I am extremely sensitive (which is not necessarily a good thing!). I still think about it everyday.

take care and thank you to everyone who cared enough to write to me about this situation. I hope that this will prevent another great parent from being prosecuted for something as ridiculous as this.


----------



## mammal_mama

Ocean2 --







I wish you the best as you move forward from here. I think as time passes, you'll find you don't think about it as much, and I honestly can't see it affecting your career at all. You sound like a wonderful mother and nurse!


----------



## annab

Ocean2--







I am so sorry. It seems like your prosecutor needs more to do. I wish you could have retained counsel and gone to trial. I think you would have had a better outcome.


----------



## mamatoablessing

Ocean2, thanks so much for the update. I am sorry about the result though. It's so unsettling to think that the prosecuter has so little to do that he has to focus his efforts on something like your case. The police officer too. I wish you the best of luck in San Jose.


----------



## Picturesque

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dubfam* 
Are you serious??!!!!!







:

It was at 7-11!!! Obviously the person isn't going to be in there for hours, and it wasn't even hot outside!! How would you be justified in destroying another person's property like that??

Don't you think that it would be traumatizing for the kids to be woken up a raging, self appointed safety officer smashing their car window and taking them out of the vehicle???!!!

It is not illegal to leave your kid in the car for 3 minutes in front of 7-11 where I live...but you will get arrested or physically attacked if you break a persons car window and take their children out of the car. I think that is called breaking & entering and attempted kidnapping.

IMHO their is nothing wrong with the Au Pair leaving them for a couple minutes as long as the OP is okay with it.

This is one of the silliest threads I've seen here in a while.

















:

I agree. I guess that if I get really creative I can think of something that could happen to a child under those circumstances, but none of the things I can imagine are any likelier than things that could happen if the children accompanied the adult into the store. I think it is each parent's responsibility to evaluate risk in ALL circumstances and act reasonably. I don't think that blanket bans are necessary or helpful.


----------



## MammaB21

Wow!!! Really, I DID NOT read this entire thread by any means. It seams pretty 50/50 here on what people think. I have left my daughter in the car once while I ran into the gas station, (car off, locked, sleeping, and parked infront of doors clearly in my veiw). Afterward I felt weird about it, and asked my mom what she thought. She said that she wouldn't have done it, and honestly I haven't done it since. But I do leave her at my own home. She takes HORRIBLE naps, and the only way she will fall asleep most times is in the car. She wakes up emididately when we try to take her out of her carseat. I will leave her in there sometimes to sleep a little longer. (mostly if I am outside doing something.) But DH is really uncomfurtable with it. Allthough I don't see the danger. Especially in my own driveway, or garage with doors locked and constant monitoring. (we live in a safe naighborhood and know all of our naighbors)
I think the lady who yelled was quite out of line. I could see someone questioning the situation, but to just go off like that was not necessary.


----------



## macca

Now I've far from read the entire thread, but I honestly don't get what the big deal is. Maybe this is a cultural thing, but I've never seen ANYONE take their kids into the service station when paying for petrol (gas) and I don't see how this situation is much different.


----------



## Ocean2

Hi I'm sorry to reincarnate this thread again, I just wanted to let you know that the Ohio Board of Nursing quickly responded (about 6 weeks after submitting all of the appropriate documents) by closing the case against my license, so I'm now just waiting on the California board to close it as well, although they have many more nurses there, so it may take awhile. I haven't looked into fostering/adopting since then, but am going to get fingerprinted for it next week to see if it's still a viable option.

Thanks again for all of your support during the most difficult time of my life (to date). You've been wonderful and I'm so very grateful for the well wishes and prayers.

Take care


----------



## Hippie Mama in MI

Well, I don't think parents should leave kids in the car even for a moment, even when the car is in view. In this day and age, a child molester could be waiting behind any 7-11 for just that opportunity to smash the window, grab a kid, and drive away. It only takes seconds. Even if the mom could SEE the abduction from inside, doesn't mean she could get there in time to stop it.
So I vote, don't leave your kids in the car. Period.

BUT:

That said, I also think that the yelling passerby who threatened to "call the cops" went WAY overboard. If I witnessed the same thing, rather than yell and threaten the mother, I would stand by and quietly watch over the kids until Mom returned.

Kady


----------



## MamaAllNatural

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Hippie Mama in MI* 
In this day and age, a child molester could be waiting behind any 7-11 for just that opportunity to smash the window, grab a kid, and drive away. It only takes seconds. Even if the mom could SEE the abduction from inside, doesn't mean she could get there in time to stop.

Woah. It is so sad that some people live in this much fear. People need to be looking at their own family, friends, & neighbors for child molesters... not behind the 7-11 at any given moment.


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MamaAllNatural* 
Woah. It is so sad that some people live in this much fear. People need to be looking at their own family, friends, & neighbors for child molesters... not behind the 7-11 at any given moment.

Yes ... and I'm just going to reiterate what I said early on in this thread: each parent needs to go with her own comfort level.

What concerns me is that so many people feel a need to try to determine _for_ _other parents_ what their comfort levels should be.

I frequently see other parents feeling comfortable with a low level of supervision that I just couldn't be comfortable with, myself -- but I'm too busy with my own life to really fret about other parents' decisions.

If anyone doesn't have enough of a life to keep them occupied -- I wish they'd find a way to *get* more of a life. Seriously. I think the world would be a better place, if more people were busy tending to their own families.


----------



## phathui5

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Hippie Mama in MI* 
Well, I don't think parents should leave kids in the car even for a moment, even when the car is in view. In this day and age, a child molester could be waiting behind any 7-11 for just that opportunity to smash the window, grab a kid, and drive away. It only takes seconds. Even if the mom could SEE the abduction from inside, doesn't mean she could get there in time to stop it.
So I vote, don't leave your kids in the car. Period.

BUT:

That said, I also think that the yelling passerby who threatened to "call the cops" went WAY overboard. If I witnessed the same thing, rather than yell and threaten the mother, I would stand by and quietly watch over the kids until Mom returned.

Kady

I don't know about that. I don't think that child molesters are hiding behind 7-11 waiting to steal my kids. Statistically speaking, the most dangerous people are people that are close to you, that the child trusts.

I wouldn't leave my kids in the car to go grocery shopping, but I'm not going to drag them in with me to pay for has.


----------



## Daffodil

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mammal_mama* 
What concerns me is that so many people feel a need to try to determine _for_ _other parents_ what their comfort levels should be.

The thing is, other parents' comfort levels affect MY family's life. Due to other parents' fears, it's now illegal in many places for me to leave my kids briefly alone in the car, even if I judge the situation to be safe. You may say, well, that's what I'm talking about, they shouldn't have tried to get those laws passed, they should have just let other parents decide on their own comfort levels. But if they think other parents may be needlessly endangering their children, it makes sense that they'd want to prevent that. I don't necessarily think they're wrong to try to prevent me from doing something they feel is dangerous. I just think they're wrong about the actual danger involved - so, yes, you bet I want to get them to rethink what their comfort level ought to be.


----------



## woobysma

Man, I'm weak. I've been trying to ignore this thread since yesterday. I thought it had finally died.









Quote:


Originally Posted by *MamaAllNatural* 
Woah. It is so sad that some people live in this much fear. People need to be looking at their own family, friends, & neighbors for child molesters... not behind the 7-11 at any given moment.

I'll just add in a







: and be done with it (again...







)


----------



## mammal_mama

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Daffodil* 
The thing is, other parents' comfort levels affect MY family's life. Due to other parents' fears, it's now illegal in many places for me to leave my kids briefly alone in the car, even if I judge the situation to be safe. You may say, well, that's what I'm talking about, they shouldn't have tried to get those laws passed, they should have just let other parents decide on their own comfort levels. But if they think other parents may be needlessly endangering their children, it makes sense that they'd want to prevent that. I don't necessarily think they're wrong to try to prevent me from doing something they feel is dangerous. *I just think they're wrong about the actual danger involved - so, yes, you bet I want to get them to rethink what their comfort level ought to be.*

Bolding mine. I see your point -- only the difference is that the more relaxed parents aren't out trying, for instance, to pass laws that parents "have" to stay in the house while their kids are out playing in the yard. The more relaxed parents aren't calling CPS to complain about how other parents are being so protective that they're stifling their children.

I have heard more relaxed parents share how their children developed a better than average ability to handle various situations and keep themselves safe -- but I've never had the experience of being screamed at by one of these parents in a parking lot, because I took my children into the store with me.

So I'm all in favor of respectful dialog between all sorts of parents, as long as all parties involved are consenting to participating (i.e. they're not being forced into it because someone's going off on them).

So I'll rephrase my previous statement: I don't think it's bad to try to persuade other parents to change their comfort-levels -- I just think it's wrong to try to bully and coerce them.


----------



## mamaofthree

I have left my sleeping kids in the van... not alone but with their big sister (13) to keep an eye on them while I pay for gas or drop something in someplace.
But that is me and I am usually fine with that... except when I hear here that people would call CPS or yell nasty things at me or think I suck as a mother because of that. I am actually more worried about "good intestioned" people being crappy to me then my kids being molested at a 7-11 while I pay for gas.

h


----------



## papercranegirl

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mammal_mama* 
Yes ... and I'm just going to reiterate what I said early on in this thread: each parent needs to go with her own comfort level.

What concerns me is that so many people feel a need to try to determine _for_ _other parents_ what their comfort levels should be.

I frequently see other parents feeling comfortable with a low level of supervision that I just couldn't be comfortable with, myself -- but I'm too busy with my own life to really fret about other parents' decisions.

If anyone doesn't have enough of a life to keep them occupied -- I wish they'd find a way to *get* more of a life. Seriously. I think the world would be a better place, if more people were busy tending to their own families.
























Personally, I leave my kids in the locked car when I pay for gas or stop at 7-11 if I can see the car for the entire time. Yes, there's a slim possibility that someone might break the car windows, hotwire the car and drive off with the kids but it seems to me that the kids and myself are MORE vulnerable during the time that I'm getting them in and out of the car.


----------



## mommyoftwo2013

Wow, I was crying as I was reading replies. I just do not understand how calling the police will help the situation rather then satisfying someones need for not sure even what.


----------



## mommyoftwo2013

If it were a foolish mistake and you are the one who stands on "calling the police" think of this before you take actions.

My sister went to a kid store as her son was crying for some toy and they were in the area of the son favorite store. My sis made a decision to go to the store and leave her daughter in the car as she was sleeping. She parked 60 feet away and could see the car from the store. Some "nice" woman called the police. My sis was not arrested as I am sure the police decided that it could be a mistake, bad one, but was. She was to appear in court.

Now, consider this, they are a family that has been very successful, community involved, helping some kid with leukemia by raising a heck of money.

They chose a neighborhood to live in for good schools, but far from work to ensure kids get the best education. My sis cut down on work hours to make sure she can stay with kids after school and have them do the homework etc.

Their son is 5,5, plays chess well, can read and write thanks to her. Her daughter 3,5 can do a puzzle of 100 on her own.

Now, this woman with wonderful kids is facing jail time, because of someone finding her of wrongdoing. Calling the police takes 5 minutes, telling mother that she was wrong by leaving kid in car takes 5 minutes.

Consequences - my sis life could be ruined and her kids could be taken away - put in foster care, grow up addicts or worse.

Leaving children in the car is wrong, however, whoever sees is should use common sense.


----------



## TCMoulton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mommyoftwo2013*
> 
> If it were a foolish mistake and you are the one who stands on "calling the police" think of this before you take actions.
> My sister went to a kid store as her son was crying for some toy and they were in the area of the son favorite store. My sis made a decision to go to the store and leave her daughter in the car as she was sleeping. She parked 60 feet away and could see the car from the store. Some "nice" woman called the police. My sis was not arrested as I am sure the police decided that it could be a mistake, bad one, but was. She was to appear in court.
> Now, consider this, they are a family that has been very successful, community involved, helping some kid with leukemia by raising a heck of money.
> They chose a neighborhood to live in for good schools, but far from work to ensure kids get the best education. My sis cut down on work hours to make sure she can stay with kids after school and have them do the homework etc.
> Their son is 5,5, plays chess well, can read and write thanks to her. Her daughter 3,5 can do a puzzle of 100 on her own.
> Now, this woman with wonderful kids is facing jail time, because of someone finding her of wrongdoing. Calling the police takes 5 minutes, telling mother that she was wrong by leaving kid in car takes 5 minutes.
> Consequences - my sis life could be ruined and her kids could be taken away - put in foster care, grow up addicts or worse.
> 
> Leaving children in the car is wrong, however, whoever sees is should use common sense.


Just because a family is well off and appears to be doing everything right in raising their children does not make them immune to making mistakes. If I encountered a child alone in a car who was in a potentially dangerous situation (extreme heat/cold, child distressed, etc) I would not even think twice about calling the police if I felt the situation warranted immediate attention. Heck I called the police when I came upon a tiny, obviously distressed dog who was left unattended on a very warm day this past summer, why would I do differently for a tiny human. Otherwise, I might stay within site of the car and keep an eye on the tiny occupant(s) until the adult came out of the store.
Also, foster care is not a guarantee that the children will turn into heroin addicted hoodlums. I know multiple foster parents and none are neglectful parents to any of their children, even the temporary ones.
Bottom line? Being well off doesn't make one immune from making poor parenting choices on occasion.


----------



## mommyoftwo2013

I think you focused too much on the position of the family in the community rather on the raised concern. The point was that the mother puts children in front of anything, and, yes, made a mistake that could cost everything she was living for.

But, hey, maybe there are people who do not make mistakes.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.


----------



## Polliwog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TCMoulton*
> 
> Just because a family is well off and appears to be doing everything right in raising their children does not make them immune to making mistakes. If I encountered a child alone in a car who was in a potentially dangerous situation (extreme heat/cold, child distressed, etc) I would not even think twice about calling the police if I felt the situation warranted immediate attention. Heck I called the police when I came upon a tiny, obviously distressed dog who was left unattended on a very warm day this past summer, why would I do differently for a tiny human. Otherwise, I might stay within site of the car and keep an eye on the tiny occupant(s) until the adult came out of the store.
> Also, foster care is not a guarantee that the children will turn into heroin addicted hoodlums. I know multiple foster parents and none are neglectful parents to any of their children, even the temporary ones.
> Bottom line? Being well off doesn't make one immune from making poor parenting choices on occasion.


This is a six-year-old thread, LOL. But, as a foster parent, I agree that there are many wonderful foster families out there.


----------



## mommyoftwo2013

Talking about foster care meant that the kids are separated from parents.


----------



## TCMoulton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mommyoftwo2013*
> 
> Talking about foster care meant that the kids are separated from parents.


Yes but sometimes a loving foster family is a better option than home.


----------



## Polliwog

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TCMoulton*
> 
> Yes but sometimes a loving foster family is a better option than home.


Absolutely. Not for reasons like the OP, of course.


----------



## TCMoulton

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Polliwog*
> 
> Absolutely. Not for reasons like the OP, of course.


Exactly.


----------



## mommyoftwo2013

I agree, sometime it is. I am not so sure about the foster care. My dad grew up in one and he ended up becoming a good, hardworking person he earned everything we had as a family on his own together with mom. However, he mentioned that it was hard being there. Not many of the "graduates" of foster care came to have a family and life as I saw it with dad.

And it was back then.


----------



## mommyoftwo2013

And, I am sorry, but what is OP? I am not a regular on forums and some abbreviations are a mystery.


----------



## tracyamber

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mommyoftwo2013*
> 
> And, I am sorry, but what is OP? I am not a regular on forums and some abbreviations are a mystery.


Original poster( the one who started the thread)


----------

