If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Please Look for this Little Girl and Pass on This Post (translate and cross post if Possible too)
"Rosalie B." wrote in message ... Leaving children in a locked room is not the same as hanging a sign on the kids neck saying "Take Me". While it may be true that baby sitting services might have been available, that isn't necessarily a cure-all unless you also assume that a) the baby sitter herself or a cohort wouldn't be the abductor and/or wouldn't have done something harmful to the child (after all - the parents wouldn't have the ability to check her out) and b) that even if they had a sitter, that the sitter would have been able to prevent the abduction. My sister and I were traveling with my niece and we did go to dinner in the hotel after asking for someone to sit with the baby (about a year old at the time). The person sat outside the room in the hall. If someone had come through the window, she wouldn't have known. It's really easy to second guess what people do. The parents are ultimately responsible for what happens to the kids. These kids were unattended, in a resort, in a foreign country. Who knows if someone had eyeballed them before, liked the girl, and grabbed her when she was unattended? Unattended children = accident waiting to happen. Just because you did it before and nothing happened doesn't make it right. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Please Look for this Little Girl and Pass on This Post (translate and cross post if Possible too)
toypup wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2007 22:03:09 GMT, Rosalie B. wrote: toypup wrote: While it may be true that baby sitting services might have been available, that isn't necessarily a cure-all unless you also assume that a) the baby sitter herself or a cohort wouldn't be the abductor and/or wouldn't have done something harmful to the child (after all - the parents wouldn't have the ability to check her out) and They didn't need to use the sitter at all. They could have had one of the adults in their group watch the child. People keep saying this, but I don't think it is much of an option at all. It wouldn't be much of a vacation for that designated adult. I wouldn't want to ask someone else to do it and I wouldn't want to do it myself and certainly not for someone else's child. I have not read about this incident anywhere except in this ng. I don't even know what country the resort was in, but I think the resort bears some responsibility here. Why were the windows so accessible. Were they on the first floor? b) that even if they had a sitter, that the sitter would have been able to prevent the abduction. An abductor would more likely take an unattended child, if one was available. If you were a purse snactcher, would you take one you see left unguarded on a bench or one that is sitting next to its owner? If you were a purse snatcher but you weren't hunting for a purse and you happened to see one laying there unattended, wouldn't you take it just because it was there? There are lots of criminals who do crime just because the opportunity is there. I do not think this is a valid analogy. No one snatches a child just because they see one unattended. (I'm thinking of the O' Henry story "The Ransom of Red Chief" http://fiction.eserver.org/short/ran...red_chief.html They are either after ransom, or they have some deranged idea in mind. Would you leave your wallet on the bench unattended because the crook could pick-pocket you if you had it in your purse anyway? Don't you think the chances of you losing your wallet is a lot greater when you leave it unattended as opposed to taking it with you? If you take it with you, does it mean you will never lose it to a thief? Of course not. It does lessen your chances of losing it, though. My sister and I were traveling with my niece and we did go to dinner in the hotel after asking for someone to sit with the baby (about a year old at the time). The person sat outside the room in the hall. If someone had come through the window, she wouldn't have known. Yes, but you didn't leave the baby locked in the room alone unwatched. Why? Because it's too risky. No we didn't leave the baby unwatched because it was too risky. It wasn't. She wasn't walking yet, and we were on the 6th floor. We were afraid she'd wake up and scream her head off and bother the other guests. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Please Look for this Little Girl and Pass on This Post (translate and cross post if Possible too)
On Fri, 25 May 2007 00:18:28 GMT, Rosalie B. wrote:
toypup wrote: On Thu, 24 May 2007 22:03:09 GMT, Rosalie B. wrote: toypup wrote: While it may be true that baby sitting services might have been available, that isn't necessarily a cure-all unless you also assume that a) the baby sitter herself or a cohort wouldn't be the abductor and/or wouldn't have done something harmful to the child (after all - the parents wouldn't have the ability to check her out) and They didn't need to use the sitter at all. They could have had one of the adults in their group watch the child. People keep saying this, but I don't think it is much of an option at all. It wouldn't be much of a vacation for that designated adult. I wouldn't want to ask someone else to do it and I wouldn't want to do it myself and certainly not for someone else's child. There are two parents. If they don't want to watch their own children or get one of their friends to do it just because they are on vacation, they should leave the children at home or not be on vacation. An abductor would more likely take an unattended child, if one was available. If you were a purse snactcher, would you take one you see left unguarded on a bench or one that is sitting next to its owner? If you were a purse snatcher but you weren't hunting for a purse and you happened to see one laying there unattended, wouldn't you take it just because it was there? There are lots of criminals who do crime just because the opportunity is there. I do not think this is a valid analogy. No one snatches a child just because they see one unattended. (I'm thinking of the O' Henry story "The Ransom of Red Chief" No one? This one did. What more glaring example do you need? A child abductor would more likely snatch a child if the opportunity were there than when it is not. He most likely would not have done it were there an adult sitting in the room. Most criminals commit crimes when they have the least chance of getting caught. If this abductor was brazen, he would have snatched one off the streets in broad daylight. No, he snatched one that was sleeping alone with two toddlers. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Please Look for this Little Girl and Pass on This Post (translate and cross post if Possible too)
toypup wrote:
On Fri, 25 May 2007 00:18:28 GMT, Rosalie B. wrote: toypup wrote: On Thu, 24 May 2007 22:03:09 GMT, Rosalie B. wrote: toypup wrote: While it may be true that baby sitting services might have been available, that isn't necessarily a cure-all unless you also assume that a) the baby sitter herself or a cohort wouldn't be the abductor and/or wouldn't have done something harmful to the child (after all - the parents wouldn't have the ability to check her out) and They didn't need to use the sitter at all. They could have had one of the adults in their group watch the child. People keep saying this, but I don't think it is much of an option at all. It wouldn't be much of a vacation for that designated adult. I wouldn't want to ask someone else to do it and I wouldn't want to do it myself and certainly not for someone else's child. There are two parents. If they don't want to watch their own children or get one of their friends to do it just because they are on vacation, they should leave the children at home or not be on vacation. I wouldn't have wanted to be left behind to watch the kids like some kind of au pair if I was on vacation. I myself would have probably paid a sitter. But I am unwilling to concede that either of us has the right to tell other parents what they should do or not do with their vacation or whether they should take their children on vacation with them. An abductor would more likely take an unattended child, if one was available. If you were a purse snactcher, would you take one you see left unguarded on a bench or one that is sitting next to its owner? If you were a purse snatcher but you weren't hunting for a purse and you happened to see one laying there unattended, wouldn't you take it just because it was there? There are lots of criminals who do crime just because the opportunity is there. I do not think this is a valid analogy. No one snatches a child just because they see one unattended. (I'm thinking of the O' Henry story "The Ransom of Red Chief" No one? This one did. What more glaring example do you need? A child The Ransom of Red Chief is FICTION. abductor would more likely snatch a child if the opportunity were there than when it is not. He most likely would not have done it were there an adult sitting in the room. Most criminals commit crimes when they have the least chance of getting caught. If this abductor was brazen, he would have snatched one off the streets in broad daylight. No, he snatched one that was sleeping alone with two toddlers. If the child was with two toddlers, she was not alone. Elizabeth Smart wasn't alone either BTW - I think her sister was in the room with her. Snatching a child who is playing outside or taking a child from a store or on the way home from school is completely different from taking a baby from inside a room at a resort. But I'd like to know why you think people of whatever age that are asleep in a resort room are available to criminals?? If the child could be taken from the room, then valuables could also be taken. Robbery is one thing that the resort needs to be aware of and/or prevent, which means not only security of the doors, but also of the windows. Why was there not security at the windows? Do they know for sure that it wasn't someone that had a passkey? |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Please Look for this Little Girl and Pass on This Post (translate and cross post if Possible too)
On Fri, 25 May 2007 03:47:15 GMT, Rosalie B. wrote:
toypup wrote: On Fri, 25 May 2007 00:18:28 GMT, Rosalie B. wrote: toypup wrote: There are two parents. If they don't want to watch their own children or get one of their friends to do it just because they are on vacation, they should leave the children at home or not be on vacation. I wouldn't have wanted to be left behind to watch the kids like some kind of au pair if I was on vacation. I myself would have probably paid a sitter. But I am unwilling to concede that either of us has the right to tell other parents what they should do or not do with their vacation or whether they should take their children on vacation with them. What about parents who leave their young children home alone to go on vacation? At some point, you must have an opinion about their decision. At least the authorities have an opinion. Those children are taken away. I do not think this is a valid analogy. No one snatches a child just because they see one unattended. (I'm thinking of the O' Henry story "The Ransom of Red Chief" No one? This one did. What more glaring example do you need? A child The Ransom of Red Chief is FICTION. I am talking about this abducted girl, not Ransom of Red Chief. If the child was with two toddlers, she was not alone. Elizabeth Smart wasn't alone either BTW - I think her sister was in the room with her. Good grief. What can two toddlers do to stop a kidnapper? As for Elizabeth Smart, I am not saying an adult in the house is a guarantee against kidnapping. It certainly is a deterrent. A kidnapper who has a choice of two equally desirable children would presumably choose the one who is unattended. But I'd like to know why you think people of whatever age that are asleep in a resort room are available to criminals?? Unattended children are easy prey. They are also a recipe for disaster. Even if the girl was not kidnapped right out of the room, she could have been frightened of not seeing her parents, being in a strange room, and went looking for her parents. The hotel could have burned down. Yes, those things can happen regardless of having an adult there or not. However, an adult would more likely take the proper actions to save the family. If children can manage, then why do parents, daycare, sitters and nannies exist? Why not leave them home alone all the time? If the child could be taken from the room, then valuables could also be taken. Robbery is one thing that the resort needs to be aware of and/or prevent, which means not only security of the doors, but also of the windows. Why was there not security at the windows? Do they know for sure that it wasn't someone that had a passkey? A resort is a location not familiar to most tourists. They don't know the locale, the safety of the area. Why leave their children in an unfamiliar area where the security may be lacking? I would not care if my valuables were stolen. Whatever valuables I do care about are with me when I leave the room. Nothing is more valuable than my children. As for the window, the window was open when the parents came back to check on them and they assume that is how the kidnapper got the child. I am assuming that since it was a window that was open and they assumed the kidnapping happened through there, that this was a bottom floor. Perhaps the kidnapper could observe that the children were alone through the window. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Please Look for this Little Girl and Pass on This Post (translate and cross post if Possible too)
"Rosalie B." wrote in message ... I have not read about this incident anywhere except in this ng. I don't even know what country the resort was in, but I think the resort bears some responsibility here. Why were the windows so accessible. Were they on the first floor? You really ought to read the news accounts before posting then! The parents are receiving a fair amount of criticism because of their actions. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Please Look for this Little Girl and Pass on This Post (translate and cross post if Possible too)
"deja.blues" wrote:
"Rosalie B." wrote in message .. . I have not read about this incident anywhere except in this ng. I don't even know what country the resort was in, but I think the resort bears some responsibility here. Why were the windows so accessible. Were they on the first floor? You really ought to read the news accounts before posting then! The parents are receiving a fair amount of criticism because of their actions. I'm not interested in what happened. It is not important except to the people involved. What I am against is judging parents on the basis of news reports, and saying things like They practically hung a sign on her saying "TAKE ME". Leaving a child in a locked room with two other children (and as for what the other children could do - they could wake up and cry and that would attract other people's attention) while you go to dinner is NOT the same as letting a child play in traffic or leaving the children alone at home while going on vacation. It's just fear-mongering. No matter how careful a parent is, there is always going to be something that you haven't thought of or have failed to do, and your child may be hurt or killed as a result. Parents are just human. Pointing fingers after the fact doesn't help. It doesn't even help to be sure that other parents won't do the same thing. The parents that it affects are the same ones that are ALREADY doing everything they can. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Please Look for this Little Girl and Pass on This Post (translate and cross post if Possible too)
In article , Rosalie B. says...
They didn't need to use the sitter at all. They could have had one of the adults in their group watch the child. People keep saying this, but I don't think it is much of an option at all. It wouldn't be much of a vacation for that designated adult. I wouldn't want to ask someone else to do it and I wouldn't want to do it myself and certainly not for someone else's child. I don't know about this incident much. But, c'mon - why not. Trading off with other adults is one common way people go about activities with young children in tow. It's one dinner, not a whole vacation to be "not much of..". People do it as weddings, at dinners, at fairs - many venues, and often as a back up plan if one or more kids act up. Banty |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Please Look for this Little Girl and Pass on This Post (translateand cross post if Possible too)
Rosalie B. wrote:
[snip] I have not read about this incident anywhere except in this ng. I don't even know what country the resort was in, but I think the resort bears some responsibility here. Why were the windows so accessible. Were they on the first floor? [snip] It's a major news story in the UK. The family was on holiday in Portugal, staying in a holiday complex. The villa and the restaurent where they were eating were both in the complex. -- Penny Gaines UK mum to three |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Please Look for this Little Girl and Pass on This Post (translateand cross post if Possible too)
deja.blues wrote:
"Boliath" wrote deja.blues wrote: "Carol T" wrote If you have this child or know who does, you are responsible for keeping two doctors away from their work Would I want two such irresponsible people to be in charge of my medical care? The parents shirked their responsibilty by choosing to go out to dinner and leave three small children alone. I'm sorry for the child and her siblings, but not for the parents. Nice judgment there. You know the family personally do you? You were there and can make the call that they were irresponsible? This family are suffering tremendous loss and anguish, the last thing they need is this kind of peanut gallery judgment. Have you read the news story? They practically hung a sign on her saying "TAKE ME". Yes I have followed the news story, I am familiar with the area in Portugal so it drew my attention from the beginning. I'm not suggesting that the parents were completely innocent of blame, they did leave their children alone while they ate a meal some distance away, it's not something I would do and they have paid a terrible price, I feel badly for them and this poor child. I do not agree, however, with casting judgment based on media reports, the media is ridiculous, they want to see papers or get you to watch their show/visit their site. In this clamour for your attention the truth is often misrepresented in favour of melodrama and sensation. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
sad (for me) post | Anne Rogers | Pregnancy | 9 | January 15th 07 09:49 AM |
sad (for me) post | Anne Rogers | Breastfeeding | 9 | January 15th 07 09:49 AM |
question (cross post) | zolwica | Pregnancy | 19 | June 25th 05 05:45 AM |
How do I cross-post to non related newsgroups? | Amanda Peet | General | 2 | January 22nd 04 05:00 PM |
Last post here | Alicia Elliott | Pregnancy | 13 | July 18th 03 02:46 AM |