If you see a baby left in a car

Status
Not open for further replies.
...they are in the car with the door locks behind tinted windows that you can't see them through.

Your car windows are that heavily tinted? VA must have changed...my mom and stepdad bought a car in Miami with incredibly dark windows, then they moved to VA. And VA told them to take off the tinting, that the legal level of tinting was WAY less than what their windows were.

And the tinting on their windows was NOT so dark that someone standing right there could not see in, especially if the things to be seen are living, breathing, moving (maybe waving) humans.

Their level of tint was ALSO very *difficult* to see through *from the inside*. Are your windows legal?

To your second question, nobody should be left in a car, without the AC running. Period. Any age.

Aw dagnabit, now I have to have my husband arrested. He left ME and our son in the car the other day. OK well the windows were open enough for me to stick my fingers through (so that someone could see my bright pink grownup size fingernails just in case they didn't notice ME in the car, if they saw DS and thought he was alone), and it was a typically cool semi-rainy lovely June PacNW day.

My point is...don't say "nobody should be left in a car without the AC running period any age", because...our car was perfectly cool and lovely and DS got a nice little nap while I was feeling very sick and hubby did the shopping. The key is to have a legal driver with keys there keeping an eye on things from inside the car (so they know how hot/cold is it).
 
I sat in the car today, with the a/c running, while DBF ran into a store. It wasn't a big deal for me BUT I'm 40......

I didn't read all the pages here, only the first and last but I actually had this experience. I live in Nor Cal, it gets HOT here, VERY HOT....we went to the bank, kids and I sat in the car while DBF ran up to the ATM. The car next to us had 2 small kids in it, 1 in the front, 1 in the back, the little guy in the back was strapped into his seat, screaming his head off.....we thought maybe Mom or Dad was at the ATM (parking is right next to the ATM at this branch) so we weren't too concerned, until DBF came back to our car, then we realized that whoever was "with" these kids was INSIDE the bank....and he was parked on the side where there's NO way he could have seen his car at all!! So we waited a few minutes more while we talked about what to do, all this time the little boy in the back was screaming, his face was red, his sister couldn't get him to calm down at all.....so we called 911. It was 100+ degrees outside, our a/c was having a hard time keeping us cool, I knew it was worse for the kids because their car was OFF. While we were on the phone with the police dispatcher the Dad came out, yelled at the kids and got in his car and left. We told the dispatcher and she asked if we could follow him out of the lot and get a direction for her, so we did, we also gave her the make/model and license plates of the vehicle. We followed him for a while (he was actually going the same way we were so it was our way home) and told her when he turned off in front of us, we had to keep going so she told us to go ahead home and they'd have an officer to the man's house. She said that this was considered child endangerment and it would be followed up on.

Leaving children or animals in your vehicle is dangerous and should never be done.....just my story/experience and yes, I would ABSOLUTELY call again if I saw it again. I call animal control for animals and the police for children.
 
what would you do? A woman left her baby in her car, strapped in the seat, car running ac on and ran into Wawa. It is a very small store where she could likely see the baby the whole time and just got a bottle of water. A man got upset and called the police. It is a small store. He could have called for the mom. When the police came there was a screaming match between the woman and the man who was very angry. When the police came she explained her situation and was sobbing.

What would I have done? I probably would have waited at the car for the woman, to make sure no one did anything bad. Might have also shown her just how easy it would be for someone to get WAY too close to the baby in the car.

Now if she didn't show up for 5 minutes or so, or if the baby started crying, I'd call the police. Because I wouldn't be leaving that car to go find the mother.

And then I'd stay there and wait.


I couldn't even leave my son in the car *to check the mail*. Big bank of mailboxes, not half a sidewalk's width away from the curb...I did it one time and nearly had to walk backwards to the mailboxes, heart in my mouth the whole time. I just kept imagining the what ifs. What if someone came right as I put the key into the lock...what if a big truck came zooming into the lot and smashed into the car at an angle that killed DS but woudln't have hit me carrying DS. What if what if what if. Never did it again.

Worse case scenario-brain also gets me with other peoples' kids. On our honeymoon we were on Granville Island in Vancouver BC. Went into a cute baby stuff shop because we were certain that I was brand-newly pregnant (and I was). Small shop, but stuffed to the rafters so you could barely see the door from the cash register. The racks were too close together for even an umbrella stroller, which is a questionable decision for a baby-stuff shop.

A woman had left her infant in one of the jumbo strollers right at the door. Hubby and I walked in and each thought "gosh, want a baby? free today!" or variations of that. As we looked around, dreaming, we noticed that the woman was VERY busy with her shopping, and never even looked up to see who had entered the shop. The whole time were in there she didn't notice us (we were watching her at this point). Neither did the employee. As we finally left, no one noted us leaving, either. We were very tempted to just take the stroller outside...it was a very cute baby and his mom didn't seem to mind if he was there or not...but decided that with our luck a police officer would walk by just then and WE'd look like the bad guys... Of course, that woman probably wouldn't have noticed even after we'd been arrested...


Anyway, I wouldn't do it (leave a baby while I go into a store), and I don't care if I was left to sleep in the car after a long trip, in our open garage...it was ridiculous of my mother to let me do that (especially given our drug-dealing neighbors), and it would be ridiculous of me to do anything of the sort, especially out in public, now.
 
I haven't seen a baby left in a car, the odd child looking about 10 but why would you call the police about a child that old or older. As for Maddie the whole thing was so odd there is a site publishing them


50 facts about the case that the British media are not telling you

Among other things you’ll find in the new leaflet that is to be printed in the New Year:

The major contradictions in the statements of the McCanns and friends
The highly trained British police dogs who detected the scent of a corpse
Strange things the McCanns have said and done
How the McCanns wasted public money on useless private detectives

Can we be sure that Madeleine McCann really was abducted by a stranger? Please take a careful look at these facts about the case, which you won’t find in any of our mainstream media. And if you are concerned about the contents of this leaflet, please copy and pass on to your friends and contacts.

SECTION A. What happened before and after Madeleine was reported missing?

1. The McCanns originally claimed they found the shutters and window of the children’s room open. They ’phoned relatives that night saying: ‘An abductor broke in and took Madeleine’. But when police and the managers of the complex declared there was no sign of forced entry, they changed their story, saying they must have left the patio doors open. The window had been cleaned the day before. Only Kate McCann’s fingerprints were found on the window.

2. The McCanns gave different accounts of whether they were both with Madeleine at tea-time on the day Madeleine was reported missing - and gave three different versions of who read the children bedtime stories the night Madeleine was reported missing: (a) Kate (b) Gerry or (c) they both did.

3. Kate McCann said that their friend Dr David Payne knocked on the front door of their apartment at about 6.30pm on 3 May, but was immediately sent away without ever entering. Dr Payne, however, said he came in, saw all three children dressed ready for bed, and stayed for at least several minutes.

4. The McCanns said the children were in their pyjamas by 6.30pm the night Madeleine disappeared, were bathed at 7.00pm and asleep by 7.30pm. But just a few weeks later, in his blog, Gerry McCann wrote: “The twins must like their new cots as they were asleep by 7.30pm which was most unusual”.

5. Dr Matthew Oldfield claimed he and his wife arrived at the Tapas bar at 8.55pm, but then went back to the Paynes’ apartment to chase them up as they were late. Dr Russell O’Brien confirmed that: “Matt, around 9pm, got up and said ‘I’ll go and drag them out’.” The Paynes flatly contradicted this.

6. Dr Matthew Oldfield changed his story several times. He said he did one ‘check’ on the children, then said he’d done two. He changed his story about the 2nd check, first saying that he walked by the McCanns’ apartment, later saying he’d entered it. Dr Kate McCann claimed Dr Oldfield said, at 9.30pm: “I’ll check on Maddie for you”. Why didn’t he say: “I’ll check on the children?”

7. The McCanns’ friend Jane Tanner insisted she’d seen someone carrying a child close to the McCanns’ apartment at 9.15pm the evening she was reported missing. But she changed her description of this person several times. Later, one of the McCanns’ detectives said she might have seen a woman, not a man. She claimed that when she saw this man, she walked past Gerry McCann and a friend, Jez Wilkins. But neither of them could remember seeing her.


8. Instead of looking for Madeleine, two friends of the McCanns tore off the cover of Madeleine’s Activity Sticker Book, writing down what they claimed was a record of the night’s events. They then wrote out a second timeline of what they said happened. In both versions, they said Jane Tanner had seen an abductor around 9.15pm. But she did not tell the McCanns what she had seen for 24 hours.

9. The McCanns claimed they were dining yards from their children, said they could see their room, and said it was ‘just like being in your back garden’. In truth, the children’s room was 120 yards away and the children’s room was on the far side of the apartment block and they couldn’t see their room.


10. Gerry McCann on 4 May (the day after Madeleine went missing) said: “Yesterday, Madeleine and and the twins were put to bed in their respective beds at 7.30pm”. Yet when the police arrived at about 11.00pm, they found a bed where Madeleine was supposed to have slept and two cots. Moreover, in a magazine interview in January 2008, Gerry McCann said: “On one bed the twins lay sleeping.

11. The McCanns said Madeleine and younger brother Sean were crying on their own the night before she was reported missing. Yet they left all three children on their own again the very next night.

12. Gerry McCann claimed that a senior Social Services official had told him: “Your child care was well within the bounds of responsible parenting”. He has never said who that was.

13. The McCanns, when asked a simple question as to whether they had given the children Calpol or other sedatives the night Madeleine was reported missing, denied on TV ever giving their children Calpol or other sedatives. But Kate McCann’s father confirmed that they did give the children Calpol.

14. The McCanns said: “Madeleine does not like to be called Maddie and does not answer to Maddie”. But Gerry McCann called her ‘Maddie’ on Friends Reunited, the twins called her ‘Maddie’, and their relatives and friends called her ‘Maddie’. A long list of examples is at www.mcannfiles.com

15. Kate McCann said that when she went to their apartment at 10.00pm on 3 May, she was 100% sure that Madeleine had been ‘taken’. But the McCanns allowed their 7 friends, several staff from the Ocean Club, and others, to traipse all round their apartment, thus contaminating a crime scene where vital forensic evidence could have been found. The police found no forensic trace of any abductor.

16. On the night Madeleine was reported missing, two sets of police arrived, the local GNR, and then the national force, the PJ. On the first occasion, Gerry McCann fell down on his knees, spreading out his arms on the ground, rather like a Muslim at prayer. On the second occasion, both Gerry and Kate McCann repeated that same strange gesture, on the double bed in their apartment, in front of the PJ.

17. On 4 May, the day after Madeleine went missing, the McCanns were returning to Praia da Luz. The police seized CCTV film at a petrol station, showing a girl similar to Madeleine with two adults. The police asked the McCanns to return to Portimão, but Kate McCann became irritated at being asked to visit the police station again. The police said she showed no hope Madeleine could be found.

18. In a BBC TV interview, Kate McCann admitted that she had never spent any time at all physically looking for Madeleine.

19. The Portuguese police were told by British police: “The McCanns have no credit or ATM cards”. But their flights to Portugal and hire of a Renault Scenic in Portugal were paid with credit cards. Then Gerry McCann admitted having credit cards, saying they went missing after his wallet was stolen. He gave two different places where his wallet was stolen: Waterloo Station - or ‘near Downing Street’.

20. After she was taken in for questioning on 7 September, Kate McCann was asked 48 questions by the Portuguese police. She refused to answer any of them. She was asked if she realised that she was hindering the investigation by refusing to answer questions. She said: “Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks”. Their official spokesman, former head of Labour’s Media Unit, Clarence Mitchell, stated: “The McCanns were fully within their rights not to co-operate”.

21. Mitchell was appointed the McCanns’ spokesman by former Prime Minister Tony Blair. Mitchell once boasted that as the £75,000-a-year Head of Unit, his job was ‘to control what comes out in the media’. When Mitchell’s post with the McCanns became part-time, he immediately landed a job with Freud Communications, owned and managed by Rupert Murdoch’s son-in-law, Matthew Freud.

22. The McCanns said publicly in August 2007: “We will take a lie detector test at any time”. Then a newspaper offered to pay for one. They then changed their mind and said they wouldn’t.

23. Some months after they returned to England, the McCanns and their friends were asked by Portuguese police to take part in a reconstruction of the events of 3 May 2007. They all refused.

24. When asked by a Portuguese journalist from Sol to give some details about Madeleine’s abduction, the McCanns’ friend Dr David Payne said: “This is our matter only. We have a pact of silence. All comments must go through Gerry McCann”.

25. The McCanns’ friends gave three different versions of how often they were supposedly checking the children - hourly, half-hourly and ‘every 15 minutes’.


26. The Portuguese police did not believe that the McCanns’ friend Jane Tanner was telling the truth about the abductor she claimed to have seen. Following a series of mobile ’phone conversations between Gerry McCann and former Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Brown pressurised the Portuguese authorities to allow Gerry McCann himself to release a description based on Tanner’s dubious claims.

27. The Home Office refused the Portuguese police permission to examine the McCanns’ credit card and bank statements, mobile ’phone records and Madeleine’s medical records.

28. Gordon Brown was told that Portuguese detective Mr Amaral, who took the McCanns in for questioning, would be removed from his post before he himself was informed.

SECTION B. The evidence of the cadaver dogs

29. On British police advice, the Portuguese asked top dog handler Martin Grime to bring his springer spaniels, Eddie and Keela, to Praia da Luz. Eddie is trained to detect the scent of human corpses; Keela is a bloodhound. Eddie had never given a false alert in over 200 previous outings. He alerted to the odour of a human corpse in these locations: four different places in the McCanns’ apartment, two of Dr Kate McCann’s clothes, one of the children’s T-shirts, on the pink soft toy, ‘Cuddle Cat’, and in two places in the car the McCanns hired. Eddie did not alert to a corpse scent anywhere else in Praia da Luz. Keela detected blood, which may have been Madeleine’s blood, at some of these places.

30. When they heard about the dogs’ findings, the McCanns reacted strangely, claiming that…
The ‘smell of death’ may have been found on Kate’s clothes because she was said to have been close to six corpses in her last two weeks at work, on the pink soft toy ‘Cuddle Cat’ because she ‘sometimes took Cuddle Cat to work’, or that the ‘smell of death’ could have come from rotting meat that Gerry McCann was taking to the local rubbish dump from time to time
If Madeleine’s DNA, were to be found in the boot of their car, it may have come from the children’s dirty nappies they claimed they were carrying in the boot
Any blood found in the flat might have come from Madeleine ‘grazing her leg’ or suffering a nosebleed. In fact, with the help of Martin Grime’s bloodhound, the police found blood underneath the tiles below a window in the living room of the McCanns’ apartment.

31. The McCanns also claimed that sniffer dogs were ‘notoriously unreliable’. They quoted a U.S. case where a cadaver dog’s alert was said to be wrong. Months later, the dog’s alert was proved right.

32. In 2008, a Portuguese TV interviewer asked: “How can you explain the scent of cadaver found by the British dogs?” Kate McCann replied: “Maybe you should ask the judiciary. They have examined all evidence”. When the interviewer pressed Kate McCann for an explanation, Gerry McCann intervened, smirking, and replied: “Ask the dogs, Sandra”.

33. When the McCanns moved from their apartment to a villa in Praia da Luz, a neighbour saw their car boot left open all night long. A relative of the McCanns, Michael Wright, admitted to police that this was because of a horrible smell in the car. This was the same car where Eddie, the cadaver dog, alerted to the smell of a corpse.

34. Kate McCann clutched ‘Cuddle Cat’ in front of TV cameras, claiming it reminded her of Madeleine, and was ‘comforting’. Yet shortly before the sniffer dogs arrived, she washed Cuddle Cat, claiming it ‘smelled of sun tan lotion’. This would make forensic analysis of it much harder.


SECTION C. Strange things the McCanns have said and done

35. The McCanns ignored police advice not to publicise Madeleine’s distinctive mark in her right eye, a ‘coloboma’. They said that if she was with an abductor, it could place her life in danger. On 15 July 2009, Gerry McCann said: “We thought it was possible that publicising her coloboma could harm Madeleine. Her abductor might do something to her eye. But in marketing terms it was a good ploy”.

36. Kate McCann, in 2007, said: “I know that what happened is not due to the fact of us leaving the children asleep. I know it happened under other circumstances”.

37. On 3 June 2007, Gerry McCann said: “We want a big event to raise awareness she is still missing…It won’t be a one-year anniversary, it will be sooner than that”. On 28 June, he said: “I have no doubt we will be able to sustain a high profile for Madeleine’s disappearance in the long-term”.

38. On 11 December 2009, Gerry McCann said: “There is no evidence that we were involved in Madeleine’s death”. The previous year, the McCanns’ spokesman said: “Can I suggest you actually quote me accurately. I said: ‘I believe Kate and Gerry are not responsible for Madeleine’s death’.”

39. On 24 August 2007, Gerry McCann, in a Scottish TV interview, said: “In fact, one of the slight positives in all of this is that there is so much rumour about what did and didn't happen, it's actually very difficult, if you're reading the newspapers, watching TV, to know what is true and what's not”.

40. Asked to comment on his reaction at learning that Madeleine had been abducted, Dr Gerald McCann said: ‘It was like being told you were overdrawn on your student loan”.

41. Clarence Mitchell, the McCanns’ spokesman, said in September 2007: “There is a wholly innocent explanation for any material the police may or may not have found”.

42. Unlike most couples who lose a dear child, they did not cling to their other two children. Others cared for them while they flew round the world to meet the Pope, visit the U.S. and do TV interviews.

43. As with all of us, the McCanns’ body language may yield valuable clues. During TV interviews, the following conduct has been observed: avoiding eye contact, nervous twitching, tense facial expressions, shaking their heads while making various assertions, and touching or scratching their faces at difficult moments. They were seen smiling and laughing on what would have been Madeleine’s 4th birthday, just 10 days after she went missing. Many people say they have not seen evidence of the grief that couples would normally express if they had lost a much-loved daughter.

SECTION D. The Fund and the McCanns’ private detectives

44. Only 13% of the McCanns’ Find Madeleine Fund has been spent on searching for Madeleine. The Fund is a private company, not a charity. Much of it has been used on the McCanns’ legal expenses.


45. The first detectives the McCanns employed were the highly controversial Spanish group Metodo 3. Just before Christmas 2007, their boss, Francisco Marco, boasted his men were ‘closing in on Madeleine’s kidnappers’, promising ‘Madeleine will be home by Christmas’. These were lies.

46. Next, the McCanns turned to a private investigator called Kevin Halligen, who has various aliases. He set up a one-man company called Oakley International, formed after Madeleine disappeared. Yet the McCanns’ spokesman claimed Oakley were ‘the big boys’ in international private detection. The McCanns are said to have paid Halligen £500,000, which he squandered on high living and hard drinking, achieving nothing. At present (January 2011), he has been in Belmarsh High Security Prison over a year, awaiting extradition to the U.S., where he is required to answer $2 million fraud charges.

47. All the main ‘private investigation’ agencies used by the McCanns had expertise in such areas as money-laundering, fraud, state security and intelligence - not in finding missing children.

48. The McCanns have produced 16 different artists’ impressions of suspects, ‘persons of interest’ and ‘persons we wish to eliminate from our enquiries’. Yet despite their spending millions of pounds, we, the public, know nothing whatsoever about who is supposed to have abducted Madeleine.

49. The McCanns took legal action to ban Mr Amaral’s book on the case: ‘The Truth About A Lie’. They succeeded in September 2009. But in October 2010 the Portuguese Appeal Court lifted that ban. The McCanns are carrying on with their libel action against Mr Amaral, using their Fund to do so.

50. The McCanns said late last year that their Fund was running low and that the Fund ‘might run out of money soon’. Yet at the very same time, they were negotiating a multi-million pound book deal.

http://www.disboards.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=41444777
 
A million things are suspicious about the McCann's story and behavior. But as a mother, the TWO that jump out are:

1. The mother supposedly returns to the condo to find Maddie gone, but the twins still there. She leaves the twins alone and vulnerable, while she goes back to the bar, over 100 yards away (the length of a football field) to tell the other adults that Maddie is gone. They all have to make the return trip to the condo, and the twins have been left alone all that time. Stink Alert!!!! If I came back to a condo, one child was gone, but toddler twins were still there, I sure as heck wouldn't LEAVE them in an unlocked condo while I went and alerted my group.....What if they were "kidnapped" while I left? No, I'd call for help using a phone or carry one twin under each arm and run like a crazy woman if needed. But any mother I've ever spoken to agrees that to leave your young twins back at the very condo you claim their older sister was abducted from, with no one to protect them, is not natural. It is a mother's instinct to protect her babies.

2. Maddie is kidnapped at night and bright and early the next morning, the McCanns dump the twins off at the resort's kid club, just the same as they'd done every day before. Couldn't get rid of them fast enough. They had plenty of friends to watch them, but no........let's pawn them off on strangers, one of whom theoretically could be associated with the "kidnapper." Again, what mother would take her eyes off her two remaining children so soon after one was taken? Let alone to hand them over to strangers you don't even know you can trust..... No, you'd want them close, or at least with a trusted friend.

Everything about those two and their lot of narcissistic CYA friends is creepy. They focused less on finding that child and more on CYA. And most of all, on raising money. My favorite was their plan (begun just a few months into the disappearance) to have a ONE YEAR ANNIVERSARY benefit concert. They were trying to get big name artists to play at it. Who plans a one year "Our DD is still missing" concert when she's only been gone a couple of months? Sopunds like they knew she wouldn't be home at one year........ They dropped that because they got such bad press for it.
 
1 Maddie was not left in a car she was left with her siblings in a hotel room
2 its never been de riguer to do what they did and they have been condemed by a lot of people for doing it.
That has to be the worst argument for this ever. Btw at what age would it (according to you) be ok for kids to be in a car?

I never left the kids in the car by themselves until they were at least 12. DS gets to stay with DD2 in the car now (17 & 7), but I wouldn't let him stay in the car with her until last year, when she got her license.

People don't leave their phones or wallets in the car. Why would you leave a small child in there? Are they thinking their phones/wallets are worth more than their babies?? :confused:

Who cares if there is a law preventing it or not? Why would you put your child in that situation???

:idea: Be a responsible parent and take your child with you.

Once again: http://www.news4jax.com/news/28007852/detail.html

http://www.news4jax.com/news/26792453/detail.html

http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_18177322?source=rss&nclick_check=1

http://lifestyle.msn.com/messageboa...00000&_p=00000065-0000-0000-0000-000005161302

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090825_11_0_BRLSIL658961

http://www.fox8live.com/news/local/...ped-in-carjacking/V_FhOy1ip0SZOezQiUQGZw.cspx
 
I don't know what a WaWa is, but it sounds from your description that it would be the complete opposite of let's say a Target or Walmart. If it were a big box store, I would have no hesitation calling the police. If this WaWa is a place where the child was not out of the mom's sight, I would let it go.

I think sometimes parents are just being lazy by leaving their child in the car. I have never done it. Not even to go and pay for gas. And I live in a very, very safe area.
 
There is actually a media push in the Mid-South to call the police immediately if you see a child alone in the car. Too many little ones have died in recent years down here, as cars get so hot so fast. 5 kids in 5 separate incidents died in one summer alone because they were unattended in a car or daycare bus.
 
Aw dagnabit, now I have to have my husband arrested. He left ME and our son in the car the other day. OK well the windows were open enough for me to stick my fingers through (so that someone could see my bright pink grownup size fingernails just in case they didn't notice ME in the car, if they saw DS and thought he was alone), and it was a typically cool semi-rainy lovely June PacNW day.

My point is...don't say "nobody should be left in a car without the AC running period any age", because...our car was perfectly cool and lovely and DS got a nice little nap while I was feeling very sick and hubby did the shopping. The key is to have a legal driver with keys there keeping an eye on things from inside the car (so they know how hot/cold is it).

As cold as it has been in our state, the man should be arrested for leaving you guys in the car without the HEATER! :rotfl: ;) I'm seriously doubting that summer will ever happen in Washington State. I'm getting anxious about it because I'm going to a couple outdoor concerts at the zoo next month and if the rain doesn't go away....well then what? :eek: Good grief!

That aside, I find this thread to be really fascinating. I think there are things that all parents do that others would never dream of doing. I personally never left my daughter in a car unattended, though I don't think it is THAT bad of a thing to do IF it's a good neighborhood and you can see the car at all times. I, on the other hand, would not allow my daughter to spend time at the homes of people who kept guns that were not locked up. Some people told me I was over protective. :confused3 I also wouldn't allow my daughter to spend more than a few minutes in any home where the parents smoked inside. I got asthma from second hand smoke when I was a kid and didn't want my daughter to have the same problem. I was called paranoid more than once over this!

When we went to Disneyland the first time, I allowed my daughter, who was seven at the time, to use the ladies room by herself. I could see the door from where I was sitting in New Orleans Square, but did not feel the need to take her in. Judging by threads I've seen on the DIS, some parents would call CPS on me for that! :rotfl: When she was 13, I got tired of birthday parties and decided at that point to let her pick a friend each year and I'd drop her that the friend off at the water slide park all day....then leave and enjoy a quiet day to myself. Some people thought that was irresponsible of me and that something could happen to them unattended. Nothing ever did and they had a great time.

My point is unless a parent does something that puts their child in immediate and obvious danger, then it really boils down to nothing more than differences in parenting. I'd be willing to bet that every one of us does or did things with our children that others would think was very wrong. I don't believe it's using great judgment to leave a child in a car unattended, but I also don't think it is as bad a thing as many people here believe it to be. Had I witnessed the situation, I would have waited until the parent came out just to make sure the child was ok. Then I would have driven away and never given the incident another thought.
 
Why is it ok for some to play the cop and watch the car themselves to see if parent comes out? If there is concern at ALL The police will always say to call THEM. This is their job. They will deal with it, even if it is a stern talking to. Far more effective than a stranger and much more likely to have an impact. The man who did call police would have no idea someone else was watching the car even if someone was unless that person stands at the car and verbalizes what they are doing. It goes both ways. If someone witnesses a possible crime with someone stalking a child, the police would be called in a heartbeat. That person wouldn't wait around to see if something tragic happens. This man acted with his best judgment. IMHO he did the right thing. Instead of criticizing someone's action/reaction, he should be applauded for it.
 
Why is it ok for some to play the cop and watch the car themselves to see if parent comes out? If there is concern at ALL The police will always say to call THEM. This is their job. They will deal with it, even if it is a stern talking to. Far more effective than a stranger and much more likely to have an impact. The man who did call police would have no idea someone else was watching the car even if someone was unless that person stands at the car and verbalizes what they are doing. It goes both ways. If someone witnesses a possible crime with someone stalking a child, the police would be called in a heartbeat. That person wouldn't wait around to see if something tragic happens. This man acted with his best judgment. IMHO he did the right thing. Instead of criticizing someone's action/reaction, he should be applauded for it.

The reason I would watch the car is simply so I could determine whether it was just a parent who ran into a store to pick something up or a child that was abandoned for a long period of time. I do this sorta thing all the time. If I'm at Disneyland and see a small child roaming around, I watch it for a few minutes to see if the parents show up. Any time I see a child or animal in a situation that *could* be dangerous, I watch for a few minutes to see if it resolves. Just because a situation CAN be bad doesn't mean it WILL be bad. If people called the police every time they saw a child unattended in a mall or store or car, the police would be too busy to do anything else. In my opinion, a responsible citizen will keep a concerned eye on a situation that is uncertain and wait until there is truly a danger and at that point call the police.
 
I was just reading about this issue last week on the internet. I looked up which states had laws regarding leaving children unattended in cars. I read a story of a woman and her son who were RUN OVER in a park by a van that had small children left unattended n it and the somehow disengaged the gear shift and threw the vehicle into DRIVE. It killed the little boy and critically injured the mom. She was mangled up under the van almost to death. I tried to find the link to the story I read but I can't find it now.

It is illegal in a lot of states, and it should be. People who endanger their own children and the lives of others by leaving a kid unattended in a car should go to jail.

Now if the kid is 12 or 14 and can stay safely in the car for a few minutes... that is a little bit different than leaving a small child unattended.
Once a child is old enough to be left AT HOME alone legally can also be left in a car without much danger to themselves or others. The only risk you run leaving an older child in the car is having someone car jack the car and take the kids with them.

My kids are 10 & 11 and are constantly asking me to please let them stay in the car while I go in the store, but I never have and won't anytime in the near future. I would not leave them at home alone and I won't leave them alone in the car.

Those of you who thinks it's ok because ppl did it 25 years ago are naive and in some cases, very stupid. We also didn't wear seat belts 25 years ago but we now know how stupid that was and now we wear them. I use to see little kids riding in the back window of cars when I was little but what dumb idiot parent would let a kid do that nowadays? Hopefully nobody. You use to be able to let your child go run off for the whole day exploring the woods and riding the bikes all over town. Do you do that now? If you do, you're stupid. There are so many child molesters and killers and perverts out there just waiting for someone like you to leave their kid on their own.

I saw someone call the police one day on a lady who left her whole CAR FULL of little kids unattended in the Blockbuster parking lot and I was glad to see it. I don't know if she went to jail. Knowing the police around here, probably not, but she should have.

It only takes 10 seconds... one time...l of leaving a kid in a car alone for something tragic to happen.
 
Why is it ok for some to play the cop and watch the car themselves to see if parent comes out? If there is concern at ALL The police will always say to call THEM. This is their job. They will deal with it, even if it is a stern talking to. Far more effective than a stranger and much more likely to have an impact. The man who did call police would have no idea someone else was watching the car even if someone was unless that person stands at the car and verbalizes what they are doing. It goes both ways. If someone witnesses a possible crime with someone stalking a child, the police would be called in a heartbeat. That person wouldn't wait around to see if something tragic happens. This man acted with his best judgment. IMHO he did the right thing. Instead of criticizing someone's action/reaction, he should be applauded for it.

The reason I would watch the car is simply so I could determine whether it was just a parent who ran into a store to pick something up or a child that was abandoned for a long period of time. I do this sorta thing all the time. If I'm at Disneyland and see a small child roaming around, I watch it for a few minutes to see if the parents show up. Any time I see a child or animal in a situation that *could* be dangerous, I watch for a few minutes to see if it resolves. Just because a situation CAN be bad doesn't mean it WILL be bad. If people called the police every time they saw a child unattended in a mall or store or car, the police would be too busy to do anything else. In my opinion, a responsible citizen will keep a concerned eye on a situation that is uncertain and wait until there is truly a danger and at that point call the police.

Post number 2 is exactly why we watched. As I said, we assumed the person with the kids was at the ATM, the car was visible from 1 ATM and just around the corner from the other two. It was when DBF did his ATM business and came back to the car that we realized the person with the children in the car was IN the bank, not simply at the ATM, because DBF saw everyone in line ahead of him do their business and leave. Then we were sure the person with them would be right out, but we waited to make sure they were OK, I was NOT going to just leave 2 small kids in a locked car for an unknown amount of time, we waited another few minutes and still no one came out so DBF called the police, he actually called 911 and was told that yes it was absolutely an emergency. At that point we'd been there for 5-10 minutes, I don't know exactly, this was quite a few years ago. The dispatch officer ASKED us wait, so we waited. I was glad we did and I'd do it again in a second!! I too will watch kids if they look "alone" or "lost" to me. I've actually had DBF go up to security at DL while I kept an eye on a kid because I wasn't sure where the parents were, DBF let security know what was going on and they approached the kid(s), it works better that way I think. :) No parents thinking I'm stalking them and their kids. lol
 
As cold as it has been in our state, the man should be arrested for leaving you guys in the car without the HEATER! :rotfl: ;) I'm seriously doubting that summer will ever happen in Washington State. I'm getting anxious about it because I'm going to a couple outdoor concerts at the zoo next month and if the rain doesn't go away....well then what? :eek: Good grief!

That aside, I find this thread to be really fascinating. I think there are things that all parents do that others would never dream of doing. I personally never left my daughter in a car unattended, though I don't think it is THAT bad of a thing to do IF it's a good neighborhood and you can see the car at all times. I, on the other hand, would not allow my daughter to spend time at the homes of people who kept guns that were not locked up. Some people told me I was over protective. :confused3 I also wouldn't allow my daughter to spend more than a few minutes in any home where the parents smoked inside. I got asthma from second hand smoke when I was a kid and didn't want my daughter to have the same problem. I was called paranoid more than once over this!

When we went to Disneyland the first time, I allowed my daughter, who was seven at the time, to use the ladies room by herself. I could see the door from where I was sitting in New Orleans Square, but did not feel the need to take her in. Judging by threads I've seen on the DIS, some parents would call CPS on me for that! :rotfl: When she was 13, I got tired of birthday parties and decided at that point to let her pick a friend each year and I'd drop her that the friend off at the water slide park all day....then leave and enjoy a quiet day to myself. Some people thought that was irresponsible of me and that something could happen to them unattended. Nothing ever did and they had a great time.

My point is unless a parent does something that puts their child in immediate and obvious danger, then it really boils down to nothing more than differences in parenting. I'd be willing to bet that every one of us does or did things with our children that others would think was very wrong. I don't believe it's using great judgment to leave a child in a car unattended, but I also don't think it is as bad a thing as many people here believe it to be. Had I witnessed the situation, I would have waited until the parent came out just to make sure the child was ok. Then I would have driven away and never given the incident another thought.

Leaving a child in an unattended car IS putting a child in immediate danger; it is not simply a difference in parenting. Even a quick trip to the store has too many uncontrolable possibilities. The line could be too long, the clerk could be busy....There are often new stories about criminal breaking into cars only to find a child in the backseat.

Parenting is full of inconveniences, I feel that schleping my kid in and out of the car is one of the smaller ones.
 
Leaving a child in an unattended car IS putting a child in immediate danger; it is not simply a difference in parenting. Even a quick trip to the store has too many uncontrolable possibilities. The line could be too long, the clerk could be busy....There are often new stories about criminal breaking into cars only to find a child in the backseat.

Parenting is full of inconveniences, I feel that schleping my kid in and out of the car is one of the smaller ones.

Exactly! :thumbsup2 Why take the risk? :confused3
 
Leaving the car running (thus unlocked) is the problem. If she was only out of the car for a few minutes and could see the kid at all times, I don't see a problem.
 
True story: A few years ago, in the midwest, a good mom left her 6 year old adorable boy strapped in the back seat of the suv while she went in to grab a quick sandwich. It was a small place in a good part of town and she could see him from where she was. It only took seconds, but someone carjacked her suv. She ran out and tried frantically to unstrap her boy, screaming the whole time. The carjacker took off, dragging the little boy to his death.

Why take the risk? What in any store is more important than your child???
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!











facebook twitter
Top