Readers yabntnhiie
— This editorial ran last month and I am only just getting around to writing about it, in part because just reading it again makes my muscles clench. The tone of the piece is so officious, so smug, and so cruel, I’d be tempted to lock its writer in a van for far longer than the six minutes this mom left her child. Here’s a sampling:
A Calgary mom has no doubt learned her lesson. The woman recently left her four-year-old son in her unlocked, running van while she picked up her daughter at a northeast school.
The mother said she was gone about six minutes, and when she came out, someone was stealing her van with her son in it.
Fortunately, the incident ended well, with the child unhurt after the thief crashed the van, and the suspect was taken into custody.
If the mom has “learned her lesson,” why is the paper urging further misery?
…charges of child endangerment need to be pressed to set an example, because no matter how often these types of things occur, other parents continue to leave their kids in similar situations.
Methinks the opposite: Charges need to NOT be pressed, lest other parents feel they can’t leave their kids for even a few minutes while they run an errand. I agree that it doesn’t make sense to keep the keys in the ignition — with or without a kid in the car. In fact, it’s dumb. But the mom didn’t commit a crime. The car thief did. And when the editorial goes on to patronizlingly remind readers:
It takes just a few minutes to get your child out of a vehicle and bring him or her along with you on whatever errand needs running. Sure, it’s more convenient just to leave a child in the car and do the errand, unencumbered. However, child safety should trump inconvenience every time.
If child safety trumps everything, how does the editorial writer square with the fact that more children die being hit by cars in parking lots and driveways than while waiting IN the car? This insistence that convenience is always wrong seems much more concerned with making parents “prove” they are bending over backwards for their kids, than with actually keeping kids safe.
Better a few extra minutes lost bundling a little one in and out of a vehicle than a lifetime of regret and what-ifs.
THIS! This sentiment that is the poison we are fed every day disguised as a “helpful tip.” START IMAGINING A LIFETIME OF REGRET. Every parent is exhorted to hallucinate the most horrific, tragic, unlikely outcome of the most average, everyday, safe activity before deciding how to act. Of course, once you have imagined the “lifetime of regret,” NOTHING seems safe enough other than grafting your child to your side.
That is why parents today feel so drained and worried. Either they are doing it “right” — hyperventilating about almost infinitesimal dangers. Or they are doing it “wrong,” by gauging the actual odds and even factoring in their own convenience. Tsk tsk. – L
29 Comments
It’s important to note that the editorial quickly received some very well thought out comments from Calgarians.
Good to know, Tim. The woman probably left the car running because of previous warnings about leaving kids in cars turned off. Also, the amount of time it takes to get one child out may not make much difference, but what about two or three or four? Who are then standing basically unattended in the parking lot while you get them all out, where there are at greater risk. On a good note, I sent my son into Walmart by himself yesterday because I had three sleeping in the car. Worked out fine.
Good to know, Tim. The woman probably left the car running because of previous warnings about leaving kids in cars turned off. Also, the amount of time it takes to get one child out may not make much difference, (although I don’t think people should be guilted into doing it) but what about two or three or four? Who are then standing basically unattended in the parking lot while you get them all out. On a good note, I sent my son into Walmart by himself yesterday because I had three sleeping in the car. Worked out fine.
The first two comments written re: this editorial really hit the nail on the head. I love it when people recognize who is the real criminal in this situation (i.e., the car thief), instead of immediately pointing fingers at the parents who are, for the most part, just trying to do their best. Even if a parent is doing something that is not good parenting practice, I don’t understand this need to “punish” him/her – where is the teaching, the learning to be a better parent? Reading stories like this make me glad that my kids are now 12 and 14. They can stay on their own, and I’ve even let them stay alone overnight. This is possible because I have instilled a sense of trust and responsibility in them since they were young, and they would not want to disappoint me by not behaving in a responsible and mature fashion – everyone comes out a winner!
Two things:
The mom was picking up another kid at school.
Who could not walk to the curbside while she waited. Why?
In current car-culture this scenario plays out thousands of times a year. Everywhere and for everything. Buckle and unbuckle. Pack up and down.
If you’re caught texting while driving, you get a ticket. Period.
They don’t threaten to take your kid away. You’re just a bad driver, not an evil parent.
That’s just another car-centric apologetic shrug. Oh well.
But yeah – lessons learned and punishment enough.
The fundamentalist family that punishes together shines righteous.
What a jackass.
I am tired of hearing “it’ll only take a few minutes to unbuckle” Just buckling and unbuckling adds ten minutes to a ten minute errand, and that’s if you have only one child that is being cooperative. Add another 10 minutes so you can walk at toddler pace or place said toddler in a stroller, and half an hour is wasted. This also assumes you never have more than one child to tend to.
Why should I be inconvenienced any more than necessary? I do enough for my kids, I don’t need to drag them out of the car for every quick errand.
This is chilling. The editor is advocating for police enforcement of a parenting style, with whatever awful thing *might* happen as the goad.
‘Here is how you should raise your kids, and if you don’t do it our way, you will be jailed’.
It wasn’t even a veiled threat. The article said so explicitly:
“… charges of child endangerment need to be pressed to set an example …”
“Parents need a deterrent, so that these incidents stop occurring. Letting parents know that charges will be pressed should they leave their small children alone in a running vehicle is the best way to prevent the danger from occurring in the future.”
Are you freakin’ kidding me?? The thought of even worst-first thinking isn’t deterrent enough evidently. We’re gonna jail you too.
The paper is clearly pandering to the very people that free-rangers are most wary of: Self-righteous jack-asses who want to feel justified in ordering people’s behavior to their specifications. And the paper is advocating a police state to do it.
Utterly and disgustingly pathetic. This is the state of journalism today! FA! Heads should roll at the Calgary Herald.
Perhaps the person who wrote this charming editorial should be given three little ones for a day, ranging in age from six months to five years. (After a thorough background check, of course.)
She or he (I’m pretty sure it’s a he, although it may be a woman whose children are grown, and who has forgotten how arduous it is to get anything done when in the company of children) should then be forced to bundle the kids in and out of jackets or (even better!) snowsuits, and in and out of car seats, keeping an eagle eye on them every single moment in order to prevent a horrible tragedy from occurring.
I guarantee it would give him/her a different outlook.
“However, child safety should trump inconvenience every time.”
Then outlaw:
stairs (falls)
bathtubs (drownings)
driveways (hit by car)
driving children anywhere (car accidents)
Eliminating these leading causes of accidental deaths would do more for child safety than prosecuting a non-criminal mom who left a kid alone to run an errand. Inconvenient not to be able to drive the child anywhere? But child safety should trump inconvenience so suck it up don’t leave the house. It’s a dangerous world out there.
And don’t even think of taking a shower and letting the kids out of your sight for a few minutes. Showers for adults should be illegal until the child can drive. Inconvenient to smell all the time? You are doing it for the children…
“Parents need a deterrent, so that these incidents stop occurring. ”
What incidents? Car jackings with kids in the car? Are those statistics really climbing that we need to start arresting people who leave the keys in the car and not more jail time for the criminals who take advantage?
Sounds like sanctimonious clap trap to me.
You think it starts with laws dictating how you are allowed to or must parent?
San Francisco passed a law dictating the diet and bedding you must provide your pet. That’s where it starts. If they can dictate for “fur kids” (pets), they can dictate for children.
So next time you hear of such a law, think before you cheer, because it WILL be extended to children in due course.
I have to remind myself from time to time that it’s self-involved and unhelpful to worry more about whether or not I may feel guilty in the future than evaluate the actual risks to my kids.
Sometimes I think parents avoid doing something, NOT because they think it’s a real risk, or because they actually worry about their children, but because they fear future regret if something does happen.
Also, I agree that a lot of mainstream parenting advice only works if you stop at two kids.
“The mom was picking up another kid at school.
Who could not walk to the curbside while she waited. Why?”
This is a REALLY good point. The ridiculous and cumbersome school sign-out policies make it so difficult for moms with younger kids. And yet, whatever they do it’s wrong; and the school is right because safety! and kidnappers! and child custody issues!
Well, put, Lenore!
“San Francisco passed a law dictating the diet and bedding you must provide your pet.”
Whoa whoa whoa…what?
The writer is a moron. People like him/her don’t care about child safety, they care about rules.
Is it not harmful to the child to have his mother arrested/reprimanded?!
This is a very scary ordeal and I am sure her own guilt will be more than enough for her to handle without the media and/or law getting involved!
Worst-first thinking aside, I don’t think the mom-shamers realize how it wears a mom down to drag kids in and out of car seats, in and out of errands, sometimes kicking and screaming, sometimes interrupting a much needed nap, all when you just really need to get a couple things done. It’s actually not a little thing. Many of us are still recovering from pregnancy and childbirth aches, pains, and injuries. Our necks and shoulders are all messed up from nursing and holding and carrying babies. Most of us are chronically sleep deprived. One less unnecessary cycle of the physicality of in and out of the car seat is like a gift from God when you’re in maternal pain and exhaustion. Insisting that moms soldier on, succumb to the fear, and do the extra step every time come hell or high water is a recipe for a mom’s nervous breakdown. And that does not benefit the children.
Andrea — to which the mom-shamers smugly reply, “If you don’t want to do the work, you shouldn’t have kids!”
Sorry, I signed up to raise children, not to fulfill every person’s notion of all the unnecessary tasks I should perform in order to be a “good mom.”
The asshat who wrote that isn’t in charge of running errands with the kids along. Period. Totally clueless. Sanctimonious turd.
What is wrong with the ppl on this thread? Parenting is hard. Yeah, you want a car, then buckle and unbuckle, too bad; otherwise walk. Someone stole the car with the kid in it, and yes, that’s not responsible parenting. IT’s lazy parenting.
Yay for Pentamom! “Sorry, I signed up to raise children, not to fulfill every person’s notion of all the unnecessary tasks I should perform in order to be a ‘good mom.'”
I hate these “engine running” stories because this seems to be the skewer in the shish kebab every damned time.
I know, we’re screwed if we leave kids in a cold car without the heat going for six minutes because the world and his wife say they might “freeze to death.” So we leave the heat on, the keys in the ignition, the doors locked… this is actually more dangerous than the ridiculous notion of freezing in a few minutes.
Same thing with hot. Screwed if you leave them on a warm day with the windows down, because “predators” (although I have yet to hear of an actual case where someone “stole” a child from a parked, non-running, no keys in the ignition car in a parking lot while parents ran an errand), screwed if you leave the car running with the A/C on.
For the love of all that is holy, PLEASE LEAVE THE CAR UNLOCKED AND OFF AND TAKE THE DAMNED KEYS WTIH YOU IF YOU LEAVE THE KID IN THE CAR.
Let them scream “child endangerment” and then make them produce the evidence that there’s any real risk at all, to anyone.
But leave the car running, and all bets are off.
I was left in the car so many times. The car was NOT RUNNING. I didn’t get abducted, I didn’t freeze, I didn’t faint from heat exhaustion. And the world was a little less polluted.
I think you meant to say “that convenience is always wrong.” It doesn’t quite make sense as written.
Ok, going to play devil’s advocate. One argument I have read on this blog is a child isn’t in danger if left alone in a car for a few minutes. Now, a child was left in the car and was actually taken, an unpredictable, dangerous situation. Are commenters angry about the article because the writer is smug or because the authorities are holding the parent accountable? Folks, there are times when negligence is criminal. The child was in danger this time, and the parent’s decision gave the criminal an opportunity. I try not to give criminals opportunities to steal my stuff, so I secure it by locking it up. If I fail to lock my bike up, and a criminal takes it, yes he is guilty of a crime, but my decision led to my loss. It is partly my fault because I made a bad decision. There are no laws on the books to punish me for my decision to leave my bike out, but there are laws for endangering kids. Mom rolled the dice and lost.
@Glen asked “Are commenters angry about the article because the writer is smug or because the authorities are holding the parent accountable?”
It would have to be because the writer is smug (and unrealistic, and in the cult of inconvenience etc). Because the writer is demanding the mom be arrested (aka the authorities hold the parent accountable) when the authorities themselves have not decided to hold the mom criminally liable for this.
And I agree she made a bad decision. Car thieves are far, far more common then kidnapers. A car that is left running is wearing a “steal me” sign. So yeah, bad decision.
That said I am with pentamom “I signed up to raise children, not to fulfill every person’s notion of all the unnecessary tasks I should perform in order to be a “good mom.””
Of course I follow the law in my area, even though it has cause more danger to my child than it has prevented.
@Glen
So what’s NOT rolling the dice? Did you see “more children die being hit by cars in parking lots and driveways than while waiting IN the car?” What if the child is run over in the parking lot while being walked into or back from the school? Should that too be negligence?
Leave the child at home with someone? What if that someone proves untrustworthy? Or an intruder breaks in, overpowers the caretaker, and harms the child? Is that negligence by the mother at the school?
There is no guaranteed 100% safe choice. That the car was stolen was certainly less than a 1% chance (and the child was safe in the end). But not 0%.
Agreed, the editorial is misguided. I live in Calgary. No problems for me leaving kids in car as long as there is fresh air and they are restrained or trained to stay in the car, but leaving engine running seems senseless. I’ve slept in cars lots in Winter in Calgary and you’re not going to die even after many hours. Abduction isn’t the problem here. There was an incident in Calgary in 2007 where a 2 year old died after getting head stuck in electric window activated by another child in the car. Good reason to turn the car off and remove the keys. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/girl-2-dies-after-getting-stuck-in-car-window-1.671970. I have also personally crashed a car when I was 5 years old when left unattended in vehicle at top of long steep driveway and managed to remove the park brake which sent the car hurtling backways for 50 m into a powerpole.
Pingback: Maggie's Farm