Note: Please bear in mind that whilst this topic does canvass opinions, it is not a fight club. You may disagree with other posters but we do ask you please to stick to our Talk Guidelines and to be civil. We don't allow personal attacks or troll-hunting. Do please report any. Thanks, MNHQ.

to think it's wrong to leave a baby/toddler sleeping alone in a hotel room?

(766 Posts)
strawberry34 Sun 07-Jul-13 14:03:22

When you have a monitor and are still in the premises?my friend says she does it when on holiday, she goes to the bar/restaurant and responds to the monitor if her 2yo dd wakes, I was shocked and said I wouldn't ever want to, I stay in the room and read a book/have a bath. Aibu to think what she's doing is wrong? I don't want to refer to famous cases but to me there's too much risk.

<laughs evilly>

Spero Tue 09-Jul-13 18:00:31

I have read worse. <mutters darkly>

But that's a pretty good example.

I regard my contribution thus: Positionality has been characterised Robert Merton (1988, 18) as taking the role of “the ultimate participant in a dual participant-observer role”; in other words, the researcher is herself a member of the social world under study (Anderson, 2006).

In one fell swoop, I reinforce every one of spero's irritations with academics!

prettybird Tue 09-Jul-13 17:36:08

I don't think you're even in the ball park. I think I'll need to sit on the fence on this one. Either that or decide to go after the low hanging fruit. Either way, you have been punching way above your weight. grin

(ex-sales person who worked for an organisation which loved to use clichés)

You would cut through Nethuns like a flaming sword through butter grin

Spero Tue 09-Jul-13 17:26:34

Damn you all.

Maybe netmums will show more appreciation.

The jargon crown is still mine!

<dances in circles>

yamsareyammy Tue 09-Jul-13 17:08:58

grin

Spero Tue 09-Jul-13 16:49:53

Well yams I think that is quite the most ridiculous assertion thus far on this thread.

<flounces in bitter rage>

But in all seriousness <strokes beard in pondering way> I always forget how poorly humour translates on Internet, either that or I am just crap at it.

I am constantly being accused of being angry and upset when I thought I had just made a delightfully witty aside.

Sigh.

Back to work.

yamsareyammy Tue 09-Jul-13 16:32:48

Dont think you are as good as Buffy with her jargon btw!

yamsareyammy Tue 09-Jul-13 16:31:52

<would now use legal speak, but dont know any!>

I do presume you are joking btw! Dont know for sure, I am not that good with jokes, as my nearest and dearest can testify<managed to find and use a legal word>!

Spero Tue 09-Jul-13 16:23:32

That is an accusation at once both unfair and untrue, made without any or any sufficient consideration of the evidence before you. Kindly retract forthwith.

yamsareyammy Tue 09-Jul-13 15:17:39

In all seriousness, I hope that the op is still reading this.
And wish that this last part of the thread, was at the beginning of the thread.

yamsareyammy Tue 09-Jul-13 15:15:52

I was going to mention jargon speak Spero wink

prettybird Tue 09-Jul-13 15:10:10

You're sounding more and more like a lawyer with every post Spero grin

Spero Tue 09-Jul-13 15:09:36

I am in fact supposed to be WORKING or at the very least re-writing the kitchen health and safety policy in light of yesterday's appalling slip up re correct placing of open milk carton, so I am going to have to turn my computer off now as I clearly have no self control at all.

Spero Tue 09-Jul-13 15:07:45

May I qualify my earlier answer to say that disagreeing with me does set up a presumption that you are in fact wrong, but I may grudgingly allow you to rebut that presumption on provision of very compelling evidence.

Spero Tue 09-Jul-13 15:06:20

Yes, I think that would be fair to say. If you already have a history, then even further minor slip ups are likely to be viewed more harshly.

This may well be fair enough. But as ever, it depends so much on the circumstances of each individual case.

yamsareyammy Tue 09-Jul-13 15:05:55

Yes, love Spero's answer Buffy grin

yamsareyammy Tue 09-Jul-13 15:04:37

Ok.
So to answer the op better, the op's friend is taking more of a risk, legally wise, if she is already known to social services?
Because if something did happen, and she was already known to social services, there could be serious repercussions.
I think I meant, untested, as in untested monitor wise. Not sure now. Cant quite remember.

And just because I disagree with it doesn't make it wrong

<copies and pastes into feminism thread>

Spero Tue 09-Jul-13 14:57:01

Prettybird - quite a chilling example of law of unintended consequences. By trying to save our children from dangers of cars we actually make them MORE likely to die by refusing to allow any opportunity to develop road sense in a relatively safe environment.

Spero Tue 09-Jul-13 14:55:17

Buffy, it should be clear to you that I have NO time for your feminist whimsy, what with running a v tight ship at home <hoicks clipboard> and constantly contributing insightful and provocative postings to various on line debates.

Yams - in the long run it may have been the right decision to remove my client's child. She was finding it hard. I just thought using this five min trip to get cigs as the trigger to removal was unjustified.

I would have done the same.

SW are just human like the rest of us, subject to the same prejudices and quirks. They should be better trained than most of us and try to put prejudices to one side but no person, or system is perfect, just as no risk is ever entirely absent.

And as I said, the Judge supported the decision to remove. So they were not permitted to make a unilateral and permanent decision. So I don't accept decisions are 'untested'.

And just because I disagree with it doesn't make it wrong.

(that was quite hard to type)

Yams I'm glad that the legal system takes each case on its merits though, aren't you? Even if it doesn't always get it right, at least that's better than blanket rulings?

yamsareyammy Tue 09-Jul-13 14:50:10

Spero. So it may well be one rule and judgement for one parent who does it, and one rule and judgement for another.
It seems to be a bit untested, court wise?

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now