Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

AIBU to go to the pub 30 metres away with a video monitor.

344 replies

HoveDad · 25/04/2013 12:04

I live in a terrace of houses and ten doors down is a really nice pub that does great food. Would it be horribly irresponsible to leave the kids (8,4 and 2) home alone with a video (+audio) monitor watching the doors to the bedrooms, toilet and hallway? One of us could be home within one minute of seeing / hearing a child but in the mean time we could be sat having a couple of pints and a tasty meal with friends with a laptop/ipad on the table showing what's going on in the house.
I suspect this isn't ok and haven't suggested it to my wife yet but wanted to canvas opinions. You could get the kit to do this for ~ £100 which is what 4 baby sits would cost.

OP posts:
pickledginger · 25/04/2013 14:43

There have been a lot of threads like this over the past few days.

LibertineLover · 25/04/2013 14:44

So you say you could watch all 3 bedroom doors, the hallway and toilet? all on one screen? even if that is the case, what about the windows in the bedrooms?

Not surprised to hear you haven't run this by your wife, you wouldn't be asking if you had.

HoHoHoNoYouDont · 25/04/2013 14:46

HoveDad Put the idea to your wife and let us know her response. I'm intrigued to know what it would be. Genuinely.

I have nothing further to add, I think quite a lot has been said already.

BearsDontDigOnDancing · 25/04/2013 14:49

Hardly hysteria, my point is, you can go out with the best of intentions and say we will be home within 90 seconds of hearing the alarm, or noticing something, but really, if they want to out for a meal with friends, they are not going to be sat there with the laptop in the table keeping a close eye, they plan on having a cpl of drinks, so, they are chatting, eating away, drinking and they might have started watching the screen every 30 seconds or so say, but over the next hour, they are caught up in the "good food" the drink, the conversation and that 30 seconds stretched out quite easily to 5 minutes or so, without them even noticing.

My point is, he either cant keep as close an eye on as he intends, or he plans on doing so, at which point, it is not an enjoyable night out and there is no point really.

sudaname · 25/04/2013 14:49

Did she don you in a flameproof suit before she sent you out here Hmm.

Just a thought but maybe your DW knows its a ridiculous idea and hence threw you to the lions suggested you poll Mumsnet.

BumpingFuglies · 25/04/2013 14:51

Oh look another one of these threads Hmm

To save time:

OP: Shall I do an utterly twatty thing?
MN: No. It's twatty
OP: But...
MN: No
OP: You're all hysterical. I am fabulous.

MurkyMinotaur · 25/04/2013 14:51

As others say, HoveDad asked a question and accepted the answer.

There are many opportunities to be right about something here because the idea had many unwise risks to point out.

Those have been pointed out now. Normal Dad. Bad idea. Lesson learned. Ditch the additional judgements. Move on. Right?

HoHoHoNoYouDont · 25/04/2013 14:51

Grin @ sudaname bunch of lions

Or the nest of vipers!

fluffyraggies · 25/04/2013 14:57

It's.not.worth.the.risk

It's not worth the risk.

It really isn't.

Especially for the sake of a pint in a pub.

MNBlackpoolandFylde · 25/04/2013 14:58

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Cherriesarelovely · 25/04/2013 14:59

Sorry, not trying to pile in when everyone else is doing so but couldn't help but respond......the reason so many people are answering you in such a emphatic way is that this goes against instinct and to many of us even thinking about it makes us feel ill. Yes, the risks may be "small" statistically but my god, what a price to pay for a night in the pub!

Cherriesarelovely · 25/04/2013 15:00

x post with fluffy, who summed it up.

ryanboy · 25/04/2013 15:03

Won't a babysitter be far cheaper than all this paraphernalia?

BearsDontDigOnDancing · 25/04/2013 15:04

Anyway...you leave a 2 year old alone you run the risk of this..

I left my two in the living room on their own once for all of 2 minutes, and got back to my 2 year old having found a black permanent marker pen (lord knows from where) and had drawn all over herself, the floor, their little table, the fire place, the windows, the windowsill, the wallpaper.

Do you have any idea how hard it is to remove a black marker moustache from a 2 year old!! Nvm anything else, that was an expensive 2 minutes since we had to repaint the windowsills, re wallpaper that section of wall and we never quite managed to get it off the fire place surround!

And i spent a fortune on magic eraser blocks to get it off the floor.

enormouse · 25/04/2013 15:05

Errrm what everyone else said, especially fluffy.

Also it seems a pretty expensive, complex audio visual enterprise.
If my DP came to me and said he wanted to rig up this kind of system for watching our DS I'd tell him he'd lost the plot. Completely.

Tee2072 · 25/04/2013 15:13

It is hysteria. The likelihood of something happening (The 2 year old might run a bath? Seriously?) is tiny.

Life is risk. You take a risk every time you walk out your front door.

As I said, I wouldn't do it. But not because someone might kidnap my child or a fire might break out. Both of which are highly unlikely.

imour · 25/04/2013 15:17

sounds like dad got kids for the day, 1 at school ,1 at pre school and 1 having a nap , hes bored so on here trying to wind all the mums up lol

spd4 · 25/04/2013 15:19

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

afussyphase · 25/04/2013 15:19

I also think there's a difference between maybe doing this once in a lifetime there is risk but it is low and setting it up to do it regularly. I can definitely understand the temptation, and I confess that we've stayed in pubs where the rooms are behind a locked door, right above where the tables are, and where we could see the only exit, and have had a meal in the restaurant there (gasp!). With the monitor. I have friends, lucky friends, whose houses are big enough that were closer to the room than we would have been at their house - no one would doubt the safety of eating in the dining room of a large house, 30m from the childrens' room, maybe EVEN without a video monitor.

So it's kind of context-dependent. The fact that you're off your property seems to matter, but would it really be less safe than at the end of a 50m garden, say? And most people would be fine with that since it's not "public". I don't think the "public" comprises much additional risk, really, but why does it, or doesn't it? After all, you could have DC running a bath / walking out the front door/ turning on the hob / laundry marker havoc if you were eating dinner on your lovely stone patio 30m from your back door, with or without your video monitor. Or in your dining room with friends enjoying loud-ish conversation, if you had a large enough house not to hear the DC.

Anyway. I get why you're tempted. I wouldn't do it and I certainly wouldn't want to see someone set up the video etc system to do it regularly. Opinion here suggests you'd have trouble enjoying your evening. But: is the actual danger really more than sitting in a big house/ big garden, especially if to do that, we wouldn't think you'd need a monitor? If not, then maybe we should all be very glad we don't have big houses or gardens because we'd want to stay within 10m of our babies anyway :)

mummymeister · 25/04/2013 15:23

spd4 I wouldn't do it because most accidents happen in the home. they happen in a split second and usually when you least expect or anticipate them. it is unreasonable to the eldest child to leave them in charge when they don't have the where withal to know what to do. how would my eldest feel if the youngest had an accident on their watch. we have only just started leaving ours aged 11 - 15 because I feel confident that the eldest DC knows what to do in an emergency and the youngest understands safety.

SirBoobAlot · 25/04/2013 15:24

For the amount this shit idea would cost you, you could afford a real human being to be there for your children.

My pet hate about technology is that some morons seem to think it's acceptable to interchange it for a person.

BearsDontDigOnDancing · 25/04/2013 15:29

it is all to do with how you feel after...that is why people have an issue. The guilt factor. Even if you are in a big house, or at the end of a big garden, you are still on the same "property" so, if anything was to happen, you know that you were there. If you were in a different building, 5,10 however many doors down, and something was to happen, even if it was the exact same outcome as if you had been in the first scenario, the guilt would be more. That would be how it is different and why people say it is different than being at the other end of a large house or a large garden.

But I never said there was a chance that something completely out of the blue will happen, I just think that he is lying to himself about how close an eye he thinks he will be able to keep via a screen in a social setting.

AugustaProdworthy · 25/04/2013 15:34

No!

Tee2072 · 25/04/2013 15:35

I've already said, twice, spd4 that I wouldn't do it because I don't think the tech is trustworthy enough.

If I had a close by pub and felt comfortable that the tech would be 100% reliable? I'd probably do it.

But wifi, video feeds etc are subject to errors. I don't chose to take the risk I feel is inherent with the tech.

It has nothing to do with a hypothetical house fire or, FFS, drawn bath.

jollygoose · 25/04/2013 15:36

remember madeleine

Swipe left for the next trending thread