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

[strawberry34]

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.

Or even worse, you would SEE your child destroy the ticket on the monitor.

I would say that if you take your child out to eat in a restaurant, the odds are greater that they are run over or have an accident, than if they are safely asleep in the locked hotel room with the baby monitor on, and parents in close proximity.

and then they would choke on the ticket before you could get back to the room

Why do you think hotels are full of baby snatching paedos by the way? I don't. In fact, I have been careful to avoid making comments like that because the chance of that happening is small and suggestions that there are paedophiles lurking around every corner are ridiculous. However within our family, we have had our hotel room accessed using a key to gain entry (either by a staff member or mugger) three times. The first was when my Mum's bag was pickpocket'ed when DT and I were 20 months old; they got in and cleaned the room out. If DM and D had left us to go for dinner in the interim, well, I think we probably would have been a bit scared to say the least.

I have dealt with three hotel fires within a comparatively small geographical area in the last 18 months. They aren't as rare as you think. You can't compare fighting your way down a long, unfamiliar hotel corridor and a domestic property which you could navigate around blindfolded. Unless you live in Sandringham, or something. Anyway, I'm not having a go, clearly it's worked for you. I'm just saying I wouldn't do it.

The first was when my Mum's bag was pickpocket'ed when DT and I were 20 months old; they got in and cleaned the room out. If DM and D had left us to go for dinner in the interim, well, I think we probably would have been a bit scared to say the least.
Probably not as surprised and scared as the intruders. I should imagine the vast majority would beat a very hasty retreat.

You have been unlucky TheCraicDealer I have never had such an experience but like I say, with a baby monitor you would have heard the intruders and would probably have been there before they left with your valuables.

As for fires. I still state that a hotel is less of a fire risk than your home because of all the safety measures they put in place. I'm not talking about 1 star hotels but reputable hotels. Because they ban smoking, because all the electrical wiring HAS to be checked and certified; because they have to do these checks regularly; because they have a fire plan; because they have sprinklers and smoke alarms and fire extinguishers.

If you were staying with relatives or a friend you cannot vouch for the safety of their homes. What if one of them smoked? What if they had a real fire? What if the batteries were out of the smoke alarm? What if the wiring was faulty? Yet I bet that almost every poster who has condemned me would happily stay at a relative's house with their child and not even think of the fire risks.

I got my MIL a smoke alarm because I did think of the risks, that's how irresponsible a parent I am.

Rhubarb

You've heard actual instances from myself and another member who worked as a hotel manager. If you choose then to dismiss this risk then of course that is your choice. Some mothers still smoke around children/whilst pregnant etc.. there is only so much people can say to get others to appreciate the risks and prioritise the wellbeing of the child. It appears to be this type of scenario here.

I think its perfectly understandable that people would judge as especially in light of the infamous case (and in a similar sort of vein to smoking) the majority of people have greater awareness and are not as complacent these days.

It's completely different from smoking in pregnancy!

Smoking in pregnancy = quantifiable, demonstrable, proven risk to child

Leaving baby in hotel room with provisions that seem adequate to parent in the individual circumstances = uncertain risk

What we are arguing about, surely, is the degree of the uncertain risk. It's ridiculous to suggest that those of us who argue there are circumstances in which we would take such as risk are no different from people who consciously put their baby at a known risk through smoking.

Would you still justify the risks you took if something did happen to your child while they were left unattended in a hotel room?

Could you look people in the eye ever again and say I did the right thing by leaving my child in a unfamiliar place because I did a risk assessment?

I'm sure MM's parents did a risk assessment and felt it was the right thing to do. If nothing bad had happened that night maybe they'd still justify their decision today but I'm sure they regret it looking back.

I know I'm a slightly cautious parent but that's mainly because I have suffered with anxiety for several years. My brain often plays me images of terrible things happening to my kids. I will follow my instincts as much as possible on whether something feels 'right' and this just doesn't to me.

because all the electrical wiring HAS to be checked and certified; because they have to do these checks regularly Ya think? They have to for liability to engage, but it's not checked up on as often as you'd hope. And a good proportion of hotel fires (at least in this neck of the woods) are deliberate; if an accelerant is used sprinkler systems and fire extinguishers will do frig all, the best bet is to get everyone out safely and wait on the appliances to arrive. The level of smoke is unreal, seriously.

I'll concede your point about the domestic housing situation, but leaving young children in a hotel room on their own is not on a par with being in their normal room, in their own home.

I think it is grotesque to keep comparing this to Madeleine McCann, esp when you won't even mention her name. Completely different scenario and those poor parents will always be blamed. It's disgraceful.

hamilton75 I never came on here to have my opinion changed dear. I came on to speak common sense, to put facts and stats on the table and explain why I chose to do what I did. I did not think I would change anyone's views either but I did think that those who were making terrible comparisons and hurling abuse about might actually stop to think.

Greater awareness - did you know that child abduction cases have decreased? And that the majority are by someone the child knows?
Did you also know that hotel safety is now much better thanks to strict health and safety laws? When you say greater awareness I say greater paranoia.

Sorry but you have come up with ridiculous hypothesis time and again which fly in the face of common sense.

Oh, and I couldn't give a rat's arse about the valuables, it would be the point that strangers got in to our room and scared the kids without me being there to protect them, that would put the shitters up me.

Not judging here. Honest.
I'm in the "wouldn't do it" camp as I've said.
I think there are some reasoned arguments on each side and also some spiky comments from both camps too tbh.

But.
The fire.
Definitely more risk in a hotel than is being suggested.
Plenty of ppl smoke in their rooms. Secretly.
Appliances are left on in unfamiliar surroundings
Nobody smokes in my house.

thecakeisalie, if something happened to my child while I had left it alone in a hotel room, I would, obviously, feel dreadful. But my point is that we have to do risk assessments all the time. As it happens, there are very few circumstances in which I would leave my child alone in a hotel room. But I think it is bonkers to act as though doing so if a form of low-grade child abuse in itself.

WITH A BABY MONITOR

It is so so so convenient for you lot to keep leaving that out isn't it?

WITH A BABY MONITOR FOR SHIT'S SAKE WITH A FUCKING BABY FUCKING MONITOR!

We can hear what they are doing. We can see what they are doing and yet you still think someone will come in and carry them away?
You still think that they will pull a ton weight on their heads and die?

thecakeisalie many parents whose children have died from sudden death syndrome and in many other ways think that all the time I am sure. What parent wouldn't? I would never let my child out of my sight if I thought that way and that would do more harm than good to my child.

Your arguments are all based on hypothetical risks and emotional guilt trips. I am so glad I don't know any of you. You would infuriate me to the point of explosion.

Would you still justify the risks you took if something did happen to your child while they were left unattended in a hotel room? Could you look people in the eye ever again and say I did the right thing by leaving my child in a unfamiliar place because I did a risk assessment?

But you could say exactly the same if you fell down the stairs carrying your baby on the way to the hotel restaurant or if the waitress spilt hot coffee on to your child. Would you say that you should have left them sleeping in their hotel room?

There are risks in everything you do in life. Some decisions are just judged more even though the actual risk is slight.

I apologise for using MM and not mentioning Madeleine McCann by name it wasn't deliberate just typing quickly. I personally think its a legitimate example of what is being suggested. Its one of those times where everyone thinks it'll never happen to me and unfortunately it did.

You say they will always be blamed but in all honesty can you say if they had been in the room with her that night it would have still happened?

I think if you are fully happy with your decision you don't need to spend time on here justifying that decision.

TheCraicDealer

So a hotel carries some fire risk? Do you think I didn't know that? I still say a hotel is safer as regards fire than a house.

Let's just say you took your baby to your parents-in-law and you had separate rooms. Your baby wakes up in the night in a strange room without you there and starts to cry. Do you feel guilty about that?

No? Then why should I who was in a hotel restaurant and who heard my baby rouse and was there before she started crying properly.

Let's also say that your PIL live in a old house with faulty wiring, but they don't know that and neither do you. Do you insist on seeing the wiring certificate? No. Neither do I in a hotel but I can be sure that the wiring would have been checked more often than in a domestic house.

Let's also say that your PIL had an open fire, lovely in the evenings but when was the last time they had the chimney swept? What if there was a chimney fire? Also, you can see the one smoke alarm downstairs but what about upstairs? And do you ask them if they have checked the batteries recently?

I am guessing you would not do any of these things let you would take an acceptable risk and you would allow your child to stay overnight in that house. You might even have a meal downstairs with your PILs whilst your child slept in a strange room upstairs.

No way would I do it. It's nothing to do with paedo paranoia either - it's just what's called basic, responsible parenting. Leaving kids alone while you swan off for a meal and drinks is neglectful parenting.
Taking away from the abduction, or boa constrictor analogies on here (FGS) How do you think your child would feel if they woke up in a strange hotel room, all by themselves and not a clue where their mum and dad have gone? Or when, or indeed if, they'd be back? Minutes would seem like hours. They'd be terrified.
Or is that acceptable for them to feel that way?
All for the sake of a child free evening. If you want 'adult only' evenings on holiday - leave the kids at home with their grandparents. Or take another trusted family member with you to be babysitter on evenings.
If not possible, suck it up and remember you're a parent now. It's the kid's holiday too. Not just yours.

No shewhowines - what you have described there are potential accidents in everyday situations not an example of leaving a baby unattended with just a monitor in an unfamiliar place.

It wouldn't have happened with a baby monitor!! They would have known someone was in the room. Anyway they were too far away and the room was unlocked.

But the McCann case is not the same at all - see Rhubarb's point about the monitor. And there are other factors - proximity of parents, size of hotel, whether you leave the actual building, as I stated upthread. Surely you can see that risks have degrees? Your child could be hit by a meteorite and it would be "one of those times where everyone thinks it'll never happen to me and unfortunately it did". But it's really bloody unlikely isn't it?

I am not justifying that decision. I am not asking for anyone's acceptance. If I had to do it again I would.

The judgemental attitudes on here are making me wish I bloody well could do it again, live on Mumsnet so you can all have a good pearl-clutching moment.

I don't agree that it isn't comparable as in light of the M case I don't see how anyone can argue there isn't a known risk. People who would choose to leave their baby alone in a hotel room are consciously making that very choice.

The risk may be small but it is a real risk (as I am aware of through my professional experience and as other members have shared through their experiences).

Not every baby whose mother smoked has suffered harm so to that extent its an uncertain risk but most people wouldn't take that risk with something so precious at stake. Same goes for leaving a baby alone in a hotel room.

Unlikely but not impossible - with a monitor or not.

Accidents happen, bad people exist and so on - all I was saying was personally I could not justify my decision in the unlikely event that something did happen and I was curious whether those people with a different stance would maintain there stance if something bad were to happen. Its how my mind works - if the worst happens do I feel I did the right thing.