To think a jail sentence for this tragic case of neglect achieves nothing?

[QuadBod]

The mum whose baby drowned in the bath while she was distracted on her phone: BBC News - Northamptonshire mum jailed for killing baby son left alone in bath
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-56860846

Completely tragic, but what does the jail sentence achieve? Publicity perhaps, and maybe that will help to save other lives, but otherwise I don't get it.

It's hardly likely that there weren't other instances of neglect. It was just this one that killed her child. And as the judge said she didn't accept responsibility for the death of her child then a jail sentence seems appropriate to me.

I wonder if there was more to this case than we know about. I agree that I was surprised that someone could be prosecuted let alone sent to prison for what seems to be a momentary error of judgement/lack of safety knowledge. She said she didn't realise he could slip out of the baby seat. It also said that there were no other signs of neglect.

Lying about being on her phone is perfectly natural. You would have been feeling terrible and scared about being judged over what was in retrospect a stupid thing to do. She didn't lie about having left the room just why she had left the room. I don't see much problem with that.

I looked up the other cases of gross negligence manslaughter and the examples I read were much worse cases of negligence over time or really really obviously stupid things to do that could very obviously lead to and did result in someone's death. They tended to involve active decisions made instead of lapses of judgment.

That's why I wonder if there was more to it than we know or (and I hope not) that she received harsher treatment because if class and/or race discrimination.

Having said this, I do see a pattern of us starting to prosecute "accidents". A man the other day was convicted of careless driving (he was spared the higher penalty of dangerous driving and prison time) after he accidentally pressed the accelerator rather than the brake. Unfortunately this resulted in him running over two people who were killed. He was a pensioner who had just dropped off his wife at the hospital and had otherwise a clean record. The relatives of the deceased were very unhappy that he had "got away with it" (not sure if they actually said that but that was the gist). And I understand they are grieving and have lost loved ones so are angry and upset; but as a outside observer the whole thing sounded to me like a terrible accident.

I also wonder if he would have been treated more harshly (ie recd a harsher sentence or prison time) had he been a young working class man or woman or a black person? These people tend to be viewed very differently by the justice system and society than an elderly white person, and different assumptions made about their motivations.

There was another lady a while back who was prosecuted for forgetting to put her handbrake in when she stopped her car and unfortunately and very sadly killed her friend as the car started to roll as her friend got out. Awful and obviously we should do our utmost to not make such mistakes but things do happen to the best of us.

People are not robots we are fallible and we make mistakes and usually there are no awful consequences but sometimes there are. Punishing people for making mistakes isn't going to cause fewer mistakes so I'm not really sure what the point of it is. Other than to make us incredibly nervous (and probably make more mistakes as a result!).

Not sure I want to live in a society that criminalises people's mistakes. Even if those mistakes have terrible consequences.

Would you send the McCanns to prison too?

Er, yes. Blatant child neglect. Much like this case, only worse.

What bearing do the Mcanns have on this though?

[quote Griefmonster]@JamesMiddletonsMarshmallows are you being deliberately inflammatory and obtuse? This case is in no way comparable to baby P and the fact you are attempting to align the 2 is outrageous and to my mind exposes your prejudice.

This mother has not been accused of murdering her baby or abusing her baby.

She was found guilty of the UNINTENTIONAL death of her child. An accident, resulting in death and caused by her short term negligence (which appears to have been a one off and NOT a pattern of concern to anyone).

If we are going to invent details from the limited information we have, a more likely context is a mother with some kind of learning difficulties, physical or mental disabilities, unable to grasp the consequences of her actions. She is distracted, resulting in the death of her child. She lies at first (it is not a sustained lie through the court case) due to inherent distrust of services, learnt from previous experience .

I felt desperately sad for the child and the mother when I read the story. Both of them were failed by a system that isn't doing enough to support families who need it.[/quote]
Yes I'm inclined to agree with this.

Interesting to see all the comments suggesting that she's suffering enough and will be haunted by this for the rest of her life

I guess it's an obvious thing to assume because that's how most of us would feel, but let's not forget an assumption is all it is. Not knowing Simone I can't know whether this applies here, but sadly there are some mothers who simply wouldn't care very much

@GiveMeTulipsfromAmsterdam

Ps the mccanns deliberately lied to the police saying the room was locked so someone must have broken in... ah but that's ok?

They didn't say the room was locked.

@RaiseTheBeastie

Would you send the McCanns to prison too?

Er, yes. Blatant child neglect. Much like this case, only worse.

What bearing do the Mcanns have on this though?

What bearing?

I said white, middle class professionals.... never even charged with child neglect let alone prison.... ! No charges at all.
This woman different background and psychological issues ends up in prison.
It is amazing what wealth, privilege and money brings to an outcome....

By being in jail there is less chance of her having another baby to kill.

@Bazinga007

By being in jail there is less chance of her having another baby to kill.

That's a ridiculous justification, given that it's only a 22 month sentence, potentially less if she's already spent time in prison whilst awaiting trial.

I said white, middle class professionals.... never even charged with child neglect let alone prison.... ! No charges at all.
This woman different background and psychological issues ends up in prison.
It is amazing what wealth, privilege and money brings to an outcome

The Mcanns should have both been sent down and it's a travesty that they weren't.

But two wrongs don't make a right...and this woman also deserved to be sent down.

@Bazinga007

By being in jail there is less chance of her having another baby to kill.

Social services can remove children at birth if they think it's necessary for their safety, but I doubt they would in this case tbh. Unless she's doing it deliberately, this is not a mistake she'll repeat.

That little baby deserves justice just the same as any other victim. If someone caused a fatal car accident because they were messing around on thier phone people would rightly be calling for that person to be jailed.
A helpless baby died because the person who was supposed to be looking after them thought thier phone was more important than insuring her child's safety. She knew she did wrong, that is why she tried to cover it up. She took the risk so she deserves the consequences.

She took the risk so she deserves the consequences.

She's got the consequences. Given the choice of the death of your DC or 22 months in prison, which would you take? Her child is dead, that's the ultimate consequence.

She didn't follow the instructions and her baby died. Would you want to jail someone who used a cot bumper against instructions, causing the death of their baby?

I don't believe cot bumpers are anything like leaving your small, helpless baby in a bath with water.
Anyone knows that is a massive risk and to do it for a text message and a phone call that she could have stayed in the bathroom to do anyway and put the phone on loud speaker there was no excuse to leave that baby, none at all.
I find the minimising of what she did on this thread really concerning.
Her child is dead because she was EXTREMELY neglectful.
You don't EVER leave a baby in the bath on their own let alone for 5 minutes!

Why should she recieve the same 'punishment' as someone who loses thier baby through no fault of thier own? She knew it was wrong to leave him in the bath, otherwise she would have been honest with police about what she was doing. He had the rest of his life ahead of him but because of her actions he won't get to live it, why should she have her freedom? She obviously didn't care about him that much otherwise she would have watched her child.

Cot bumpers are different as they are unfortunately still allowed to be sold in shops so many people think they are safe. I do think parents who read stories like Preston's (Justice for Preston) and continue to use them morally have a case to answer if anything happens to thier child as a result.

Her child is dead, that's the ultimate consequence.

And if the law took that approach, killing your child would go without further punishment. All you’d have to do would be to say you were sad afterwards. So their lives would be considered to have no innate value, only value to you as the parent.

What scary is how little others manage to get away with, either because the current laws are ridiculously lenient, or because of "technicalities".

Actions having consequences... that's how it should be.

I don't disagree that something should be done against manufacturers and suppliers of cot bumpers, not just the parents who use them despite constant reminders!

And if the law took that approach, killing your child would go without further punishment. All you’d have to do would be to say you were sad afterwards. So their lives would be considered to have no innate value, only value to you as the parent.

Not if you'd intentionally killed them, obviously.

I don't believe cot bumpers are anything like leaving your small, helpless baby in a bath with water.

Why not? Babies have died when they were left unsupervised with them, everyone knows not to leave babies unsupervised with them, we're told repeatedly that cots should be empty and bumper-less, many babies have used them unsupervised and gotten away with it.

Bath seats- we know not to leave babies unsupervised with them, babies have died in them, many parents have nipped out for a minute while their babies have been in them and gotten away with it. I doubt it was the first time this particular mum had left the baby unattended in the bath, and bath seats give parents a false sense of security around children and water, in a similar way to armbands in swimming pools.

And if you read the article, when the paramedics arrived she admitted what she'd done straight away and said it was her fault.

"Why not? Babies have died when they were left unsupervised with them, everyone knows not to leave babies unsupervised with them, we're told repeatedly that cots should be empty and bumper-less, many babies have used them unsupervised and gotten away with it."

I don't know why you don't understand this but water is extremely dangerous to leave a 5 month old baby in that cannot move them self properly they can drown on the tiniest bit of water.
Bath seats are not safe in the slightest, left unattended in them babies can easily slip out which is why you should be present because it's a bath of WATER.
I can't believe you seriously think leaving a baby in the bath in water for 5 minutes whilst you are on the phone is the same as using cot bumpers. unbelievable!
She had no reason to leave that baby she was negligent.

Not if you'd intentionally killed them, obviously.

But in all other cases the law distinguishes between ‘accident’, ‘negligence’ and ‘intentional killing’. Why is this different? Why should this baby lose his life without formal consequence?

The McCanns are white, middle class "respectable" people. Their surviving children weren't removed from them and they weren't prosecuted for neglect.

This woman is black, working class and possibly has some learning difficulties. And people are only too quick to say she absolutely should go to prison and that she might do it or something similar to any other children she may have.

No one has ever suggested that the McCanns might put their other children at risk even though they have never acknowledged that their actions were negligent

Branleuse

“Thats a tragic accident.”

No, it wasn’t. You don’t “accidentally” leave a baby not old enough to sit in the bath for nearly 5 minutes to look at SM (or for any reason at all). It was tragic neglect.

@Fieldoftheclothofgold

Not if you'd intentionally killed them, obviously.

But in all other cases the law distinguishes between ‘accident’, ‘negligence’ and ‘intentional killing’. Why is this different? Why should this baby lose his life without formal consequence?

Does a formal consequence benefit anyone in this case? Does it help the baby? Does it help society?

If not, why do it?