Nobody fed the baby.

[shaylla]

I need a bit of perspective from others point of view here please.

A 13 month old - given breakfast at 7.30, then instead of his normal lunch is only given half an eggs worth of scrambled egg at lunch time. No water or milk all day then till 5 when another adult returns home and finds out (and feeds baby immediately). The adult/s in charge of the baby all day 'didn't realise' ... ??

This is neglect yes?

OP - generally speaking, I think you’re unjustly getting a hard time from other posters on here.

i don’t blame you giving minimal info at first - and I do think the info you gave initially was more or less enough for people to give a reasonable opinion on the situation. Sometimes people give minimal context initially because they want others’ opinions to be objective as possible on that particular situation itself. And then if they add further info they’re instantly subjected to cries of:

”DRIP FEED!!!!!!!!!!”

OP I think it’s really good of you to offer to look after the baby more often.

And there are some parents out there that can’t look after babies for a day on their own without calling for ‘Army back up’, as it were

I have a funny feeling that gaming was involved here. If the dad had a headset on and didn’t show his parents where his wife had left the food etc it all makes sense.

So the child ate at breakfast, lunch and at 5. Am I alone in thinking the reaction here is a bit over the top?

But the whole issue is that he's not looked after the baby properly. It would also be interesting to know what else he's done all day. Have they been out for a walk/shopping? Has he done anything useful in the house? You know, the sort of things the DD will be doing when she's at home with the baby.

It's not her job, but how will Dad learn if Mum always takes care of everything?

I mean this more generally. It's so easy for mums to fall into the trap of becoming default parent for various reasons, such as maternity leave and breastfeeding.

Yeah I think you're alone.
I'd be fuming if my husband didn't even bother filling the baby's water cup or offering milk, offering random stuff the baby didn't like instead of his lunch is weird too.

Wouldn't surprise me.

The baby's Dad is hardly a "new caregiver,".

I was referring to the grandparents as they were the ones feeding baby.

Because the poor wee man can't look after his own child, he needs his parents, and now the OP (so the in-laws too) to help him look after his own child????

Fuck that for a game of solidiers.

Dad steps up here. Puts away his games console (as I'm guessing that is the only thing that he was doing all day) and he starts looking after his child.

It really is that simple.

Why do each of your scenarios have to be mutually exclusive? I'd say it's all three to be honest.

Some babies/kids aren't attune to thirst and need prompting - I had one like that still like it as older teen- also can be starving one day and not hungry next.

Some Grandparents do forget baby care - or assume toddlers will ask for drinks as their's did. MIL especially had bloody odd ideas around kids that age - though was okay once they could talk.

The Dad do not get - missing snacks possibly but not knowing your child might ned prompting to drink or to offer when you an adult has one - just don't get. Did he slip into I'm with my parents so reverts and assume it shared responsibility - assume it wasn't his job to look after the kids - I had words with DH about this if everyone was watching/caring for the kids it means no one was.

@shaylla - I am sorry some posters are being so angry with you about it, it seems quite unfair as I totally get why you started the thread without all the information so that it could be focused on the main issue at hand.

One question I just wonder is does the father work full-time and so is effectively trying to work from home and look after the baby? I don't think that's really fair on him if that is the case. Or the child.

I stayed at home for the first full year and then my son went to nursery three days a week. It would seem better if the baby went off to nursery and had stimulation and social contact rather than sitting at home with a father who is too busy/incapable to actually look after him properly.

But equally It seems very incredible It's got to the child being a year old and he still doesn't know that s/he needs to be given regular drinks from a sippy cup, etc - but if he is trying to do a full-time job WFH while looking after such a young child that is a bit of a recipe for disaster

I can totally understand your plan to step in and take over, but I would be a bit wary about doing that for many reasons – I think children starting at nursery and having a few days there per week is no bad thing.

The issue is not the food, it's lack of drinks all day for a 13 month old. That is neglect.

Humans can last quite a long time without food, but cannot last very long without fluids. Small children get dangerously dehydrated very quickly. This is why so many of them get hospitalized during vomiting bugs.

How do more people not know this basic fact?

Wow, the context is very important tbh because if it had been like some sort of family crisis going on, and the baby been hastily placed with a load of relatives who don't really know much about children and weren't sure who was in charge, and had loads of other stuff going on, just for one day, then it would be like "well, not ideal, but oh well."

But the child's OWN FATHER, and grandparents, ALL OF WHOM were specifically there only to look after the baby??? That's just absolutely bloody hopeless.

I wouldn't necessarily say it means they can never look after the baby again, but I would certainly read them the riot act and if they don't sound like they understand what the problem is, or if it ever happens again then they should never be alone with the baby again.

its not gross neglect.

This, I know so many friends this has happened to. In one case he used to leave the children alone to go and do his hobbies when it was his turn. Thankfully the oldest child is old enough to call the mother who went and got them (many times). Because nothing bad actually has happened to them (because mother steps in to do more than 50% when her ex just abandons them) she is still in a fight for court to recognize she is doing more than 50% and that he is neglectful. Same ex has also palmed them off multiple times on a succession of girlfriends. The kids now don't want to go to their Dad's but the constant saving them from neglect is affecting the mother's ability to work. He actually doesn't really want 50% but he does want to financially abuse his ex and the system enables him to do so. He knows she won't leave them being neglected.

Sorry bit off topic, but have seen this or a variation of this happen so many times.

Was this grandparents who were supposed to be offering care?

Sorry, missed a page

That's absolutely bloody shocking and I'd have raised merry hell with my 'D' H

this is all so… odd

are they the grandparents? Not wilful neglect per se if it’s a one-off, and they’re not used to looking after the baby, but sounding more like sheer and utter stupidly combined with the arrogance of the “I know best” attitude- why didn’t they give the child the food that was provided for him?

I would not be leaving a baby in their care again

Yep, and the child was observed so closely all day we can be sure he/she wasn't given a drink all day yet also totally neglected. ....and he/she had nappies changed. Schrodinger's neglect.

There is no way this child went all day without a drink. It's just third hand Chinese Whispers. He/she had the time of her life with Dad and Grandparents and most likely had a good few treats as well. Grandparents don't visit their grandchildren with the aim of neglecting them. More likely spoiled rotten.

Yes, a neglectful father even wore thin for a friend of mine's teen/tween DSs when they realised that the initial euphoria of being allowed to game all night, eat mostly takeaways and not bother showering also came with no washing being done ever, getting into trouble at school because they'd not done their homework and not having uniform that fit because he'd not taken them to buy it when he was supposed to. One of them now lives entirely with his DM and the other lives with a friend. Friends ex lives in squalor, as would many lazy and neglectful men, left to their own devices.

I don't think we will know the true version here as it relies on speculation.

Was this the dad's first time looking after the child? Only you mention daughter doing an extra day, so is this a one off?

Also is it too many people assuming someone else has done a job?
With the drink could a grandparent assume dad had done this? Did the grandparents know they were meant to be looking after the child or did they simply think they were visiting (to me this would mean they might be less helpful as a visitor rather than a helper).

Does the daughter actually want to go to work, or does she want husband to mess up as a good excuse to stay home? How much involvement does he have when she is there in getting the food and drink?

Not giving any drinks at all might be.

You are just making stuff up now. You have absolutely no idea whether the baby had the time of their life with their grandparents and a few treats as well.

OP said:

'We know no drink was offered because the main adult admitted it. Forgetfulness is the excuse.'

We know that the grandparents didn't give the baby the lunch that the mum had left with instructions, but gave the baby different food that it did not like.

The grandparents obviously didn't visit the baby with the aim of neglecting them. They sound incompetent and clueless, as does their son, the baby's dad.

The main adult was watching the baby all day closely enough to know it didn't drink. But didn't notice it crying from thirst?

What were these three adults doing? Staring at a baby all day so they could all be sure it didn't have a drink but never helping it in any way except to change the nappy which somehow became full more than once despite no food or drink intake for 9 hours.

If this had been three drug addicts I can fully understand a Trainspotting type incident but two grandparents and a Dad neglecting a baby in one specific way whilst looking after it perfectly in every other way and watching it constantly to be sure none of them gave it drink. Doesn't pass the sniff test.

Occams razor says Chinese whispers.