Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

2 1/2 year old and 18 mth old die in a fire...

79 replies

MrsWood · 01/02/2006 10:33

...whilst parents ignored their screams due to having a romantic evening together... WTF?!
Just read this in The Mirror. Apaprently, the boys were terrors, and parents changed the door handle to be turned upwards to get out so they couldn't do it. 2 1/2 y.o. lit 11 matches near his brother's cot... parents thought they were playing up and refused to go and see them. They had 80% burns and died few weeks later.
Terrible tragedy.

OP posts:
tiredemma · 02/02/2006 13:29

I have 2.5 yr old, there is no way he would be able to get at matches without me knowing about it. Put them up on a high shelf for christ's sake.

Do social services/ health visitors have no imput with regards to families of low intelligence having children?

Why on earth would you lock kids in a bedroom?

im probably asking the wrong questions, the parents have to live with this for the rest of thier lives, but for f*cks sake, someone should be responsible.

im responsible for my kids 24/7, who looks after kids of people who appear to be unable to look after themselves?

Dinosaur · 02/02/2006 13:30

tiredemma I agree with everything you've said.

tiredemma · 02/02/2006 13:41

dino, i could say so much more but at the fear of being shot down for insensitivity I wont.

But really, things like this make me so angry.

what is classed as 'Low intelligence' nowadays anyway? - not being able to read and write?

nobody can police who can reproduce, if they did then we wouldnt have kids having to be brought up in care, but my god, if they really were of that low intelligence that they think its ok for a 2.5 yr old to take matches to bed, then someone in authority somewhere should of been helping them.

kittyfish · 02/02/2006 14:54

Agree Tiredemma. No doubt it will all come out at the trial how SS were keeping an eye on them and how the kids wern't percieved to be in danger. I am so cross about this. Those poor, poor kids had no chance. Low intelligence my a**e. Those two must have been brain dead.

HappyMumof2 · 02/02/2006 20:16

Message withdrawn

monkeytrousers · 03/02/2006 08:16

"The court was told that the mother used to tie a t shirt between their door handke and another door to prevent it being opened too.'

That is actually a recomended atrategy in 'Toddler Taming'

kittyfish · 03/02/2006 09:27

I was too cowardly to post that myself happymumof2

kittyfish · 03/02/2006 09:31

I distinctly remember Super Nanny (can't think of her name) saying "We never lock children in their room." Which I would have thought is pretty good advice.

Elf1981 · 03/02/2006 09:42

Can I just say though that not all children in care are due to "bad" parents.
My friends had a daughter who was a toddler when they decided to have another baby. They had a son who was born with two holes in his heart, deaf and problems with his digestive system. It's a gene that my female friend carries that she passes onto boys. He was very very poorly, fed through a tube and lived in hospital for the first few months. He had his heart repaired, was allowed home but still struggled to eat. When he lost an oz in a week, social services got involved and took the baby into care saying that my friends couldn't look after him. He remained in care. At the same time, the daughter was diagnosed as having ADHD. Social services decided that they couldn't look after BOTH kids and it went to court and the parents lost custody. He has now been adopted by the family that had fostered him (he's nearly six now). My friend still sees him with the adoptive mothers consent. My friends now have another daughter and are doing fine with both kids, despite the younger one also being diagnosed as having ADHD.

tiredemma · 03/02/2006 09:53

" Toddler Taming???" how does locking a child in a room "tame" them? if anything it would only make them worse. They are not animals for F**ks sake.

The more I read about this, the more angry I get. The parents may be of low intelligence, but it doesnt take a rocket scientist to know that locking two children under the age of three, in a bedroom, while you are out of hearing distance, is an extremely bad idea.

I used to live two doors away from a family with two young boys, they also had a total disregard for their kids safety, ive lost count of the time that I had to literally sprint around to their house to tell the mother that they were both hanging out of a bedroom window.

im glad you posted that happymum, it is what i thought- but i thought i would get hung, drawn and quatered for saying it.

if they were of such low intelligence that they didnt understand it was wrong to let a 2.5 yr old play with matches, then they shouldnt of even been allowed to keep a dog. never mind children.

oneofeach · 03/02/2006 09:58

Intelligent enough to work out how best to keep their children locked in their room, sadly.

tiredemma · 03/02/2006 09:59

elf, my post was directed at people who shouldnt really be allowed to have children- for example,

a relative of mine with a drugs habit who takes her daughter out shoplifting, leaves her with strangers and takes drugs in front of her, plus leaving her in shitty nappies as she spends all her money on smack.

the case of the woman who left her daughter in a dirty nappy for so long that she had blisters, which in turn caused blood poisoning and she died, she went on to have more children.

i could go on.

i dont think that people who have children with such health problems that they stuggle cope should have their kids taken away, they need help.

The family with the boys who died in the fire needed help if they were of such low intelligence.

NotQuiteCockney · 03/02/2006 10:02

Um, state sterilising of unfit parents is a very slippery slope. Various countries have taken this up as a policy, and it always ends up being applied to people for some very spurious reasons. Like to 15-year-olds who are judged to be "promiscious". And it's generally applied much more to people of whatever ethnicity is locally "undesirable".

I think SS should obviously be involved, but sterilising people without their consent isn't something a civilised country does.

tortoiseshell · 03/02/2006 10:02

Interesting that the majority of people are focusing on the 'locking in the bedroom' - I do know lots of people who've done this, or put stair gates across, to teach them that they stay in their rooms at bedtime (shouldn't be out of earshot though). I'm MUCH more horrified at them leaving them matches to play with tbh!

NotQuiteCockney · 03/02/2006 10:03

Oh, and from what I remember of Toddler Taming, it advocates using "time out" - having a child go to its room, whether it wants to or not - as a method to cope with very bad tantrums. It's as much to let the parents calm down, as to let the kids, from what I know. It doesn't advocate locking children in their rooms overnight.

cathyspam · 03/02/2006 10:04

really in ! how terribly

NotQuiteCockney · 03/02/2006 10:04

Good point tortoiseshell, I know lots of people who use stairgates for that reason.

My DS1 only recently worked out how to open the hatch on his loft room. He's 4.

LadySherlockofLGJ · 03/02/2006 10:07

Sterlisation Of People with low IQ's

Great Idea then we can start on ............

Short People

Brunettes

People who drive Land yachts

People who drive too quickly

People who drive too quickly in the school playground.

Men who leave the toilet seat up.

Where does it end ??

Elf1981 · 03/02/2006 10:39

Imagine if we did have a steralisation programme, even if it were for people convicted of a crime about children. Imagine how awful we'd now feel if those mothers who had been convicted of shaken baby syndrome and have now been acquitted had been steralised, or their other children put into care away from their parents.

tiredemma · 03/02/2006 10:45

ok, point taken.

Im probably making irrational comments because this has really saddened me.

steralisation would not be a great idea in the great scheme of things.

But certain guidlelines should be put in place to help people with little intelligence when it comes to looking after dependants.

but people who just cannot be arsed to look after their own kids, subjecting them to a life of abuse and misery? no comment.

HappyMumof2 · 03/02/2006 12:27

Message withdrawn

jenkel · 03/02/2006 12:55

What on earth were children of that age doing with matches.....

And even worse, locking them in their bedroom.

Poor little souls.

hotmama · 03/02/2006 13:04

I have a friend that has adopted a dd because the natural parents were "low intelligence" or whatever the term is. The natural parents wanted to keep the baby, but the authorities took the view that the parents did not have the abilities to look after the baby e.g. would forget to feed etc - really basic stuff - so was put up for adoption.

My friend is doing the best for this child - and she does feel for the natural parents - but the needs of the child should be uppermost - if parents are not able to meet the basic requirements of childcare - though hard that it is - they shouldn't be looking after them - even if they can have them.

spacecadet · 03/02/2006 13:19

its so very

bangersandmash · 03/02/2006 13:36

i know loads of people who have turned the handles on there doors upside down to stop kids opening them. dp turned out kitchen door one upside down to stop them getting in there.

i think the matches stuff is the worst bit.

Swipe left for the next trending thread