Madeleine McCann

[morningpaper]

Instead of starting lots of new posts about Madeleine, could I politely request that anyone who wants to post on the subject please post on this one thread? (N.B. Duplicate threads may be flamed hysterically.)

Please note that this thread is not to criticise Madeleine's parents or family, as this is not in the spirit of Mumsnet.

Please can I take the liberty to quote from this article:

"This is the real life of Kate and Gerry McCann, and it must now have become a place of agony beyond all understanding. Pity them, if you have any compassion at all, and demonstrate the minimum of grace: the ability to desist from judgment."

I can only feel for teh child and what she has gone through and pray that by some miracle she returns.However I am on the other side of the fence who feels they were somehow involved and although it is an unpopular opinion I have to be honest and not skirt the issue.

I have all the sympathy in the world for Madeleine.

Most situations are unavoidable, but life is full of risks. Most of the time we take those risks and are fine. I mean, how many of you have done something you now feel was really stupid with your kids? I know I've done loads of things that, looking back on now I wonder at my own stupidity. Thankfully neither of them have come to any harm, but only by the Grace of God.

That child was taken from her room. There are inconsistencies in their stories, of course there are. If something had happened to you, both you and your dh would disagree and differ over exactly what happened. To be honest, if their stories had tallied completely then it would be more suspicious.

When something like this happens, it is somehow easier to want to find another explanation. Even if that means pointing the finger of blame at the parents. Because that, as horrible as it sounds, is easier to accept than the reality that some stranger forced his way into the room and took a sleeping child away to God knows where.

And if you think that can't happen, then remember that poor teenager who was raped and murdered in her hostel room that she was sharing with her schoolfriends.

Winetimefinetime (great name!) well said.
Ms HW - it is not 'either or'. They are certainly guilty of neglect, and even Mrs Mccann's mother now seems to be concurring with that. Mark Warner offered them a babysitter because the noise of them crying on previous nights was disturbing the neighbours. In additon, if Madeleicne died either because she fatally injured herself in their absence and they covered it up; or if they struck out in anger and accidentally killed her, in that instance they would be guilty of addtional crimes. As yet, as there has been no evidence of an abduction other than their say-so. None of us are qualified to claim that they are innocent, nor until they are convicted can they be presumed guilty of anything other than the self-admitted neglect.

I am hoping that on the anniversary there is some miracle and she is found. I know it is unlikely, but I do hope.

I did post in the very beginning saying I would never understand how parents can feel it is okay to leave young children on their own, but that there are probably things I do as a parent that other parents find difficult to reconcile in their minds.

People were talking at work today saying that they felt the twins should be taken from the parents. I find that the saddest idea in the world. The awful feeling you get when you lose sight of your child in the supermarket / park... the idea of having to live with that feeling every day... I dont know how people can still say they want the McCanns to be "punished"

I'm glad that people are able to discuss this subject rationally now - there was a period of time when people were so emotionally engaged that discussion just degenerated into fevered and nasty (and frequently personal) attacks.

"4- The McCanns made a grave misjudgement on the night of May 3rd 2007 for which they, their daughter, and their entire family continue to pay the price. To read what some of you say, they deserved to lose Madeleine because of this. This is beneath contempt."

Assuming they are innocent - which I personally do as I am bound to - innocent until proven guilty - they deserve our sympathy for their loss of their daughter

What I don't agree with is the sentiment that our sympathy and yes our sorrow too should prevent us from having a rational discussion about the child protection issues raised.

I don't believe that leaving three children under three home alone is a sensible risk to take. Very few parents would IME. Well none that I've met in real life anyway. Is it not time for clearer legislation? As the law stands parents may feel that the loophole of reasonable risk assessment allows them to take essentially unreasonable actions.

Elf i find that very that people believe they would put their twins at risk , if anyhting i wouldimagine they would find it hard not to be too over protective.

yes, I find it very sad too. But it is still a view (some) people take.

Quattrocento, I am not trying to suggest that leaving 3 children under three at home was sensible. I think the fact that Madeleine remains missing one year on is more evidence that it was not than anyone should need. It is also, MrsGofG, evidence to support the abduction theory since, if they or someone else had killed her that night I think the odds are that some tangible evidence of that (like her body) would probably have been found by now.

However, the fact that they made the choice they did is done and dusted and nothing can ever change it or the consequences of it. They, to my eyes, are clearly suffering for it and further talk of punishment, or indeed of neglect (which I don't think this was), is just pointless and cruel.

If she was, indeed, abducted, then I think the issue of existence of the abductor and the authorities' response to her disappearance is much more important than any sanctimonious bosom hefting about acceptable child-rearing practices.

I don't have a problem with a rational discussion about child protection. Dismissing the abduction issue in favour of trying to strike down the McCanns is not rational.

MrsGofG, I am not claiming they are innocent. I stated the fact that I believe that they are innocent.

Quattro, I agree.
It is nice to see a reasonable debate.
Lots of people, not just mumsneters hold a view atleast of the McCann story.
Most feel atleast some sympathy for them. Some more, some less. Some think they are ultimately responsible for leaving their children in the first place. Some people have done this themselves. And some would never even consider it.

One their local websites had to be closed down, becaasue of the responses on there. Both for and against.

Thus, it is only to be expected, to hear both sides, on a thread.
It was unrealistic of Morningpaper, to ask that "thread is not to criticise Madeleine's parents or family, as this is not in the spirit of Mumsnet"
Becasue all people are allowed to discuss.

"Dismissing the abduction issue in favour of trying to strike down the McCanns is not rational."

I don't believe that anyone is dismissing the abduction issue, but abduction by strangers is terribly terribly rare. Children are most at risk from their immediate family members (this is not a dig at the McCanns btw, who look as innocent as it is possible to look) just a statement of fact.

It's better for legislators to focus on more immediate and higher risk areas to protect children. It would be far better to legislate that (say) no children under 7 to be left home alone ever, children 8-10 with capacity can be left for periods up to 30 minutes, children 11-15 discretionary for periods up to 3 hours or whatever. You get my drift. Clear legislation with clear boundaries.

What do you think?

I think that would be good as there will always be some people who don't know that they shouldn't leave a child of a particular age alone.

I think the idea of clear legislation with clear boundaries is appealing but unrealistic. I don't think you can legislate for every type of scenario any more specifically than is currently the case (in the UK, at least). It strikes me as being the kind of area where the law of unintended consequences would apply and that legislation such as you describe would do much that was pointless or even harmful while not actually helping anyone in genuine need.

And there are those who, I think, are trying to dismiss the notion of there being an abduction - although I was not suggesting that you are one of them. One poster called the Amber Alert campaign a "red herring", suggesting it was a ploy by the McCanns to "save their own skins" and there have been other similar comments.

I do realise that stranger abduction is extremely rare - it was the perception of its rarity, after all, that must have contributed to the McCann's decision to leave the children in the apartment; the idea of abduction did not occur to them. However, I do think that the Madeleine McCann case has demonstrated that, once it has happened, the response by the authorities is lacking and I really do think that more can be achieved by taking action in this area.

I really genuinely cannot see why they couldn't see this as a risk. I have three children close together - three under 3.5 at one point. So not unlike the McCanns. You have to be constantly alert with such a family make up. You have three very little and unsafety conscious children at the same time. The potential for accidents was huge just steping out the front door.
When we went abroad, and were all in the hotel room, I locked the patio door in case of a quick wanderer. There is no way I would leave them in a room alone. One wakes up for a drink, wakes another one, two little toddlers wandering around an unlocked room. How can that not be a risk? Seriously, I want to understand.

But what's the point wondering, nikos? Clearly they decided it was OK to leave the kids and equally clearly it actually wasn't. I don't think anyone who knows what happened that night now thinks it was the right decision for them to take, least of all the McCanns themselves.

Because I believe they genuinely did think there was no risk involved and I struggle to understand that. How two obviously highly intellegent people could not see that. I have some friends who are doctors and have worked in A&E and if anything they are extra cautious because they have seen so many accidents.

But nikos, whatever they thought on May 3rd, they do not now think it was the right thing to do. They have repeatedly explained in interviews that they thought it would be safe. It does not matter what you think you would have done in their shoes. You weren't and what is done is done.

When my dd was 4 months old (she is now almost 3), we went to a hotel for a few days. The hotel had a listening service which we used the first night. All it involved was leaving the room phone off the hook and then listening in via any phone in the hotel. Post-Madeleine McCann, I have thought about that night and realised how potentially vulnerable she was should there have been a would-be abductor around. If here had been, no doubt there would have been those who would now be scratching their heads and wondering how we could ever have thought it was safe.

None of us now can separate the decision the McCanns made from the consequences of that decision. They did not have that luxury.

Oh it's odd but there is a real phenomenon of middle class child neglect. India Knight's written about it - she's quite sound on that subject at least.

The thing is that you spend literally years building up careers, working hard, having lots of adult time and well coddling your own ego. Then when you come to have children in your thirties, it's a big adjustment. People really feel entitled to me-time. Actually most of the working mums I know (me included) are desperate to the point of insanity for me-time.

In those sorts of circumstances people choose to believe what is convenient for them to believe rather than what is logical and sensible. So people choose to believe what is convenient for them - ie that it is okay to leave three tots under three alone.

So I honestly believe that they persuaded themselves that this was a sensible way to behave. And because you get locked in to that type of (IMO selfish - believe me I have been there) behaviour you choose to ignore contra-indications like complaints about your daughter crying having been left home alone.

I think it didn't help that they were in a group tbh because any doubts any of them might have had would be assuaged by the others.

Doctors are not infallible

Well put, Quattro. It's also true that intelligent people can be misled. I believe that the McCanns were misled into believing it was safe to leave the kids. That kind of thing is worth discussing - i.e. what information and from what sources do we use to assess risk and what influence do other factors such as the desire for "me-time" and the behaviour of others have upon us. Self-awareness can only be good.

I just take exception at the witch-hunters who seem to me to be motivated only by trying to prove that they are better parents than someone else when the only humane response is to feel compassion and sympathy for a family who have been overcome by one of the worst catastrophes any family could suffer. We can rationally discuss issues that arise from the case without failing in that.

Do you have any links to India Knight on the subject? Where can I find her writing? I'd be interested to read it.

I think until you have had three children close together you cannot realise how much of your day is spent watching. It is not the same as one child, with all due respect.
You cannot take your eye off the ball for a minute unless they are all in one secure room. I am genuinely baffled by this and have said on the various threads that you can feel both compassion and wonderment at how they could take this decision.

People make mistakes. The other day my daughter nearly got ran over. She was running a little ahead, turned the corner. I wasn't too worried - she always stops well before the curb when we are walking. But some idiot had driven on the pavement, and nearly hit her.
I look back now and think Jesus, why did I not have her on the reigns.
Had I got two children, had my daughter been injured by that car, would the general public be calling for my other child to be taken from my care?
That is what I find unsettling, regardless of whether I agree or disagree with their decision to leave their children alone.

Quattro speaks sense.

Having just been to Praia da Luz, the apartment was clearly visible from the bar, the town quiet and felt safe. I can see how one could get lulled into a feeling of security and make a decision which unfortunately for the McCann's they'll have to live with all their lives. The idea of legislation as to when you can leave children alone sounds great but what counts as alone? Doing a bit of gardening? Fine in my teeny house, maybe not in some. Getting the shopping in from the car? Going to pay for your petrol? Next door with a baby monitor? what criteria do you use? And of course it takes little account of the developmental stage of individual children. I also wonder about leaving the door unlocked, something that seems on the face of it stupid. I don't know figure, but know that with elderly people with cognitive impairment we always recommend to family NOT to lock them in their houses unless they can look after locks themselves - fire is a greater hazard and being unable to enter property if necessary. I do object to the holier than thouness of some who suggest this warrants removal of the twins. What is actually important to the twins is that they have a loving, caring caregiver /s and I don't think anyone really thinks they are not that (I will probably be surprised to find some do). The McCanns would clearly never make the same mistake twice. I thought Kate McCanns distress was painful to see on telly, and thought they probably had no choice but to focus on more general measures in raising the profile of missing children. Very commendable imo but must be so hard to move on from throwing everything into finding your daughter, especially when you have to justify this to people you've never met. The hate (sometimes couched) some people have for them makes me curious as to why they've aroused such strong feelings and I agree with a previous poster that it's much easier to blame than to accept something so awful can happen to YOU and that any mistake you make can have such disastrous consequences. And to have them constantly on TV reminding us of this. Long post, think the discussion's been pretty measured so far.