7-yr-old killed riding quad bike ON UNLIT ROAD AFTER DARK!!!

[WendyWeber]

What were they thinking of???

Blu it was apparently known that the road was dangerous. And unless they are very stupid how could anyone believe there was little or no danger in allowing a small underage child on a road on a powerful maching?????

Blu - I agree probably no parent would 'deliberately' put their child at risk. Yes, the reality is that they probably thought it was safe enough, they knew the road well, it wasnt far, and I expect the kids themselves were clamouring to be allowed. But that's the case with any calculated risk isn't it? - we weigh up the factors and make a decision. A few years ago DP and I almost bought one of those remote contol helicopters for our ds. It would have been one of those fairly powerful ones, and when we looked into it, we realised you need a license for it. About the same time there was an incident reported in the papers about a child being badly hurt by one. We thought long and hard, weighed it up, and decided that on balance, because we wouldnt always be able to guarantee the level of supervision needed (knowing ds he'd have wanted to go off with his mates and use it) we would not buy one. And that was a perfectly legal 'toy'!! The fact that this child was illegally riding on the road is not a minor detail here - it's central to the incident. We all have to make judgements and decision on a daily basis, but here, there was really no judgement to make, because the law already says DON'T DO IT.

The Mail has actually lifted it from a Sunday Telegraph exclusive so at least it's not a tabloid door-stepping piece.

If you scroll down here, there is a picture of the gates to their farm, with a long private driveway stretching off behind them - why couldn't they just have ridden the bikes up and down the drive?

She obviously was a lovely and much-loved child; but her father is still responsible for her death.

We all have to take decision regarding risks to our children. DS2 has been clamouring for me to let him buy a 15+ rated game for the PS2 (DS2 is 12). I have said no. My reasoning is that the rating is there for a purpose; clearly it has been considered inappropriate for children under that age - regardless of the fact that his friend's brother (aged 8) has been playing it. I have still said no because I do not believe a 12 yo should be playing games aimed at 15 years and over. It is a decision I take as his mother and that is part of my role. He has been badgering and badgering me to let him buy it.

I suspect that this is what happened with this poor child. I bet she (and her brother) begged and begged their dad to let them ride their quads home. And he, for some totally inexplicable reason, thought this was one occasion when he would give in. Probably 99% of other parents would not. But he did and will have to live with the consequences of letting his children do what they wanted.

If he truly believes that this was "just one of those things" (rather than it being something he said without being conscious of what he was saying), he has a strange grasp on what a parent's role is wrt risk assessment where children are involved. It also means that he does not accept any responsibility for what happened. Perhaps a prosecution would bring home to him that he was entirely responsible for his child's death. Of course he may be saying it because he absolutely cannot consciously accept his part in all this because how could he cope with that?

So many lives have been profoundly affected by what was probably a moment of weakness on the part of a doting dad in the face of two excited children.

What I have been thinking about regarding this is that if that stupid man thought it was safe enough to let his child do this then I am surprised she had lived that long.
If that hadn't killed her then his idiot grasp of risk assessment would have put her in truly life threatening situations many many times during her short life.
If he really is that thick then it no surprise at all.
I reckon the odds were stacked against her big time

Freckle - What is the PS2 game? As a matter of interest. Some of the age ratings are truly peculiar imho. I have a 15 year old and a 12 year old which is challenging when it comes to age recs for games and films etc.

inthegutter NO ONE here [with the exception of QofQ possibly] has said this is the kind of mistake anyone could make. Everyone has expressed shock at the parents' lack of judgement. but there is a difference between feeling free to randomly insult people who have just lost a child and disagreeing with what they did.

It was Smackdown vs. Roar 2008 I think. The problem with games (and I agree with you that some of the ratings seem a little inconsistent to say the least) is that, unlike dvds, I can't go through them to judge whether they are suitable or not. With dvds, I can watch and then decide if the boys can watch them - and they do get to watch 15 rated films as a result - but with games I have neither the time nor the skills to go through them to the end to make a judgement. So I have to trust the ratings. But that is my role as a parent. To assess the risk before exposing my child to it. No matter how much they want to do something, sometimes you just have to be strong enough to say no.

Agree with Ruty.
By all means question the decision made. I did, many pages ago.
But the venom of the personal tirades against the parents, who are grieving the death of their daughter, demonstrates, to me, a massive lack of empathy. It's bile, frankly.

The dad has said there is no point regretting what has happened and they will deal with any police action should it happen.

Hi Blu ..of course the papers were knocking on the door the day it happened. That should not shock you. It's just what they do.

What upsets me (other than the obvious) is in that picture, she's wearing a hard hat and a body protector. So obviously her parents cared enough about her safety to make sure she was properly dressed for riding... so what happened?

I happen to know Blackmore very well - we very nearly bought a house there before dd arrived and I scoped it out from top to bottom - and one of the 'against' factors was that the roads into and around the village were so narrow and winding - despite there being a brilliant livery yard on the doorstep, I personally would not have felt safe riding my horse along there, the way that the traffic barrels along - so again, I'm bewildered as to what went through her parents' heads when they let them out there... very sad, and so avoidable .

And sadly reporters seem to show no evidence of a conscience at all when this sort of thing happens - they all crawl out of their sewers and bang on your doors no matter what kind of state you're in (have had first-hand experience of this, they really don't give a shit about anything but their story).

I noticed the (huge) hard hat and body protector too, lovecat

I suspect her dad was a bit pissed on B Day evening and went "yeah, whatever" when they nagged him to go out on the bikes.

Actually the fact that she rides does explain to some extent their ... er... robust attitude. Kids ride on horses and ponies on the road all the time and are exposed to the risk of traffic accidents. None of us think that's an irresponsible thing to allow them to do. For all we know, the girl may well have been wearing her riding gear and his logic may have been that it's the same risk. The difference I think is that most kids don't ride after dark (well, none of them, to my knowledge, but I'll stand corrected if someone knows better than me).

they don't live in sewers
don't shoot the messenger
unrealistic attitude

Reporters that knock on the door of a family the day after their daughter has died do come from the sewers IMO.

Nope, they are just doing their job. And you'd be surprised how many people want to talk - want to tell the world about the person they have lost.

(disclaimer - have never done this kind of job myself but know lots of lovely people who have)

candypandy, until you've been doorstepped by these arseholes when you haven't even buried your baby brother yet, then don't tell me where those scum come from.

No offense to 'nice' journalists (I do happen to know a few, I know they're not all like that, but anyone who does that for a living doesn't give a tin shit about the families involved, they just want their quote)

I find it hard to believe the father feels there's no point in regretting what happened. Dh lost his older brother in a road accident. Dh's parents agreed that, at 10yo, Db was old enough to visit granny by himself, which involved a short bus trip. (This was in 1950, when I think most people would say life was safer and children had more freedom.) Tragically, when Db got off the bus he was so excited, he ran straight out into the road behind the bus and was killed instantly by a bus coming in the opposite direction. Even worse, Granny was there to meet him and saw it all. I don't believe a day has gone by since then without dh's family regretting the decision they made that day, even though in their circs, it was a perectly reasonable one to make.

I think at this stage you'd want to blank it as far as possible from your mind, wouldn't you? So to say that he thinks there's no point in regretting it is probably as far from the truth as any of us could imagine.

sue

Candy - I'm not surprised, and because it is realistic to expect it, doesn't make it desirable. In general I find that the boundaries of what i would call news - or ways of finding it - are not the boundaries I would choose. I think there is a case for intrusion and investigative activity where it is in the public interest, to do with public office etc, but so often the press is not a simply a 'messenger'.

And if the press responds to people who want to tell personal stories then it risks becoming a PR machine rather than a news mechanism, with al the loss of integrity that that entails.

IMO that a child died under particular circumstances is news, but the details of her family's grief is not. If there is a court case and there is discussion about the facts and decisions that emerge in that case, that will also be news, imo.

But this is a wider discussion, and probably not for this thread.

Blu yes, it's a discussion for another thread, and yes, it's great to think about it rather than have the kneejerk reaction. For example, you're right, the press it not simply the messenger. But really my point was, there is no point in complaining, it's just the way it is and ever shall be. I am a realistic and quite frankly there are people in suits and boardrooms and white coats doing far worse things than journos. But the journos always get the flak usually from people who read ever word avidly. Am not journo by the way.

have got alzheimers. sure i checked every word in that post and it's full of errors.
proof am not journo -- unless i work for the guardian.

As always, Blu puts it far more eloquently than I could ever hope to do...