A different perspective about leaving a child alone

[chocolatekimmy]

There is one point that doesn't appear to be coming across in the numerous postings and articles since the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

When a parent makes a decision to leave a child to 'pop out' for a while or however long it happens to be - do they not consider something happening to them whilst out that prevents them from returning to their child who is then left alone and defenceles without anyone realising it.

It never crossed my mind until I mentioned to my mum about someone I know who used to put her very young baby 'safe' in her cot to go out running to get rid of some of the stress she had from the babies crying (despite much protest). She felt that no harm could come to the baby (aside from considering fire etc). My mum just said - "so what happens if she gets run over and killed or injured badly and no one knows that the baby is at home alone"?

Its just another consideration for those that make that decision.

Feeling quite upset now Rantum. If you knew me, you would know that I am the last person on earth to be self-righteous or judgmental. I am only sharing my own beliefs and I do it all out of love for my kids.

Sorry bighair21, I do not wish to upset anyone and I am NOT calling you judgemental! I am aware that we all react to shocking events in different ways.

I really just wish that people would channel their concerns about child welfare towards finding ways to fight against the dangerous people who MAKE OUR WORLD UNSAFE for children!

I posted this last year.

My parents took my older brother into town on a Saturday when I was small. I remember waking up, getting out of my cot and wandering round the house looking for them.

Then I went back to my cot and cried.

I had completely forgotten this until a similar situation occurred.
I remembered then how much it had hurt to be left behind and how much it had affected my adult relationships.

Most of us spend all day, every day worrying about our children, trying to protect them, thinking about their futures, loving them, making the best decisions that we can for them in the millions of different circumstances that our lives find us in.

There are selfish, hideous people in the world who don't care about all of this, and THEY should be the target of our energy.

I am sorry if anyone thinks that I am attacking them personally; I am not, but like most of us I have very strong feelings about this.

I agree Rantum. It's a very emotive subject and feeling upset is my own stuff.

Avalon, my heart goes out to you.

watched peter pan yesterday with the dc's, haven't seen it for years and had forgotton that the flm starts with the children being put to bed and left alone in the house whilst their parents go off out for the evening.

Thanks, bighair.

Lucykate - if you read any children's literature that's pre-60s, the children have huge amounts of freedom. Whether it reflected reality is hard to say.

I know LucyKate - watched Peter Pan recently and was amazed! Not as if nana was in the house either.

i grew up on an estate in the 70's, my parents were friends with the neighbours and often, particularly around christmas, all the kids would be left at home asleep, while the adults all went to one house for a party. we were checked on, but only once during the evening, no baby monitors either.

i have to admit, we went to our next door neighbours and had a take away a few months ago, leaving ds and dd at home asleep. they have kids too but our monitor works long range, it was turned up so loud i could even hear them breathing. not sure i will feel comfortable to do that again.

geekgrrl - you said

I find this argument about as full of holes as a sieve...
obviously it'd be soooo much better if she got knocked down with a baby strapped to her chest, wouldn't it?

Why twist it and take it to the extreme. This is about leaving a baby or young child alone - it is an unecessary risk.

Some people will take those risks and get away with it every time - others won't and will live to regret it.

Others have quoted about crossing the road or going out in a car but that in itself isn't an unecessary risk. If I need something urgently from a shop I take my three with me, waking them if I have to and loading them in the buggy etc or go without and be more organised next time.

Fillyjonk - leaving a newborn baby to go out running is a problem in my view (and many others). There are many things I would rather have been doing after I had my babies but the reality is that I had to make sacrifices and accept that as part of my choice to become a parent

Chocolate Kimmy you have been much more eloquent than me - taking risks just ain't worth it.

Taking some risk is sometimes necessary. And some things are both risky and beneficial. Where people disagree is where the lines are drawn. And where risk taking becomes neglectful.

oh ffs sake bighair, that's such a sweeping statement - so is it less of a risk to take your children with you, risking them running off or getting run over? How can people assess that leaving a child alone in a car or a cot for a certain amount of time is riskier than taking them out with you?
And just how risky is it to sit and watch a film in the evening whilst a baby sleeps upstairs in a cot? You wouldn't hear them choking (unless you had headphone plugged into the monitor I guess ) - and then if you're glued to your baby's every breath 24/7, what's the risk of you becoming demented and sleep-deprived, driving into a tree on a risk-free outing?

So much of this is holier-than-thou and seems to come from people with very easy lives. I'd love to watch one of you saintly lot trying to shepherd my children from the car to the cashier at a petrol station without exposing them to more risk than they would be exposed to staying in the car.

I don't like your tone or your swearing at me. For your info I leave my child locked in the car when I pay the cashier at the petrol station. I am talking about going out JOGGING while your kids are alone in the house. Also, before you pass your judgments on me and accuse me as one of the people who has easy lives, please bear in mind that I am already divorced and my second husband is about to leave me and has been controlling me for years and I have two kids, one aged 4. So DON'T JUDGE ME.

Fillyjonk - my neighbours had exactly the same viewpoint as you regarding stairgates. At least they did until their 17 month old fell down 12 wooden stairs and ended up with concussion. They have since reconsidered their viewpoint.

It does depend on where you live. Stairgates are considered unnecessary by many people in Belgium, whereas they are far more common in the UK.

Safety reins and fire guards are also very rare, frowned upon in fact.

With all risks, you have to calculate the probability of the risk occurring and take a decision based on that degree of probability.

I occasionally left my baby daughter sleeping in our flat in order to take the rubbish out - four floors down in the lift. I was probably gone for three minutes. Nothing ever happened.

I once left her asleep in a locked hotel bedroom with a monitor, in a cot, before she could walk, while I was at the pool - about 2 minutes walk away.

I two or three times left her asleep in a ground floor hotel bedroom when I was eating dinner about 10 metres away. But since the Madeleine case I probably wouldn't do this again unless I had a direct view of all the bedroom doors/windows.

I once, recently, left her asleep in our locked flat to go shopping for bread and meat - I was probably gone for 15 minutes, and I was very sure she wouldn't wake up during that time as she never wakes during the first 45 minutes of her nap (she is 2.6) But I would only do this again in desperation.

Am I a negligent mother? I don't think so. But yes, I have taken risks and I could have been taken short.

bighair, sorry. didn't mean for my whole post to read as though it was directed at you personally, honestly. sorry you're having a crappy time. xx

Haven't read the thread, but in answer to the OP I don't think it is a new angle tbh.

I never left my babies alone precisely because of the unlikely event that I might be run over or attacked by a knife-wielding lunatic or have a heart-attack or be struck by lightning or hijacked on the way back from the shop (3 minutes away).

I knew I was being paranoid and ridiculous, but I took the view that as the consequences of a tiny risk were horrendous, I wouldn't take the risk. I wouldn't condemn anyone else who did though, would think if they found it an acceptable risk, good luck to them. I would just think it extraordinarily bad luck if they did meet with an accident on the way.

Thanks GG. On the edge at mo and taking things to heart.

GiantSquirrelspotter - well said

For anyone else that has had something dreadful happen to a young child after taking a risk and leaving them alone to go to the shop or out jogging or whatever, surely the first thing they say to themselves is "I shouldn't have......". To me, its just not worth the risk with such a precious thing

well belgo, i have a 22 mo and a 3 1/2 yo and they have never fallen down ANY stairs

otoh i know PLENTY of kids who have fallen down unstairgated stairs outside their homes

There is risk in everything, including making things so safe that kids don't learn from their mistakes.

Fillyjonk - I understand your theory. I suppose I just don't want to test it out on my children.

well no one is forcing you to, belgo.

and its not a theory, no more than yours

I really feel a bit attacked for a parenting choice here, I am leaving the thread