Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 7, 2024 13:38:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2015 15:21:45 GMT
That's all well and good but those fences and railings are there for a reason and it isn't to set your child on. Well no sh*t. Thanks for that insight. She didn't plop him up there and let go of him. She had her arm around him the whole time. But toddlers are slippery creatures, aren't they? But I doubt that there is a mother among us that hasn't done something similar at a zoo/aquarium/theme park/museum etc. You walk up to an exhibt with a railing that your child can't see over. You hold them up. Maybe you sit their tush on the railing, never imagining that something bad could happen in the blink of an eye. I know I have done it. The question should also be, why did the zoo not have the exhibit more protected, with netting below the railing to catch anything that might be dropped over the railing? I've certainly lifted my son up when he was smaller but never in a million years would have placed him on one of the fences, railings, etc. even with a good grip on him because, as you said, toddlers are slippery creatures. It's just a foolhardy thing to do because you never know what the child might do and the risk is too high. Parenting young children seems to be half about doing our best to avoid the things that can happen in a blink of an eye.
|
|
smartypants71
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,816
Location: Houston, TX
Jun 25, 2014 22:47:49 GMT
|
Post by smartypants71 on Apr 15, 2015 15:25:00 GMT
I think I have a problem with the use of the word "dangling." Dangling to me looks like what Michael Jackson did with "Blanket" - holding the kid out at arms length. I just don't see how this woman could have done that with two kids. Based on the pic above, i'm guessing what she did was stand both kids on the railing with her arms around both. I think that was a dumb idea too but to imply she held her kid out over the pit seems wrong to me.
|
|
|
Post by Regina Phalange on Apr 15, 2015 15:25:19 GMT
At least they had a happy ending. A few years ago a mother set her toddler on the railing at the painted dogs exhibit at the Pgh Zoo and he fell in and got mauled to death by the dogs.
And am I the only one that sees the absolute IRONY in Lynlam scolding others for having no empathy?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 7, 2024 13:38:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2015 15:31:26 GMT
I stalked her facebook page a few days ago. Seems like a real loving mother / family. I feel terrible for them as I'm sure it was an unfortunate accident. I am sure she wasn't pulling a "Michael Jackson" or anything, but she clearly messed up somehow. Sad story - but glad the kid is going to be ok.
|
|
tincin
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,378
Jul 25, 2014 4:55:32 GMT
|
Post by tincin on Apr 15, 2015 15:36:13 GMT
That's all well and good but those fences and railings are there for a reason and it isn't to set your child on. Well no sh*t. Thanks for that insight. She didn't plop him up there and let go of him. She had her arm around him the whole time. But toddlers are slippery creatures, aren't they? But I doubt that there is a mother among us that hasn't done something similar at a zoo/aquarium/theme park/museum etc. You walk up to an exhibt with a railing that your child can't see over. You hold them up. Maybe you sit their tush on the railing, never imagining that something bad could happen in the blink of an eye. I know I have done it. The question should also be, why did the zoo not have the exhibit more protected, with netting below the railing to catch anything that might be dropped over the railing? Actually I took my children to the zoo many times when they were younger, never once did I "sit their tush on the railing." I held them up, on my hip or on my shoulders and kept them well away from the danger. That is/was my job as their parent, to keep them out of harm's way. Certainly I was not a perfect parent but I owned my mistakes. I think your friend may just have to face the music and while it may not be a tune she wants to dance to, she made the choice and now must pay the piper. Harsh? Perhaps but the child could very well have died. She is getting off easy if all she faces are some media blitzes and strangers judging her. She could have been planning a funeral and picking out a gravesite.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 7, 2024 13:38:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2015 15:46:43 GMT
I think I have a problem with the use of the word "dangling." Dangling to me looks like what Michael Jackson did with "Blanket" - holding the kid out at arms length. I just don't see how this woman could have done that with two kids. Based on the pic above, i'm guessing what she did was stand both kids on the railing with her arms around both. I think that was a dumb idea too but to imply she held her kid out over the pit seems wrong to me. But from what I have seen, it's not the media that began using "dangling" on their own. It's the zoo, and the eyewitnesses that first used "dangling". If the eyewitnesses want to call it dangling, I, as a person who was not there or was not a witness to it can't really define dangling any other way and with that said, don't blame the media.
|
|
tiffanytwisted
Pearl Clutcher
you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave
Posts: 4,538
Jun 26, 2014 15:57:39 GMT
|
Post by tiffanytwisted on Apr 15, 2015 15:46:49 GMT
I never said anything about the charges. I'm talking about the media coverage of a total non-story. Why on earth is this national news for days on end? It shouldn't have been anything more than a blurb on the local. I didn't say that she didn't make a poor decision. She did. But we have all done such things. Empathy is dead, it seems. Everything is black and white I guess now. And we all think we are the perfect parent/citizen/human being with all the moral authority to sit in judgement of others, despite the fact that we never have all the facts. This family is a good family, and the mother is a good mother. A poor decision does not make one a bad parent. If it did, we'd all be screwed. No I don't think empathy is dead, but I do think that a lot of people can see situations near and dear to their heart a bit more black and white than other people. I have seen you very harsh with people in situations where I had a lot more empathy for the person involved. I am often criticized for seeing the other side by people who are very zealous with their opinions on certain subjects. With this situation I do feel badly for the woman involved. I know I have made questionable decisions in a variety of situations. If an unexpected accident occurred I guess I would have to live with the repercussions. My only hope/need is that those repercussions did not include anyone critically hurt or dead. The reason that it is all over the media is the same reason that the cute baby story, or the funny animal story, or the touching veteran story is all over the media. We now have an unlimited scope and venues in which to see stories. The reason that we see/hear them is because we can, and something has to take up that space on the information highway. This. Sure, I've done some things I'm not proud of or wouldn't want to admit to. But if something horrible happened as a result, then I have to be held accountable. Would I hope to maintain my privacy? Of course. Would I assume I would? Hell no. Welcome to the age of YouTube, snapchat, Twitter, etc. Does it suck? Yes. But it's just the way it is.
|
|
The Great Carpezio
Pearl Clutcher
Something profound goes here.
Posts: 2,983
Jun 25, 2014 21:50:33 GMT
|
Post by The Great Carpezio on Apr 15, 2015 15:49:45 GMT
I do feel empathy for her. We do all make mistakes. There are consequences to those mistakes. If I look at my phone while driving my kids, and I get in an accident, it is my fault. I did not intend to hurt my children, but I did. There are consequences to those actions. I do think she should not be publicly lynched for this, but I think it is a valid discussion that serves as a cautionary tale for people nationwide, and i don't think it is out of line for her to appear in court. I had to appear in court years ago for "failure to yield" and had to pay a fine. I looked, and then looked away as I slowed down to make sure I had the right turn...I then turned, without looking again. A car T-boned me. Neither of us was hurt. My car caused her car damage, and mine had $8000 worth of damage. We had to skip our one year anniversary trip to Colorado. I had to appear in court and pay a fine. I didn't mean to do something wrong. I didn't hurt anyone. My insurance paid for the damage, and I suffered private consequences, but I STILL had to go to court, miss a college class, and pay a fine. That's life.
I had two year old twins. I am sure I held them up to look at things. I would not have placed them on the wood. I might have squished ONE of them up against the concrete--at my absolute worst. The other guy would have had to wait or someone else would have had to lift him up and squish him against the concrete.
I do feel that the OP lecturing about empathy and black and white thinking is just simply further signs of her apparent cognitive dissonance.
|
|
smartypants71
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,816
Location: Houston, TX
Jun 25, 2014 22:47:49 GMT
|
Post by smartypants71 on Apr 15, 2015 15:59:29 GMT
I think I have a problem with the use of the word "dangling." Dangling to me looks like what Michael Jackson did with "Blanket" - holding the kid out at arms length. I just don't see how this woman could have done that with two kids. Based on the pic above, i'm guessing what she did was stand both kids on the railing with her arms around both. I think that was a dumb idea too but to imply she held her kid out over the pit seems wrong to me. But from what I have seen, it's not the media that began using "dangling" on their own. It's the zoo, and the eyewitnesses that first used "dangling". If the eyewitnesses want to call it dangling, I, as a person who was not there or was not a witness to it can't really define dangling any other way and with that said, don't blame the media. I see where you're coming from, but I think it is up to the police to investigate and for the media to report what actually happened. I just don't see how a woman could dangle (definition: hang or swing loosely) two toddlers at the same time over the railing pictured above. She has some major back and upper body strength if that's the case. I just think the way they are reporting it paints a sensationalized picture of the event. Shocker, I know As I said, I still think what she did was careless, but the way they make it sound, she was literally swinging her kids out over the pit.
|
|
Nink
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,955
Location: North Idaho
Jul 1, 2014 23:30:44 GMT
|
Post by Nink on Apr 15, 2015 16:02:42 GMT
Having seen the picture someone posted of the railing etc, there's a big difference between lifting your toddler up to see and holding them on/over the railing, which is what she would have had to have done for someone to fall in.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 7, 2024 13:38:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2015 16:05:28 GMT
But from what I have seen, it's not the media that began using "dangling" on their own. It's the zoo, and the eyewitnesses that first used "dangling". If the eyewitnesses want to call it dangling, I, as a person who was not there or was not a witness to it can't really define dangling any other way and with that said, don't blame the media. I see where you're coming from, but I think it is up to the police to investigate and for the media to report what actually happened. I just don't see how a woman could dangle (definition: hang or swing loosely) two toddlers at the same time over the railing pictured above. She has some major back and upper body strength if that's the case. I just think the way they are reporting it paints a sensationalized picture of the event. Shocker, I know As I said, I still think what she did was careless, but the way they make it sound, she was literally swinging her kids out over the pit. This is SPECULATION, but if she set them on the railing and their legs were hanging off the front - which to me, seems the most likely scenario - I think "dangling" would be the word I would use to describe it if I were an onlooker. It would be their legs dangling, not their whole bodies, but it still seems like a appropriate word choice.
|
|
raindancer
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,095
Jun 26, 2014 20:10:29 GMT
|
Post by raindancer on Apr 15, 2015 16:08:42 GMT
I do feel that the OP lecturing about empathy and black and white thinking is just simply further signs of her apparent cognitive dissonance. There. I couldn't figure out how to say this. I agree.
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Apr 15, 2015 16:09:48 GMT
lynlam wrote: "I'm talking about the media coverage of a total non-story. Why on earth is this national news for days on end? It shouldn't have been anything more than a blurb on the local."
^^^^^ well, DUH!!! is all I have to say to that.
This is pretty much what MOST of quote-unquote NEWS is nowadays... probably 1/3 (or more) of the threads that get started here and go for pages and pages are about topics that would fit this description.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 7, 2024 13:38:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2015 16:18:02 GMT
I see where you're coming from, but I think it is up to the police to investigate and for the media to report what actually happened. I just don't see how a woman could dangle (definition: hang or swing loosely) two toddlers at the same time over the railing pictured above. She has some major back and upper body strength if that's the case. I just think the way they are reporting it paints a sensationalized picture of the event. Shocker, I know As I said, I still think what she did was careless, but the way they make it sound, she was literally swinging her kids out over the pit. This is SPECULATION, but if she set them on the railing and their legs were hanging off the front - which to me, seems the most likely scenario - I think "dangling" would be the word I would use to describe it if I were an onlooker. It would be their legs dangling, not their whole bodies, but it still seems like a appropriate word choice. Exactly...we're trying to speculate why it should/should not be referred to as "dangling" when none of us were there.
The point I tried to make earlier is that it wasn't the media that began using "dangling" on their own. They're quoting eyewitnesses that were there and saw what happened and zoo officials who also must know.
So with that said, if they want to use dangling, it's not up to me to correct them or chide the press over their use of the word.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 7, 2024 13:38:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2015 16:19:35 GMT
"The zoo says several people saw the woman holding the child over the railing."
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 7, 2024 13:38:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2015 16:24:19 GMT
Yes, it's not the media applying "dangling" to the situation - it's the eyewitnesses. And the word could be perfectly a perfectly appropriate description of what happened, no sensationalism required. I can easily see how it could be correctly applied, as my definition of dangled doesn't require it to be a la Michael Jackson and Blanket.
|
|
|
Post by annabella on Apr 15, 2015 16:31:37 GMT
Judging from the picture my speculation is that the two babies were seated on that thing, then she moved one hand to check her phone and in a second the baby climbed over.
Here's my thing with this thread, I'm surprised at all the judgement over this woman, she shouldn't have done x or you would never do y. It's so easy to look at an event afterwards and see an easy error. Today I read another thread with people admitted their cell phone mishaps, accidents happen to everyone. I know if I started a thread judging woman who push 4 year olds in a stroller it wouldn't go so well for me, so I'm surprised you guys are so harsh on this mother.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 7, 2024 13:38:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2015 16:34:22 GMT
Judging from the picture my speculation is that the two babies were seated on that thing, then she moved one hand to check her phone and in a second the baby climbed over. Here's my thing with this thread, I'm surprised at all the judgement over this woman, she shouldn't have done x or you would never do y. It's so easy to look at an event afterwards and see an easy error. Today I read another thread with people admitted their cell phone mishaps, accidents happen to everyone. I know if I started a thread judging woman who push 4 year olds it wouldn't go so well for me, so I'm surprised you guys are so harsh on this mother. Anyone who would have two toddlers on a railing above a cheetah display and decide that's a good time to check their phone would be a fucking moron. The shit you come up with sometimes is just astonishing.
|
|
sharlag
Drama Llama
I like my artsy with a little bit of fartsy.
Posts: 6,580
Location: Kansas
Jun 26, 2014 12:57:48 GMT
|
Post by sharlag on Apr 15, 2015 16:36:21 GMT
Judging from the picture my speculation is that the two babies were seated on that thing, then she moved one hand to check her phone and in a second the baby climbed over. Here's my thing with this thread, I'm surprised at all the judgement over this woman, she shouldn't have done x or you would never do y. It's so easy to look at an event afterwards and see an easy error. Today I read another thread with people admitted their cell phone mishaps, accidents happen to everyone. I know if I started a thread judging woman who push 4 year olds it wouldn't go so well for me, so I'm surprised you guys are so harsh on this mother. I'm not surprised at all. I see a lot of self-righteous remarks about many topics here.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 7, 2024 13:38:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2015 16:37:43 GMT
I really hate the whole "but she is such a good person". Okay great, but so what? Her kid still fell into a cheetah pit. I'm sure she is perfectly nice. But she had a huge lapse in judgement and yes people are going to have strong feelings about that. Every single zoo has signs not to do this. Every single person knows not to put kids up there but they still do it. And this kind of stuff happens. Sorry but we know better. Do better.
|
|
|
Post by Yubon Peatlejuice on Apr 15, 2015 16:41:21 GMT
At least they had a happy ending. A few years ago a mother set her toddler on the railing at the painted dogs exhibit at the Pgh Zoo and he fell in and got mauled to death by the dogs.
And am I the only one that sees the absolute IRONY in Lynlam scolding others for having no empathy? no you are certainly not the only one to see the irony. We have been annual members of the Detroit zoo and Binder Park Zoo since DS was born. In 8 years I can honestly say I've never done anything as fucking stupid as this woman did. I do not feel sorry for her whatsoever. There is a very similar cheetah enclosure at Binder Park Zoo. The cheetahs are ALWAYS sleeping under the railing where you can't see them. I think they do this on purpose. I'd be willing to bet my next paycheck that this moron was leaning far over the railing and trying to show both of her toddlers the cheetah. Hence the "dangling" eye-witness reports. Darwinism at its finest.
|
|
MerryMom
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,562
Jul 24, 2014 19:51:57 GMT
|
Post by MerryMom on Apr 15, 2015 16:41:43 GMT
Holding a child UP in order to see, and holding a child OVER are two very different things.
Methinks the truth lies somewhere between "dangling" and "holding", but more that she clearly held the child OVER the cement wall and then OVER the three wood railings.
Mumsy violated a "duty of care" hence the child endangerment charge. Intent isn't part of the charge.
Plus she is an assistant director at a child care center and knowing the training that she would have to do in order to be the assistant director, she is well-educated about making good choices regarding child safety.
|
|
|
Post by pjaye on Apr 15, 2015 16:49:45 GMT
OMG, no it's not an easy error. Your young vulnerable children are on one side, dangerous wild animals that eat meat are on the other, there is a large barrier to keep the two separate because it is potentially fatal to have the two meet. To pick up your children and put them into a position over the fence where they can fall in and potentially die form the fall or potentially die form the wild animal mauling them is just sheer stupidity. It's not an accident, it's not something you couldn't have predicted. This was clear cut a dangerous thing to do with small children, and the proof of that is that something bad actually DID happen as the result of her actions. She's so lucky that child is still alive. Most of those aren't accidents either, they are also cases of bad judgment. The BIG difference it's a phone, an inanimate object that is easily replaced. It's not your flesh and blood child that can never be replaced. Someone puts their phone in the oven and then turns the oven on, it's kind of funny...and no-one really cares or gets upset because no-one got hurt as a result. Putting an innocent child's life in danger that as a parent you should be doing your best to protect is absolutely and totally different. I can't believe you are equating dropping your phone with dropping your child into a pit of wild animals
|
|
|
Post by Yubon Peatlejuice on Apr 15, 2015 16:51:09 GMT
We are going on a cruise this summer. I am totally going to let DS sit on the railing so he can see better. If he falls, then it's just an accident and no way should it be on the news or should I get punished for it.
|
|
|
Post by pjaye on Apr 15, 2015 16:57:54 GMT
We are going on a cruise this summer. I am totally going to let DS sit on the railing so he can see better. If he falls, then it's just an accident and no way should it be on the news or should I get punished for it. What a wimp of a mother you are, any decent mother knows that if you want your child to have the *best* view of the ocean he needs to be at the front of the boat, standing on the other side of the railing leaning forward with his arms outstretched and yelling "I'm the king of the world" He'll need to see the whole ocean, not just that little bit from sitting on the rail. Then come back here and post - I'm sure you'll get 20 pages of sympathy and kind thoughts and be told over and over how it wasn't your fault.
|
|
|
Post by Yubon Peatlejuice on Apr 15, 2015 17:00:22 GMT
We are going on a cruise this summer. I am totally going to let DS sit on the railing so he can see better. If he falls, then it's just an accident and no way should it be on the news or should I get punished for it. What a wimp of a mother you are, any decent mother knows that if you want your child to have the *best* view of the ocean he needs to be at the front of the boat, standing on the other side of the railing leaning forward with his arms outstretched and yelling "I'm the king of the world" He'll need to see the whole ocean, not just that little bit from sitting on the rail. Then come back here and post - I'm sure you'll get 20 pages of sympathy and kind thoughts and be told over and over how it wasn't your fault.
Thanks for the advice. What a great idea! I'm glad I posted here because without your help, our cruise probably would not be nearly as much fun! Now when DS asks me for a better view, I can be the best mom ever!
|
|
smartypants71
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,816
Location: Houston, TX
Jun 25, 2014 22:47:49 GMT
|
Post by smartypants71 on Apr 15, 2015 17:01:17 GMT
"The zoo says several people saw the woman holding the child over the railing." I feel like I am having to defend her because what fool would actually DO something like that??!!! Clearly lots of denial on my part LOL!
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 7, 2024 13:38:58 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2015 17:02:27 GMT
"The zoo says several people saw the woman holding the child over the railing." I feel like I am having to defend her because what fool would actually DO something like that??!!! Clearly lots of denial on my part LOL! Sadly I've seen it numerous times at zoos, animal kingdom, etc. People are dumb.
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Apr 15, 2015 17:04:09 GMT
You can lift your child up to see without being over the barrier. Stand back 1 foot and there is no problem.
|
|
|
Post by foolana on Apr 15, 2015 17:07:53 GMT
How is it that Rainbow and Lynlam are ALWAYS on the opposite side of all the refupeas in every single situation? It boggles the mind.
|
|