Couple arrested for leaving baby in hotel room while they went to bar next door

[Anonymous]

I don't see what the big deal is. The baby was sleeping and safe. So the owners and staff of the hotel are saying that it's not safe for anyone to sleep unattended there? That's more of a concern to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously, the people who are excusing these parents have done or would do the exact same thing - go out to a bar to drink while their toddler/baby is alone asleep in the hotel room, as if children don't wake up while sleeping.

+1 You know who used to do this sh!t with their kid? The parents of the Oxford, Michigan school shooter. I drink and I am the opposite of a hyper anxious parent and you people defending this or saying it’s fine because nothing bad happened or equating it to something like walking into your front yard with your dog are ridiculous. This is trashy behavior in addition to rightly being illegal. Telling these parents that this is negligent and abusive will hopefully have the effect of them not doing it again.

Was this a hotel bar in a different building?

We were at a higher end resort with our 1 year old once. We strollered him to the tiki bar with us. He was asleep and it was like 7pm. There were parents there watching their kids via monitors. It’s not something I would do mainly because our child is a terrible sleeper and would be likely to wake up and panic if we weren’t there. But it didn’t seem incredibly negligent if your kid sleeps well. I thought about this a lot because of the contrast between us with our child sleeping in the bassinet and the other parents with their kids back in the room.

What about different floors in hotels? Same hallway? Hotel restaurant?

We’ve never done any of that before, but I could be convinced that insisting on being within 10 seconds is overkill. Not sure where the line is - but it seems like a lot of posters find the idea of being on the other side of a large house to be negligent (conceivably a large 1 story house could be 150-200ft from end to end).

It’s a different building entirely separate from the hotel, about 500 feet away. There’s no mention of a monitor in the article.

If there was no monitor, I think they weren’t punished enough. That’s insane behavior and incredibly poor judgment.

How does a monitor help in this situation?

Let’s say you hear the child moving, you look at the monitor and see him opening the door to the hall. You’re 5 minutes away, maybe 6 or 7 depending on how long the elevator takes. Is that close enough?

Or if you hear someone come into the room. Is 5-7 minutes a good amount of time?

If I saw a 1 year old get out of a crib, get over and open the door, and walk out - I’d be so gobsmacked I don’t think I’d regain consciousness in 5-7 minutes.

But the reason a monitor helps reduce the punishment is because the child wasn’t actually abandoned. I don’t think it’s the best move but the parents were at least aware they had a responsibility.

Without a monitor, they might as well have left the child in the changing room of Target.

Why would you be gobsmacked by a 1 year old who can get out of a pack and play or who can open an accessible door. Most 1 year olds can do both those things. They are not uncommon.

You must have the usual DCUM success story… but most kids aren’t opening doors and climbing out of pack and plays at 12 months old. And if the kid can get out of the pack and play, a sleep sack will stop that. Or can they unzip that too?

My kid was climbing out of her pack and play st 21 months.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about leaving a kid at your house sleeping while you go to a neighbor’s house within a 3 min walk?

Would this be different than someone who lives in a huge house and has different wings of a house and the baby sleeps in one room in an area that’s far from the parents room?

All the same.

The parents should sue the hell out of everyone involved.

What are you smoking writing a post like this???

In most jurisdictions it is ILLEGAL to leave a child home alone who is not yet into the double digits in age - years, not months.

You must be a dreadfully neglectful parent, if you are one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How was the employee certain that this was what happened? And is this much different than putting your child to bed and then sitting out on your deck having cocktails with your spouse?

You’re pathetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is stupid. I really doubt anyone seriously believes that it is in this child’s best interest to have his/her parents arrested and go into foster care.

Agree. This is absurd. The baby was in a safe space (crib), secured in the bedroom and the parents were nearby. They weren’t even a car ride away. They were in the same building. The chances the hotel catching on fire are slim to none. Your house could also catch on fire while your kid is sleeping and you aren’t in the same room as them

Incorrect based on my reading of the article. Deputies had to travel to the nearby bar/restaurant. Nothing in the article suggests that the bar was in the same building--because it wasn't. Clear case of child neglect/child abuse.

What if housekeeping knocked on the door for turn-down service, etc. ? At the very least, the child would be awakened,scared, and exposed to a stranger.

Isn’t that literally what the police did?

No. Are you unintelligent?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well I think the responses here are very telling. I suspect those defending the parents have left their children alone. When my kids were young I was shocked at parents we knew who left their kids. One mom told me she left her son home in his crib to get her husband from work because they only had one car and she was only gone 10 minutes. I was speechless. A lot can happen in 10 minutes and she could have gotten in an accident or broken down and been gone longer. I knew other moms who defended leaving little ones in the car while they ran into a school for pickup/drop off or even into a store. All made it seem like other parents were overcautious or paranoid. In fact, these parents are violating the law. Even if not, parental instinct should kick in. I know the foster care system is awful but arresting the parents was not overkill. They needed to receive the message loud and clear and be closely monitored when the kids are returned.

+1

+2

[Anonymous]

The sleep sack argument is ridiculous. The answer isn’t “tie the baby up better so he can’t escape.” The answer is don’t leave infants and toddlers unattended. This is really parenting 101.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well I think the responses here are very telling. I suspect those defending the parents have left their children alone. When my kids were young I was shocked at parents we knew who left their kids. One mom told me she left her son home in his crib to get her husband from work because they only had one car and she was only gone 10 minutes. I was speechless. A lot can happen in 10 minutes and she could have gotten in an accident or broken down and been gone longer. I knew other moms who defended leaving little ones in the car while they ran into a school for pickup/drop off or even into a store. All made it seem like other parents were overcautious or paranoid. In fact, these parents are violating the law. Even if not, parental instinct should kick in. I know the foster care system is awful but arresting the parents was not overkill. They needed to receive the message loud and clear and be closely monitored when the kids are returned.

I disagree with your assessment of danger.

I once had several moms tell me I was wrong for walking my dog along the culdesac (NOT a 1/4+ walk, I live in the same culdesac and was gone <5 min) while my baby was asleep. I still think they're psycho. My dh would be gone M-F during the week and the dog needed to go outside, considering my kids slept 7:30-7:30. Dog couldn't poo without some sort of brisk movement outside.

I also had an elderly lady go off on me for buckling my kids in the car, locking the door, and returning my cart to the Aldi cart return. I physically couldn't carry my baby that far at the time, while wrangling my 2 year old. She said I should just abandon the Aldi cart, which I personally think is a rude thing to do.

It doesn’t matter if you “disagree.” It’s against the law. And no, it’s not equivalent to jaywalking or going 5mph over the speed limit or whatever asinine retort you’re formulating.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm okay with this provided they arrest every parent who has ever texted or held their phone while driving. That is also against the law and statistically much more likely to result in a problem.

And here’s the completely invalid, asinine comparison, right on cue! Amazing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Arrested feels melodramatic. This was a great opportunity for them to get a ticket, called back for some kind of parenting class, and be scared straight.

It's like when a cop shows up on a welfare check and there's no food in the house, so they buy the family some food ro take them to a food bank. Technically not having food in the house meets the definition of neglect, but the cure shouldn't be worse than the disease.

And before anyone assumes I just leave my baby in buildings and wander away to drink because I don't think these people should have been arrested and the baby shipped off to another relative - I think what they did was stupid. But sometimes when people know better they do better, and it's wild to jump straight to arresting people for situations where no children were hurt. Same as the woman who had her kid taken away because she had her doing homework in the food court while she interviewed for a job at the mall. Better to follow the spirit of the law (keeping kids safe) than the letter (looking for a reason to punish parents for imperfection).

No. Being poor isn’t the same as wanting to go drink for funsies. Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm okay with this provided they arrest every parent who has ever texted or held their phone while driving. That is also against the law and statistically much more likely to result in a problem.

And here’s the completely invalid, asinine comparison, right on cue! Amazing.

Why? There's always a bunch of posters who say their arrest is correct simply because "it is against the law", nothing to do with whether it makes sense or not. According to their argument, then surely if you enforce one law then you should be enforcing all laws.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well I think the responses here are very telling. I suspect those defending the parents have left their children alone. When my kids were young I was shocked at parents we knew who left their kids. One mom told me she left her son home in his crib to get her husband from work because they only had one car and she was only gone 10 minutes. I was speechless. A lot can happen in 10 minutes and she could have gotten in an accident or broken down and been gone longer. I knew other moms who defended leaving little ones in the car while they ran into a school for pickup/drop off or even into a store. All made it seem like other parents were overcautious or paranoid. In fact, these parents are violating the law. Even if not, parental instinct should kick in. I know the foster care system is awful but arresting the parents was not overkill. They needed to receive the message loud and clear and be closely monitored when the kids are returned.

I disagree with your assessment of danger.

I once had several moms tell me I was wrong for walking my dog along the culdesac (NOT a 1/4+ walk, I live in the same culdesac and was gone <5 min) while my baby was asleep. I still think they're psycho. My dh would be gone M-F during the week and the dog needed to go outside, considering my kids slept 7:30-7:30. Dog couldn't poo without some sort of brisk movement outside.

I also had an elderly lady go off on me for buckling my kids in the car, locking the door, and returning my cart to the Aldi cart return. I physically couldn't carry my baby that far at the time, while wrangling my 2 year old. She said I should just abandon the Aldi cart, which I personally think is a rude thing to do.

It doesn’t matter if you “disagree.” It’s against the law. And no, it’s not equivalent to jaywalking or going 5mph over the speed limit or whatever asinine retort you’re formulating.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

NP: lol what?? It is illegal to walk your dog in the cul de sac (assuming within view of your front door) for 5 minutes? 🤣 or leave a kid in the car to return a shopping cart 20 ft away? 🙄

Absurd. If you called the police for either of these things, they would roll their eyes and leave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about leaving a kid at your house sleeping while you go to a neighbor’s house within a 3 min walk?

Would this be different than someone who lives in a huge house and has different wings of a house and the baby sleeps in one room in an area that’s far from the parents room?

All the same.

The parents should sue the hell out of everyone involved.

Sue them for what, exactly? Following the law?

Many things they could sue for. Defamation. Wrongful arrests. Persecution. 4th Amendment violations. Etc.

A good lawyer can always find plenty of reasons to sue.

[Anonymous]

Stop having kids you don’t wanna give up partying for

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kudos to the employee who alerted police.

+1
Poor baby!

How did employee know?