DC parents leave kids in car for wine tasting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There's going to be a lot of awkward silence when they get back to work. "So, Christophe, how was your weekend?" "Hey, Jennie, what's new?"

How was that wine tasting you were going to?

[Anonymous]

The kids are going to end up on Wednesday's Child

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think preventing all contact with the children until the parents' hearing on the 18th is in the best interest of the children. That's more than two weeks away. Look, these people are idiots, and the "system" needs to step in to ensure that these children will be safe. But not allowing those children to see their parents for weeks is just not helpful to the kids and their longterm emotional development.

I have to agree here.

I am a parent and disgusted by what happened.

Unless they can prove this is an ongoing thing with these parents, the kids should see their parents until the trial.

Agree. The parents were selfish and idiots but I have a 25 month old and know that toddlers that age still experience separation anxiety. For the kid's sake, they need to let the parents contact. Even a parent with bad judgement is better than strangers. Poor kids I feel so upset imagining they don't get contact with the parents (who incidentally deserve to be publicly humiliated).

You have a child and know...what? everything there is to know about child development, and the problems that neglectful and abusive parents may create? Clearly not or you would know that not all kids are securely attached to their parents, and some may be better off with other, better, caregivers than with the ones who are genetically related to them. Ones they can trust, who won't leave them alone in the cold to nap and then not come when they cry.

It's Tuesday, the kids are back in their usual daycare, those are probably the caregivers they're most bonded to anyway, if their parents are as neglectful as this makes it seem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think preventing all contact with the children until the parents' hearing on the 18th is in the best interest of the children. That's more than two weeks away. Look, these people are idiots, and the "system" needs to step in to ensure that these children will be safe. But not allowing those children to see their parents for weeks is just not helpful to the kids and their longterm emotional development.

I have to agree here.

I am a parent and disgusted by what happened.

Unless they can prove this is an ongoing thing with these parents, the kids should see their parents until the trial.

Agree. The parents were selfish and idiots but I have a 25 month old and know that toddlers that age still experience separation anxiety. For the kid's sake, they need to let the parents contact. Even a parent with bad judgement is better than strangers. Poor kids I feel so upset imagining they don't get contact with the parents (who incidentally deserve to be publicly humiliated).

You have a child and know...what? everything there is to know about child development, and the problems that neglectful and abusive parents may create? Clearly not or you would know that not all kids are securely attached to their parents, and some may be better off with other, better, caregivers than with the ones who are genetically related to them. Ones they can trust, who won't leave them alone in the cold to nap and then not come when they cry.

It's Tuesday, the kids are back in their usual daycare, those are probably the caregivers they're most bonded to anyway, if their parents are as neglectful as this makes it seem.

How would you know this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds to me like these kids would BENEFIT from being in foster care. Seriously, people. Take out the fact that they are highly educated and own a million dollar home. If this happened to a low SES couple these kids would be gone. These two have no business being parents.

I'm guessing you are not a parent to toddlers. For toddlers, these parents are still way better than any foster care, even a loving grandparent care.

Nah, who knows what other kind of dumb stuff these parents are doing at home. There severe lack of judgement makes me even wonder if they could be druggies.

[Anonymous]

Having a degree of any kind doesn't mean you have common sense. Just like the nut in my office who has a J.D degree and can't even comprehend a damn email.

[Anonymous]

Apparently parents left an iPhone in the vehicle and brought another phone into the restaurant to monitor with an app. So this truly was thought out. Blows my mind.

[Anonymous]

Smart people do dumb/careless things -- I had a cousin who was "overwhelmed" with one baby bc she was "far" from her family -- in Rhode Island for her DH's residency while her family was in Oklahoma. She'd regularly leave the baby in the crib for hours -- esp when she was mobile and had to be chased around -- and turn on Skype so her Okla. family could "watch" the baby. Not that stupid bc the baby was contained in the crib and mom was home though in another room, watching TV etc. -- she'd rely on her fam to text her to say -- the baby looks fussy, is crying, go check on her etc.

This is just that concept taken to a whole new level.

I'm not sure why they thought the phone thing would work. If they just used the phones to call each other and keep the line open -- they could hear crying -- IF they were holding their own phone to their ear, which they presumably weren't at a wine tasting. It's not like they could have the phone on speaker at the event cause who wants to hear your kid shrieking. I bet they turned the volume down as much as possible and stuck the phone in her purse/dad's jacket and checked when they remembered.

[Anonymous]

Something makes me think the kids are adopted...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So how old were these children? Does anyone know if they were adopted? Surrogates involved?

I ask b/c the reports say they left a 22-month-old boy and a slightly older girl.

I find this story something that I can not stop coming back to. You have a mom who is 46 who had a child at 43 and 44 - and now after whatever efforts went into that, you think it is OK to leave the kids in the car to go taste some wine?

She's Asian. Asian women seem to age more slowly.

They don't when it comes to fertility. They tend to be infertile at younger ages than other races. Ask my Asian SILs, none of whom could conceive after 37 (I really feel for one, who is 39 and has been trying since 34). All of the SILs are unrelated (only boys in DH's family). PCOS is really common in Asia.

Now wrinkles? Yes, they all look fabulous into their 40s. But not fertility IME.

This hasn't been my experience at all. I conceived easily and naturally at 41 and 43. I'm Korean. My BFF who is Chinese conceived at 41 without issues. Most of my Asian friends had children in their late 30ties and early 40ties without problems. My grandmother had my dad at 42.

Back on topic. These parents are from another planet. What they did was neglect and inexcusable.

[Anonymous]

I wonder if something came out in the first hearing -- even just a lack of remorse or concern re the kids' whereabouts all weekend -- that made the judge decide that if he lets this couple have the kids for the next 2 weeks, they would do the same thing again or something worse and thus decided to put them in foster care since there doesn't appear to be local family available to "supervise" the parents.

So for all you family law types out there -- is the next 2 weeks going to be business as usual for the parents? I know they'll be spending time with their lawyers building their case, but otherwise are they free to come and go as they please? They should enjoy their child free weeks to the fullest -- restaurants, wine tastings, whatever they want to do that they can't with kids in tow. They'll have plenty of time together, as I bet their friends and coworkers are all distancing themselves.

I wonder if they're going to work during this time or if they can take some kind of emergency leave or ask to work from home?

Somehow I'm thinking this is a household which has a decent care system during the week -- be it daycare or nanny -- and I'm betting the kids were glad to be back to that person on Monday/Tuesday as it probably feels "normal" to them. No -- I don't know that they necessarily got to go back, but I'd imagine judges try to make things as "easy" as possible on foster families and want to maintain "normalcy" for the kids -- while they didn't allow them to see the parents, I have to imagine they are at least allowing the kids to get back to their normal weekly routine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is very common in some countries. In Scandinavia people often leave kids outside in a pram.

I don't see what all the fuss is about. Taking the children away from their parents is cruel and needless.

+1

Oh, did these parents leave their kids in the car in Washington, D.C., the tony neighborhood in Oslo? Cuz I thought it was here in the US. My bad.

[Anonymous]

Per USA today only 8 months age difference. 22 months and 2 1/2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Per USA today only 8 months age difference. 22 months and 2 1/2

2 1/2 could be really 2 3/4, 2 4/5...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is very common in some countries. In Scandinavia people often leave kids outside in a pram.

I don't see what all the fuss is about. Taking the children away from their parents is cruel and needless.

If it's common in Scandinavia, it's bc of the social contract of those countries -- i.e. people walk in and out of stores every day seeing prams of cute babies sleeping; they keep would notice if someone was running off with a baby bc that would be uncommon, so they'd know to call the cops and alert the parents in the store. Here in the U.S. there is no such social contract. People don't look into cars to see if there's a child in there bc no one expects to see one; these kids got lucky that the state dept atty happened to live right there/notice something was wrong/hearing the crying and call the cops. It's just as easy that he could not have noticed and in another hr or two the kids could have succumbed to the cold and gone unconscious or someone could have kidnapped a kid or car jacked the car or whatever.

I'm also assuming that the overall crime rate in the Scandinavian countries is lower than in U.S. esp a big northeastern city like DC.