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

[Anonymous]

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.

It also isn't in the baby's interest to be left alone by its parents, who are both consuming alcohol. Presumeably, they'd still be under the influence when they came back to the room. It's also not in the baby's best interest to have caregivers who are under the influence of alcohol.

So you are saying it should be illegal for parents to drink, ever?

How about at least one person who cares for young children is sober whilst caring for said children?

[Anonymous]

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.

You’re stupid. The child won’t go to foster care. She is taken care of by relatives. The court will probably order the couple to take classes in how to keep your baby safe and CPS will monitor for a while.

Please tell me you don’t have children.

And you think that being woken up by the police, being placed outside of his parents care, and being monitored by CPS is better for the child than just waking up from his nap and going on with life?

You honestly believe this is overall a positive and beneficial experience for this family?

[Anonymous]

Whether you agree with the law or not, this was very clearly illegal. No gray areas. You don’t get to opt out of laws because you think they are dumb. That’s not how it works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"A hotel employee told deputies that two guests — James Grant of Laurel and Carrie Zauner of Columbia — had left their child unattended in their room while they went to The Jetty Restaurant and Dock Bar.

Deputies traveled to the Jetty Restaurant and Dock Bar, where they found Grant and Zauner consuming alcoholic beverages.

The couple admitted to leaving their child alone in the hotel room, according to the sheriff’s office.

Deputies returned with the couple to the hotel and conducted a welfare check. The child was found asleep and alone in the room. A family member was called to take custody of the child."

https://www.fox5dc.com/news/maryland-couple-arrested-after-leaving-one-year-old-alone-hotel-room

Thoughts?

They obviously never heard of Madeleine McCann.

[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.

If your neighbor got into a car accident while picking up her husband from work, wouldn’t it be BETTER not to have the baby in the car and potentially injured or killed?

It’s like, even in your hypothetical, you would rather be perceived as a good mother than actually keep your child safe.

By this absurd logic you should always leave your baby home so they don’t get in a car accident.

[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.

If your neighbor got into a car accident while picking up her husband from work, wouldn’t it be BETTER not to have the baby in the car and potentially injured or killed?

It’s like, even in your hypothetical, you would rather be perceived as a good mother than actually keep your child safe.

By this absurd logic you should always leave your baby home so they don’t get in a car accident.

If you really looked at statistics, that’s probably true.

But saying that you always take your baby with you so that they would die too if you got into some kind of deadly collision is crazy, isn’t it? It’s even crazier to be shocked that your neighbor doesn’t feel the same way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They deserved to be arrested. Even with w monitor, the biggest concern is a fire. There is no possibility for a baby to escape a fire…

But there wasn’t a fire.

It’s not worth it to definitely cause harm to a child (arresting parents, taking custody of the child) in order to prevent an extremely unlikely and improbable event.

Ok - you need to understand risk/consequence....

The likelihood of an event occurring goes on the X-axis. The consequences of that event goes on the Y- axis. If the grid is a 9 box, you want all the risks you take to be in the middle box, to the left and to the bottom. This one would be in the upper red box.

Where would these fit in your model? The US Fire Administration reports about 15 people die annually in fires in hotels (in most years this does not include any children). In 2022, 1,129 children were killed in car accidents. Is taking a child in a car also in the upper red box? What about gun deaths? If a parent owns a gun, would that be in the upper red box too?

Lol. Right?
What if a mass shooter came into the Jetty while the parents were there and everyone died, but the baby was safe because he was sleeping in the hotel room?
That seems at least as likely as the hotel catching on fire.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nope. Negligent and irresponsible of these parents.

I’m an empty nester - raised 4DC and recall with my first I was nervous to go to my basement to do laundry and leave her alone -awake or asleep two levels up -for a good long while. My mom had to talk me down! My postpartum anxiety served a purpose.

Woah. I had the opposite reaction. I think untreated parental anxiety is really showing up in today's children as Gen Z enters the workforce.

[Anonymous]

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.

You’re stupid. The child won’t go to foster care. She is taken care of by relatives. The court will probably order the couple to take classes in how to keep your baby safe and CPS will monitor for a while.

And you think that being woken up by the police, being placed outside of his parents care, and being monitored by CPS is better for the child than just waking up from his nap and going on with life?

You honestly believe this is overall a positive and beneficial experience for this family?

You don't have any idea whether they woke up the child before or after Grandma or whoever arrived to pick them up.

My kids had the experience of being put to bed by one relative, and woken by another all the time. They weren't traumatized. From a toddler's perspective, being monitored by CPS means that someone talked to their parents. My kids had that experience all the time too. I talked to many different people in front of my children. Again, they were not traumatized.

[Anonymous]

What would've happened had the toddler woken up? My toddler was able to climb out of their crib so we put them in a regular toddler bed so they wouldn't hurt themselves getting out.

Being outside your house with a baby monitor while gardening or reading is different than being at a bar away from the hotel while drinking. For people who can't tell the difference, you might want to read up on child endangerment laws in your state/jurisdiction.

[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

They weren't in the same building. If you look on google map the Jetty restaurant is not in the same hotel.

Also, this wasn't a baby, it was a toddler at an age when many children start climbing out of cribs. Most hotel rooms have accessible door handles that toddlers can open, and don't have a way to lock from the outside that prevents opening the door with the handle.

This is why I don’t shower or sleep when I stay in a hotel room with my children. If DH is with me, we sleep in shifts.

If you're in a hotel room with a child young enough to sleep in a crib, and old enough to climb out of a crib, like this one, it makes sense to put the latch on the door before you take a shower, or go to sleep. You can't do that if you are outside the room. So, your logic doesn't apply.

You should not leave toddlers in hotel rooms that they can leave at will and go to restaurants that are not connected to the hotel. I can't believe we are even debating this. If you desperately want to go to a restaurant without your kids, you should ask Grandma or Uncle or whoever to watch your kids. If you don't, then apparently the police will. That's not horrifying.

[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.

It also isn't in the baby's interest to be left alone by its parents, who are both consuming alcohol. Presumeably, they'd still be under the influence when they came back to the room. It's also not in the baby's best interest to have caregivers who are under the influence of alcohol.

So you are saying it should be illegal for parents to drink, ever?

How about at least one person who cares for young children is sober whilst caring for said children?

I didn't read anywhere that they were both drunk. Did you? Or is one drink one too many?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

They weren't in the same building. If you look on google map the Jetty restaurant is not in the same hotel.

Also, this wasn't a baby, it was a toddler at an age when many children start climbing out of cribs. Most hotel rooms have accessible door handles that toddlers can open, and don't have a way to lock from the outside that prevents opening the door with the handle.

This is why I don’t shower or sleep when I stay in a hotel room with my children. If DH is with me, we sleep in shifts.

If you're in a hotel room with a child young enough to sleep in a crib, and old enough to climb out of a crib, like this one, it makes sense to put the latch on the door before you take a shower, or go to sleep. You can't do that if you are outside the room. So, your logic doesn't apply.

You should not leave toddlers in hotel rooms that they can leave at will and go to restaurants that are not connected to the hotel. I can't believe we are even debating this. If you desperately want to go to a restaurant without your kids, you should ask Grandma or Uncle or whoever to watch your kids. If you don't, then apparently the police will. That's not horrifying.

+1 this is crazy. hotel rooms aren't *that* safe. That's why people use the latches and lock the door when they go to sleep.

If there was a fire in the hotel, there is no way the parents would've gotten to the kids in time, assuming this was a multi-story hotel building. Most of us don't live in more than a 2 story house, so being outside in your yard while your kid is in the house is not as big of a deal.

[Anonymous]

Something similar happened to a family member on vacation at an AI in Mexico. These idiots put their kids (four of them!!) down for a nap and then went and got wasted, leaving them alone for hours. One of the kids got out into the balcony and was screaming his face off so security came and had to break in. They almost got kicked out of the resort (should have) but they are long time customers.

If you value getting wasted i stead of taking care of your children maybe you shouldn’t have them.

[Anonymous]

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).