DC parents leave kids in car for wine tasting

[Anonymous]

Love that we tied 90210 into this story. Well done!

Holy crap - just checked on her Facebook profile and we have a mutual friend in common. Must get details!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Love that we tied 90210 into this story. Well done!

Holy crap - just checked on her Facebook profile and we have a mutual friend in common. Must get details!

Are we sure this is the right person? There a lots of Jennie Chang's. I have to wonder why they would leave this page up.
It is an adorable pic, maybe they are hoping to garner sympathy.

[Anonymous]

I seriously doubt they will get 10 years. I'm sure they'll get a good deal and plead guilty for a misdemeanor of some kind.

[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.

So sad. That baby should have been in daycare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the most vocal "free range" parent advocates has written a piece decrying the fact that the parents didn't get their kids back immediately. She defends them on the basis of the IPhone (which was "giving the kids an open connection to" the parents!) and argues that the police should have tried "teaching them that this wasn't a good idea and telling them not to do it again" instead of arresting them." Because "seizing their children" is "acting as if they were deliberately cruel."

Unbelievable.

http://reason.com/blog/2015/02/03/parents-who-left-kids-alone-in-cold-car

That's wack. (And I am a fan of free range parenting).

Yes! This Schenazy free range woman should butt out of this one-totally a different situation than typical Free Range parenting. Letting your 8 year old play outside near your home, 9 year old walk to a nearby park, or 11 year old to the corner store for milk is vastly differnt from leaving 2 babies strapped in a freezing car for an hour while their parent's drink wine. Schenazy is nuts!

Free-range is used for older children. This bitch is crazy. Infants/toddlers can not inherently be free-range because they have not yet developed mental or physical capabilities to be safe.

Yea--my 22-month old that swallowed all of his siblings Legos was 'free-ranging' so I did not see it happen

This. That article is insane. You can't leave babies and toddlers unattended.

That article basically was 'don't hate them because they are rich'.

I'll bite. We are very similar finacially, education-wise, age-wise to this couple. We also happen to own a 1million+ rowhouse in similar area.

I think why it is so distasteful is that we do find it absurd that such-educated people could be so stupid. The fact they have every means available to take care of their kids--hiring babysitters, etc. makes this even harder to stomach.

I don't feel it's attack on the rich by any means.

Agree.
Their means provide options. (Unlike, perhaps, the single mother who leaves children in car while she interviews for elusive job)

What poor SELFISH decision-making.

[Anonymous]

dumb question, but what is meant by monitoring by iphone? You make a FaceTime call and place the phone somewhere in the car streaming the kids and maintain the other phone constantly open or what? or you use an app for that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:dumb question, but what is meant by monitoring by iphone? You make a FaceTime call and place the phone somewhere in the car streaming the kids and maintain the other phone constantly open or what? or you use an app for that?

In this case, I think dad called moms phone. Mom answered her phone and left it in car. Dad walked out of car with his phone on. Since kids were asleep, he wasn't hearing anything. Went to wine bar with phone connected to call, hoping to hear when/if kids woke up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:dumb question, but what is meant by monitoring by iphone? You make a FaceTime call and place the phone somewhere in the car streaming the kids and maintain the other phone constantly open or what? or you use an app for that?

In this case, I think dad called moms phone. Mom answered her phone and left it in car. Dad walked out of car with his phone on. Since kids were asleep, he wasn't hearing anything. Went to wine bar with phone connected to call, hoping to hear when/if kids woke up.

A plan that appears not to work, if the description in the article of the daughter "screaming hysterically" during the time the car was watched is true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:dumb question, but what is meant by monitoring by iphone? You make a FaceTime call and place the phone somewhere in the car streaming the kids and maintain the other phone constantly open or what? or you use an app for that?

In this case, I think dad called moms phone. Mom answered her phone and left it in car. Dad walked out of car with his phone on. Since kids were asleep, he wasn't hearing anything. Went to wine bar with phone connected to call, hoping to hear when/if kids woke up.

Maybe that is why there is a report saying the mom was dropped off and the dad went to park and then came Into the restaurant. They had to set up the FaceTime and made sure it would work so she goes into the restaurant, dad FaceTime calls her from the car, it works so he positions his iPhone where he wants it, then exits car and goes to restaurant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the most vocal "free range" parent advocates has written a piece decrying the fact that the parents didn't get their kids back immediately. She defends them on the basis of the IPhone (which was "giving the kids an open connection to" the parents!) and argues that the police should have tried "teaching them that this wasn't a good idea and telling them not to do it again" instead of arresting them." Because "seizing their children" is "acting as if they were deliberately cruel."

Unbelievable.

http://reason.com/blog/2015/02/03/parents-who-left-kids-alone-in-cold-car

That's wack. (And I am a fan of free range parenting).

Yes! This Schenazy free range woman should butt out of this one-totally a different situation than typical Free Range parenting. Letting your 8 year old play outside near your home, 9 year old walk to a nearby park, or 11 year old to the corner store for milk is vastly differnt from leaving 2 babies strapped in a freezing car for an hour while their parent's drink wine. Schenazy is nuts!

Free-range is used for older children. This bitch is crazy. Infants/toddlers can not inherently be free-range because they have not yet developed mental or physical capabilities to be safe.

Yea--my 22-month old that swallowed all of his siblings Legos was 'free-ranging' so I did not see it happen

I think you can follow a "free-ranging" approach with 22 month olds, it's just that you give them more freedom than some other people give their toddlers. For example, I know some families who use play pens or other containment systems whenever the child is outside an adult's eyeshot (e.g. mom went to the bathroom), while others might allow their kid to play in a safe playroom, while mom is in another room.

But these kids were strapped in. There is nothing "free range" about that situation.

[Anonymous]

I can't believe that Free Range parenting blogger is hitching onto this situation to promote herself. Oh, wait, yes I can. This has nothing to do with free range parenting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:did you really just compare this to bev hills 90210??

No -- not this; I compared the hedge fund families in Greenwich leaving their kids with nannies 24-7 to 90210. Dylan was a grown ass man, these kids are 2 and 3 strapped in a car. WTH - read closer next time.

Not only was Dylan a grown-ass man, he was a fictional-ass man.

[Anonymous]

Is it possible that MPD visited the home in advance of the Monday court hearing and found things there that prompted the judge to bar them from contact? Like, are they the types to have locks on the kids' bedroom doors?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I just the read the article and she's not defending the parents for doing it she just thinks putting the kids with strangers and no contact with their parents for two weeks and then possibly throwing the parents in jail for 10 years is overkill. I agree with her. I have no idea what these parents were thinking but how is it better to put two more kids in the foster care system? Also, how does it help the kids to be suddenly yanked away from their parents with absolutely no contact until the next court date? Wouldn't supervised mandated parent education and monitoring be better?

This happens when the parents exhibit such bad parental judgment that it is considered safer for the children not to be left in their care until they have had some mandated parenting classes. They apparently have a complete lack of common sense, judgment and safety that the children are considered unsafe even in their presence. Frankly, that's the way I would read this. For any parent that would even consider this, let alone, actually put this in practice for two children under the age of 3, I agree with the judge that it is safer for the children to be in some other child care situation. I would not want these children to be left alone with these parents until they had completed some significant parenting classes and I had reassurance from the instructor that they seemed to pay heed and actually understand their obligations.

At that age, my kids would put any and everything into their mouth, could occasionally reach things in the car that they might put around their necks (they think it is fun to wrap things around their necks), or otherwise cause damage or harm to themselves in less time than it would take for me to hear on a phone and make it back to the car. They're toddlers for crying out loud. If you aren't going to watch them yourself, hire someone to do it for you. In another 2-3 years, you can do more free-roaming care, but for now, they have absolutely no judgment, experience, or sense of safety to leave them unattended.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I just the read the article and she's not defending the parents for doing it she just thinks putting the kids with strangers and no contact with their parents for two weeks and then possibly throwing the parents in jail for 10 years is overkill. I agree with her. I have no idea what these parents were thinking but how is it better to put two more kids in the foster care system? Also, how does it help the kids to be suddenly yanked away from their parents with absolutely no contact until the next court date? Wouldn't supervised mandated parent education and monitoring be better?

This happens when the parents exhibit such bad parental judgment that it is considered safer for the children not to be left in their care until they have had some mandated parenting classes. They apparently have a complete lack of common sense, judgment and safety that the children are considered unsafe even in their presence. Frankly, that's the way I would read this. For any parent that would even consider this, let alone, actually put this in practice for two children under the age of 3, I agree with the judge that it is safer for the children to be in some other child care situation. I would not want these children to be left alone with these parents until they had completed some significant parenting classes and I had reassurance from the instructor that they seemed to pay heed and actually understand their obligations.

At that age, my kids would put any and everything into their mouth, could occasionally reach things in the car that they might put around their necks (they think it is fun to wrap things around their necks), or otherwise cause damage or harm to themselves in less time than it would take for me to hear on a phone and make it back to the car. They're toddlers for crying out loud. If you aren't going to watch them yourself, hire someone to do it for you. In another 2-3 years, you can do more free-roaming care, but for now, they have absolutely no judgment, experience, or sense of safety to leave them unattended.

This.