What happened to this California family?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An 8 mile high takes all day long. They were carrying the weight of the baby, and the weight of the packs with heavy water, with sun beating down on their heads with no shade and hot rocks reflecting heat back. If you don't wear a hat and stay hydrated, it's stressful on the heart and you pretty much fry.

They started out in the morning but may have stayed by the river for hours until the temperature was better. They intended to be home by Monday morning. They might have planned to return in the evening. They weren't found until Tuesday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An 8 mile high takes all day long. They were carrying the weight of the baby, and the weight of the packs with heavy water, with sun beating down on their heads with no shade and hot rocks reflecting heat back. If you don't wear a hat and stay hydrated, it's stressful on the heart and you pretty much fry.

They started out in the morning but may have stayed by the river for hours until the temperature was better. They intended to be home by Monday morning. They might have planned to return in the evening. They weren't found until Tuesday.

The police already said it was a day hike. They had their nanny show up on Monday so they could
Work. They weren’t planning an overnight stay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get this "what mother would leave her baby" thing UNLESS the dad was the threat. I am a mom and if I were in trouble I'd absolutely trust my husband with the kids if for some reason we thought I had to be the one to get help.

If your husband and dog were keeling over from heat stroke, your instinct would be to try to get your baby out of there as quickly as possible, not leave her in the blazing sun for hours longer waiting for rescue.

What if you reach this realization halfway through the hike, at the bottom of the +1000' elevation change and 4 miles from the car?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I could see the baby having a medical emergency, the parents realizing and freaking out and exhausting themselves so much they collapse. But I would think the baby would be in their arms and not the carrier.

Was the baby in the carrier? The reports I've seen said the baby and dog were "beside" the father.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An 8 mile high takes all day long. They were carrying the weight of the baby, and the weight of the packs with heavy water, with sun beating down on their heads with no shade and hot rocks reflecting heat back. If you don't wear a hat and stay hydrated, it's stressful on the heart and you pretty much fry.

They started out in the morning but may have stayed by the river for hours until the temperature was better. They intended to be home by Monday morning. They might have planned to return in the evening. They weren't found until Tuesday.

The police already said it was a day hike. They had their nanny show up on Monday so they could
Work. They weren’t planning an overnight stay.

Yes, they could have taken a couple hours down, stayed in the shade by the river (which was toxic), then returned in the evening.

The police are not thinking that heat is the cause of death. Whether they were hiking at noon or another time, it wasn't heat. It was something else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get this "what mother would leave her baby" thing UNLESS the dad was the threat. I am a mom and if I were in trouble I'd absolutely trust my husband with the kids if for some reason we thought I had to be the one to get help.

If your husband and dog were keeling over from heat stroke, your instinct would be to try to get your baby out of there as quickly as possible, not leave her in the blazing sun for hours longer waiting for rescue.

This assumes one very specific scenario, people are stating it like a general rule.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An 8 mile high takes all day long. They were carrying the weight of the baby, and the weight of the packs with heavy water, with sun beating down on their heads with no shade and hot rocks reflecting heat back. If you don't wear a hat and stay hydrated, it's stressful on the heart and you pretty much fry.

They started out in the morning but may have stayed by the river for hours until the temperature was better. They intended to be home by Monday morning. They might have planned to return in the evening. They weren't found until Tuesday.

The police already said it was a day hike. They had their nanny show up on Monday so they could
Work. They weren’t planning an overnight stay.

Yes, they could have taken a couple hours down, stayed in the shade by the river (which was toxic), then returned in the evening.

The police are not thinking that heat is the cause of death. Whether they were hiking at noon or another time, it wasn't heat. It was something else.

We don’t know whether the investigators think it’s heat or not. They are methodically ruling out other possibilities that may require more urgent attention one by one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An 8 mile high takes all day long. They were carrying the weight of the baby, and the weight of the packs with heavy water, with sun beating down on their heads with no shade and hot rocks reflecting heat back. If you don't wear a hat and stay hydrated, it's stressful on the heart and you pretty much fry.

They started out in the morning but may have stayed by the river for hours until the temperature was better. They intended to be home by Monday morning. They might have planned to return in the evening. They weren't found until Tuesday.

I recently took an 8 mile, very steep and technical, hike and it took me 7 hours. This was in mid-80’s weather, with tons of shade, water, food, hat, and sunglasses. Took a lot of breaks including in cool, in contaminated water. No baby and dog to carry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you don't believe they all could have died of heat stroke, I recommend the book "Over The Edge: Death in Grand Canyon". People rarely die of murder or from animal attacks. Guess what kills most of the people there? It can be amazing how quickly they perish from the heat. One of the saddest stories was about a pack of boy scouts who had adult leaders who were idiots. Even people who train and have adequate water perish.

Here's a short true story about heatstroke, it was interesting and scary

https://rescue911.fandom.com/wiki/Heatstroke_Hiker

Very informative, thank you. Shows how dangerous it is and how difficult to overcome heatstroke when there are no resources like abundant water or ice packs nearby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the baby were in a carrier, you could still feel its legs and hear it. The other parent could check on it. Even if the baby died first, the parents if they could have saved themselves could have had another baby. People want to think the mom was the fitter one, but if you’re small hiking with a tall male, you basically have to take at least twice as many steps to keep up.

WTF?

If the baby died first, you might still have the will to live, to have another baby.

- says someone who hasn't had a baby (i hope)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get this "what mother would leave her baby" thing UNLESS the dad was the threat. I am a mom and if I were in trouble I'd absolutely trust my husband with the kids if for some reason we thought I had to be the one to get help.

If your husband and dog were keeling over from heat stroke, your instinct would be to try to get your baby out of there as quickly as possible, not leave her in the blazing sun for hours longer waiting for rescue.

This assumes one very specific scenario, people are stating it like a general rule.

I'm someone who said it. And it isn't that I wouldn't trust my husband, it would be whatever was causing me to leave my husband behind. If he was in bad enough shape to be left behind he wasn't well enough to care for the infant. If the infant was sick, she wouldn't have risked the extra hours of exposure. There is no logical explanation for her going alone because the only reason TO go alone is someone being in distress (either dad or baby)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If the baby were in a carrier, you could still feel its legs and hear it. The other parent could check on it. Even if the baby died first, the parents if they could have saved themselves could have had another baby. People want to think the mom was the fitter one, but if you’re small hiking with a tall male, you basically have to take at least twice as many steps to keep up.

WTF?

If the baby died first, you might still have the will to live, to have another baby.

- says someone who hasn't had a baby (i hope)

My first thought when I heard this story was 'thank god one of the parents didn't survive, because if it was me, there is no way I could go on'

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get this "what mother would leave her baby" thing UNLESS the dad was the threat. I am a mom and if I were in trouble I'd absolutely trust my husband with the kids if for some reason we thought I had to be the one to get help.

If your husband and dog were keeling over from heat stroke, your instinct would be to try to get your baby out of there as quickly as possible, not leave her in the blazing sun for hours longer waiting for rescue.

This assumes one very specific scenario, people are stating it like a general rule.

I'm someone who said it. And it isn't that I wouldn't trust my husband, it would be whatever was causing me to leave my husband behind. If he was in bad enough shape to be left behind he wasn't well enough to care for the infant. If the infant was sick, she wouldn't have risked the extra hours of exposure. There is no logical explanation for her going alone because the only reason TO go alone is someone being in distress (either dad or baby)

In that scenario I think knowing your own limits would be a factor. You'd have to try to be realistic about whether bringing the baby would prevent you from getting help for ANY of you. That would be an awful decision, but this poor woman didn't make it back to her car, so she was obviously struggling as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get this "what mother would leave her baby" thing UNLESS the dad was the threat. I am a mom and if I were in trouble I'd absolutely trust my husband with the kids if for some reason we thought I had to be the one to get help.

If your husband and dog were keeling over from heat stroke, your instinct would be to try to get your baby out of there as quickly as possible, not leave her in the blazing sun for hours longer waiting for rescue.

Assuming you weren't suffering from delirium.

And assuming the baby didn’t perish before either parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't get this "what mother would leave her baby" thing UNLESS the dad was the threat. I am a mom and if I were in trouble I'd absolutely trust my husband with the kids if for some reason we thought I had to be the one to get help.

If your husband and dog were keeling over from heat stroke, your instinct would be to try to get your baby out of there as quickly as possible, not leave her in the blazing sun for hours longer waiting for rescue.

Assuming you weren't suffering from delirium.

And assuming the baby didn’t perish before either parent.

Yes, all of these things. I was responding to the person who said they dont understand why everyone is saying the mom would definitely take the baby. I couldn't leave my baby out in the hot sun to die, even if I knew it was folly to try to get her out. Just like a burning building; I think I would still try to go back in there for my kids even if it was futile.

Maybe if my H and the baby were in the shade and I thought she might be ok for a little while longer? it's all awful to consider.