Reply to Dax Tejera’s widow’s arrest for child endangerment

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Dax Tejera’s widow’s arrest for child endangerment "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]This is crazy! You don’t leave your young kids/babies in a hotel room by themselves so you can go out for dinner.  There are no excuses for this!  It was a stupid and careless parenting decision.

[/quote]

I wouldn't do this because I'd be stressed the whole time about something like this happening but honestly I don't think that badly of her. They were a block away from the hotel and had cameras on the kids. They were not in any danger if they were asleep and not in any more danger then they'd be in their own home on another floor. [/quote]

No sorry being a block away in a whole other building while your kids are presumably several floors up is not at all the same as different part of the house. Not at all.

How quickly could you get to them in a fire? How many hotel staff have keys to that room? What if they get sick and the building elevators aren’t working? It’s just a huge amount of response time required to get back versus walking upstairs in your own house. 
[/quote]

The only one of these things that is actually concerning is the fire. And while its concerning, there are plenty of situations where my kids are far enough away from me where if a fire spontaneously broke out I wouldn't be able to get to them. Normal situations. I don't live my life taking extreme precautions based on highly unlikely outcomes. I understand some people think this is insane but honestly they have a camera on them and I imagine they could, if running, be back to the room in 3 minutes. And the stairs work even if the elevator doesn't. No kid is harmed from crying for a few minutes. And if they get sick (suddenly?!) in such a dramatic fashion that would alert me if I was in the room, like vomiting I guess? Then that would be evident on camera. But honestly my 3/5/7 year old are DEAD TO THE WORLD when they fall asleep. I could 100% leave the house to go run an errand and have no one be the wiser and no one endangered.

I do think leaving the hotel is a little much but if they were eating in the hotel restaurant would people be saying this? I dunno I just can't get onboard with demonizing this they were close and had a camera. [/quote]

You need to read the details about Madeleine McCann. Ground floor apartment, parents only 180 feet away, checked on the kids supposedly more than once in person. It still ended horribly.

And before you insist that it's super rare for a stranger to abduct a child like that: Do you really not comprehend that on a camera set up in some random hotel room or apartment, you would NOT necessarily be aware f your child were vomiting, for instance? A young child might cry if he vomited...but of course you insist that "no kid is harmed from crying for few minutes" so you'd be at dinner, waiting to see if your kid would just cry it out and go back to sleep....

And who "could, if running, be back to the room in 3 minutes"? From down the block and maybe multiple stories to climb on those handy stairs you reference? Even if the elevator's working it'll be more than three minutes.

As for "my kids are dead to the world when they fall asleep," well, in a strange environment with unusual noises around, like a hotel, hooray for you if that's true. It won't always be true and you cannot know if the one time you leave a child alone in a hotel room is the one time the child will wake, wonder where the adults are, go looking for them, etc. By the time you look up from your dinner to check the camera and see them gone, well, you'll have no idea how long they've really been out of bed, maybe out of the room.

You're preening yourself on how "I don't live my life taking extreme precautions based on highly unlikely outcomes." Fine. But read the post at 11:16: [i]The odds that nothing would go wrong are extremely high, but the unexpected does happen sometimes. [b]It would never cross your mind that your young, seemingly healthy husband would just drop dead, but it does happen to some people. It could happen to any of us at any time. [/b][b]You don’t leave your kids alone because even though, most likely, they would be just fine, what if they weren’t? What if something would happen? You just don’t roll the die when it comes to your children’s wellbeing.[/b][/i]

Enjoy rolling the die all you want. Most of us wouldn't. It is not paranoid or silly to choose to go out and have fun only when there is an actual responsible adult to care for kids. [/quote]

I mean it IS super rare. What happened to that girl. And it was in a ground floor apartment not up in a hotel room. It is so rare that that case is notoriously famous as the horrifying example of the time the worst actually happened. [b]A camera will be set up pointed at the kid, thats the whole point of the camera.[/b] And a vomiting incident could go unnoticed just as easily if the parents were eating dinner in their own kitchen with a monitor on.

I mean I think you're assuming that if home a parent doesn't let the kid cry. I always let my kid fuss a bit before going up, not for a half hour or anything but a few minutes absolutely they frequently went back to sleep!

The problem with the bolded is that to really live that life you need to live in a bubble. We take risks all the time, humans are terrible at risk evaluation. The kids were likely more at risk driving to the hotel then they were in that room. [/quote]

DP. Those of you depending so heavily on "the camera will be pointed at the kid" are so, so naive.

So your children never get out of bed on their own? Do you really not think that in a strange place, where they're outside their usual routines and not in their own beds in their own bedrooms, they will just sleep perfectly like logs and not possibly sleep more lightly and maybe get up and get out of bed to look for mom or dad? Yes, even out of a pack and play or crib if they're able. You look up at your precious camera trained on the kid's bed and they're not there. Not in view. What now, geniuses? You can't know if they're just out of frame or in the other room opening the mini bar or in the bathroom exploring the hot water tap that's set for scalding. Oh, but so sorry -- any mention of specific dangers in life frustrates you because you don't like to hear about them and assume that being aware of them means we..."live in a bubble," I guess.

[/quote]

No what I think is that if I am a block away that I could be back in my hotel room in less than 5 minutes if I was properly motivate (IE, running) and that even waking up in a strange place, very little can happen in 5 minutes. Situations that require an immediate response (ie, the incident where being 10 seconds away instead of 300 seconds away) are extraordinarily rare.

You're all mad at me, I have said I wouldn't do this, I just don't agree with you that its dangerous. I think generally it does show bad judgement because [b]while I don't think its dangerous, the consequences of being caught are SEVERE[/b] and being caught is not nearly as unlikely as something bad happening. I mean any of the things you describe could happen if I was in the room but asleep. There is no perfect safety situation. [/quote]

Re: the bold: Your concern, then is that YOU would get caught and be punished. Your concern is not that the behavior is inherently risky toward your own children.

Got it. [/quote]

Yea the poster defending this woman is truly awful.  And the messed up part is, I bet when a bad thing happens to her she’s like… well that’s life! When in reality, at least some fraction of the time, she’d actually just made a terrible decision that a reasonable person would never have done but she thinks it’s w in the range of acceptable.  Fine to do to yourself.  Not okay to do to children you brought into this world….[/quote]

I am that poster you are talking about so casually. Horrible things actually have happened to me, and I do not always think 'that's life'. There are specific decisions made by specific people (sometimes me) that have led to bad things happening. My brother died as a teenager riding a vehicle my parents purchased for him and allowed him to ride. I believe they hold some responsibility for his death. And my house burned to the ground after being struck by lightening, which was no one's fault. But I actually think it is BECAUSE I have experienced fairly extreme tragedies in both extremely random ways and in ways where a single decision led to a chain of events that led to the tragedy that I have this perspective.

And I spent my first year as a mother in a state of extreme stress and anxiety about protecting my child because of these (and some other) events. And at some point I realized that I was hurting her both by being so amped up and by not allowing her to experience things and that I had to figure out how to make better risk analysis to survive motherhood. And so I worked at it, and I challenge myself to experience moments of discomfort when my children are taking risks that I find uncomfortable but that aren't actually dangerous to just sit, because they learn through failure/experience.

Anyway none of that is relevant here as there is nothing to be gained by the kids from being left in a hotel room. I just don't think anything is served when we make situations like this out to be THE WORST THING EVER. A lot of truly terrible things and terrible neglect happens to children. IMO, this isn't that, although I will say the story someone told in the early pages about a toddler wandering around and a poster finding the mother in the lobby partying horrified me. In my imagining of how I could do something like this, I actually feel like I would be watching the monitor far more closely than if I was at home (where frequently the monitor was just plugged in somewhere in the room and I'd look at it if I heard something). To the point where it just wouldn't be fun and relaxing. And the other reports that they were with a group of people made me question my own assessment here because in that situation they are less likely to be watching that monitor like a hawk. And talking about it like it is just isn't helpful and actually hurts people who are in the greyer areas (working mom needing groceries example etc)[/quote]

I agree with PP's earlier assessment and this update is lovely.  You seem kind and thoughtful, PP.  I think people like to judge in these sorts of instances to feel better about their own choices and to reaffirm their (false) belief that their children will be safe because they do all the "right" things.  There's no guarantee that anyone's chidlren will be safe and there is no definitive "right" thing.  Which is terrifying, so people spend a lot of time judging others and pretending their own choices are the right ones so they aren't so scared.
[/quote]

This is just a really dumb way of thinking.  Literally NO ONE here is saying there is a guarantee to a child’s safety.  We are saying there are things you can do to increase or reduce their safety.  We find what this couple did to be an unacceptable reduction in the child’s safety.  Saying that you can never have 100% safety is NOT an excuse to be irresponsible but I have seen people like you use it as an excuse to make horrible decisions.  [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics