I would be annoyed, but it would be ridiculous to expect someone else to pay nearly 1K for my recklessness. Leaving a phone by the baby pool is asking for it to get thrown in the water.

Yes, the thrower’s parents should apologize, but offering a replacement is way over the top. Adults aren’t exempt from personal responsibility.

At our baby pool, there are a few dozen toys scattered around, all meant to go in the water. There are buckets, toy boats, funnels, pool noodles, you name it. It’s assumed that any object in that area is fair game for kids to play with in the water. I don’t think I would expect a 2yo to recognize that was a real phone and not a water toy. If mom set her phone down at the pool edge and paid little enough attention that a 2yo could grab it before she could stop him, she was being careless with it. When you’re careless with stuff, it gets damaged.

That said, it’s the nice thing for the other mom to offer to pay ... but I don’t think this is one of those clear-cut cases where it’s completely obvious that the toddler’s mom NEEDS to pay.

kids throw things. Kids and adults are walking around the pools. A phone that is on your pool chair and put away is one thing, a phone sitting by the edge of a pool? That is on the phone owner because they took a risk. Sorry.

If you take stupid risks with your phone, you are accepting the consequences of it.

I have phone insurance so when I drop my phone in the pool, I pay $100 for a replacement. But when a 2 year old or 12 year old throws my phone purposefully into the pool, then I should expect $800 (or possibly $100) from the parent, promptly.

Sorry, this doesn't make sense to me.

I think this is pretty easy. If you or your young child damages someone’s property, on purpose or by accident, you should offer to pay for it.

If your kid damages something on purpose later in life - not this example, but think breaking a shop window or keying a car- your kid will likely be required by law to pay for it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parent of the boy who threw it.

+1. If my child did that, I would be falling all over myself with offers to pay, including an immediate Venmo of $X.

I agree with you. Doesn’t matter if the mom should not have left her phone there. My child damaged her property. He may be a toddler, but that does not matter. I am still responsible for his actions.

OP, how about the hypothetical 12 year old dashing by and tossing the phone in the pool? Is it the kid's fault, his parents' fault, or is it the responsibility of the phone owner who left her phone right there by the edge of the pool?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The kid who threw it in the phone, no hesitation. If the kid was running and knocked it into the pool by accident, there may be some blame on the mom who left it by the pool, but it sounds like this kid grabbed it and purposely threw it in the pool. Parent of that kid should offer to cover the cost of getting it repaired or replaced

I think that's an important distinction. Parent should definitely offer to pay.

+1 It's not a kid knocking a phone into the water accidentally. In that case, it's the owner's fault for leaving it within reach of the child. But chucking a phone in the pool? I agree it's trashy for the mom of the throwing toddler to just leave without offering to pay.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So glad my kids are grown that I don't have to even bother with such hypothetical's anymore.

Yes, now you can move on to a deeper exploration of when to use the plural vs. when to use the possessive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parent of the boy who threw it.

+1.

That's logical. But is it correct?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So glad my kids are grown that I don't have to even bother with such hypothetical's anymore.

Yes, now you can move on to a deeper exploration of when to use the plural vs. when to use the possessive.

Thank you for helping guide others into these mysteries.

Anonymous wrote:Parent of the boy who threw it.

+1.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren't iPhone pretty water resistant now? I realize submerging it may not be great, but I thought they had that whole commercial of the guy riding his bike in the pouring rain?

You're assuming that everyone has the latest iPhone. Probably not a good assumption.

Except that if it's an old iPhone it's not worth much anyhow (and thus isn't $800 to replace, but more like $100). The only way this is a huge deal is if it's the newest one on the market.

Anonymous wrote:So I have a 2 year old and she'd 100% know it was wrong to throw my phone in the water. My 8 month old would easily throw it in and not know it was bad.

Mom's fault for having her phone at the pool and not in a pool case. We use our pool phone cases every time, even if the phone stays in the bag.

I have a 2 year old and I don’t think she would know any better. She just turned 2 though. I would think by 3, they would know.

My 2yo wouldn’t know that water could damage a phone. Then again, we follow her around like a hawk.

At a baby pool, I may let her walk around. It is a baby pool.

Anonymous wrote:So glad my kids are grown that I don't have to even bother with such hypothetical's anymore.

Yes, now you can move on to a deeper exploration of when to use the plural vs. when to use the possessive.