Why Do We Judge Parents for Putting Kids at Perceived But Unreal Risk?

Re:Why Do We Judge Parents for Putting Kids at Perceived But... by grahamburger on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @02:27PM (#12346165)

EDIT - I should have read the article, sounds like the child was not only not asleep but in pretty bad condition.

---------

It doesn't say if the 2-year-old was asleep (does it? skimmed the article) - if it was asleep in a crib then it was probably in very little danger. When we lived in an apartment we would sometimes put the baby down and when we were sure he was asleep we'd go to the apartment hot tub. The hot tub was right under our room, we could see our front entryway and the baby's window. We would also start a phone call and leave one phone in the baby's room and take the other with us on mute as a longer distance baby-monitor. I don't think this was putting our son in danger.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why Do We Judge Parents for Putting Kids at Perceived But... by Jarwain on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @02:29PM (#12346188)

The OP really just uses the title of the news article as a sort of segue. Reading the news article itself shows that the parents were fairly negligent.

>According to the Pinal County Sheriff's Office, a neighbor found the 2-year-old boy outside his home in the 700 block of East Payton Street Thursday night and called authorities.

>Deputies arrived and found the child screaming and crying, attempting to get into the residence. They said the boy was barefoot and wearing only a diaper and a T-shirt. The child was reportedly red-faced, sweaty and dirty.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why Do We Judge Parents for Putting Kids at Perceived But... by aganders3 on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @04:42PM (#12347422)

It was also 98°F that day in San Tan, for reference.

[ Parent | on HN ]