If there are multiple kids, it is clearly more risky to walk them through a busy parking lot.

Edit. For those interested in the risk analysis side:

“ On average, 38 children under the age of 15 die each year from heatstroke after being left in a vehicle. Nearly every state has experienced at least one death since 1998. In both 2018 and 2019 a record number of 53 children died after being left in a hot vehicle.”

..

“ an average of 50 children per week are injured by being backed over in a parking lot or driveway. Despite the increasing prevalence of back-up cameras in vehicles, parking lots remain dangerous for families due to: Driver distraction (looking for a perfect spot or other in-vehicle distractions)”

Nothing to do with risk, everything to do with supervision. A person sees a child in a car alone, they don't create a risk assessment with instant access to available stats in their brain. They see a child alone and immediately think 'where are their parents?'. When you see those horror stories in the news a person's first thought is 'where are their parents?'. Regardless of the overall risk, people will always ask 'where are the parents?'. You've obviously experienced the negative consequences of these actions and are attempting to prove in whatever way that leaving the kids unsupervised is the best option, but that is generally not acceptable in the wider community.

> that is generally not acceptable in the wider community

That is the U.S.. Which is why I brought this point up. Different countries/cultures have different perspectives.

"Acceptable in the wider community" is a fairly poor standard to go on. Hitting your child with a belt was acceptable until recently (and still is, in many places).

It's only in the past 15 years that our histrionic society has decided that in all instances, without exception, that leaving your children unsupervised in a car is attempted murder.

My parents used to leave me in the car from time to time, they always made sure the window was cracked, the car was out of direct sunlight, and the sunshade was put on the windscreen. On the other hand, the thing that came closest to killing me (multiple times) was traffic.

That said, here in Australia, apparently parents leaving their kids in the car while they go to the pub to play pokies (slot machines) is enough of a problem that venues have signs reminding people not to leave children in cars. The pub round the corner from my place even has a kids playground, which I suspect was put in to stop parents leaving their kids in the car.

The hitting a child with a belt is a weird analogy. I don't think it's as acceptable as you think it was. Yes we all probably experienced it growing up, but how many times do you see a child given the belt in public? Did you ever see someone walk up to a parent with a crying child and ask 'why haven't you given them a flogging? You can use my belt if you want'. It's always done behind closed doors out view. An adult hitting child is always likely to spur negative emotions in people and opinions are likely to change.

That is completely different to kids in cars, there wont be a time where we will decide 'Hey maybe leaving them in the car is better.', it just wont happen.

Society views always change, that should be obvious to anyone. Events that shock people change the way we think about certain situations. Kids dying in cars as hot as oven's is one of them.

‘My parents used to do it’, is also a poor standard to work from.

Those incidents I mentioned occurred in Australia. ‘Well the incident rate is low’, that’s because almost all parents take their kids with them. If we all decided to start leaving kids in cars then the number of incidents would increase.

You live in a community, if you take actions generally frowned upon by the majority of people, like it or not you will possibly receive some negative consequences, especially if it involves children. Likewise a business like a pub would be trying to avoid an incident with a child left in a car while their parents played their addictive pokies. No business wants to deal with those negative consequences.

“ You live in a community, if you take actions generally frowned upon by the majority of people, like it or not you will possibly receive some negative consequences, especially if it involves children. ”

This is the logic used by people who call the police on children walking to the park without an adult. These are commonly people who watch a lot of news (and are therefore more misinformed according to multiple studies) and who would fail basic knowledge tests on actual risks of various activities.

Stop pretending you're more 'informed' then others or an expert on risk management. You think leaving multiple kids in a car with the engine on is effective risk management. Now you're trying to convince us it's weird that someone would ring the police if they saw a child wandering the streets without a parent. So they are too young to manage a carpark and its best they stay locked in a car, but letting them wonder off to the park on their own across how many roads is fine. People who would be concerned are generally stupid and watch too much news.

This is all one big joke. I think I'm about finished arguing the absurd.

Until 10 to 15 years ago, all of that was completely normal, and kids did not die en masse. Consider why you think the world is drastically more dangerous than it used to be. Is it based on fact, or is it based on living in a culture of fear?

It was never normal to let say a 3 year old walk unsupervised to a park which may have roads and vehicles on the way. You have simply been misled into the idea of that safety is synonymous with fear.

Sorry if it seemed like arguing, just trying to frame my reasoning:) peace!

I like a good internet 'debate', why I don't know. If It comes across as aggressive I apologise, It's more arguing the point then the person. 'Nothing personal' as they say.

Well first risk analysis doesn't work like that. Second leaving ur kids unsupervised in a car is illegal in most states here. Hell in most states it's legal for me to break your car window if you do that to a freaking dog. so yea ur so wrong I'm pretty sure you're trolling us.

It’s clearly safer to leave a group of kids in the car with the air conditioning running while they are on their iPads for seven minutes then it is to bring them all through parking lots, regardless of how the media has distorted the risk of this situation ( Extreme cases are usually the result of drug addiction).

Totally not trolling, just pushing back against media misinformation.

No it’s not ‘safer’. You’re ‘stats’ don’t consider the fact that nearly all parents take their kids with them after parking the car. If parents on masse decided to leave their kids in the car then the number of incidents would greatly increase.

The risk is spontaneous engine failure to stop the AC is lower than the risk of children running in different directions among moving vehicles.

In what world would it be acceptable to leave multiple kids unattended with the car engine on?

Who lets their children run around in different direction around moving vehicles? Thats the whole point of having a parent present. Thats your responsibility... you go on about risk, but ignore the fact you should go another time or another shop if its too busy for you to manage multiple kids, find a car park closer to the entrance or find some help. Thats mitigating risk. Locking kids in cars with engines running is the exact opposite of risk mitigation.

I don't claim that any of this is easy, quite the opposite. But it was 'too hard' is not going to cut it.

You've completely distorted the statistics to justify, I assume your wife's actions. Imagine the scenario where instead of all parents taking their child with them into the shops, they all left their kids in the car with engine running. What do you think would happen to your statistics?

Why are you trying to convince yourself that a child is going to die or be kidnapped if left alone for ten minutes in a locked, cooled car?