2 toddlers dead after been left in car overnight.

Samaris wrote: »

No idea what your actual question was, but the major, huge difference is as follows;

Tipp case: There was no evidence of deliberate neglect. The father did not intentionally leave his child in the car. There was no evidence that he realised the little one was still there. This is something that, as awful as is it, happens, has happened to people from all walks of life, some excellent parents as well as less involved parents, and is recognised as a tragic accident that can leave children dead and families destroyed. This is so goddam tragic and also important to realise because it can happen to anyone. Even you or me (god forbid). The fault is ultimately the parents', that's true, but it is not criminal neglect unless done intentionally (there was one case where it was).

This case: There was every evidence of deliberate neglect, she was reminded consistently about the children, she was asked to bring them in, someone else actually went and stayed in the car and had to push her to bring the children to the hospital. She made a deliberate decision to leave the children in the car.

The only connection is that the children were in a car when the fatal effects of heat stroke occurred that killed them. It's insane to keep trying to compare them as the same thing. It is utter rubbish, it plays down what happened here and it exaggerates what happened in the other case. Just because the results are the same - children are dead through no fault of their own - does not mean that all surrounding factors were the same.

I am well aware of all of the above.

I have not confused one case with the other, if you believe I have, please show where you think you saw that.

My questions arose from another poster mentioning the "Tipp" case and the subsequent, inevitable closing of the thread because the topic was not the usual boards fare.

Presumably it's OK to discuss and and fall for "genuinely forgotten baby in the car syndrome" if it happens in the US but not so if it's too close to home.

That's your prerogative, that's how boards is operating now, discussions with only mainstream views are encouraged.

Thinking outside the box and against the grain is not, for fear of upsetting the PC brigade.

My questions, which seem to be presenting some difficulties, were about how people would react should the "syndrome" they have now so considerately embraced from the US become more widespread here and whether they'd be so understanding if it was their baby that had been a victim of the "syndrome".

No is to blame if I follow that rightly.
It's all explained away.
Would you still be so understanding if your own child died in a hot car, a victim of the syndrone, presuming that you're also a proponent of this syndrome, as most posters here seem to be?

I don't think anyone would if it hit them personally, I certainly wouldnt.

If I'm off topic that's one thing, but please dont make out I'm confusing one case for the other.

jonnycivic wrote: »

MOD - Buzzwell, the Tipp thread was closed for valid reasons, if you have an issue with that you can PM any one of the After Hours mods to discuss but discussion of it in this thread ends now!

That's fine thanks, no, Im not interested in trying to have a board management decision overturned and I appreciate you not saying Im confusing one case with the other.