it might be unlikely but god knows we have seen stranger stuff here. he is always home because he is retired, he knows cpr and stays calm in a emergency so he saves her life twice. or... he is bored at home and thinks this makes him a hero. after reading about people who microwave babies or use dog stun collars on their kids or rent their kids out to perverts or smoke crack with their 5 year old or drown their kids because a boyfriend dont like them or.... hell who knows you could be right.
AZ - 2 year old girl almost drowns AGAIN in same pool
- Thread starter Nocgirl
- Start date
Brefie
New Member
Aaaahhh, I see. Very interesting. I had not considered that.
southcitymom
Well-Known Member
Actually, according to the most recently posted article, the grandmother found the child following this second doggy door escape.
southcitymom
Well-Known Member
Hi Sherri,
While it's true that these incidents could be a result of Grandfather Munchausen by Proxy or caretaker negligence, odds are this is a loving family trying to respond to a high energy toddler.
I say odds are because the vast majority of parents are loving good folks. While we read a lot about the exceptions to that rule on this board, abusive and negligent caretakers are still the exception and not the rule.
So without further information, odds are that this family falls into the category that most parents fall into.
southcitymom
Well-Known Member
Probably to encourage the doggy to do his business away from the pool area.
imthemom
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2007
- Messages
- 1,050
- Reaction score
- 15
\
I agree Brefie, they did try to protect her and she probably had never gone out the doggy door before and they never thought she would. I have one of those crafty 2 year olds and that is why we aren't getting a pool until she can swim and my mom hasn't put her pull up for the last two years. We know better, she loves water and she is so fast, I think she is part ninja sometimes.
The doggie door apparantly leads out to the pool, which is just stupid.
This mother obviously cannot take care of her child. She should not be leaving the child with great-grandpa if he cannot keep track of her. Sorry but this mom has already been given a second chance, and she blew it. She needs to loset custody. Where mom was during this second incident is unclear but she obviously is not watching this child.
If my child had fallen into and almost drowned in a pool, I would exhaust all efforts to move someplace without a pool. That is what she should have done, or get rid of the pool.
This mother obviously cannot take care of her child. She should not be leaving the child with great-grandpa if he cannot keep track of her. Sorry but this mom has already been given a second chance, and she blew it. She needs to loset custody. Where mom was during this second incident is unclear but she obviously is not watching this child.
If my child had fallen into and almost drowned in a pool, I would exhaust all efforts to move someplace without a pool. That is what she should have done, or get rid of the pool.
Brefie
New Member
I cannot honestly believe that people are calling for this child to be removed from the home. The last time a tragedy happened at this home they took a HUGE step to prevent it happening again. Fair enough, it did not work, but we cannot all be 'parent of the year'. Who is to say what step they will take this time. Perhaps their first thought was "That did not work, the pool has to go."
As for the mother not being in the home at the time of the second tragedy...what if she was at school, trying to get an education and had graciously accepted the offer of a home for herself and her child while she got on her feet? Even if she was out socializing, have we never hired a babysitter for an evening so we can get a break?
I am just amazed at the speed at which some think a child and parent should be separated and the reasons for doing so.
Lanie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 16, 2007
- Messages
- 2,843
- Reaction score
- 38
IMO, cars are a luxury, not as big a one as a pool, but lots of people get through their lives without a car.
I don't care how hard someone tries, accidents are going to happen, and the more parents try to prevent every possible thing, no matter how rare and unlikely, the more childhood a kid loses.
When my children were little, we were poor, my husband was a truck driver and home maybe 4 days a week, and I had no family help. One of my 4 was very high-strung, she woke me up AT
I hit the wrong button, and it entered this. I edited it, I thought, but it doesn't seem to have shown up. Anyway, to make a long story short, my basic point was IMHO, it is unrealistic to expect anyone, parent, babysitter, etc, to NEVER take their eyes off of a small child/children. Parent or not, it is still human to need sleep, to go to the bathroom, to get bored even and look away, distracted, whatever. I swear, some of these posts here intimate that a person should never, and I mean never, let a child out of their sight. I can remember when it was not a crime to take a nap when you had kids, but that is now no longer the case, so I can't help but wonder how long it will be before parents are only allowed to sleep at night in shifts, so one is always awake and aware, and God help the single parent.
Lanie
I don't care how hard someone tries, accidents are going to happen, and the more parents try to prevent every possible thing, no matter how rare and unlikely, the more childhood a kid loses.
When my children were little, we were poor, my husband was a truck driver and home maybe 4 days a week, and I had no family help. One of my 4 was very high-strung, she woke me up AT
I hit the wrong button, and it entered this. I edited it, I thought, but it doesn't seem to have shown up. Anyway, to make a long story short, my basic point was IMHO, it is unrealistic to expect anyone, parent, babysitter, etc, to NEVER take their eyes off of a small child/children. Parent or not, it is still human to need sleep, to go to the bathroom, to get bored even and look away, distracted, whatever. I swear, some of these posts here intimate that a person should never, and I mean never, let a child out of their sight. I can remember when it was not a crime to take a nap when you had kids, but that is now no longer the case, so I can't help but wonder how long it will be before parents are only allowed to sleep at night in shifts, so one is always awake and aware, and God help the single parent.
Lanie
Moms job is to be a mom, and that means watching her child or leave the child in the care of a competent babysitter. Now, I don't know how old great-grandpa is but being mom is 20, then her parents, then this set of grandparents who is the child's great-grandparents. Grandpa is probably pushing at least 70 or 80.
Secondly, the child has already suffered 2 near drownings at this home. No matter what way you look at it, mom was not supervising the child either time. So what will it take for mom to get he ract together? Should CPs give the mom yet a third chance, next time maybe the child will die.
I cannot believe that mom still lives in the home where a pool almost killed the child the first time. Even with a gate, a gate does not replace parental supervision. If you are going to have a doggie door that leads out directly to the pool, you might as well remove the fence.
Just a stupid family it seems like.
Secondly, the child has already suffered 2 near drownings at this home. No matter what way you look at it, mom was not supervising the child either time. So what will it take for mom to get he ract together? Should CPs give the mom yet a third chance, next time maybe the child will die.
I cannot believe that mom still lives in the home where a pool almost killed the child the first time. Even with a gate, a gate does not replace parental supervision. If you are going to have a doggie door that leads out directly to the pool, you might as well remove the fence.
Just a stupid family it seems like.
Brefie
New Member
Let's eradicate the word accident, since they never happen. And save your pennies, b/c if you all ever get your way with CPS and what you expect them to do, then I imagine taxes will skyrocket.
southcitymom
Well-Known Member
I don't see the "obvious" you see in the few facts we know about this incident. We don't know that the family didn't exhaust all efforts to move into a house without a pool or to have it filled in. Perhaps they did and were limited financially to installing a fence and then keeping a closer eye on the child.
Not that I think the family was morally obligated to move into a house without a pool after the first incident, because I don't. But neither do I understand assuming the worst about these three adults based on the limited information we have.
Based on what we know, I feel tremendous compassion for these caretakers. Unless CPS uncovers some information to indicate true neglect of this child, I am quite sure she will not be removed from her home.
southcitymom
Well-Known Member
I think a drained pool could be just as dangerous as a full pool to a clueless, spirited 2-year-old. I think the fence around the pool was the best action that could have been taken.
southcitymom
Well-Known Member
The child was found and saved both times - that's pretty competent babysitting and life-saving if you ask me.
During the second incident, the child had been out to bed and was still checked on 5 minutes after that. I never checked on my 2-year-old 5 minutes after I put him to bed, so these elderly caretakers were more cautious than I am. And I am a good mother.
Accidents can and do happen - that's why such a word exists in our language.
We just don't have enough information to assume the worst about this family - in fact the information we do have sheds them in a positive light. They have shown themselves to be responsive and to taking action to protect thye child. We do have enough information to say that they need to develop some stronger safeguards for this child and this pool.
What I don't get is how a child who is supposedly sleeping in her room (for 5 minutes) jumps out of bed, gets outside, goes through a doggie door and ends up in a pool.
IMO, that is more than one mistake.
1) My son is 3 and we still have a monitor in his room. (so no sneaking out of his room)
2) The area from his room to the main area of the house where all exits are is gated.
3) My doors are locked AND dead-bolted.
Granted, I don't know the setup of their home and how long it would actually take for this baby to get up and out the house and in the pool, it just seems to me that there should be more preventative measures going on in this home. Especially if they say she is a wild child - that's exactly why I have to do these things with my son, and I would do them even if he wasn't, you never know.
A monitor is $20, a gate is $5 and a deadbolt is $15. Probably A LOT cheaper than the gate with doggy door around the pool.
I am just surprised that it would take a second near drowning for a family to seriously evaluate the situation, or to not have seen such simple & normal solutions to protecting a toddler.
I hope they do now.
IMO, that is more than one mistake.
1) My son is 3 and we still have a monitor in his room. (so no sneaking out of his room)
2) The area from his room to the main area of the house where all exits are is gated.
3) My doors are locked AND dead-bolted.
Granted, I don't know the setup of their home and how long it would actually take for this baby to get up and out the house and in the pool, it just seems to me that there should be more preventative measures going on in this home. Especially if they say she is a wild child - that's exactly why I have to do these things with my son, and I would do them even if he wasn't, you never know.
A monitor is $20, a gate is $5 and a deadbolt is $15. Probably A LOT cheaper than the gate with doggy door around the pool.
I am just surprised that it would take a second near drowning for a family to seriously evaluate the situation, or to not have seen such simple & normal solutions to protecting a toddler.
I hope they do now.
Brefie
New Member
You don't think that having a fence installed is the result of serious evaluation???
Whether it worked or not is besides THIS specific point. Fact is, installing a fence was indisputably a safety measure they took so that this child would be safe.
Your first thought is $20 monitor - Their first thought was a much more expensive fence.
Somebody point out specifically where the negligence is, because it seems to me that they tried VERY hard to keep this child safe. Negligence is not bothering.
If the child is getting out this much, is that out of control, what does she do IN the home? They stated the child was hard to control and into things, yet all they changed was the pool.
PS, I did not state negligence, what I said was that I don't get how they went big, and didn't see the simple.
Brefie
New Member
Bold = BINGO!!! I wonder what some would have CPS say to this family - I know you tried so hard to protect her, but oh well, hand her over. She simply must not be with people who try hard, but have had their attempts be in vain.
I repeat - I just cannot believe how little it would take for some people here to separate a child and their mother!