Ear infection or not, the public knew the baby was sick. Or are there degrees of sickness? the public would have more urgency with an ear infection vs common cold vs not sick at all? A missing baby is a missing baby.
I know she said infection, the post I was replying to said earache.
And yes, infections DO normally clear up on their own if given the chance. Ask any pediatrician now. The ADMA is trying to convince more people to actually give them a chance to clear up on their own due to antibiotic resistance fears.
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=122267
On the tags that my dogs wear, along with all the information, I always add, needs medication daily. Please return, REWARD. My dogs have never needed meds daily, but this is a precaution.
That being said, the first thing I would say to the media is, my daughter is a very sick little girl and she needs her medication/dr. care. Whatever! DB didn't play her cards right, or maybe she did - depending on the outcome she wanted.
The ear infection was a huge surprise to me, I don't understand why it's just now coming out.
But one thing that bothered me from the beginning is the only thing they ever really said is that they need Lisa b/c she completes the family.
If one of my children went missing, I'd hope beyond all hope that whoever took them wanted a child of their own, and I would give them information to help keep my kids happy. Favorite foods, songs, toys, movies, etc. Lisa was 10 months old, why wasn't the brand of formula she was on ever mentioned, or whether or not she was breastfed? Why no mention of brand of bottle & nipple? Most kids will not just take any bottle.
All of that stuff wasn't mentioned, so why would she mention that Lisa had an ear infection, she's probably prone to them due to her parents smoking and it should have been mentioned even if she was almost over it, b/c she's probably likely to have more.
It's these small things that were left out that make me question the parents innocence.
Or why she was medicating her....?
To my thinking, the added info about the clearing up of the ear infection is that it elevates the degree of Baby Lisa's discomfort and possible fussiness on the night she disappeared. Many babies have runny noses and what appear to be colds while they are teething. Granted, this is true, it has been expressed that a mere cold shouldn't really warrant any extra concern or vigilance from her mother. But now that her mother has said Baby Lisa was recovering from an ear infection, as well as the cold, and that she was more fussy, would it not follow that Deborah should have checked on her more often?
I certainly may be wrong (as it has been a very long time since my children were babies) but I thought babies had a more difficult time sleeping when they had URis and ear infections. Aren't they harder to get to sleep and even less likely than usual to sleep though the night? Deborah's statement that she put Lisa down earlier than usual and neglected to check on her seems in opposition to my own experiences.
Deborah, by her current timeline, put her sick (not just a runny nosed) baby in her crib at 6:40, was herself still awake (and having her own time) and admits that she never once peeked in to see how her child was faring possibly, possibly until almost four hours later ~ and perhaps not even then! The heightened degree of Baby Lisa's illness also heightens the degree of Deborah's irresponsibility for Lisa's well being.
That's why the added information makes a difference to me.
I have wondered about this scenario from the very begining. The cough and cold was DB's excuse for possibly medicating Lisa with Benedryl in order to put this baby to bed at 4:30/6:30 pm and expect Lisa to sleep through the night or at least through "Adult Time". Now, all of a sudden, Lisa also has an ear infection. This information omitted at the begining of the case, when information is most important to find a missing child. So why now? Did the little boys mention to LE about DB medicating Lisa and that question was forwarded to DB's attorneys for an explanation and the explanation came via Dr. Phil's show?
I have had 3 children and now have 4 Grandchildren and one of the Grands was diagnosed this morning with an ear infection. She is 15 months old and was prescribed antibiotics. In the 28 years that I have been a Mother never once did I put my sick child to bed at 4:30/6:30pm because they were fussy and expect them to sleep through the night. I held them, loved them, rocked them and walked the floor with them when they were sick, especially with an ear infection. "Adult TIme" would have been the last thing on my mind. JMO.
BEM: I thought this about the bug bite. I'm not allergic to stings, but I've had friends and employees who were, and many took benedryl or used the cream. That's why I too, wonder if she gave her benedryl and is now changing it to an antibiotic and maybe pain meds. It would sound worse to have given her too much benedryl - perhaps she rethought that scenario?
I can't stand it now when my daughter, who is 26, tells me she is sick - I want to be there for her. Of course she can take care of herself now, but again, she's 26. There could be nothing worse, that I can think of, than having your precious baby taken in the middle of the night - except (IMO), having your precious baby taken in the middle of the night sick.
Tacopina goes on about how there were three very credible sightings of a man carrying a baby with only a diaper on (and embellishing the temp.), in the cool night air, yet DB still just talks about wanting whomever has her to take her to a church, hospital, whatever. OMG, what mother - ok, what "good" mother could stand to hear that about her sick baby being carried around SICK in the cold night air NAKED except for a diaper? One would think she'd be begging this person to take care of her, find a way to give her what she needs, even if they have no intention of bringing her back.
That's just me. I didn't check on my daughter every 7 minutes when she was a baby, but I checked on her often when she was sick and "fussy".
.
I've looked everywhere for a direct quote, but didn't DB say in the beginning that she not only checked on Lisa at 10:30, but saw her standing up in the crib and gave her a bottle??
people magazine interview w/ DB (oct 17):
put baby to bed @ 6:40... checked on her soon afterward and found her standing up in the crib
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20537543,00.html
hinky meter re: "versions of DB's story":
http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2011/10/18/lisa-irwin-case-version-4-0-1-a-lawyer-still-no-baby/
The problem with changing the medication is if she starts saying BL was on a prescription antibiotic, that stuff can be tracked beyond the bottle sitting on the counter. She's going to be held more accountable to that (by LE) because they can easily find out if she filled a prescription for BL recently.
On your second point about her talking about taking her to a church/hospital, she's talking as of today. Surely you don't believe that BL, if alive, would still have whatever sickness that she had in October? She wants her baby back, she doesn't want the abductor to 'give her what she needs' and 'raise her'. Do you understand how that would even sound and come out if she worded it like that?
It is not necessary that you agree with me - but I do know how I would feel, and I would feel helpless to do anything BUT beg whomever has her to make sure she is checked out. My daughter had pneumonia three times before she was 6 - all three times started out as a cold, so maybe I'm an alarmist due to experience. Still breaks my heart thinking about her hooked up to IV's and having her chest vibrated to get out the mucus. Ugh.
By the way, DB hasn't expressed concern for Lisa's health issues since day one, so it's not about being three months later.
BEM: Then LE should have mentioned it. If someone did/does have her they may find a way to get her medical attention, without being caught.But you see that is the issue with a lot of this. Folks say what they would say and do and thus judge DB accordingly based on what their own reactions would be. This thing with the ear infection, we don't know anything about that. Who's to say it's not something as simple as BL having an ear infection a week and half before she went missing and that's what she meant when she said 'clearing' an ear infection. I find it extremely hard to believe that if BL was in the middle of an ear infection, on prescription meds and everything, that wasn't communicated to LE by either DB or JI. Even if you go ahead and say DB is trying to cover for something, why wouldn't JI say she had an ear infection to LE? How about SB? or PN? None of these people knew that BL had an ear infection?
I've looked everywhere for a direct quote, but didn't DB say in the beginning that she not only checked on Lisa at 10:30, but saw her standing up in the crib and gave her a bottle??