Why? Because the kids in your neighbourhood do? If they get molested by a priest are you going to say it is totally the priest's fault? I think that it would be partly your fault then because you didn't watch them. This is not the safe day and age of Beaver. They are your kids and you can do as you please. However, if something happens to them and you weren't watching them or there wasn't a responsible adult present, do remember to look in the mirror and add the person you see there to the list of the blamed.

As long as your kids get hurt and it doesn't cost anyone else a dime or inconvenience anyone, it is your business provided the law doesn't step in. You would pay the bills in full should your kid get a serious injury "learning" how to fall properly, right? :rolleyes:

http://www.smm.org/robots/images/hands-on-head.jpg

Well now that the negligence and responsibility angles are completely covered, lets introduce a 3rd term: Judgement.

Needless to say, you can't track a 12 year olds every move, but there are things a parent should do to assure nothing bad is going on. If they want to go down the street to play at a friends house, at least be sure that a parent or responsible adult is there to keep an eye on things. If they go out, find out who they are going with and when they are returning. Even go so far as a phone call to check it out. Then use *judgement* to determine if its OK.

Put the toddlers in the back yard to play by themselves? Even in the best circumstances, kids have a way of getting their heads caught in something or doing something completely stupid and unexpected. Anybody with kids knows this. Astute application of *judgement* will uncover the fact that more than a minute away is a bad thing.

Every parent is responsible for their kids from birth thru age 18. Give them increasing freedom as they grow older so they can learn how to live, but use *judgement* to determine when to pull in the reins.

Many parents have abandoned their sense of judgement, relying on blind faith that their kids will do nothing wrong, or worse, relying on the government to set guidelines (curfew laws, etc.) for their kids' behavior. And thats where they are negligent.

Well, if you are responsible for the kid till 18, then it is your job to make sure they are ok. That is why I said leaving them unsupervised is a bad thing. Yes, you can give them increasing freedom as they grow older. HOWEVER, they have to earn it. IOW, if they don't show that they can use sound judgement, you don't give them the freedom. Freedom is not free. It has a price. You have to earn it.

Many parents are LAZY. That is why it takes a village to raise a kid. Because the parents are too LAZY to make sure everything is ok.

My statement was to address those that condemned the parents who allowed such a danger as an abandoned vehicle, not the issue of blaming the police.

I agree, too many people look to blame others for misfortunes that they are perfectly capable of deterring in the first place.

Allowing the danger in and of itself is not the problem. If you're raising kids on a farm for example, there are similar dangers in the form of machinery around every corner. The problem is in allowing access to the danger, then seeming totally oblivious to it when it rears its ugly head. This child was mentally disadvantaged, so the father had a responsibility above and beyond that of the rest of us. He failed miserably, and the results were absolutely tragic.

I don't necessarily have a problem with a momentary lapse that allows a kid to fall in a pool. I do have a problem with a parent who doesn't remedy the situation. In this instance, these kids didn't die in the couple of minutes it would take to drown. This could and should have been prevented by a average and expected dose of vigilance.

.........now you certainly can say "negligence".

There's an even better word for the helmet statement. My kids helmet up on tricycles and the helmets have the dents and scuffs to prove it.

Just proves what I have known all along.............. ;)

What's the difference between having an abandoned car on your property as a potential trouble spot or a swimming pool? Or a large piece of land that is close to wild animals?

I fail to see where being negligent in any scenario gives any parent a free pass or excuse.

YOu can be negligent with/without financial resources.

Sad? Absolutely.

Is there blame to be placed on the parents? Absolutely.

That's great. Makes those helmets look like pretty good investments. It's funny how much more safety conscious people have become. My Dad used to tell us about an amusement park he went to as a kid in Scranton, Pennsylvania. He said the rides were insane. They had one contraption that consisted of a spinning horizontal disc, actually more of a flat cone. The kids got on the disc and tried to grab for the point in the middle to keep from getting thrown off. The catch was that the disc had imbedded copper rivets right where kids would try to grab on. The operator had a switch that sent electrical current to the copper rivets, so the kids would have to let go and get thrown off, taking with them whoever got in their way. Try getting insurance for something like that these days.

The other thing that amazes me is that people used to play hockey without helmets or face guards, including goalies.

I also like the part about teaching your kids that they only have to obey the laws you like.

That ride was designed to keep operators from getting bored! ;)

I can easily argue that there is no negligence involved with leaving a car unlocked on your own driveway, with kids around. Just about all of them have a steering and shift lock preventing the vehicle from rolling.

But, if you wish to argue leaving your keys in the vehicle, with the vehicle unlocked, then I'll agree with you.