Mother Jailed 5 Years As Son Drowns

[agchristie]

Very sad on a number of fronts. Given the known circumstances what do you think of the sentence?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-34491753

[Gromit]

// Ambulance crews attended the address at about 12.40 and the boy was taken to Warwick Hospital.
"He was later transferred to the Leicester Royal Infirmary where all efforts were made to save him, but sadly he died on Tuesday afternoon.
"The circumstances of the incident are being investigated but police are not treating it as suspicious. The coroner has been informed."
Only 11 days ago a three-year-old boy drowned in a neighbour's garden pond during a family get-together in nearby Birmingham.
Ruben Louie Buckley had been at a family gathering at his aunt and uncle's house, when he climbed through a fence and fell into the pond.
Around five children drown every year in garden ponds, and the majority of these deaths occur at the homes of relatives and friends. //

5 deaths a year means this is a fairly common accident. The child is generally unsupervised, and the parent distracted. The parent generally, are not Prosecuted.

[Gromit]

// What happens when one of your children falls over and hurts themselves at one end of the garden and then the other one falls in a pond. //

Those accidents are unlikely to happen simultaneously. If you are distracted because you are attending the child who has fallen, you are unfortunately neglecting the safety of the other one.

[ummmm]

True...but it's not necessarily the parents being neglectful. As a parent of three I have breakfast, lunch and dinner to make....I also have a house to clean.

What would you suggest?

[EDDIE51]

The story says that her 2 other children were referred to SS when they were found playing on a busy road unsupervised. They also had no shoes and 'inadequate' clothes.So there is a history of involvement with the SS !

[ummmm]

SS are not just there for child neglect so involvement with them means nothing, in reality.

[Gromit]

I would suggest that accidents happen. Locking the parent away achieves nothing.
If the accident you describe happened to yoy, think yourself lucky you are not in a lower class, or you you might be AnswerBanking from prison.

[Hypognosis]

I think a lot of it has to do with parents assuming that toddlers (particularly theirs) have sufficient "common sense" to not fall into a pond, or do something equally dangerous. Given how top-heavy they are, all they have to to is lean over the edge, out of curiosity and over they go.

The maxim used to be "keep the under-fives inside" but they don't show public information films any more; deemed to be too patronising, no doubt.

Remember the furore over a pavement-cyclist who ran into a three year old coming out from the gateless entry to a terraced house? She was saved from running between two cars into the street, in my humble opinion. (The cyclist was in the wrong but possibly saved her life, I mean). Should have been in a playpen or on a leash.

Put the playpen in the garden if you insist on giving them fresh air and sunshine (just don't forget the sunblock: early years damage is the most serious form).

[ummmm]

My mother was pretty laid back. She was a great mum, no question was too trivial answer, she encouraged us to go out, climb trees, mud pies, run, skip and jump.

Was I the same with my kids.....not a chance in hell. I've suffered too many broken bones and had far too many stiches and have far too many war scars to not supervise them as much as possible.

But...I often had my sisters kids and my younger cousins... you can't watch 6/7 at a time...

[THECORBYLOON]

If you had an open pond in the garden, would you take steps to ensure wee ones could not fall in it?

[mikey4444]

Indeed you can't watch them all the time Umm, but she could have filled in the pond, and that would have prevented this accident. The child died because the pond was there and he was unsupervised at the time. Whose fault is then, if not the mother's ?

[mikey4444]

Corby...well, I would, without doubt. This woman was warned about the obvious danger but choose to do nothing about it.

[Hypognosis]

@ummmm

I am having trouble assessing what angle you were taking with this

//Saying that I would NEVER leave a little one unattended around water.

I nearly drowned at the age of 3. I fell in a lake at a holiday park and my parents didn't realise until mum turned round and I wasn't there. So....it could happen to good parents too.//

Viewed entirely neutrally, the same accident befell you as befell this boy but you were lucky enough that rapid intervention saved you. (by whom?)

"It can happen to good parents too", quite understandably, praises your parents but sort of implies that you mean the woman in this story is a bad parent.

But, viewed another way you could be trying to get us to not view her actions harshly because nearly the same thing happened to you and your parents aren't bad.

That is to say that you are unable to condemn this woman because that would have to apply to your parents as well?

[ummmm]

I wouldn't have open water because of what happened to me. I was 3 and remember it.

I'm not saying she's a bad parent, just like mine weren't, they were chatting as they walked , and us little ones, car free zones, toddled behind, me being the curious little so and so, took another direction.

Hypo...I wouldn't allow my kids to go outside without me because I feared for them but my mum did...and she was a brilliant mum.

[Hypognosis]

@ummmm

Understood.

There is also the aspect that the world is a more crowded place, these days. The roads aren't safe to play in, any more. Compare the performance characteristics of the average boy-racer's hot hatch with a late 60s supercar and the local housing estate no longer seems to be fit to be a playground. No-one would be at all surprised at you wanting to be more protective with your own kids.

All the best.

[Hypognosis]

@agchristie

I think the punishment was harsh, on the face of it. If it was meant to deter others, that is. Surely the potential for loss of a child is deterrent enough?

If it had something to do with her track record then, perhaps, it was appropriate *for her*. In which case we should not expect identical judgements to be meted out except in *identical* sequences of circumstances.

If being middle class, or above, would be a 'mitigating factor' in any way, shape, or form, with regard to sentencing then this case would be a disgraceful example of 'class war'.

[agchristie]

@ Hypo

Yes, I would agree with that. Always difficult to comment fully on a court case as we are not privvy to the full facts nor from a historical context.

[EDDIE51]

^ We can never know the full facts, the social services operate in almost total secrecy where child protection issues are concerned. Only the judge would have the full facts and he/she can never reveal them.

[Gromit]

Didn't our own Prime Minister drive home from the pub and leave his child behind? Perhaps he was distracted? The consequences could have been the same but I doubt the punishment would have.

[hc4361]

Another tragic accident:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3267654/A-baby-drank-oven-cleaner-dad-turned-split-second-suffered-kidney-failure-severe-burns-face.html

[agchristie]

There will be countless examples of cases some involving high profile names that could have had the same outcome but didn't.

Even where neglect can be proven the severity of the sentence may well be indicative of earlier reported incidents to SS perhaps as in this case. One account has been referred to but as Eddie points out the secrecy factor could mean that our understanding of reality is skewed.