Overflowing toilet leads to child neglect case (single mom was working to provide 4 them)

[Omaha Steve]

She was at work. IF she stayed home on welfare people would bitch about that. I hope to post the full story as the info becomes public.

OS

http://omaha.com/index.php?u_page=2798&u_sid=10620238

Published Monday April 27, 2009
Overflowing toilet leads to child neglect case

Omaha authorities were tipped off to a case of child neglect by an overflowing toilet dripping into another tenant’s apartment.

The tenant with the leaky ceiling contacted a manager at the Harrisburg Apartments, 9411 Holmes Plaza, earlier this month.

When the manager went to investigate the source of the leak, he found the overflowing toilet in an apartment where two children — ages 4 and 2 — had been left alone, according to Omaha police.

The children told authorities that while their mother worked, they usually stayed home alone to watch TV.

The 33-year-old mother was arrested on suspicion of child neglect.

- Judith Nygren

[Mz Pip]

1. While I do feel bad for the

family and for the Mom, it really isn't okay to leave a 2 & 4 year old home alone.

[lame54]

55. What's your solution for this particular dilemma?

[Canuckistanian]

67. You appeal to a social worker that you're unable to cope.

Talk to Family Services. Neighbors. Ask them if they know of low-cost daycare. In short, the smart thing would be to seek help.

What you DON'T do is leave a 4 and 2 year old alone in an apartment for hours.

If you can't take your kids to work and you have to work and you can't find someone to look after them - then you have a choice to make.

She made the wrong one.

[midnight]

87. Can you imgaine the Sophie's choice that mother has to make

day in and day out. This is the crap that families are living with. I'm sure she also wanted a better option. Thank you for speaking up on this dilemma.

[Number23]

60. I could not agree more. ANYTHING could have happened to those children

It's a terrible state this family is in, but those children are much too young to be at home by themselves and especially not for hours at a time. That poor family.

[MrCoffee]

2. Leaving a 4 year old and a 2 year old home alone is neglect.

It doesn't matter where she was, she wasn't taking care of the kids.

[Gormy Cuss]

3. Single mother made a dangerous choice.

Leaving two children that young home alone is child neglect. I hope that the case is thoroughly investigated and if the woman's only issue is affordable child care that some better solution is worked out.

What's sick is the view that our welfare programs should be shameful.

[backtoblue]

127. Sad situation altogether

And people are made to feel worthless and like mooches if they turn to the governement for help.

It's terrible that a mother cannot raise her own children in this day and age and must rely on strangers to raise those children while she is away working.

With that being said, she should not have even considered leaving her children along for even the tiniest amount of time. Anything could have happened to those kids.

[cali]

4. as clear a case of child neglect as anyone could find

you don't leave a two year old and 4 year old home alone. ever.

[LanternWaste]

5. My mom left my brother and I alone...

When my dad was doing prison time, my mom worked the late shift at a bowling alley each night and left my brother and I alone when we were 6 (him) and 4 (me).

And although it may have technically been abuse, I can only image how horrible my life would have turned out had she been arrested and my brother and I taken away.

Sometimes people do the best they can after being dealt a bad hand. I hope that if that were the case with this young lady, NE CPS does their best to do right by everyone involved.

[NorthernSpy]

21. My father had to take us to work when my mother was in the hospital.

He was working for like, six bucks an hour in a small factory that was pretty much a direct descendant of those "dark, Satanic mills" that William Blake railed against. We played unwatched outside the door of the boiler shed while Dad did his rounds.

We could so easily have wound up in foster care for that. Thank heavens no one ever called the authorities.


I really think that working class people need to take back the Left. Take it back from these bossy middle class do-gooder types who don't understand us and never will.

[proud2BlibKansan]

57. It's not abuse, it's neglect

And as in the OP, it's just not okay.

[LanternWaste]

111. I re-read my post

I'm not one to take issue over six of one and half a dozen of the other... :shrug:

I re-read my post and fail to see where I implied that being left alone was okay.

[Dappleganger]

129. You didn't seem to imply that at all...

at least from what I could tell.

[zazen]

6. and where the hell was the Dad or Dads? where are fathers' rights advocates on this?

Go after these deadbeat mofo's and then I'll listen to you tell me that mothers take your rights away. Jesus F Christ I am so sick and f-ing tired of people telling me I'm not allowed to talk about deadbeat fathers because God forbid they might be minorities and then I'd be RACIST.

Do we really think she got oodles of child support or else had a loving father in the home and still choose to leave them to work because she had no other option?

USE CONDOMS or SUPPORT YOUR KIDS, you selfish sons of bitches, white, brown, black, asian, whatever race/ethnicity/economic class from which you come.

Where are the armies of men with pitchforks taking these guys out? There was a white abolitionist movement against white slaveowners. We need good men committed to decent parenting to beat the crap out of these guys. I'll stick with working with the women so they don't continue to do dumbassed things like this. Men, deal with the men.

[csziggy]

26. "the father has been cited for child neglect"

From another source:

<SNIP>
Officers also found a 6-inch pan on the stove with chicken drumsticks in it. The police report says it "showed signs of children cooking it."

So far, the father has been cited for child neglect.
http://www.action3news.com/Global/story.asp?S=10257037

[proud2BlibKansan]

58. Dad might be dead

Or in prison.

I know we don't have enough information to judge this father.

[JonLP24]

61. Yet another source says he has been cited for 'child neglet'

And the other source does say the mother was at work with no explanation where the father was. Both of these articles suck but yet we have so many opinions about this situation.

[proud2BlibKansan]

73. Then it's not fair to judge him

[TorchTheWitch]

107. the mother may not know who the father is

There are tons of women who have children having no clue who is the father and intend to raise the children alone. Happens ALL the time.

[lumberjack_jeff]

62. Deadbeat dads? SHE is the one who left her toddlers alone.

I'm interested in where they are as well. She is obviously better suited to paying child support than to being a custodial parent.

Use condoms so shitty moms can't neglect them later? Sounds like good advice to me.

[JonLP24]

63. What about the father who was cited for 'child neglet'?

Where was he while the mother was at work? Sorry for asking you, the article doesn't explain either.

[lumberjack_jeff]

64. If this was a two parent household, then there's no excuse for either mom or dad. n/t

[JonLP24]

66. Ok so you make that judgment without knowing what the father was doing

Say the mother was at work and the father was drinking is the mother still wrong? Still not enough information but it would be very helpful to know what the father is doing.

[lumberjack_jeff]

69. "the kids said that mom goes to work and leaves them to watch tv"

Don't jump to so many conclusions. The stories are bereft of information, but we shouldn't ignore the info which is there.

And yes, if kids are unattended in my household, I have a problem regardless of my spouse's role.

[Arkansas Granny]

171. The fact that he was cited for child neglect makes me wonder if he

was supposed to be at home with the kids while mom worked. The article leaves a lot of questions unanswered.

[Ilsa]

7. It isn't as if she left them to go drinking and dancing. Instead of

prosecuting her, they should get her some help, and maybe some parenting classes are in order. But nothing will help if she doesn't have affordable childcare for her children.

[Lyric]

10. I agree with this. It was neglect, but not malicious, selfish neglect.

Mandatory parenting classes, child safety classes, and some help getting affordable childcare would do more to help this family than taking the kids away and putting their Mom in jail.

[omega minimo]

16. Why are you justifying it, qualifying different types of neglect? Age 4 and 2? Left alone?

[NorthernSpy]

17. Do you consider yourself a feminist?

.

[Quantess]

79. A feminist can't call that outright neglect?

:wtf:
Oh well, count me out of your club, then.

[JonLP24]

22. They're different qualifying types for homicide

Type One, Type Two, Sometimes type 3, reckless homicide, manslaughter, justified homicide why can't their be qualifying types for child neglect. Leaving children home to go drinking and dancing is worse then working because you have to work to provide a roof and clothes for children. I was raised with my brother with my mom by herself. She has done similar(She worked days, I'd get home from school before she got home from work).

[omega minimo]

24. Leaving children 2 and 4 alone is not an option

[JonLP24]

27. It makes me wonder what her options were

I guess living on the street with her two children is a better option then going to work with no babysitter. It reminds me of a previous relationship with a single mother, it was less then a year but she always took me with her when she had to leave home because she wouldn't trust me alone with her 4 year old daughter. She had other fears as well such as hiding large kitchen knifes from well. It took some time before she would be willing to trust me w/ her but she was the type that would rather leave her 4 year old daughter alone then leave her with someone she doesn't entirely know well.

[kiva]

28. No, but unfortunatly it's a reality.

How many middle-class parents have to leave their pre-school children alone? Not many. How many poor working-class kids take care of themselves? A lot more than we know. Prosecuting this mother will do nothing except push women in her situation further away from trying to get help.

[NorthernSpy]

33. Reality is what you're left with when you can't afford "options".

Tell us, please, what exactly this woman was supposed to do?

[omega minimo]

41. Not leave a 2 and 4 year old alone. Are you saying that's okay?

:wow:

[NorthernSpy]

42. I asked first. How would you have had her handle the situation?

Well?

[omega minimo]

44. Pardon me. I'm not in for the belligerence here. Thank you.

:hi:

[NorthernSpy]

47. Now who's projecting?

Sheesh.

[omega minimo]

49. "I asked first" ---- oh look, I answered and you ignored it.

"Not leave a 2 and 4 year old alone."



:thumbsup:

[liberalhistorian]

101. I tell you what I never would have done as a single

mother raising my son. I NEVER would have left him alone at those young ages, ever. NO JOB would have been worth the health and safety of my child. I would have found friends, a social worker to help, etc., etc., there were many options even when you didn't think there were options. This is child neglect, plain and simple, end of discussion. You NEVER leave children that young alone, EVER.

[KitchenWitch]

147. And get evicted from her and her children's home because she can't pay rent.

Yes, I agree she should not have left them home alone, but I have lived long enough to know that safe, healthy and affordable childcare options for the working poor are excessively rare.

[Lyric]

68. Because I am poor and a mother, and I've made hard choices too.

Because I was born into a desperately poor family with a mother who left me watching my siblings at entirely too young an age, because it was either that or lose the job that kept us from being homeless and hungry. Because my own Mom did this, and other things, that people would label as "neglect" because her shitty life circumstances and lack of help left with her little choice, and because she was in all other ways a fantastic, loving mother who had harder choices than YOU will ever face, and without whom my life would have been even more of a hell than it already was. Because I see the possibility that this woman and I might have had similar lives, and my initial response is to defend what appears to be a fellow victim of deep poverty.

If you honestly think that there is NO qualifying difference between leaving your young children at home alone so that you can work to feed and shelter them, and leaving them at home alone so that you can go run around and party, then there's no point in talking to you. To me, that's like saying "stealing is stealing, don't qualify it" when comparing theft for pleasure and recreation, and theft to feed your starving kids. Whether you are capable of admitting it or not, there IS a moral difference.

[proud2BlibKansan]

71. Neglect is neglect

There are no grey areas here. I don't care what Mom was doing. NOTHING should be more important to her than her children. NOT A THING.

[Lyric]

75. You assume too much.

You honestly can't see any way that a poor mother might believe that keeping a job first and foremost is the best thing she can do to put her children "first?" Do you understand the enormous difference between the way that middle-class people perceive a job, and the way that poor people do? To the middle class, a job is a way to continually replenish the funds you spend on your daily life. To the poor, a job is often the only life you HAVE. It is literally what stands between you and being hungry and evicted the very next week. Those jobs are becoming increasingly more difficult to get at the moment, and people who USED to be middle-class and who have lost THEIR jobs are now starting to take up jobs that poor people used to be able to count on--fast food, grocery stores, retail, etc. For the poor, the job market is bleak, and they are stuck competing with people who have college degrees for a job flipping burgers at McDonald's. Mark my words--we will see LOTS more of these desperate acts as people try to cling to jobs, because they're terrified of not being able to find another one if they lose it.

The world is not black and white, and our problems are not as simplistic as you're making them out to be. But please, keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better about the universe. It's not like it makes a whit of difference in YOUR world. As for me, I will continue working within the real world of poverty, which is about as complex as life gets, and which OFTEN involves ugly choices that no mother should ever be forced to make, and for which the only "happy endings" involve insane luck and the ability to fly under the radar skillfully enough to not get caught.

[omega minimo]

83. NOT at 2 and 4 YEARS old

:evilfrown:

"You honestly can't see any way that a poor mother might believe that keeping a job first and foremost is the best thing she can do to put her children "first?"

"But please, keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better about the universe. It's not like it makes a whit of difference in YOUR world. As for me, I will continue working within the real world of poverty, which is about as complex as life gets, and which OFTEN involves ugly choices that no mother should ever be forced to make, and for which the only "happy endings" involve insane luck and the ability to fly under the radar skillfully enough to not get caught."

Lyric, that huge chip on your shoulder undercuts all the good points you make.

That's not "fly under the radar skillfully," that's risk your children's lives to go to work and justify it by being completely out of touch with the reality of childrearing.


2 years old
4 years old

You wanna make this same argument at a later age, maybe, ok.

2 and 4? Nuh uh.

[Lyric]

88. Well let me put it this way:

It doesn't matter how unthinkable it is, or how obviously wrong--it's GOING to get worse. Ignore my points at your leisure, I really don't care, but the reality is that as times grow harder, people get more desperate to hold onto their jobs, and help resources become fewer and further between...things like this WILL increase in frequency. You would be shocked what "civilized" people are able to rationalize doing when their circumstances are desperate enough.

To address your "out of touch with childrearing" comment--are you serious?! You really have no idea what deep poverty is like, do you? Let me give you a hint: "childrearing" is not a priority for these people. Their priorities are a little simpler--food, warmth, shelter. Everything else is potentially negotiable. Is it wrong? Of course it is. But sitting around passing judgement does NOTHING to stop it from happening. Jail is not a deterrent. As I said, poor people live in a different world. In THEIR world, going to jail means that you didn't do a good enough job at staying under the radar and avoiding detection by The Man. Your neighbor getting busted has absolutely no bearing on the choices YOU make, because you assume that your neighbor just got unlucky, and that YOU will do a much better job of avoiding the cops than she did.

So the question is, do you want to separate poor kids from their parents and stuff them into the hell of the already-overloaded foster care system, or do you want to alleviate the underlying problem by providing them with resources? Because the "No excuses, no mercy" approach leads directly to the former, while the "Acknowledge that it's wrong, but be compassionate and offer help to avoid it in the future" approach is the path to the latter.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that I somehow think it's gravy to let a four year old watch a two year old. Of course I don't. We both acknowledge that it's wrong. The only difference between us is that you seem desperate to convince yourself that the Mom has only herself to blame, while I, who have BEEN there, have seen the complexity of what leads to situations like this, and I am capable of assigning blame on a broader level. I see no need for further discussion--I've said what I meant to say, and you remain unwilling to consider points of view beyond your own pronouncements of judgement, so there really isn't much left to say. Continue on your way, and I shall continue on mine, "chip on my shoulder" that society put there at a VERY young age and all.

:hi:

[omega minimo]

97. "It doesn't matter how unthinkable it is, or how obviously wrong--it's GOING to get worse."

"Ignore my points at your leisure"

Aside from your insulting AT TI TUDE, your "point" is that this woman is justified due to societal forces and bears no responsibility for her own judgement and anyone who says otherwise is inappropriately judging her.

"It doesn't matter how unthinkable it is, or how obviously wrong--it's GOING to get worse" b/c others in those circumstances ABDICATE ALL RESPONSIBILITY for the decision to leave a TWO AND FOUR YEAR OLD AT HOME ALONE.

"You seem to be under the mistaken impression that I somehow think it's gravy to let a four year old watch a two year old."

All of your sniffy comments undercut whatever understanding there is here b/c it is ABSOLUTELY INSANE to think that A FOUR YEAR OLD CAN "WATCH" A TWO YEAR OLD"!!

That's judgemental? That's just fine with you and it's gonna happen more and people are gonna blame everyone but themselves for that insane decision?

:wow:

"The only difference between us is that you seem desperate to convince yourself that the Mom has only herself to blame..."

That is total bullshit. And you "seem desperate to convince yourself that the Mom has" EVERYONE BUT "herself to blame."

"while I, who have BEEN there, have seen the complexity of what leads to situations like this, and I am capable of assigning blame on a broader level........."

and succeeded in alienating those who also see the big picture AND know that you don't leave a 4 year old to "watch" a 2 year old.


"I see no need for further discussion--I've said what I meant to say, and you remain unwilling to consider points of view beyond your own pronouncements of judgement, so there really isn't much left to say. Continue on your way, and I shall continue on mine, "chip on my shoulder" that society put there at a VERY young age and all."


That's just great. Those kids can grow up just like you and "remain unwilling to consider points of view beyond your own pronouncements of judgement," proud of the chip on their shoulders and the socioeconomic tradition of justified and unavoidable child abuse.

[proud2BlibKansan]

85. It is NEVER okay to leave a 2 yr old and a 4 yr old alone.

Never.

[Lyric]

89. Of course it isn't.

That doesn't mean that it's magically going to stop happening.

It's NEVER okay to let children go hungry, or cold, or homeless, or without medical care, or without clothes and shoes that fit, either. NEVER. And yet, there it is, happening every single day right here in America.

Pronouncements of judgement are worthless in cases like this, where the neglect was caused DIRECTLY by poverty and desperation. We need solutions, not sentences.

[omega minimo]

94. The neglect was caused DIRECTLY by the mother's judgement

You're accusing of "judgement," you're judgmental yourself, you're blaming the larger forces and leaving out the judgement of the mother who decided to do this.

You're saying this is a culture of behavior that is justified.

[omega minimo]

95. .

[Kool Kitty]

105. Very well said.

Perhaps if jobs paid a better wage, she could have afforded child care. Not everyone can depend on the kindness of their family to help with child care-I certainly couldn't.

[ima_sinnic]

172. holier-than-thou, sanctimonious, judgmental people are so delightful

don't you think?

thanks for showing your true colors.

[omega minimo]

82. How absurd.

How absurd that we're splitting hairs over when there's a "moral difference" b/w leaving your 2 and 4 year old at home to work or to party.

That's just really sick. If the upshot of this thread that the US of A is a third world nation or that subgroups are socioeconomically marginalized (duh), so be it and the let's talk about that....

But to try to justify leaving children that young alone, where the clue to the neglect was an overflowing toilet that HOPEFULLY had the seat down and even if it did, the 4 year could lift and the toddler could fall into......................................... :wtf:

AND to tell your personal story and have an audience hearing you and THEN go off on "she was in all other ways a fantastic, loving mother who had harder choices than YOU will ever face."

How much more discredit and alienation are you prepared to bring down on mothers like this? Who the hell do you think you are making assumptions like that?

:thumbsdown:

"If you honestly think that there is NO qualifying difference between leaving your young children at home alone so that you can work to feed and shelter them, and leaving them at home alone so that you can go run around and party, then there's no point in talking to you."


If you think there IS, there's no point in talking to you.

[Lyric]

90. Well that settles that.

Goodbye.

:hi:

[Hippo_Tron]

76. What she did was wrong...

But if we're deciding whether or not it is best to take the kids away from her then it is important to differentiate. If she was neglectful out of stupidity or selfishness then it is best to take the kids away from her and place them in foster care. If she was neglectful out of desperation then it would probably be best to let the kids remain under her custody and have a social worker help her find some sustainable child care solution and check up on her periodically.

[omega minimo]

84. And how long had this "desparation" gone on, gambling, before she was found out?

If she was that desparate, she needs outside intervention. This may be the only way.

The system sucks.

[Hippo_Tron]

98. Clearly she needs outside intervention

But the question is whether or not outside intervention can create a safe situation for her children. If the neglect is out of selfishness or stupidity then she needs to have the kids taken away. If she really is trying to be a good parent then a social worker can help her find some sustainable childcare situation and the social worker can monitor her for a period of time to make sure that the situation remains sustainable.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

93. News to you: the world is NOT black & white. There are degrees of almost everything. -nt

[omega minimo]

99. Do you have a point or just a drive by? You think 2 children under 5 should be left alone?

[Duer 157099]

18. Classes? And who will watch the children while she's there?

Classes are nice, but I'd bet my bottom dollar that this woman didn't do it because she didn't know it was wrong but because she felt she didn't have any other choice (and she likely didn't).

Too many people assume that if only people knew what the right thing to do was, that they'd do it. No so. Sometimes people cannot do the right thing, even when they want to.

[omega minimo]

29. Maybe have the classes before the children?

[NorthernSpy]

36. No prob -- I'll just fire up the time machine...

And then this woman can go back in time and become someone you might actually be able to care about, before giving birth to her children.


:eyes:

[omega minimo]

39. Drop your projections.

[dropkickpa]

148. And there it is!

Dumb poor slut shouldn't have had those kids!

[omega minimo]

158. The justification in this thread for leaving a toddler and 4 year old alone is truly bizarre.

If it's a thread about the need for solving socioeconomic/education/opportunity/health issues, then yes, childrearing awareness would be part of the process of finding solutions.

If it's a thread about how a parent is justified in this type of neglect because it's not a worse type of neglect because she thought she had no other option, that's absurd.

Your ugly attitude doesn't help anything.

[dropkickpa]

164. I was commenting on YOUR attitude

It's been subtle throughout most of the thread but the post I specifically responded to you made it pretty clear what your attitude really is. I just called you on it.

[omega minimo]

168. your mistake

and your attitude and ugly misinterpretation don't help anyone.

You can't "call me" on your disgusting projection. It reveals your attitude as simplistic and hostile. It's also been pointed out the article didn't specify what the mothers conditions or options were. So, most everyone on this thread is commenting without much information and the bickering is pointless.

Again, the justification of leaving children that young alone is what's really the problem attitude here. Deal with the issues together and don't be a jerk or make false accusations against those who call YOU on THAT.

:thumbsdown:

[Lyric]

92. You take your kids WITH you to parenting classes. That's the point.

And I know and agree with your last sentence. I still value parenting classes, though, because even the best instinctive parents can always use a bit of advice and support, and those classes are fantastic resources for making connections with other low-income parents. Those connections are extremely valuable--people trade childcare, meal tips, offer each other financial support and advice, and create a network of resources to help when things get hard.

The classes are really a terrific way to help low-income parents make similarly-situated friends, and they help decrease the feelings of isolation and fear that go along with trying to raise kids while struggling to survive. Most of them teach stuff like nutrition, first aid, how to treat basic mild illnesses without constantly going to the expensive ER, strategies for dealing with behavior problems in your kids, etc. They really are great classes--nothing like the "This is a baby. Don't shake it." stuff that most people expect.

:hi:

[omega minimo]

96. "trying to raise kids while struggling to survive"

[proud2BlibKansan]

59. Neglect is neglect

It is NEVER okay to leave children this small alone. NEVER

[JerseygirlCT]

40. And removing the children from her care sounds like

it would just add to the family's trauma.

She needs affordable child care. Maybe a minimum wage that actually is a living wage might help, huh?

So sad.

[Ilsa]

131. Exactly. Jailing and fining her are not the answer. Foster care isn't the

answer. These are her children. She needs help with keeping her rent up and food on the table and the utilities on.

[Ilsa]

132. dupe. nt

[Shell Beau]

125. What if they burned the building down? So many

things could have happened. They should have never ever been left alone to take care of themselves. It is just wrong wrong wrong.

[Ilsa]

130. I DIDN'T SAY THEY SHOULD BE LEFT ALONE, for crying out loud. I was talking

about how to approach preventing this from ever happening again. Parenting classes and affordable childcare are the answer, not throwing the mother in jail. She's probably trying to figure out how not to let her kids and herself starve and be evicted.

[Shell Beau]

133. No need to yell.

[Ilsa]

135. This was also a reply to the rest of this portion of the thread, capped to get their attention.

Justice requires wisdom, not just beating up on people who made bad and dangerous choices. This woman may not even know of what could be available to her in social services.

[Shell Beau]

137. I don't think she should be thrown in jail, but something needs to be done.

If these children died due to the neglect or whatever you want to call it, I believe some here would be singing a different tune. Hell, the whole building could have burned up and have taken other lives as well. Maybe that is a stretch, but anything could have been possible.

As a parent, the main concern always should be the safety and well being of your children. That includes food, shelter, etc. But it also includes being taken care of. A 4 and 2 year old are not able to take care of themselves. Period. Maybe this woman had no other options, but leaving these kids at home alone should have never been an option. It just can't be an option. So many things could have gone wrong. She is quite lucky (as are the children) that nothing happened.

[Ilsa]

140. No one is arguing with you on that. I was stating that there is no

need for punitive measures like fines, jail, or forcing the kids into foster care. This mother needs help and information so she never is faced with that wrong choice again.

Maybe she had been threatened with losing her job if she ever skipped work again, and was afraid she couldn't find work. We don't know all of the circumstances that would mess with her mind enough to her to make such a horrible, wrong choice.

As a parent, I know there is plenty of stuff out there that has to do with basic security that can mess with your mind. She needs help, not a beat-down and criminal record. The mistake has been made. The next order of business is for social workers to help her not make that mistake again.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

8. This is child neglect, plain and simple. We need free, safe childcare for poor working parents.

[hedgehog]

12. Who is neglecting the children, the mother trying to keep

a roof over their heads or the rest of us for looking the other way when she needs help?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

20. Both.

[Number23]

65. That is so true. And "safe" is the operative word here

Too many times you hear about mothers putting their kids with babysitters because they can't afford regular (licensed) child care and the horrible consequences that happen. The babysitter is inadequately trained or sometimes much, much worse.

Even if the childcare cannot be free, if there was some type of allowance provided to the working poor that would allow people to put their children in safe, educational child care that would be a huge and dramatic improvement over what is out now.

I currently live in Australia and the Aussies provide money for child care for every citizen. The money doled out is based on family income. It would be nice to see a similar framework in place in the States.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

113. On our income tax returns there is a child tax credit but it's not large enough. In the case

of parents working minimum wage jobs that are below the poverty line, care should be free and go upward using a sliding scale.

[janx]

9. I have always wondered, having been a single mother myself,

why communities couldn't get together about child care. There are many single mothers who have to work and who don't have family to help with children. Many of them don't make very much money, but building a resume helps them and their kids in the long run. Why couldn't communities get together just to help connect these single moms? Maybe then they could coordinate their schedules and help each other out.

[JerseygirlCT]

45. I've heard of such co-opts

If you have a strong community, I imagine that might work well.

But you know, leaving your kids with anyone these days is scary enough... I can also see a whole lot of potential roadblocks with it.

It's another symptom of our way of life, though. No more extended family and long-time friends and neighbors around to pitch in. So many isolated lives, just struggling to make it alone.

I don't condone her leaving the kids at all - that's nuts. Mine is nearly 10, and I won't leave him alone yet. But, boy, what a crappy spot to be in. And remembering those early childhood years - it can be the HARDEST time to make the sort of friends you really need. Very easy to be isolated.

[janx]

50. I've never heard of it! But I've always wondered why some kind

of information system didn't spring up because of it. There's no need to demand federal government child care. If only a system existed, on a statewide or countywide basis, to connect single moms, so much the better. There are "day care" people who are weird and incompetent. But I cannot imagine that such a local system couldn't be refined and ironed out in a town.

[JerseygirlCT]

52. Yup - I think it might be quite workable

so long as there was some way to check everyone's qualifications, etc. And might have a positive ancillary effect of building some good networks for the people who need them most. Sort of filling the place of extended family.

[hedgehog]

11. When I worked as a warehouse supervisor, we had one guy who was a great

worker but in danger of losing his job because he was late or missed work when his child care arrangements fell apart. I contacted the union rep to see if they could match him up with a more reliable sitter.


Don't forget the sad story a couple summers back of the woman who left her kid in the car in the employee lot while she went in to work. She figured he'd be safe in a locked car, but didn't think of the heat load from sunlight.

[Art_from_Ark]

81. I once worked with a guy like that, too

Poor guy was in a similar situation as your coworker, and he also had problems with his car and lived 10 miles from the work site. The company "warned" him once, and the second time, showed him no mercy.

[Skittles]

13. no mention of the father, as usual

[dustbunnie]

38. Someone else posted that the Dad was cited for child neglect.

[NorthernSpy]

14. A woman with children that young should not be expected to work outside the home.

Certainly not if it interferes with caring for her children. Those little kids have a human right to receive their mother's care.

This woman was away from home because she was trying to provide for her children. And now she's been arrested for that, and her kids are separated from her by from the well-paid agents of the state. All for their own good, of course.

:eyes:


Talk about child neglect... Why don't we as a society ever really consider putting the needs of the child first (yes, even ahead of our collective desire to stick it to "welfare queens" I mean, teaching mothers of young children "self-reliance")?


The fact that we accept this appalling situation (and the official response to it) as normal says a lot about us -- and none of it very good.

[Fumesucker]

15. Bingo..

So much of the outrage is directed at the mother and so little at the society that forced her into such a cruel choice.

[Laelth]

25. Hear, hear! n/t

:dem:

-Laelth

[Hippo_Tron]

78. This is why I'm still adamantly opposed to "welfare reform"

I don't care how many anecdotal examples the Republicans can find of people spending their welfare money on drugs or of women having babies just so they can collect a welfare check. This type of situation is morally reprehensible and as a society we are compelled to fix it even if that fix means simultaneously giving money to people who abuse the system.

[nadine_mn]

19. neglect - yes... should she have been arrested.. nope

well let me clarify the nope: if leaving them alone while going to work was the ONLY issue (otherwise children were provided for, loved, fed, etc)

My mom was a single parent and when I was 7 she hired a babysitter while she went to work (oh btw the father in this case (my dad) was an abusive heroin user who regularly locked me in a closet when he had visitation because he didn't know what to do with me, and we had moved to Vegas with my step-dad to get away from where my dad could find us... my step-dad abandoned my mom and me in Vegas - her family was in MN so we knew no one - after just 3 months of marriage).

The babysitter hired ME out to babysit younger kids, so she was collecting from my mom and other moms. When my mom found out she was sooo pissed but what else could she do - she knew no one, so I was instructed to stay home and not leave the house after school or while she was at work. Oh man did I get into trouble, stuff she still doesn't know about. I am surprised I am alive.

But this was 1979/80 so what choice really did she have? We eventually moved back to MN... where my grandparents kept an eye on me like nobody's business. Would jail have been the answer? No.. affordable childcare is what we need in this country.

I worked with women trying hard to get back on their feet and off welfare, they would get a job but then no childcare - the waiting lists for affordable/subsidized childcare in some areas are months/years long. In the meantime - what are the options?

Not everyone has family or friends to help out - once again we are punishing the wrong people.

[WolverineDG]

23. How's about the do-goody social workers help her out with child care

instead of taking her kids away? Or is that too logical a solution? :eyes:

dg

[NorthernSpy]

31. Careful -- that might involve work.

Much easier for the social workers just to drop the kids into foster care.


The foster parents will be paid, of course. Can't expect to get a valuable service like child care for nothing! So there's money available for that.


But before anyone gets any ideas, giving that money to the mother would be out of the question, even if it would mean that two little kids could be reunited with their very own mommy. Because she's gotta go to jail to learn valuable lessons about personal responsibility and self-reliance -- all them groovy things.


:sarcasm:

[WolverineDG]

46. they get money for yanking kids from their parents

and even more if they can terminate parental rights & get the kids adopted out. They don't get money for thinking & actually helping a family out.

dg

[proud2BlibKansan]

86. Social workers get money for taking kids out of their homes??

:wtf:

Not in my state they don't.

Thank gawd.

[WolverineDG]

112. Not directly, but there is a bounty put on kids' heads for putting them in foster care

and even more to terminate parental rights & put 'em up on the adoption market.

A well-intentioned law signed by President Clinton with very bad consequences.


dg

[proud2BlibKansan]

134. If it's the law I am thinking of,

it's funding for foster and adoptive parents. I wouldn't call that a bounty. Besides, what's wrong with making sure kids are adequately cared for in foster homes? :shrug:

[WolverineDG]

144. Nothing, except when it's used as an incentive to remove

If you get more money for removing more children, obviously, the impetus is going to be on keeping removals at those levels or higher, since no agency wants their funding to go down.

dg

[proud2BlibKansan]

145. But if the money goes to the families

how is that an incentive?

[WolverineDG]

146. the money goes to the agencies

there may be other funds that go to the families, but state agencies get money too.

dg

[cali]

126. what a disgusting and completely false claim.

sick.

[WolverineDG]

157. Wrong nt

[proud2BlibKansan]

72. How about helping her with child care and also penalizing her?

I don't know that taking her kids away is best but there needs to be some consequences here. These kids were far too young to be left alone. That is just not okay, by any stretch of the imagination.

[Hippo_Tron]

77. She should have a social worker check up on her periodically

That would be an appropriate punishment, IMO.

[WolverineDG]

114. Perhaps some community service?

but taking her kids without actually taking into consideration why they were left alone isn't going to solve the situation. However, the do-gooders are only trained to yank kids & tell the parents how awful they are, instead of finding ways to keep the family together as they are supposed to.

dg

[flying rabbit]

30. Where does it say she was single?

:shrug:

[JonLP24]

32. Well they didn't arrest a father for child neglet

I guess that's why we made that assumption.

[flying rabbit]

34. See post 26

That's why I asked.

[JonLP24]

43. That article says the mom was at work as well

Niether article says where the father was while the mother was at work which makes me wonder. This article says the mom was cited with no mention of a father and the other article says the father was cited with no mention of the mother. Ahh I hate reporting like this. Not enough info for me.

[flying rabbit]

48. It is a bit confusing. n/t

[LisaL]

35. Well I think that 4 years old and 2 years old are way too young

to leave alone.

[JVS]

51. I agree. Also, according to the story the kids said that this was the normal routine.

If it were a one time thing, maybe this could fly, but when your routine involves leaving two small children (kids of an age where they have probably not even mastered using the telephone or reading notes) to fend for themselves, you're a negligent parent and really should find some kind of alternative arrangement.

[JerseygirlCT]

37. This sucks in so many ways.

Thank goodness, no one was hurt. But geez - what choice do people have in this position? We offer so little by way of help to them, even when they want to do the right thing.

[AzDar]

53. She needs HELP, not criminal charges.

[proud2BlibKansan]

54. Sorry Steve, that's called neglect

And yes. I would rather see this mom be on welfare than leave her kids unsupervised.

[JonLP24]

56. My question is what the father was doing while she was at work

None of the two articles here mention that. It would be very helpful in forming an opinion if they just said wth the father was doing while the mom was at work.

[proud2BlibKansan]

70. Maybe he's dead

or in Iraq.

It would be helpful to know if the father is even part of these children's lives before we judge him as a bad parent.

[slackmaster]

118. I'd like to know that too

It was the first thing that came to mind for me. Yeah, maybe he's dead, but the "reporter" who wrote the story didn't make any effort to find out the answer to that most obvious question.

There is no depth to what passes for journalism these days.

[EFerrari]

80. She's 33. She should know better. I hope someone monitors

this family for a while. :scared:

[Ilsa]

139. Age and Ability to Reproduce do not a good parent make. nt

[EFerrari]

149. It helps if you're out of your early 20s and your brain has developed. n/t

[ZombieHorde]

74. Sad story, child care should be socialized. nt

[rcrush]

91. That free day care from those "evil" socialist countries sounds pretty good right now.

Just makes sense.

[liberalhistorian]

100. I'm sorry, I've been a single mother, but you just do NOT

leave children of those ages alone, for ANY REASON. You just don't, period. Once is bad enough, but it sounds like it was a lot more than once.

There are a lot of social service resources to help find and pay for needed child care if you must work but can't afford child care and don't have willing family or friends or a support network around, but you have to make the effort first, you can't expect others to do it for you, nor should you. I agree that single parents often can't win for losing no matter what they do, having been down that road for many years, and it's beyond infuriating. But you just do NOT leave children this young alone, PERIOD. You have to take some responsibility. The charges are justified in this case, I'm sorry to say.

[MissB]

102. I agree.

Kids that age can't respond to emergencies. If a fire breaks out, they're dead. If they try to cook lunch, they're probably injured. If they're bored and decide to go for a walk, they are probably not safe.

And the mother needs better options. With state budgets getting cut across the country, there will likely to be cuts to programs that could help.

And the mom does need some basic parenting. At the very least, she should be taught this isn't okay and that she should ask for help.

[KittyWampus]

115. All it takes is the four year old manages to open a window. Hope Mom gets help she needs

She cares enough to work.

[Shell Beau]

128. Not sure what you mean with "all it takes is the four year old manages

to open a window". Certainly you don't mean if a fire breaks out.

[dustbunnie]

143. Someone posted that cute story recently about the two babies who wandered into the neighbor's.

... and ate everything in sight. They were about the same age. So, there are all kinds of things that can happen when a little one gets a window or door open.

[KittyWampus]

151. there was a news story a while back- one toddler opened window and the other fell out of it

By some miracle, two men standing beneath managed to catch the little one.

The father of the children was home, btw.

It only takes a second.

May that Mom get the support she needs.

[Shell Beau]

155. Oh! I do remember that now. Yes, anything could have happened.

It is scary to even think of what might have happened.

[Ilsa]

136. Living in NY, are you talking about a child falling out of a window from a great height? nt

[KittyWampus]

150. Yes. As others have lamented- it only takes a second. Didn't Eric Clapton write a song

about his little one who fell out a window? And that was with someone home.

[Shell Beau]

156. Yes, and I also know of a family who lost a 3 year old to a freak accident

like that. Fell off of the balcony. So scary to even imagine.

[Ilsa]

163. Yes. Tears in Heaven. Children have to be watched. That mom needs help. nt

[Forkboy]

103. She was totally wrong to leave kids that young alone, but talk about a no-win situation.

A sucky story for all involved.

[sohndrsmith]

104. Doesn't matter what one can/can't afford, you don't leave toddlers alone.

If this mom earns a decent salary, then there's no excuse for not having some sort of childcare/supervision/sitter/etc.

If this mom doesn't earn a decent salary and she's that bad off financially, then she qualifies for assistance either with childcare or other things (food stamps, WIC, etc) so that she can arrange something so her children aren't left unattended.

The fact that the toilet was that backed up is a good indication that these kids were likely getting into things (that's what toddlers do...). This mother is lucky her kids weren't injured or worse. It takes only seconds.

I speak from experience of being a single mom. Earnings can often be the same as childcare costs. The idea of leaving my children alone - ever - was never an option, and there's no leeway on that. You don't leave kids alone until they're old enough and emotionally/developmentally prepared for it. That can mean different ages depending on the kid.

This mother put other things before the health, safety and welfare of her children and that's inexcusable under any circumstances, including a job. It's no day at the fair being a single parent, but that doesn't justify mistreating one's kids and it's hard work to be constantly creative because unexpected obstacles always pop up and always complicate schedules. Too bad, that's the way it is.

[liberalhistorian]

106. Amen, very well put!

Especially your point about it being hard to be constantly creative in dealing with daily life and unexpected obstaces but that it has to be done. It CAN be done if people take the needed responsibility, which they must do when young, dependent children are involved.

[proud2BlibKansan]

108. Well said

[Omaha Steve]

109. Where is subsidized child care for parents that work?

This would help a lot of parents make better choices on working and leaving kids home alone.

[MrsBrady]

110. you are so right.

after reading through some of the other poster's comments, I just had to say something.

OUR system sucks. And by "our", I mean the general accepted practice in America.
No social services, lack of appropriate help for people who are working.
Either you can't work so you can get help...or you are lucky enough to be middle class or better.
If you work and are poor, then forget about getting help...you will make "too much" to get help.

Do I think she was in the wrong by leaving her children to be alone? Of course.
But I would say her choices were clearly diminished.

I would say it's a three pronged problem in this situation and many others like it.
Absent father, mother left to choose between options that are bad behind door number one and worse behind door number two, and a system that will not help those that are employed.

I know churches sometimes help in these situations, but even they are strained and limited in what they can do...if they are available at all.

Who's at fault here? Our culture is wrong to let this continue, and the mother was wrong to leave her children alone. It's both, IMO.

[Ilsa]

138. Exactly. Not all companies provide for childcare deductions

as part of the company's benefits tax-savings plan for employees. Alot of parents have to fund it out of pocket until they can declare a childcare credit on their federal income tax. And even then, it isn't enough.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

153. Thank you.

This is what we should be discussing. Why are we bashing parents and child services?

This would be a fantastic economic stimulus if we can ensure that those who are employed to care for the children are qualified.

[Dappleganger]

116. The Village failed this family

Mom shouldn't have left them, but if The Village had provided child care for her then this wouldn't have happened.
So sad.

The Village=family, friends, neighbors, employer, churches, community centers, town and the state.

[slackmaster]

120. Any mention of The Village with initial caps makes me think of one thing

[Dappleganger]

123. Would you leave your kids with them?

I think they'd have a BLAST!

[slackmaster]

141. Yes, without hesitation

:D

[dustbunnie]

142. It makes me think of M. Night Shyamalan and "those we do not speak of."

[deek]

154. The Village does not exist. eom

.

[slackmaster]

117. Not one word about the FATHER (or fathers) of those children

And why he (or they) are not being held accountable for the welfare of their offspring.

[Jennicut]

119. I am a 33 year old mother myself with a 3 and 4 year old. Its dangerous to leave them alone though

I do feel for this woman if she could not pay or or find child care. Not sure what the answer is. But if I leave my kids alone for 5 minutes to go get the mail or something and they get in all sorts of trouble. Sometimes funny things (pouring an entire bottle of baby powder all over themselves when they were 2 and 3) and sometimes its not. Toddlers and preschool age kids just are way too young to realize what can be dangerous.

[slackmaster]

122. Yes, I'd rather see her on 100% public assistance than leaving kids unattended

It's amazing how much trouble the little ones can get into in a VERY short time.

[Jennicut]

124. I left my 3 year old playing in the living room yesterday to go make her breakfast and our new

kitten scratched the side of Christa's face. I kept telling her not to get her face too close to the kitten's face but she is only 3. To leave little ones alone like that for hours a day makes my heart almost stop. I do feel for the woman. I would rather be on welfare.

[WI_DEM]

121. A good judge will probably see the circumstances, but still it's not good to leave a 4 year old and

2 year old at home alone. Lots of things can happen.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

152. a lot of poor people worldwide have to lead toddlers alone

if we decide that this is wrong, then we shoudl provide a real alternative.

one without the other is just punitive to the poor

[omega minimo]

159. The USA has become a Third World Nation

[La Lioness Priyanka]

160. yeah, no one woudl fault a mother living in the slums in india because she had to leave

her kids there to go to work. people would know she had no choice

[omega minimo]

161. A midwife who works at a clinic that offers free maternity services for poor women wonders how

they manage to come in with their cell phones and salon nails.

Are cases like the one in the OP ever about priorities and not just options?

[CatsDogsBabies]

162. I read the article

There isn't much information there. It isn't clear what the home situation of the woman is - it doesn't say she was poor, whether or not she has a partner, whether another adult is also responsible for the children. It doesn't say that she tried to find affordable child care, but couldn't. Who knows whether this mother even sought alternatives to leaving her children at home alone. The mother is 33, definitely old enough to know what she was doing when having children and old enough to know that it is wrong to leave a 2 and 4 year old alone. I know single parents, poor parents, and even poor single parents - none of whom would leave their 2 and 4 year old home alone. Is everyone certain there is no alternative for this mother? Or are people just assuming that she exhausted every possible resource before leaving a 2 and 4 year old home alone? I know that the city I live in has free preschool for all children beginning at age 3 with free wrap around care (before and after school) for everyone, even people who have money to pay for these things. If I looked, I am sure I could find resources for younger children too. I think the vulnerable ones here are the children. One of the articles said the children were cooking themselves a pan of chicken drumsticks - my goodness, I won't even let my animals near drumsticks because of the choking hazard.

[ejpoeta]

165. 4 and 2 is just too young to be left home alone.

hell, i'd say 10 is pushing it. i can understand the woman's difficult position, but you just don't leave small children without supervision.

[varelse]

166. Nice - I see the "kick em when they're down" progressives are out in force here

Before everyone expends much more energy discussing what this young mother *should* have done - could someone actually from the area (Omaha) please let us all know what kinds of "services" are available to poor and low income parents to help prevent them from resorting to neglect while they are at work? If the state's financial condition is anything like it is here (California) many of those services could be scarce or already gone.

Steve?

[karynnj]

167. Leaving a 2 and 4 year old alone is child neglect and greatly endangered the children

It is FAR better this was discovered now rather than through one of the children dying. I would hope that this leads to a better solution. What is wrong is that there were not clearly identified alternatives communicated to people like this woman. This may be a case where the welfare changes of the 1990s have dire consequences. (I know there was discussion on the need for affordable child care - but it would seem at the lowest income level there are cases where working outside the home is not the right answer.)

[GetTheRightVote]

169. All I will state is that you can tell the single parent no help from those that were not in post.

How very sad of you who were not the first but who choose to judge her anyway...put on her shoes before you dare to do it, hmmm.

:kick:

[Greyhound]

170. More victims of Clinton's legacy, thanks Bill. n/t