Well... here in Gran Canaria there has been 2 kidnappings: 1 of a 14 year old girl named Sara and one of a 7 year old boy named Jeremi. I think that these kind of things are like very complicated. So, almost 3 in a row in Spain -.-'
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color=009966>?Freya? wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Micrówave wrote: [/QUOTENAME]It's amazing what some people will do. There was a woman arrested here last week for leaving her 3 kids (ages 4 & under) home... WHILE SHE WENT OUT ON A DATE!!![/QUOTE]
Obviously that isn't right, but I don't believe what Madeleine's parents did was negligence. The restaurant they were in was 100 yards from the holiday apartment and they were checking on their children every half an hour. Maybe they should have brought their children with them, but, I can see why they did what they did. [/QUOTE]
Let's not blame the parents, but the sick asshole who took her. And to be honest... I'm afraid she's not alive anymore, or she's alive in some cellar being abused all days.
Obviously that isn't right, but I don't believe what Madeleine's parents did was negligence. The restaurant they were in was 100 yards from the holiday apartment and they were checking on their children every half an hour. Maybe they should have brought their children with them, but, I can see why they did what they did. [/QUOTE]
Let's not blame the parents, but the sick asshole who took her. And to be honest... I'm afraid she's not alive anymore, or she's alive in some cellar being abused all days.
Shit happens.
Really... you can blame anyone you want, but the perp obviously had it in their head that they were going to snatch a kid. If it wasn't this one, it may well have been someone else.
I can't understate the importance of keeping an eye on your kids pretty much at all times. For every hundred days nothing goes wrong 'when I only left him for a minute', there can always be one fuck up. And you need to be around to deal with it. Within earshot. It's just how childbearing is.
I'm only an uncle, but this stuff is common sense to me.
Well.... here's hoping they find the kid, anyway.
Really... you can blame anyone you want, but the perp obviously had it in their head that they were going to snatch a kid. If it wasn't this one, it may well have been someone else.
I can't understate the importance of keeping an eye on your kids pretty much at all times. For every hundred days nothing goes wrong 'when I only left him for a minute', there can always be one fuck up. And you need to be around to deal with it. Within earshot. It's just how childbearing is.
I'm only an uncle, but this stuff is common sense to me.
Well.... here's hoping they find the kid, anyway.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color=009966>?Freya? wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]CMU HistoryGirl wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Janet,
I totally agree with you, but unfortunately it doesn't take brains to breed, naturally or through IVF. You just need to know how to screw, or have the money to pay for IVF.
I don't care how far the restaurant was from the hotel room, or that they were checking on them regularly...what they did was inexcusable. I would say that the parents deserve what happend, but that would be unfair to the innocent Madeline. As a parent, you DON'T EVER leave your child unsupervised...ever. When you have a child, you have a responsibility and a duty to raise that child and protect that child until they are old enough to protect themselves. The only excusable way I could see this working is if the other children were 16+.
I also hope that Madeline died painlessly, because she probably is. If she's still alive, I hope that they never let her go back to her obviously negligent parents, and I hope they take away the other children. These people are obviously not ready to be parents, nor are they responsible enough. [/QUOTE]
Oh please, people leave young children all the time and it doesn't make them bad parents. I used to have a friend whose parents always used to leave her and her younger sister alone when they were about 4 or 5, and I never agreed with it, but no harm ever came of it. I think it's totally wrong to say these children should be taken away from their parents. Doing that would definitely cause more harm than good.
Like I said in my first posting, we left my cousin alone in a hotel room and she's 8 months old, and that certainly doesn't make my aunt and uncle bad parents, in fact I have never met a set of more devoted parents than my aunt and uncle. Granted, it was completely different, we were in the same building and same floor as my cousin and could practically see the door of the room from where we were, and we had the baby monitor so we could hear her all the time.
Perhaps it's slightly different when they're older and they can walk, because, as Janet said , it only takes a split second for a child to wander off and hurt themselves.
Nobody could've guessed that would've happened and whether or not it was 'their fault' NOBODY deserves that.
There are children treated a lot worse than they treat their children who don't get their kids taken away, and I think things should be kept in perspective. The parents did not harm their children, they simply made a terrible mistake. [/QUOTE]
I have to disagree, Freya. You may think your friends, or your aunt or uncle are not bad parents, but it only takes 30 seconds for a child to be abducted, or 30 seconds from them to hurt themselves. I'm not trying to absolve the abductor of responsibility...he/she needs to be caught and punished. But I am saying that he never could have abducted her had her parents protected her, like they are supposed to do. They NEVER should have left the floor without taking their children with them...they provided the opprotunity that the abductor used to take Madeline. This makes them half responsible for that happend. It's like saying, "Oh, yeah, there is a pool in the backyard without a cover or fence, and my 5 year old is out there alone with no one watching her, but it's ok...nothing bad will happen." Do I need to tell you how many times this statement has been proven tragically wrong? These are children we are talking about...not pets or full grown adults. They don't know how to protect themselves, and when you have responsibility for a child (parent, relative, babysitter, etc.) you have to protect that child not only from others, but from themselves. The "Nobody could have known what would happen" argument doesn't hold water. We can't see the future, we can't know it, and it's a matter of choice in the end. Are you willing to bet on the fact that no
I totally agree with you, but unfortunately it doesn't take brains to breed, naturally or through IVF. You just need to know how to screw, or have the money to pay for IVF.
I don't care how far the restaurant was from the hotel room, or that they were checking on them regularly...what they did was inexcusable. I would say that the parents deserve what happend, but that would be unfair to the innocent Madeline. As a parent, you DON'T EVER leave your child unsupervised...ever. When you have a child, you have a responsibility and a duty to raise that child and protect that child until they are old enough to protect themselves. The only excusable way I could see this working is if the other children were 16+.
I also hope that Madeline died painlessly, because she probably is. If she's still alive, I hope that they never let her go back to her obviously negligent parents, and I hope they take away the other children. These people are obviously not ready to be parents, nor are they responsible enough. [/QUOTE]
Oh please, people leave young children all the time and it doesn't make them bad parents. I used to have a friend whose parents always used to leave her and her younger sister alone when they were about 4 or 5, and I never agreed with it, but no harm ever came of it. I think it's totally wrong to say these children should be taken away from their parents. Doing that would definitely cause more harm than good.
Like I said in my first posting, we left my cousin alone in a hotel room and she's 8 months old, and that certainly doesn't make my aunt and uncle bad parents, in fact I have never met a set of more devoted parents than my aunt and uncle. Granted, it was completely different, we were in the same building and same floor as my cousin and could practically see the door of the room from where we were, and we had the baby monitor so we could hear her all the time.
Perhaps it's slightly different when they're older and they can walk, because, as Janet said , it only takes a split second for a child to wander off and hurt themselves.
Nobody could've guessed that would've happened and whether or not it was 'their fault' NOBODY deserves that.
There are children treated a lot worse than they treat their children who don't get their kids taken away, and I think things should be kept in perspective. The parents did not harm their children, they simply made a terrible mistake. [/QUOTE]
I have to disagree, Freya. You may think your friends, or your aunt or uncle are not bad parents, but it only takes 30 seconds for a child to be abducted, or 30 seconds from them to hurt themselves. I'm not trying to absolve the abductor of responsibility...he/she needs to be caught and punished. But I am saying that he never could have abducted her had her parents protected her, like they are supposed to do. They NEVER should have left the floor without taking their children with them...they provided the opprotunity that the abductor used to take Madeline. This makes them half responsible for that happend. It's like saying, "Oh, yeah, there is a pool in the backyard without a cover or fence, and my 5 year old is out there alone with no one watching her, but it's ok...nothing bad will happen." Do I need to tell you how many times this statement has been proven tragically wrong? These are children we are talking about...not pets or full grown adults. They don't know how to protect themselves, and when you have responsibility for a child (parent, relative, babysitter, etc.) you have to protect that child not only from others, but from themselves. The "Nobody could have known what would happen" argument doesn't hold water. We can't see the future, we can't know it, and it's a matter of choice in the end. Are you willing to bet on the fact that no
This reminds me of the girl that was abducted back in 2000 - Sarah Payne. Dont ask why...
It's just really sad that a family can't go on holiday and leave thier kids somewhere without summat like this happening.
Now, a lot of people are blaming the parents, saying they were irresponible to leave them on their own. But the parents must have been fairly confiedent that they could leave them on their own - so that must mean that they've leaft them on their own before...
Now my parents leave me on my own - but that's completely different because I'm a lot older and responsible. But her parents were only a matter of minutes away from their apartment - am I right? So there must have been someone watching the apartment day and night - it would be pot luck to walk into an aparment and find a little girl on her own.
I do hope they find this little girl - but (I'm sorry of this sounds like I'm being negative) it's been two weeks. The chances of finding her are growing slimmer all the while. I do hope they find her though.
It's just really sad that a family can't go on holiday and leave thier kids somewhere without summat like this happening.
Now, a lot of people are blaming the parents, saying they were irresponible to leave them on their own. But the parents must have been fairly confiedent that they could leave them on their own - so that must mean that they've leaft them on their own before...
Now my parents leave me on my own - but that's completely different because I'm a lot older and responsible. But her parents were only a matter of minutes away from their apartment - am I right? So there must have been someone watching the apartment day and night - it would be pot luck to walk into an aparment and find a little girl on her own.
I do hope they find this little girl - but (I'm sorry of this sounds like I'm being negative) it's been two weeks. The chances of finding her are growing slimmer all the while. I do hope they find her though.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]fatty wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I hate to sound so cold but lets be honest. How many of us really care about what may or may not have happened to that little girl? Of course I'd love to see her returned alive and well to her family but all this media attention is doing nothing more than to flog a few newspapers and show the great British public up for the mindless fuckwits they really are. This has happened time and time again. Princess Diana dies and we queue for hours to sign books or lay flowers for someone we have never met. The World Trade Centres are attacked and again we feel we have to put on a huge display of public grief with each one of us a little more upset than the last.
Remember when Ken Bigley had his head lopped off on video (does any one else even remember Ken Bigley?) and one silly wee girl from Queenzone made a special website where we were all supposed to line up and pay our respects.
Now along comes another tragedy and the press convinces us that we should all be beating our chests and trying to outdo each other in the grief stakes. It's a pretty safe bet that ther will be a 2 minute ( or are we up to 10 minutes now?) silence at football matches the length and breadth of the UK in the next week or so.
I hate to be the one who breaks this but there are kids dying right now in Africa, Iraq, Afghanistan and in every other continent of the world. Whn do they get their pictures on the front page of the newspapers?
If you know the family and want to offer support, feel free but all this forced grief is doing nothing but paying for Mr Murdoch's next ivory back-scratcher.
fatty.[/QUOTE]
Thank you, finally someone tells it like it is.
And if she's not found, soon, the public will get bored with this little real-life soap opera and forget all about her.
The false grief is cringeworthy. It just gives the average joe on the street something to gossip about in the same way they would gossip about what's happened in Coronation Street/EastEnders/Emmerdale (delete as applicable) lately. And gives the newspapers a very easy way to fill pages.
Sickening.
Oh, and I do blame the parents. Selfish idiots.
Remember when Ken Bigley had his head lopped off on video (does any one else even remember Ken Bigley?) and one silly wee girl from Queenzone made a special website where we were all supposed to line up and pay our respects.
Now along comes another tragedy and the press convinces us that we should all be beating our chests and trying to outdo each other in the grief stakes. It's a pretty safe bet that ther will be a 2 minute ( or are we up to 10 minutes now?) silence at football matches the length and breadth of the UK in the next week or so.
I hate to be the one who breaks this but there are kids dying right now in Africa, Iraq, Afghanistan and in every other continent of the world. Whn do they get their pictures on the front page of the newspapers?
If you know the family and want to offer support, feel free but all this forced grief is doing nothing but paying for Mr Murdoch's next ivory back-scratcher.
fatty.[/QUOTE]
Thank you, finally someone tells it like it is.
And if she's not found, soon, the public will get bored with this little real-life soap opera and forget all about her.
The false grief is cringeworthy. It just gives the average joe on the street something to gossip about in the same way they would gossip about what's happened in Coronation Street/EastEnders/Emmerdale (delete as applicable) lately. And gives the newspapers a very easy way to fill pages.
Sickening.
Oh, and I do blame the parents. Selfish idiots.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME].DeaconJohn. wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
The false grief is cringeworthy. It just gives the average joe on the street something to gossip about in the same way they would gossip about what's happened in Coronation Street/EastEnders/Emmerdale (delete as applicable) lately. And gives the newspapers a very easy way to fill pages.
[/QUOTE]
It might be false grief for some, but for others it truly is compassion and concern. For still others, it serves as a wake-up call. Maybe these parents wouldn't have been so lax in their responsibilities had something similar just recently hit the headlines. Stories like this remind us to look out for ourselves and our own. We get complacent sometimes and forget to do a double check. It doesn't mean we have to live in fear all the time, but caution certainly makes sense. Though it's awful for all involved, this situation should remind us of that.
The false grief is cringeworthy. It just gives the average joe on the street something to gossip about in the same way they would gossip about what's happened in Coronation Street/EastEnders/Emmerdale (delete as applicable) lately. And gives the newspapers a very easy way to fill pages.
[/QUOTE]
It might be false grief for some, but for others it truly is compassion and concern. For still others, it serves as a wake-up call. Maybe these parents wouldn't have been so lax in their responsibilities had something similar just recently hit the headlines. Stories like this remind us to look out for ourselves and our own. We get complacent sometimes and forget to do a double check. It doesn't mean we have to live in fear all the time, but caution certainly makes sense. Though it's awful for all involved, this situation should remind us of that.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]CMU HistoryGirl wrote:[/QUOTENAME]
I have to disagree, Freya. You may think your friends, or your aunt or uncle are not bad parents, but it only takes 30 seconds for a child to be abducted, or 30 seconds from them to hurt themselves. I'm not trying to absolve the abductor of responsibility...he/she needs to be caught and punished. But I am saying that he never could have abducted her had her parents protected her, like they are supposed to do. They NEVER should have left the floor without taking their children with them...they provided the opprotunity that the abductor used to take Madeline. This makes them half responsible for that happend. It's like saying, "Oh, yeah, there is a pool in the backyard without a cover or fence, and my 5 year old is out there alone with no one watching her, but it's ok...nothing bad will happen." Do I need to tell you how many times this statement has been proven tragically wrong? These are children we are talking about...not pets or full grown adults. They don't know how to protect themselves, and when you have responsibility for a child (parent, relative, babysitter, etc.) you have to protect that child not only from others, but from themselves. The "Nobody could have known what would happen" argument doesn't hold water. We can't see the future, we can't know it, and it's a matter of choice in the end. Are you willing to bet on the fact that nothing bad will happen to your children while you go out of the building for breakfast? If you are, then you bear some responsibility for the bet if it goes sour...because you made that choice. The future isn't predictable, and humans only have one life...it's far better to plan for the worst and prevent against it.
And your argument that "People do far worse things and still have their kids" doesn't apply to anything...the law isn't perfect, and it never has been. The government and social workers can't observe every parent at every hour of the day. Doesn't make it right, but it's reality.
I hope they find Madeline alive...but it's a well known fact that for every hour after the kidnapping, the chances of that diminish rapidly. It's now been 2 weeks. If she manages to live through this, she will be the exception, not the rule. I hope she is the exception[/QUOTE]
I think you're misunderstanding me, I'm not condoning what they did, I'm saying I can understand why they did it and how they probably found themselves lolled into a false sense of security that the area was safe.
I am aware that a child is 100% percent a parents responsibility but I also think there is such a thing as being over-protective and I think one needs to put things into perspective. You can't keep a child wrapped in cotton wool all their lives, because at some point they will come into contact with the real world.
You said 'he never could have abducted her had her parents protected her, like they are supposed to do." I don't agree with this at all. This is like saying if a child gets abducted, it's the parents fault, if a child wonders of in a super market, this is the parents fault. This isn’t the case at all. Children have a mind of their own and no matter how much people say 'I never take my eyes off my children' there will always be a time where a child gets lost in a shop for example and it's not down to how much a parent protects a child.
A parent can only do their best, and in this case the parents made an awful mistake and I'm sure the guilt will stay with them until the day they die, whether Madeleine is found or not. They do not deserve to have their children taken away from them and I think it's mad to suggest such an idea.
Also, according to what I've heard, it looks as though whoever took Madeleine wasn't just a random opportunist, he (or even she) had been watching the family and had pinpointed Madeleine to take, which means, s/he would've taken Madeleine whether or no sh
I have to disagree, Freya. You may think your friends, or your aunt or uncle are not bad parents, but it only takes 30 seconds for a child to be abducted, or 30 seconds from them to hurt themselves. I'm not trying to absolve the abductor of responsibility...he/she needs to be caught and punished. But I am saying that he never could have abducted her had her parents protected her, like they are supposed to do. They NEVER should have left the floor without taking their children with them...they provided the opprotunity that the abductor used to take Madeline. This makes them half responsible for that happend. It's like saying, "Oh, yeah, there is a pool in the backyard without a cover or fence, and my 5 year old is out there alone with no one watching her, but it's ok...nothing bad will happen." Do I need to tell you how many times this statement has been proven tragically wrong? These are children we are talking about...not pets or full grown adults. They don't know how to protect themselves, and when you have responsibility for a child (parent, relative, babysitter, etc.) you have to protect that child not only from others, but from themselves. The "Nobody could have known what would happen" argument doesn't hold water. We can't see the future, we can't know it, and it's a matter of choice in the end. Are you willing to bet on the fact that nothing bad will happen to your children while you go out of the building for breakfast? If you are, then you bear some responsibility for the bet if it goes sour...because you made that choice. The future isn't predictable, and humans only have one life...it's far better to plan for the worst and prevent against it.
And your argument that "People do far worse things and still have their kids" doesn't apply to anything...the law isn't perfect, and it never has been. The government and social workers can't observe every parent at every hour of the day. Doesn't make it right, but it's reality.
I hope they find Madeline alive...but it's a well known fact that for every hour after the kidnapping, the chances of that diminish rapidly. It's now been 2 weeks. If she manages to live through this, she will be the exception, not the rule. I hope she is the exception[/QUOTE]
I think you're misunderstanding me, I'm not condoning what they did, I'm saying I can understand why they did it and how they probably found themselves lolled into a false sense of security that the area was safe.
I am aware that a child is 100% percent a parents responsibility but I also think there is such a thing as being over-protective and I think one needs to put things into perspective. You can't keep a child wrapped in cotton wool all their lives, because at some point they will come into contact with the real world.
You said 'he never could have abducted her had her parents protected her, like they are supposed to do." I don't agree with this at all. This is like saying if a child gets abducted, it's the parents fault, if a child wonders of in a super market, this is the parents fault. This isn’t the case at all. Children have a mind of their own and no matter how much people say 'I never take my eyes off my children' there will always be a time where a child gets lost in a shop for example and it's not down to how much a parent protects a child.
A parent can only do their best, and in this case the parents made an awful mistake and I'm sure the guilt will stay with them until the day they die, whether Madeleine is found or not. They do not deserve to have their children taken away from them and I think it's mad to suggest such an idea.
Also, according to what I've heard, it looks as though whoever took Madeleine wasn't just a random opportunist, he (or even she) had been watching the family and had pinpointed Madeleine to take, which means, s/he would've taken Madeleine whether or no sh
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<b><font color=009966>?Freya? wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]CMU HistoryGirl wrote:[/QUOTENAME]
I have to disagree, Freya. You may think your friends, or your aunt or uncle are not bad parents, but it only takes 30 seconds for a child to be abducted, or 30 seconds from them to hurt themselves. I'm not trying to absolve the abductor of responsibility...he/she needs to be caught and punished. But I am saying that he never could have abducted her had her parents protected her, like they are supposed to do. They NEVER should have left the floor without taking their children with them...they provided the opprotunity that the abductor used to take Madeline. This makes them half responsible for that happend. It's like saying, "Oh, yeah, there is a pool in the backyard without a cover or fence, and my 5 year old is out there alone with no one watching her, but it's ok...nothing bad will happen." Do I need to tell you how many times this statement has been proven tragically wrong? These are children we are talking about...not pets or full grown adults. They don't know how to protect themselves, and when you have responsibility for a child (parent, relative, babysitter, etc.) you have to protect that child not only from others, but from themselves. The "Nobody could have known what would happen" argument doesn't hold water. We can't see the future, we can't know it, and it's a matter of choice in the end. Are you willing to bet on the fact that nothing bad will happen to your children while you go out of the building for breakfast? If you are, then you bear some responsibility for the bet if it goes sour...because you made that choice. The future isn't predictable, and humans only have one life...it's far better to plan for the worst and prevent against it.
And your argument that "People do far worse things and still have their kids" doesn't apply to anything...the law isn't perfect, and it never has been. The government and social workers can't observe every parent at every hour of the day. Doesn't make it right, but it's reality.
I hope they find Madeline alive...but it's a well known fact that for every hour after the kidnapping, the chances of that diminish rapidly. It's now been 2 weeks. If she manages to live through this, she will be the exception, not the rule. I hope she is the exception[/QUOTE]
I think you're misunderstanding me, I'm not condoning what they did, I'm saying I can understand why they did it and how they probably found themselves lolled into a false sense of security that the area was safe.
I am aware that a child is 100% percent a parents responsibility but I also think there is such a thing as being over-protective and I think one needs to put things into perspective. You can't keep a child wrapped in cotton wool all their lives, because at some point they will come into contact with the real world.
You said 'he never could have abducted her had her parents protected her, like they are supposed to do." I don't agree with this at all. This is like saying if a child gets abducted, it's the parents fault, if a child wonders of in a super market, this is the parents fault. This isn’t the case at all. Children have a mind of their own and no matter how much people say 'I never take my eyes off my children' there will always be a time where a child gets lost in a shop for example and it's not down to how much a parent protects a child.
A parent can only do their best, and in this case the parents made an awful mistake and I'm sure the guilt will stay with them until the day they die, whether Madeleine is found or not. They do not deserve to have their children taken away from them and I think it's mad to suggest such an idea.
Also, according to what I've heard, it looks as though whoever took Madeleine wasn't just a random opportunist, he (or even she) had been watching the family and had pinpointed
I have to disagree, Freya. You may think your friends, or your aunt or uncle are not bad parents, but it only takes 30 seconds for a child to be abducted, or 30 seconds from them to hurt themselves. I'm not trying to absolve the abductor of responsibility...he/she needs to be caught and punished. But I am saying that he never could have abducted her had her parents protected her, like they are supposed to do. They NEVER should have left the floor without taking their children with them...they provided the opprotunity that the abductor used to take Madeline. This makes them half responsible for that happend. It's like saying, "Oh, yeah, there is a pool in the backyard without a cover or fence, and my 5 year old is out there alone with no one watching her, but it's ok...nothing bad will happen." Do I need to tell you how many times this statement has been proven tragically wrong? These are children we are talking about...not pets or full grown adults. They don't know how to protect themselves, and when you have responsibility for a child (parent, relative, babysitter, etc.) you have to protect that child not only from others, but from themselves. The "Nobody could have known what would happen" argument doesn't hold water. We can't see the future, we can't know it, and it's a matter of choice in the end. Are you willing to bet on the fact that nothing bad will happen to your children while you go out of the building for breakfast? If you are, then you bear some responsibility for the bet if it goes sour...because you made that choice. The future isn't predictable, and humans only have one life...it's far better to plan for the worst and prevent against it.
And your argument that "People do far worse things and still have their kids" doesn't apply to anything...the law isn't perfect, and it never has been. The government and social workers can't observe every parent at every hour of the day. Doesn't make it right, but it's reality.
I hope they find Madeline alive...but it's a well known fact that for every hour after the kidnapping, the chances of that diminish rapidly. It's now been 2 weeks. If she manages to live through this, she will be the exception, not the rule. I hope she is the exception[/QUOTE]
I think you're misunderstanding me, I'm not condoning what they did, I'm saying I can understand why they did it and how they probably found themselves lolled into a false sense of security that the area was safe.
I am aware that a child is 100% percent a parents responsibility but I also think there is such a thing as being over-protective and I think one needs to put things into perspective. You can't keep a child wrapped in cotton wool all their lives, because at some point they will come into contact with the real world.
You said 'he never could have abducted her had her parents protected her, like they are supposed to do." I don't agree with this at all. This is like saying if a child gets abducted, it's the parents fault, if a child wonders of in a super market, this is the parents fault. This isn’t the case at all. Children have a mind of their own and no matter how much people say 'I never take my eyes off my children' there will always be a time where a child gets lost in a shop for example and it's not down to how much a parent protects a child.
A parent can only do their best, and in this case the parents made an awful mistake and I'm sure the guilt will stay with them until the day they die, whether Madeleine is found or not. They do not deserve to have their children taken away from them and I think it's mad to suggest such an idea.
Also, according to what I've heard, it looks as though whoever took Madeleine wasn't just a random opportunist, he (or even she) had been watching the family and had pinpointed
Thank you Freya, what I think is, yes, the McCanns made a mistake in leaving a three-year old alone and no, they'll never do it again. But some of the people pointing the finger at those parents are hypocrites. A great deal of parents will leave their children alone to enjoy some private time, on their holiday (or not) alone. And they, like the McCann family, make preparations to do this sort of thing, family-friendly complex with security, pick a villa in full view of all the restaurants close by, one of which the parents were eating at and checking up on the children every half hour. They were horrifically unlucky and I do genuinely hope for her safe return as do many others despite what QZ's resident 'comedian' may think. Yes a thread dedicated to Maddie will hardly make a difference but so many people can sympathise with the family, those who are parents or young siblings or cousins. It's foolish to say people don't care.
I also think that people will be very careful about leaving their children again.
I also think that people will be very careful about leaving their children again.
I really cannot believe the finger-pointing to the parents. They hardly left them to roam free. They shut all the windows, doors, LOCKED them; they were BROKEN INTO!! Hardly as if someone came by and plucked Maddie from her bed as easy as that. And as I say the McCanns took precautions. It turned out the precautions weren't enough and they'll never do this again. They definitely shouldn't be deemed unfit parents. This is punishment enough.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=brianJM>RollingBowieQueen wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I really cannot believe the finger-pointing to the parents. They hardly left them to roam free. They shut all the windows, doors, LOCKED them; they were BROKEN INTO!! Hardly as if someone came by and plucked Maddie from her bed as easy as that. And as I say the McCanns took precautions. It turned out the precautions weren't enough and they'll never do this again. They definitely shouldn't be deemed unfit parents. This is punishment enough.[/QUOTE]
Amen.
Amen.
I'm disturbed that so many people think it's ok to leave children alone for that long, while they LEFT THE BUILDING...all kids under the age of 3, no supervision. Yes I understand you can't protect them forever, and when they are old enough you let them start taking their lumps...it's the only way they learn. But at that age they can't protect themselves, and it's your JOB as a parent to protect them. Sorry if that means your social life dies for about 15 years...but that's what baby sitters/daycare is for...you made that choice when you had kids.
I guess I'm just going to chalk it up to teenagers who don't know any better about being a caregiver/parent, and hope that things change.
I guess I'm just going to chalk it up to teenagers who don't know any better about being a caregiver/parent, and hope that things change.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]CMU HistoryGirl wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
I guess I'm just going to chalk it up to teenagers who don't know any better about being a caregiver/parent, and hope that things change. [/QUOTE]
Yeah, I'm obviously just stupid because I don't have kids. Yeah, that must be it.
I guess I'm just going to chalk it up to teenagers who don't know any better about being a caregiver/parent, and hope that things change. [/QUOTE]
Yeah, I'm obviously just stupid because I don't have kids. Yeah, that must be it.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]CMU HistoryGirl wrote: [/QUOTENAME]I'm disturbed that so many people think it's ok to leave children alone for that long, while they LEFT THE BUILDING...all kids under the age of 3, no supervision. Yes I understand you can't protect them forever, and when they are old enough you let them start taking their lumps...it's the only way they learn. But at that age they can't protect themselves, and it's your JOB as a parent to protect them. Sorry if that means your social life dies for about 15 years...but that's what baby sitters/daycare is for...you made that choice when you had kids.
I guess I'm just going to chalk it up to teenagers who don't know any better about being a caregiver/parent, and hope that things change. [/QUOTE]
I'm not denying that what they did was wrong - yes they should have know better than to leave the child alone. But they were pretty sure that nothing could of happened to her at the time. No-one is a perfect parent - we are only human after all.
Look how many other children have been abducted over the years. Many of them were a lot older than Madeleine. But what you've got to remember is that young children are easily bribed with things like "I've got sweeties" or "I know your mummy and daddy, come with me". We may never know who snatched her, but whoever it was must have had some form of connection with her - like he has been watching the family or summat.
You can't always be there for your children. The parents may have been nearby - it wasn't as if they had abandonded her for christs sake!! The main thing is, her parents admit they shouldn't have left her - but the apartment they were staying in must have boasted that the security was top notch - otherwise why else whould her parents have left her there??
I guess I'm just going to chalk it up to teenagers who don't know any better about being a caregiver/parent, and hope that things change. [/QUOTE]
I'm not denying that what they did was wrong - yes they should have know better than to leave the child alone. But they were pretty sure that nothing could of happened to her at the time. No-one is a perfect parent - we are only human after all.
Look how many other children have been abducted over the years. Many of them were a lot older than Madeleine. But what you've got to remember is that young children are easily bribed with things like "I've got sweeties" or "I know your mummy and daddy, come with me". We may never know who snatched her, but whoever it was must have had some form of connection with her - like he has been watching the family or summat.
You can't always be there for your children. The parents may have been nearby - it wasn't as if they had abandonded her for christs sake!! The main thing is, her parents admit they shouldn't have left her - but the apartment they were staying in must have boasted that the security was top notch - otherwise why else whould her parents have left her there??