"Who would leave children that young alone?"

[SapphireSteel]

Back on topic which is - "who would leave children that young alone"

Regardless of doors being opened/locked/unlocked, Madeleine would still be safe if her parents had stayed in that evening.

Indeed, she would have been spared untold distress and fear on other evenings too. The children were heard crying for hours, in fact Madeleine herself had asked BOTH parents why they didn't come when she had cried.

This knowledge did not change the parents plans one iota...instead they belatedly organised some *advertiser censored* eyed "listening" scheme which PROFOUNDLY FAILED.

The children were left alone in a strange hotel room in a strange country.

Anything could have happened.

Decent, ordinary, unselfish parents would simply not do this - in fact, the McCanns were the ONLY ones in the party who chose to behave this way.

What sort of people would do this?

 

[fabgod]

On topic,
I think people who would leave children under the age of 4 alone in a foreign country that they had little if any first hand knowledge of, at the same time, leaving a door unlocked which was within yards or metres of a road, whilst enjoying themselves for hours at a time,
would be negligent and other words too strong and opinionated for a forum like this.
But, it isnt illegal apparently!

 

[SapphireSteel]

On topic,
I think people who would leave children under the age of 4 alone in a foreign country that they had little if any first hand knowledge of, at the same time, leaving a door unlocked which was within yards or metres of a road, whilst enjoying themselves for hours at a time,
would be negligent and other words too strong and opinionated for a forum like this.
But, it isnt illegal apparently!

It should be.

Can you imagine how much advice Kate doled out to harried parents as a GP?

I'm sure if one of her patients had confided in her they were going out drinking and leaving their kids alone, KM would be mandatorially advised to report it, and give her patient a stern talking to...

But ordinary standards of behaviour don't seem to apply to the McCanns.

ullhair:

 

[LinasK]

It should be.

Can you imagine how much advice Kate doled out to harried parents as a GP?

I'm sure if one of her patients had confided in her they were going out drinking and leaving their kids alone, KM would be mandatorially advised to report it, and give her patient a stern talking to...

But ordinary standards of behaviour don't seem to apply to the McCanns.

ullhair:

One would certainly hope so, but even if I lived in the UK, Kate McCann would not be my first choice of pediatricians...

 

[brit1981]

They were not going out drinking, they were having dinner and like most people had wine with their dinner. being fifty metres away from a child whilst you eat dinner and check on the every half an hour is not considered neglect in the UK nor in Portugal, and having wine with dinner is not considered going out drinking either.

 

[LinasK]

They were not going out drinking, they were having dinner and like most people had wine with their dinner. being fifty metres away from a child whilst you eat dinner and check on the every half an hour is not considered neglect in the UK nor in Portugal, and having wine with dinner is not considered going out drinking either.

I'm in the US and I consider it neglect regardless of whether they were drinking alcohol on an empty stomach or not! Two of their children were already sick, Maddie or her brother had been crying for them the night before for 11/2 hours without response, the kids spent most of the vacation in what we term daycare- in a foreign country I might add, meanwhile anything could have and did happen in the 30min. they were out of sight and hearing range of their children- with a swimming pool and an unlocked door next to a parking lot in-between them I might add...
So clearly 30min and 50 meters was too far whether it was an abduction or murder cover-up. And drinking alcohol added to the risk factor, it certainly didn't help their responsiveness to their children!
Why bother to bring your children on vacation if all you are going to do is shove them off???

 

[OneLove]

Back on topic which is - "who would leave children that young alone"

Regardless of doors being opened/locked/unlocked, Madeleine would still be safe if her parents had stayed in that evening.

Indeed, she would have been spared untold distress and fear on other evenings too. The children were heard crying for hours, in fact Madeleine herself had asked BOTH parents why they didn't come when she had cried.

This knowledge did not change the parents plans one iota...instead they belatedly organised some *advertiser censored* eyed "listening" scheme which PROFOUNDLY FAILED.

The children were left alone in a strange hotel room in a strange country.

Anything could have happened.

Decent, ordinary, unselfish parents would simply not do this - in fact, the McCanns were the ONLY ones in the party who chose to behave this way.

What sort of people would do this?

If it is true that Maddie cried for hours the night before,then they were NOT checking in on them every half hour and it's my opinion that these non-deserving parents were only annoyed by the inconvenience and chose to drug Maddie into oblivion the next night. Who knows, maybe it was an error; maybe one drugged her and then the other did also, not knowing about the first dose. Maybe one or both were hitting the alcohol too heavy BEFORE dinner began and it caused an error in judgement. Whatever happened, I believe there are signs of "guilty conscience" covered by extreme defensiveness and outrage which is typical of narcissists. I also believe the cold callousness shown immediately after Maddie's disappearance indicated they were STILL angry and frustrated at HER for the crying episode the night before. I think the attitude may have been something like this "if she hadn't been such a pesky bugger, she wouldn't have caused all this. We HAD to do something, fgs. It's not OUR fault she died". IMO

 

[brit1981]

Drinking wine with dinner is just not considered going out drinking in the EU, it is perfectly normal thing to do unless one is driving or a recovering alcoholic or has some other health risk. It is not uncommon in many places to have wine with lunch. It is nto considered irresponsible.
I personally woudl not have left the children like this, but it is a common practice. We even havenanny listening services where people can leve their children in their holiday accomadation and every half an hour a nanny will listen outside the door. mark warner offered this at its campus style resorts and the mccanns friends had used them the year before, so that is where they got the home made listening service idea from. MW has now stopped its service, but lots of places in the EU still use them and advertise them so they are still popular.

The children were not really in day care, they were in the children's clubs. Again something common in the EU. They are just fun clubs for the children where they hang out together and have activities together, it is not the same as daycare.

There wer eno reports of any of the mccann children being unwell, and no confirmation that they were crying for an hour and a half either.

 

[OneLove]

Drinking wine is fine. Drinking wine in sufficient quantity to cause a high enough blood alcohol level to impair judgement and reaction times should not be done when one is driving or responsible for the care of others, PARTICULARLY very young children not capable of caring for themselves.

Any physician knows this.

These people seem to have drunk quite a quantity AND not even been present with their children. In fact, NO ONE was present with their preschool age children.

 

[Donjeta]

Witness statement of Gerald Patrick McCann, on the 10th of May 2007, at 3.20 p.m.
Location: CID Portimão

Concerning the half-hourly checking of the children, it had been inspired by the MARK WARNER system called "baby listening", as referred to previously. On the night of the events, he ate fish at dinner, and sausages and potatoes as a starter, drinking white wine. Usually, between 20h30 and the end of dinner, they would drink more or less a bottle of wine per person.

http://missingmadeleine.forumotion.net/t5212-gerry-mccann-statement-10th-may-2007

If someone drinks a bottle of wine per person or more it is more than enough for me to say that they have gone out drinking, regardless of whether they also had dinner at the time. To me it's not that significant whether you call it dinner or a night out at the pub, it's how drunk you are. Depending on the size of the person and the degree of tolerance, a bottle of wine consumed in a couple of hours is enough to make some people drunk and others tipsy.

(For the record, I'm in the EU.)

 

[BritsKate]

They were not going out drinking, they were having dinner and like most people had wine with their dinner. being fifty metres away from a child whilst you eat dinner and check on the every half an hour is not considered neglect in the UK nor in Portugal, and having wine with dinner is not considered going out drinking either.

We've been over this...over and over and over yet again. What I bolded is simply not true based on UK law.

UK law makes no such distinctions. The best we can claim is the McCann's were not charged with neglect. Another set of parents who commit the same actions may very well be though because UK law on neglect is just that broad.

Please stop stating by UK law it isn't neglect when this is very flatly totally untrue. The law simply states any person who leaves a child in circumstances which could cause harm to the child could be charged with neglect. I should mention child advocacy groups are fervently seeking to change that legislation as well to better define what constitutes neglect.

 

[BritsKate]

I have to say too that nanny listening services are rather a moot point since they weren't utilised anyway but...

Let's say hypothetically they were and Maddie was still 'abducted'. Or they utilised an in-room hotel nanny. Would the McCann's not have a HUGE law suit against Mark Warner? Of course who is there to sue if you alone are responsible?

JMO

 

[fabgod]

I find it amazing how little time they actually spent as a family each day.
According to the statements they would spend two hours together each day between kids club sessions.
So apart from getting up and having breakfast and then bath time and bed, its not really that much of a family holiday is it?
Why take them at all?

 

[rashomon]

Witness statement of Gerald Patrick McCann, on the 10th of May 2007, at 3.20 p.m.
Location: CID Portimão

Concerning the half-hourly checking of the children, it had been inspired by the MARK WARNER system called "baby listening", as referred to previously. On the night of the events, he ate fish at dinner, and sausages and potatoes as a starter, drinking white wine. Usually, between 20h30 and the end of dinner, they would drink more or less a bottle of wine per person.

http://missingmadeleine.forumotion.net/t5212-gerry-mccann-statement-10th-may-2007

<...> Depending on the size of the person and the degree of tolerance, a bottle of wine consumed in a couple of hours is enough to make some people drunk and others tipsy.

And didn't the McCanns, according to their own words, also have some wine (even if it was only a glass) before they went to the Tapas restaurant?

 

[fabgod]

Talking of drinking and leaving children alone!

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/909100-mother-jailed-for-leaving-baby-home-alone-while-she-went-drinking

15 months for leaving her child in the house alone and apparently it is not illegal to leave a child or three especially when you keep nipping back to check, oh hang on this mother was nipping back as well?

Its a good job the dogs didnt have to go in, what with all those dirty nappies lying around!
Double standards from what I see?

 

[fabgod]

And didn't the McCanns, according to their own words, also have some wine (even if it was only a glass) before they went to the Tapas restaurant?

amazing, more or less a bottle of wine per person, so some would have had more by the sound of it and you are right Rashomon, the NewZealand wine from the supermarket, it just gets worse!
Probably wouldnt be in much of a state to react too responsibly and effectively if anything went wrong? Oh it did didn't it, what was the quote?

"well within the boundaries of responsible parenting"?
I would love to read those boundaries sometime

 

[Gem2626]

Talking of drinking and leaving children alone!

http://www.metro.co.uk/news/909100-mother-jailed-for-leaving-baby-home-alone-while-she-went-drinking

15 months for leaving her child in the house alone and apparently it is not illegal to leave a child or three especially when you keep nipping back to check, oh hang on this mother was nipping back as well?

Its a good job the dogs didnt have to go in, what with all those dirty nappies lying around!
Double standards from what I see?

I'm a social worker in the UK. You cannot compare these two cases they are totally different. The story you linked is far worse than what the Mccann's did it just has a happier outcome for the child.

The mother 'would return each day to feed her 15-month-old daughter' This indicates she returned home once a day to feed her daughter. Wait though...

'she had returned to feed the baby cereal and microwaved food the baby also appeared extremely hungry when she was fed at a police station'

It appears that she wasn't sufficiently fed!?

'The house was in a state of disarray with rubbish, dirty clothes, empty wine bottles, beer cans and dirty nappies strewn over the floors'

The baby was also living in unsanitary living conditions.

'There was no heating on in the house and she was partly covered by a blanket.'


This is neglect on a huge scale the child was hungry, cold and surrounded by filth. The child experienced significant harm (physical and mentally) over a long period of time. There is no evidence that Madeleine or the twins came to any harm other than this one night.

 

[Gem2626]

amazing, more or less a bottle of wine per person, so some would have had more by the sound of it and you are right Rashomon, the NewZealand wine from the supermarket, it just gets worse!
Probably wouldnt be in much of a state to react too responsibly and effectively if anything went wrong? Oh it did didn't it, what was the quote?

"well within the boundaries of responsible parenting"?
I would love to read those boundaries sometime

Not 'responsible parenting' but 'reasonable parenting'. 2 different things.

 

[fabgod]

I'm a social worker in the UK. You cannot compare these two cases they are totally different. The story you linked is far worse than what the Mccann's did it just has a happier outcome for the child.

The mother 'would return each day to feed her 15-month-old daughter' This indicates she returned home once a day to feed her daughter. Wait though...

'she had returned to feed the baby cereal and microwaved food the baby also appeared extremely hungry when she was fed at a police station'

It appears that she wasn't sufficiently fed!?

'The house was in a state of disarray with rubbish, dirty clothes, empty wine bottles, beer cans and dirty nappies strewn over the floors'

The baby was also living in unsanitary living conditions.

'There was no heating on in the house and she was partly covered by a blanket.'



This is neglect on a huge scale the child was hungry, cold and surrounded by filth. The child experienced significant harm (physical and mentally) over a long period of time. There is no evidence that Madeleine or the twins came to any harm other than this one night.

Oh Ok, you are a social worker thats good to know thanks!

Can I just highlight one of your statements, that is " there is no evidence that Madeleine of the twins came to harm other than this one night"

In your experience as a Social Worker, Is that acceptable then, that over a period of what, 6 nights, they only lost one of the three?
So to leave three children all under 4 years of age in an unlocked apartment, in the dark, in a foreign country for 6 nights is responsible parenting?

I dont suppose you could point me in the direction of the guidlines that state this are could you?
I think you are right and wrong in your opening comment though, Right in that it was a far better outcome for the child in that at least her whereabouts are still known and she is in relatively decent health, but wrong in the fact that althoug the childs treatment was abysmal by a neglectful parent, how is it far worse when Madeleine has seemingly disappeared off the face of the earth,
Just what do Parents have to do to be deemed neglectful?

 

[Gem2626]

Oh Ok, you are a social worker thats good to know thanks!

Can I just highlight one of your statements, that is " there is no evidence that Madeleine of the twins came to harm other than this one night"

In your experience as a Social Worker, Is that acceptable then, that over a period of what, 6 nights, they only lost one of the three?
So to leave three children all under 4 years of age in an unlocked apartment, in the dark, in a foreign country for 6 nights is responsible parenting?

I dont suppose you could point me in the direction of the guidlines that state this are could you?
I think you are right and wrong in your opening comment though, Right in that it was a far better outcome for the child in that at least her whereabouts are still known and she is in relatively decent health, but wrong in the fact that althoug the childs treatment was abysmal by a neglectful parent, how is it far worse when Madeleine has seemingly disappeared off the face of the earth,
Just what do Parents have to do to be deemed neglectful?

What I meant was that this was an isolated experience, circumstantial to them being on holiday, in comparison to the article where the neglect was longer standing and there was far more evidence to get a conviction. There is no evidence to suggest that the Mccann children were anything other than happy, healthy children and apart from this occasion (being the 6 nights) were well cared for.

This case is very complex. Personally I think what they did was very irresponsible, professionally I am trained to be objective and empathetic.

There is no exact definition of 'reasonable parenting' (they certainly have never been called responsible). The law considers parenting in the light of whether it is abusive or not but the law is extremely vague. If a claim is made that a child is 'in need' or 'at risk' the local authority has a duty to investigate. It is up to the social worker who is assigned the case to determine whether the evidence they have collected constitutes as significant harm. This requires extremely good judgement.

The Mccanns were interviewed by social services and no charges were brought against them additionally the twins have at no point been deemed as 'in need' or 'at risk'. I think it would be hard to get a conviction against them. I also think that it would not be in the best interests of their twins.

I think genuinely the Mccanns made a very stupid mistake. Because Mark Warner offered a seemingly successful baby listening service they felt a false sense of security in carrying this out themselves. I think this is a huge factor in why charges were never brought against them because it was deemed that under that false sense of security they acted reasonable.

Again highlighting the differences in the cases I think the Mccanns made an error of judgement due to this false sense of security I do not believe it was a deliberate act and there is no evidence to prove that Madeleine wouldn't have been abducted (if you believe that theory) even if the parents were there. In the other case it was deliberate neglect plain and simple, longstanding and beyond selfish.

What do parents have to do to be deemed neglectful? The level of neglect is determined on a case by case basis and by referring to case law. Tricky business.

Just my opinion