Child Who Drowned In Pool

C

Colin Phillips

At the Start
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
13,268
Location
Talbot Green
Any thoughts on the decision of the parents of the 3-y-o who wandered out of nursery and drowned in a garden pool.

An inquest came to the conclusion that it was an accidental death but attached the rider that it was due to neglect on the part of the nursery staff. It seems a door and a gate were left unsecured.

The mother when interviewed said that she and her husband were finding it difficult to cope with the stress involved, so they were looking for compensation by proceeding with a civil case.

James, I may have used a wrong word or two here so please don't jump on me.

Being an old-fashioned sort of person myself, my gut reaction was that perhaps they should have been satisfied with one income and looked after the child themselves.

I have heard most of the arguments about families not being able to exist on one income but I don't think they hold a lot of water.
 
A truly tragic case and it appears that the nursery closed permanently the same day and has not reopened.

I feel desperately sorry for both parties - the parents who will never get over the loss of a child and the nursery staff who will have to live with the guilt and the knowledge that it could have been prevented.

Whilst I appreciate your views, Colin and I have not read the case in any detail, many parents see nurseries as forms of early intergration with other children the same age rather than places to dump them while they work. My cousin is a stay at home Mum who gave up her job but she lets her toddler go to nursery twice a week for this very reason and she loves going.
 
I know nothing about the case itself but I also disagree with your implied notion Colin, that women should stay at home and look after their children if they are going to have them. This world is rapidly evolving and times are changing - it is not always possible for mothers to stay at home with their children, and more to the point, they may not want to stay at home all the time. There is nothing wrong with a woman wanting to work after she has had a baby - would you be able to cope with being stuck at home with nothing bar nappies and crayons and teletubbies, with no adult conversation or stimulation?

As jinnyj says, it is also vital for children to go to nursery at least for a few hours a week so they learn to interact and socialise with children their own age, whether or not their mother stays at home 24/7 to look after them.
 
Shads, I didn't say that the woman should stay at home. I accept that would be sexist of me.

And would you believe that I heard a report the other day that suggested that nursery education may be bad for the child. Don't remember the argument as to why that should be but I definitely heard the report.

But coming back to the staying home to look after your children argument, it does seem rather strange to me to make the decision to have children and then hand over the responsibilty of looking after them to strangers. Surely many parents regret not seeing their children through the early developement stages.
 
It doesn't necessarily mean that you cut all ties with the child though! There is nothing wrong in the stay at home parent having a part time job, for example, or even having a full time job, in my view. At the end of the day it is entirely down to the parents involved as to which route they prefer.
 
Colin, I read abit about this case. Wasn't this the case where the mother turned up at the nursey to see the staff looking around outside in the road, and when she enquired what they were looking for she was told they were looking for a dog. :blink: The lady went off to help looking as she soon realised they were actually looking for a child, infact her daughter. The lady, I believe saw what she thought was her daughters shoe in a pond not far from the nursery in someones back garden and to her horror the shoe was actually attached to her daughters foot and no one had realised. There seemed to have been lots of excuses that followed and the parents rightly must have been distraught. The gate had been left open and this young child wandered off unnoticed. I cannot begin to imagine the pain the parents suffered having been told it was a dog they were looking for, then the mother actually being the one to find her daughter and it was too late to save her. I think in these particular circumstances a private prosecution should be considered - given the outright lie followed by a clear case of negligence.
 
Originally posted by Colin Phillips@Mar 23 2006, 07:08 PM
But coming back to the staying home to look after your children argument, it does seem rather strange to me to make the decision to have children and then hand over the responsibilty of looking after them to strangers. Surely many parents regret not seeing their children through the early developement stages.
Click to expand...
Its not a case of just dumping them on someone else CP! The pre-school nursery that my two daughters attended (the youngest is still there) encourages parents to stay in class and participate in the activities. My wife often does.

We felt it important for our two to interract with other youngsters as early as possible and judging how they are both thriving in school, it definately hasn't hindered them.

The two hours a day our youngest spends with her lil' pals each day has no way limited the hand we have had in her development.
 
Thoroughly agree with Caj's views and, as a mother who chose to work, can understand both viewpoints. However, while I empathise entirely with the parents in wanting to inflict pain on those they rightly consider to be responsible for their daughter's death, I do wonder quite what they believe they will achieve by pursuing financial compensation? How can you put a value on a child's life?

It's not the same as losing a mother or father whereby their loss immediately imposes a heavy financial burden on the survivors - unless you subscribe to the view that your children are your insurance against penury in your old age - a little far-fetched in our society....

Following on from your views about a parent staying at home, Colin - as we are a rapidly ageing population with an increasingly serious pensions crisis looming, your solution wil mean an even bigger problem than we know already exists. If more parents stay at home and become one-income families, claiming income support and God knows what else, who exactly is going to be paying for it? Fewer people in the workforce means reduced tax and NI revenues. Plus the fact that further education is almost mandatory, so how do you justify having a highly educated population with only half of those of working age actually doing so?
 
If I were to say that nurseries weren't useful and, in some cases, very necessary (especially in the cases of single, working mums), I'd be hypocritical, because my aged mother is in a nursing/care home. Maybe I should stay at home and look after her (even though I physically can't, because of her immobile - and heavy! - status. Two nurses are needed to safely hoist her out of bed and onto a frame, just to transfer her to a chair.). So we rely on nursing care, just as people rely on nursery care at the other end of the age scale.

If a husband earns a really good salary, then it's perfectly possible to support wife, child/ren, any mortgage repayments, run a car and live decently without recourse to any other help. There are plenty of women who don't need nursery services to give them time away from their children, as they can easily afford live-in nannies. A trawl through 'The Lady' will show the continuing demand for those!

But the nursery is, as has been stated very effectively, a place for little children - especially the only child - to begin simple learning, but mostly to enjoy social time with peers. I was an only child, both my parents worked when I was a baby and very young, and my Grandmothers (both Grandfathers being dead) used to look after me, or aunts and uncles who were childless or whose children were now grown-up. Additionally, I was let loose onto the common ground outside our flats, in the days when it was fairly safe to do so, since all the kids looked out for each other, and there were always eagle-eyed Mums around.

Now that so many children can't spend time playing in the virtually-deserted roads and streets of yesteryear, thanks to millions of vehicles now on them, and because so many open spaces and commons have been choked with new housing, nurseries represent places where they can run around, squeal their heads off, and have lots of fun, in a reasonably safe environment.

In the case of this little kiddie, what happened was tragic, but no more or less tragic than what happens in parented environments every week - kids drown in bath-tubs while a parent answers the phone, kids get mauled by the neighbour's dog when they crawl under the fence, kids swallow pills, get electrocuted, and kids get abducted in supermarkets, from back gardens, even from prams. You can try all you might to prevent ANY sad or bad thing happening to children, but human error and the wilfulness of accidents to happen just won't allow for it.
 
I did say I hold an old-fashoned view on the subject and I don't know that I am right in my beliefs and I take on board Jules' point, but it is just my opinion and if the parents really have been traumatised (not suggesting they haven't) is a civil case the best way to get over it. (sorry Grammar Police)

Surely take this to its conclusion and there will be no-one left to look after young children because they will be afraid of charges they will face when things go wrong.
 
The case shows up the tragedy now of people not wanting to even go near small kids - as per the brickie who saw the little girl 'tottering along outside the nursery', but didn't want to approach her in case someone thought he was trying to abduct her! It's a very sad thing, but so many people feel like that now. He's probably wracked by guilt, thinking 'if only'.

It's a bit harsh on the nursery that it's found guilty of 'neglect' when parents whose children die when they take their eye off the ball, don't suffer such a stigma. I don't think the emotional pain of going through a civil case will do anything but stress the parents out even more, although they have to vent their fury and grief at something - no doubt they're also feeling extreme guilt for having placed the girl at the nursery, too.

I wonder if parents who survived the tsunami, while their children drowned, can't get out of their minds the thought that it was 'their fault' for taking them on holiday? It's just the law of averages at its crueller work, nothing more, but there's little comfort knowing that.
 
Not sure about this one, the nursery and staff are in a position of trust, and it is their duty to ensure that there charges are supervised at all times.
Making sure that doors and gates are closed should be routine and part of a security and safety policy, there is no conclusion other than that they neglected their duty not just to the little girl and her parents but put at risk every other child that had been placed in their care.
Maybe other child care providers will learn from this really sad situation and realise that checking and double checking is an important part of their agenda.
 
I think it is important to remember that negligence is a failure to take reasonable care not a counsel of perfection.

It is a terrible tragedy .
 
I manage the claims portfolio for the Community Centres - Childrens PA (Personal Accident) here in Australia. Some of the claims I get are astonishing beyond belief.

About 80% of the times I sit back, scratch my head and wonder how half of these people are employed for such positions. The risk management procedures of the child care centres are attrocious, and the standards of care of the child are not as high as one actually thinks. Will give you one example from a claim I assessed recently.
A child, aged 2 was having his nappy changed, as it was soiled. The carer did not speak English, only Farzi (the native tongue of Persia/Iran). Now technically when one change's a child's nappy, it should be either done on a mat on the ground (per standard safety regulations in place in Australia). However this childcare centre decided to use a stand, with no form of railing on it for safety. Pretty much a disaster waiting to happen, especially when the child had ADHD. Suddenly the child started coughing, and kicked the childcare worker in the nose, which ultimately did break her nose. And then suddenly the child rolled off over the side of the stand it had been placed on, and fell about 1 1/2 metres to the ground. This eventuated into the child having concussion, a broken leg and broken arm.

No surprise the childcare centre in question is being sued for negligence, particularly for not holding a duty of care.
A simple risk management error that could have been avoided by having the child's nappy changed on a mat on the floor.

As for childcare, I think all children should be encouraged to attend preschool. It has been proven that our understanding develops at a young age, and in fact its going to compulsory shortly for all Australian children once they turn 4 to be subject to compulsory child care.
I attended preschool twice a week. I can understand why most parents don't consider it, at $500 a week on average here in Australia, its an easy revenue raiser. But then again, education is so highly valued and a critical tool for the future development.
 
Lock them in the cupboard and feed them stale bread and water. Apparently it makes them turn into highly successful teenagers with supernatural powers.

You can then write about their experiences and make a mint.
 
Thank you Ardross.

I am temporarily quitting quitting smoking. Instead I am concentrating my efforts on forming a terrorist organisation to protest about the ban now instituted here.
 
Originally posted by Shadow Leader@Mar 27 2006, 09:48 AM
Murdered any coppers who have tried to stop you from lighting up?
Click to expand...
No bastard coppers going to take me alive (Viz, 1991)

I have not murdered anyone as yet, but by forming a compound of old men's unwashed socks and Senga fae Royston's knickers, I have created a very "dirty" bomb indeed.

This will shortly be unleashed on the architectural monstrosity that is the Scottish Parliament.
 
Back
Top