real parenting is entirely different than the ideal imaginings of non-parents

This is the line. I've talked to a couple of parents about this, and they've all left small sleeping children for a small amount of time while they go and do something else. It's not ideal, they show various degrees of guilt for doing it, but it happens. fwiw, I can't understand it as well, but like you, I'm not a parent.

My feeling on this one is that it's entirely plausible that the parents were fed up, the children were fast asleep and they saw no problem with leaving them for a few hours so they could go, be with friends and relax. I'm not saying this is what happened, or that it was an OK thing to do, but it seems plausible.

This moral crusade against the McCann's is awful. I'm sure there are perfect parents out there that never do anything silly and keep an eye on their five year old children at all times, but I doubt it's a huge percentage.

but... why wouldn't they just get a sitter? The hotel provided such a service, and it certainly wouldn't have been a financial hardship for them. That's the part that sort of staggers me. Perhaps it was the sort of arrangement that needed to be booked well in advance, and they decided to do this on the spur of the moment. This has just occurred to me.

Checking in every half-hour when the kids are fast asleep is probably fine enough 90% of the time. Knowing myself, though, I wouldn't be able to enjoy the socializing at all, because the other 10% (or whatever the actual figure might be, if such a figure could even be estimated) would haunt me. For what it's worth, I always figured that if I did ever have kids, I would have to struggle mightily to modulate my overprotective instinct (even my husband has to dodge that instinct sometimes!)... something that, unchecked, might well end up being more harmful in the long run than very brief periods of neglect.

I'm a parent and have been for 22 years now. I would never, ever leave a child that young alone in a hotel room while I went to dinner. Not ever. Sure, there have been times when it's been tempting, but I have never done it. For seven of those years, I was a single parent and I still didn't do it - where I went, my daughter went. End of story.

Being a parent means making sacrifices, one of the major ones of which is the loss of most of the time spent doing whatever you want without having to be responsible for small creatures. If you aren't prepared to do that, don't become a parent.

I don't know that I would even trust a hotel-provided service. At least I never have, but I could conceive of doing so, if my instinct told me the sitter was OK, I guess.

Hmm, it's iffy. I think I might leave a 5-year-old asleep in a hotel room to go down to the lobby for a newspaper or something, but not for an evening. I wouldn't leave her alone for anything over ten or fifteen minutes. I suppose something could happen in those 15 minutes.

That's the thing with kids. It's impossible to watch them every second, and it only takes a second for something horrible to happen.

My gut feeling is that they had sedated the children. Apparently when the alarm was raised and the apartment was filled with people, lights, noise, hysteria, the other two children (twins, aged about 2) stayed fast asleep through the whole thing.

There appears to have been very little criticism of the McCanns in the British press and I suspect that much of this is because they're middle-class doctors. If they'd been from a chav estate in Barking or Rochdale, they'd have been pilloried in the press for leaving the children "Home Alone" (which is the popular way the tabloids describe abandoned children).

They left the kid alone; they have to deal with that fact every time they look in the mirror.

To me, what's more disturbing is the media attention given to one family and one child when there are thousands of children in grave peril a few hundred miles away.

Oh, wait... Britney just flashed her cooter again! OJ punched a guy! Some actress is really skinny (on purpose, as opposed to starving to death by accident because the UN won't help her)!

These stories are all so much more important, somehow, than the reality of genocide. That's what sticks with me.

Yeah, it's very sad that a child has gone missing (and is quite possibly dead)... but why do we have to go on and on with the coverage? It's sick.

EJ, they may have sedated the kids. I don't know.

I do know, however, that when I was six years old that a guy broke into our house and I slept through my mom screaming at him, him running through a large front window in the living room to get out and cops showing up with a dog. The living room was right down the stairs from my bedroom - the stairs opened into my bedroom. So, it is possible for a kid to sleep through that.

Even now (at 34) when I finally fall asleep - I can sleep through almost anything.

My gut feeling is that they had sedated the children.
That had never occurred to me, but I'm aware that many parents do this. There are OTC medications that contain mild sedatives intended for when they are sick enough to have trouble sleeping, but are regularly used when kids are not sick by some parents.

chuckdarwin - get over yourself.

Chuckdarwin, I tried to sort of address this in the heading and body of my post. It's just a real question that I have had on my mind... But go ahead and make a Darfur post, though. We're not short of space.

Oh yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if they had sedated the kids. And I also don't understand why they left the kids alone to go to dinner. Could they not have ordered in or gotten carry out from the same restaurant? And like Taz said - it's not like they couldn't have arranged for a sitter.

Something about the story the couple tells doesn't sit well with me - I'm not sure if it's just that they left the kids alone to go celebrate OR if I think they're guilty or what.

Chuck - if it was your child you would want as much coverage as possible.

I wouldn't have left my child alone in a hotel room.

But go ahead and make a Darfur post, though.

There's no point.

Chuck, it's good that you wouldn't leave your child alone in a hotel room. It is. If something ever happened to one of your children when you weren't around - I'm just saying you'd want coverage.

I'm not saying I agree with the constant barrage of crap from the media but I do think in the cases of horrific things happening to single children that sometimes they get coverage because people empathize with families in need more so than being able to wrap their heads around millions of people in need. It seems more doable to people to help ONE or a few people than to help millions.

When I was that age my Dad took my brother and I to Jamaica with him. We were 5 and 7, respectively. He left us alone in the hotel room every evening, with the stern warning that we could watch tv for a half hour, then we had to go to sleep. He would then go down to the bar and I'm sure god knows what else he was up to (there was a toga party one night for sure).

One night midway through the trip, some guy started calling the room looking for someone who had (presumably) stayed in the hotel room before us. Called up screaming and yelling down the phone. My brother and I just hung up on him repeatedly. About 15-20 minutes later, that same person showed up at the hotel and started pounding on the door screaming and yelling, making all kinds of threats. This person did not seem to grasp that the only occupants of the room were two small children. My brother called the hotel operator and they sent security up, who apparently told the person the situation and let them run off on their merry way.

It took them maybe another half hour to find my father, who was off at the toga party (which wasn't even at our hotel, it was the next hotel over). In the meantime the very nice hotel security guy sat in our room with us and told us jokes. Newly-single dad was having fun at night and taking us around during the day. No one seemed to have a problem with it. My brother and I were scared shitless of course and both had nightmares for a while after.

The best part being that my dad continued to leave us alone in the hotel room at night for the rest of the trip. Even though there was a babysitter service in the hotel. I think often people have two modes - complete sense of security which cannot be shattered until something truly bad happens, and then total paranoia and fear. It seems like these people were lulled into the false sense of security of the resort and thought they could enjoy their vacation without the kids for a couple of hours. Very. very sad.

Well, chuckdarwin, you can make the Darfur and refrain from asking why other posts are not Darfur posts, or you can not make it and continue to imply that other people are shallow for not making Darfur posts. Or you could just not make a Darfur post, and not criticize others for not making a Darfur post. Weigh these options.

I am a parent, I've been on holidays like this, and no. It wouldn't occur to me in thousand years to leave a child/children like that.
BUT I am aware of quite some subleties about parenting since I moved to the UK. In Ireland and southern Europe, children are more around in social settings, more accepted. (Although Irish bars can be very iffy!)
I found more people here in the UK (anecdotal!) have seperate rooms for babies at a much earlier stage than I was used to, there seems much more of an emphasis on the mother and the couple having their own space and maintaining their own identities. This is both a good nd a bad thing. There is also a tendancy in social settings almost for the children to have their own space and not interrupt the adults socialising. I've been to parties where separate tables are set for the kids in separate rooms and some of the mothers volunteer to "look after them" (keep them from annoying the adults).
It may be significant that the people I socialise with in this corner of Middle class britian are hospital doctors like the McCanns, so it certainly seems to be a mindset I had already marvelled at. My kids had real probelms as they are used to being at the main table chatting to everyone (and imbibing the adults wine!)We really had to teach them a new way for these parties. My 13 year old stopped coming with us!
There is some suggestion in the press that the parents may have OTC medded the kids, I certainly did a few times (long-haul travel, ferries) but never to leave them alone.
Some of these package places can be deceptively secure, it may have seemed to them like a giant extension of the living room. You know how meditteraneans live half outdoors? Well it can be seductive for northern Europeans when they get a sense of that and the laid-back holiday atmosphere, surrounded (you think) by like-minded families.....
I know I'm reaching but I can't bring myself even remotely to condemn them. I try to think of all the slips I made as a young mother, who knows where they could have led....I can't imagine having to live with this pain

Yeah, I'm not perfect either, so who am I to talk?

It seems more doable to people to help ONE or a few people than to help millions.

That's a good point, but I think that the media is trading on people's fears and insecurities about parenting. Fear = profit.

I wasn't questioning your post, taz; it's a great post and a good question (would you leave your kids alone and sedated in a hotel room?).

I was questioning the media.

"... I won't judge anyone, trust me. "

Eh, riiiiight.

How about if they'd left a 105 pound Doberman Pinscher in the room with sleeping but undrugged kids? I've done that, no problems. But it was only 2 kids, and for short periods, not to go down to the restaurant or the bar.

Family dogs have been more constant guardians in our family, than parents or grandparents, going as far back in my personal memory as my grandparents, and now down to my grandchildren.

I agree with that, chuck. Totally. I think the media is not even a breath away from the Natural Born Killers fictional depiction... but I wasn't making an OMG SOMEONE GRABBED THIS BEAUTIFUL CHILD ARE ANY OF OUR CHILDREN SAFE ANYMORE AIIIIIEEEEEEE!!!! post. I just really want the opinions of parents about how ordinary or extraordinary that sort of scenario of leaving the toddlers on their own might be.

I don't think I understand the question, paulsc. I would probably feel a tiny bit safer if the family dog were with the kids.

More than a tiny bit. But I say tiny because the dog probably wouldn't be able to protect them from pulling down a big glass vase on top of their head, or playing around with electrical outlets, etc.

I wasn't questioning your post, taz; it's a great post and a good question (would you leave your kids alone and sedated in a hotel room?).

I was questioning the media.

that's cool and it's a valid question... and considering taz's point up above, I'll be selfindulgent here and cave into a strong temptation i've had for awhile. forgive me taz and everyone else but this is kinda getting on my nerves, too

consider that in my post here, I first made, then edited out, a direct snark at you, chuckdarwin, to pre-empt just that sort of commentary. I edited it off because I re-read it and realised it added nothing to the post except snarkiness, and to point out once again that yes dude, you really, really do like to ride that insufferably smug anti-american LOLMEDIASUXAMIRITE!!!11 hobbyhorse of yours around this site.

and the sad thing about that is that dude, while it's a fine and perfectly valid point on its own, you bring it up Every. Goddamn. Chance. to the point where it's really starting to affect your credibility. You sound like a broken record. we get it, man. Really, we do.

to your point, taz (sorry for the derail there) I agree with you. I wouldn't leave a young kid alone either.

However, since I am also Not A Parent, as I've been repeatedly informed by my friends and acquaintances who are, in fact, parents, I Have no Valid Opinion On Such Matters, so I'll stop now.

this is not to imply that non-parents don't have perfectly valid opinions on parenting... hell we vote on legislation too, so our opinions affect y'all... it's just the stance all my parent friends take in any of these discussions

" More than a tiny bit. But I say tiny because the dog probably wouldn't be able to protect them from pulling down a big glass vase on top of their head, or playing around with electrical outlets, etc."
posted by taz 25 September | 07:51

There aren't many glass vases in family hotel rooms, in my experience, taz. :-) The Doberman I left with my kids with was my dog, if not the family pet. And the kids knew that if they got rambunctious, and started "bed flying," that the dog would get excited, start barking, and rat them out, right away.

Nobody wants to get ratted out by a Doberman.

I just really want the opinions of parents about how ordinary or extraordinary that sort of scenario of leaving the toddlers on their own might be.

I've known parents who did it. Every single one of them was a physician of some sort. Draw your own conclusions.

Paulsc! Don't make me go into all the ways I can imagine a little kid getting into dangerous mischief! Never mind if there's a glass vase or not, I've never seen a completely kidsafe room outside of a padded cell, and we probably shouldn't keep our kids there. Or should we? Hmmmm....

But, yes, you're right. I bet if we had had a family (or just invested/protective/nervous) dog on hand that time I accidentally embedded my two front teeth into my sister's forehead while playing Batman on our facing twin beds, it would have turned out for the better. The dog would have tried to interfere with that mock aggression jumping-around willy nilly stuff and probably saved her a couple of stitches, and me a great deal of remaindered guilt. :)

You don't even have to do anything wrong and you'll blame yourself forever. Just imagine fucking up.

Sideline retrospective makes it easy to decide good and bad. Fact is, the proof's in the pudding. She's gone, and they were negligent.

Putting yourself in someone else's shoes aids understanding, not judgment.

On sedating children. There's a reason why the calpol advert states "if you've got kids you'll understand." If any of you think doping your kids on calpol so you can get a good nights sleep isn't widespread, then you can think again.

On Nice Doctors. You know who else was a doctor.

dg. Even if you never left your kids alone, I bet there's a whole load of other stuff that in retrospect you look back and cringe at. Stuff that most "right-minded" parents would consider dangerous and stupid and which in all probability you do now too. Come on man. 'fess up.

Parenting's a responsible thing, but it's an easy thing to fuck up. Nobody escapes those first 15 years of your first borns life without making at least one cock up. The best everyone can hope for is that your best is good enough and the mistakes don't kill them.

As for why they didn't use a baby-sitting service... Well, maybe they didn't trust the baby sitters. They're middle class and English, so you can assume that they're desparately afraid of anyone with even a hint of a tan.

I don't think it's stupid. I posted about Madeleine Mcann a while back. Something about this case left me very sad. Probably because I have a child the same age. I think I have OCD or something. ha.

I would never leave my kids in a hotel room alone. Never. I wouldn't leave them for the sheer fact of safety. It's likely they could wake up, become frightened, open a door, wander off even.

I could maybe understand if the front door of the hotel room was a few steps off the pool or cafe table that I wanted to visit, and I could keep a direct eye on the door. But, never, never around the corner, yards and yards away.

Hiring a sitter seems to be a no-brainer in this case, but I can understand why the McCann's did it. They are probably very aware of their children's sleeping habits. They were probably familiar with this resort and felt a sense of safety. They were in a big pile with other families like themselves.

They probably assumed that once they were sleeping they would stay sleeping. They may have been afraid of how their kids would react to a sitter they've never met. It may have been easier on their minds to let them sleep instead of going through the hassle and stress of leaving them with a sitter. It sounds ridiculous, but I can understand their mindset. I don't know these people, but I don't blame them.

While planning trips and researching hotels and such, I read about babysitting and nanny services. I would not leave my kids with a babysitting service in a hotel or call a nanny in for the night so my husband and I could go out. It wouldn't cross my mind. I would worry about the kids the entire time and wouldn't be able to relax enough to enjoy myself. I'm not that trusting. Not only would I be concerned about their safety, I would worry about the children's comfort level with a "stranger". I have to know a person longer than five minutes to entrust a person with the welfare of my children. That's my personality though. I'm a worrier and a bit of a control freak.

I'm not perfect in the least. I've left my children in the car, with the windows rolled down, to go into a Jiffy mart for a minute. My older son "told" on me. My husband was a bit pissed. I rationalized it -- I know it was a bad idea. I've been tempted to let my younger child continue napping while I retrieve my first grader from school. The school is literally one mile from my doorstep. It would be so easy to hop in the car and be home again in five minutes. I can't do it. Not only is it illegal and irresponsible, my older child would rat me out. :) I think of all of the things that could go wrong. The kid could wake up, the house could burn down. I would have my picture taken in handcuffs on the front lawn.

We bring our kids with us on trips. We like including them. We do most everything with them, actually. We have to forgo fancy dinners and cocktails in the evening, or shows or plays, or long day trips. But that's life if you bring the kids with you.

seanyboy, I'm not really asking if anyone has ever made a mistake in parenting. I'm pretty sure everyone has, many times. And if they haven't... well. That's almost a little scary by itself. I'm simply asking if leaving kids that young alone while checking in on them every half-hour or so is something that many/most/few/hardly any/no people who have kids, who post here, would do.

dg, Even if you never left your kids alone, I bet there's a whole load of other stuff that in retrospect you look back and cringe at. Stuff that most "right-minded" parents would consider dangerous and stupid and which in all probability you do now too. Come on man. 'fess up.

I'm not dg, but I'll comment. Just because we wouldn't leave our kids in a hotel room, doesn't mean we're perfect. Once my younger child wandered out the front door without pants when he was just three years old. He was probably outside for five minutes or less. I was in the bathroom. The doorbell rang. I answered it, still unaware that my child was gone. My neighbor was holding my little naked child. I screamed, then thanked him.

I've left my kids in the bathtub. My younger son burned his arm on a pan. The same younger son fell while showering with me in the shower stall. He split his face open at the bridge of the nose and had to have stitches. The same kid cut his leg on a broken glass wastebasket I was sweeping up. He walked in and before I knew it -- gash in the leg. I was too stupid to shut the door. They've fell numerous times on wet floors and bashed their heads and bums. I've been tipsy while out with my kids at parties and such. Not the best practice. Thankfully my husband isn't much of a drinker, and stays sober to drive. One of my kids stuck a fork in an uncovered outlet. Etc. etc. etc.

Maybe I'm extra paranoid, but I even take the keys out of the ignition when I'm getting the mail with my kid in the car. It's a 10-step walk to the mailbox from the curb, but I have to be out of direct sight of the car for 10 seconds, and that's long enough for someone to jump in the car and drive off. And I would never dream of going into the 7-11 without taking her in with me.

There was a story here recently of a woman who "just ran in" to a convenience store, with her kid in the (running) car. They found her car with her kid in it a day later in Richmond (~2 hours away). She was lucky.

No fucking way is avoiding the 15 seconds of effort it takes to get my kid out of her booster seat worth the lifetime of guilt and despair I would feel over something like that happening to me.

So, to answer your question directly, taz, no no no NO NO NO NO NO NO!!! If my child is with me on vacation, that vacation is no longer mine.

When my brother and I were kids (this back in the way-back days, so we were probably between 5 and 8 years old), my parents liked to take us to Reno. Not every weekend, but at least twice a year. Did my parents hire a sitter every single time they went down to the casino floor after we went to bed? I honestly don't know. I remember having a sitter a few times, but mostly I was asleep!

It's easy to pass judgements on other parents: I would never sedate my kids to get them to sleep on my schedule, for example. But that's so easy for me to say, isn't it? I've never been in a position to do so. I'm guessing this is mostly a UK thing, right? I think most American parents would be shocked to learn that it's a widespread practice.

Why would anyone who didn't need to do so ever leave children under five alone for more than a few minutes, even if they are sleeping?

Well, the thing that I keep coming back to is: that's just the story. Maybe they did leave the kids alone while at dinner.... or maybe they killed her. I don't know. It strikes me as one of those stories where we might never really know the truth (Tampa had a story like that years and years ago: Sabrina Aisenberg, and that story is still unsolved).

Gods know I'm an irresponsible, trusting parent. Hell, among others, my daughter had a babysitter with a blue mohawk named Ricky Fuckhead, not to mention the evil college age friends of mine who would borrow her, age 3, as, they said, the most amazing chick magnet ever - better than a puppy. And my kids have been in and out of bars and taverns and poolhalls all their lives with me and it hasn't hurt them one bit.

That said, I would never a) drug my children or b) leave them alone in a hotel room if they were under the age of 5. I did, once, leave my son alone in a hotel room when he was 7 or 8 for a couple hours while I was downstairs in the bar. I checked on him every half hour or so & made sure he knew how to call the bar from the room. They had Nintendo in the room which we didn't have at home; he actually was mad at me when I came back upstairs. I would never have left him with younger kids; I would never, again, have left him if he was that little and frankly, I cannot understand it and never have understood that about this case. Especially if you can afford a sitter - hell, I would have left my little angels with a sitter any time one was offered if I ever could have found one! I think. Maybe not. I was pretty mother bear about my kids when they were infants and toddlers

I started letting my kids stay home alone at about age 11 or 12 - the age when I started babysitting, which in retrospect kind of scares me. I remember being left with the neighbors' kids, who were 4, 2 and 3 months until about 2 in the morning once: I was maybe 13. That now strikes me as insane.

Oh, and we've always had a large dog. Toby, who I got when I was pregnant with my son, would never leave my kids alone for a moment whereever we went, which is one of the reasons I felt totally comfortable camping with preschoolers - no way he would let them wander off for a moment. OTOH, there was that time I came downstairs early one morning and found my 11 month old son sitting on top of the refrigerator. . . he could climb out of the crib at 8 months, before he could walk.

The robot nanny made my child eat a frozen hot pocket. :(

Parenting standards have changed a lot in the last 30 years, and not, I think, always for the better. It may be just old age on my part, but I find people now tend to raise stupid and irresponsible children, compared to times past, when kids were often left in each other's charges. Kids need to feel responsible for themselves, if they're going to become truly responsible adults, and while a 5 year old shouldn't be expected to have much in the way of memory, judgement, or responsibility for herself or others, I don't think all that somehow comes along with the calendar being turned for a person's 18th or 21st birthday, either.

As the oldest kid in my birth family, I was responsible for my brother and sister, for hours at a time, from about the age of 8. But, equally, they were responsible for me, in the sense that they were expected to rat me out to my parents, if I did silly or dangerous things, or got overbearing. And they did, too! They loved to get me in dutch, and they'd make up songs to keep from forgetting any transgressions of mine, before they could tell our parents. "Paul did ya-ya! Paul did ya-ya!" if nothing else, repeatedly endlessly. I can still hear their shrill little kid voices, in my mind's ear, 50 years later...

The net result was that, together, we tended to be pretty conservative about what we did and didn't do. We didn't rough house. We didn't play in the kitchen. We didn't jump on the beds or furniture. We didn't leave the yard, even if it seemed like our friends were having fun down in the vacant lots. As we got older, the duration of periods we were left unattended grew, and we became allowed/responsible for fixing our own meals, and operating household appliances like the washer and dryer.

I could dial phone numbers, on rotary phones, by age 7. I could tell adults my address, phone number and where my Mom and Dad each worked, by then as well. So could my brother and sister, by the time they were 7, because we were drilled on it, until we could, especially when we moved (it was a game to be the first to remember new addresses and phone numbers, until we all left home). We could all tell time by age 8, too, and we knew what it meant when Mother said she'd be home in half an hour. We had family watchwords. We were expected to know some safety commands, like "down," by age 4. I wouldn't have a dog or child that didn't respond immediately to my "down" command, and a couple years ago, when my then 34 year old son was here for my father's funereal, I happened to make the "down" sign in his direction, and he grinned, and still took a knee. To his dying day, if my father made the "down" gesture at me, I took a knee and shut up, too.

Toddlers need supervision and protection, but I don't think that need be constant, if the child's habits are regular. Sleeping children mainly sleep, watched or not. The problem with mine was generally waking them up, not keeping them down. And I do think there is a perceptible difference in children raised early to be responsible for themselves, and ones never so trusted.

I also recognize that all this is changed in these present days, and that the modern view that humanity only survived to the present on sheer dumb luck is the only sane view to hold, and that all the laws passed in the last 20 years raising the bar for parenting should have been elements of the Bill of Rights, from 1789. I count myself lucky to have lived to see this day, I guess.

But I am left wondering, how old would Madeline McCann have needed to be, before her kidnapping would have not been the result of irresponsible behavior on her parent's part?

But I am left wondering, how old would Madeline McCann have needed to be, before her kidnapping would have not been the result of irresponsible behavior on her parent's part

That's a great question (that I do not know the answer to).

Look, by the time I was 12, my parents were trusting me to babysit my little sister for relatively short periods. By the time I was 13-14 and up I was babysitting (many) other people's kids (in the neighborhood).

Many, if not most, people these days would be aghast at letting such a young person babysit. But I never had a bad incident on my watch. The worst thing that happened was several threatening/obscene phone calls I got at the home of some kids I was babysitting in my neighborhood when I was 15. I called my parents, they came and brought us all over to our house, and the next day my dad had a really intense conversation with a certain person who lived in our neighborhood. I don't know the details, but it never happened again.

I don't think they were wrong for letting me take care of my sister when I was 12. They knew me, and they were never very far away and not ever almost immediately available. Times are different, cultures are different, whatever. Here in Greece, everyone takes care of their own kids and everyone else's kids - whoever comes into their radar, while in the U.S. if you even show much of an interest at all in someone else's kid you're liable to be branded a pedophile.

I'm not trying to insinuate anything or condemn anyone. But kids two years old and four years old, left alone, seems bizarre to me.

A large dog may be a good protection against intruders, but is not much help in a fire, especially if the door is locked. In looking around I also found that "hotel room accidents" are the most common cause of travel injury. One Canadian travel-safety site asserts that more than 100 children are admitted to ERs annually after pulling a television down on themselves, for instance.

Anyway - I'm not an overprotective sort. Though not a parent, I've spent a lot of time in loco parentis in residential education and camp settings. I also can assert (as I'm sure we all can) that my parents left me alone in my own room at home, left me and friends or siblings alone in our living rooms and bedrooms, and left me alone in unfamiliar rooms at family members' and friends' houses while visiting. So it's ridiculous to say that anyone normal watches their children 24/7, unless that person also sleeps and goes to the bathroom with them until they reach some magical age of self-governance. The key, to me, is risk assessment. Mike's example of the car is good; there is a risk to getting out of the car for the mail, but he minimizes the risk by de-powering the car and removing the keys. Can something still go wrong? Always - but adults responsible for children should identify risks and minimize them wherever possible.

In this case, the parents' risk assessment was pretty faulty. Leaving your kids alone in a room for 5 minutes while you go get a bucket of ice might be one thing, IF you've already removed the matches and checked that the TV is bolted in place and know that the water isn't scalding hot and that there isn't a balcony or that the balcony door is securely locked. But this family didn't take into account that 1) their room was on the ground floor, very easy access from outside; 2) there was no security filter at the hotel - you could walk right up to the guest houses without going through a lobby when someone might presumably see you or get a security camera picture of you; 3) that they left the apartment unlocked; 4) that they would be gone up to thirty minutes in between checks (not near enough with young kids)and 5) that they were on vacation and thus not in an environment that they knew much about from a law enforcement or safety point of view.

In short, I don't think the action of 'leaving kids alone in hotel room', in itself, was the thing that was so terribly wrong as their poor judgement in assessing and minimizing risk. They let their guard down too much.

I absolutely agree with paulsc and taz that children are generally less capable than they used to be of self-sufficiency. I ranged up to a mile radius through our neighborhood by the age of nine, usually with other kids out of sight of adults, and was looking after my brother as latchkey kids from the age of 12, and babysitting infants and toddlers at 14. But I still think no matter how responsibly you raise your kids, four is too young to be unsupervised in this way. 120 meters isn't really all that close, certainly a far cry from sitting in the backyard while a kid sleeps upstairs.

The key, to me, is risk assessment. Mike's example of the car is good; there is a risk to getting out of the car for the mail, but he minimizes the risk by de-powering the car and removing the keys. Can something still go wrong? Always - but adults responsible for children should identify risks and minimize them wherever possible.

Miko, once again, comes along and says things better than I am able. I don't want to come across as a crazy, over-protective parent type. I'm not. Quite the opposite, in fact. BUT. If there are little things I can do (take the keys out of the ignition, take my daughter into the store with me) to lessen the risk, then you're damn right I do them, because they're easy and if I didn't do them and something happened, my laziness would be the reason why and I could not live with myself.

I don't think what they did was a good idea, but equally I think 'negligent' is a bit strong. At that age and younger, I was left asleep in the unlocked house while my parents were out in the back garden, and it never did me any harm. (IANAP, though).

On the topic of possible sedation, Calpol doesn't have any sedative effects at all. Giving children Calpol might settle them down by distracting them from whatever merry hell they were raising, but, contrary to what lots of people think, of itself Calpol has no effect on sleep.

I can't myself imagine leaving an under-five (or, hell, under ten) child alone in a hotel room for more than a minute or two. Rationally, the safety and risk issues are the paramount ones, but that's not what I find most viscerally upsetting about the idea; rather, it's because I have a very clear mental image of how terrifying it would be to a small child to wake up in an unfamiliar room, and to not have a parent at hand, or anywhere near by or within earshot. This is projection, I'm sure, from my own childhood memories--I was an exceptionally fearful child, who took a long time to get comfortable in new places--but man, I can't imagine putting any child I cared about in that situation, let alone sitting and having a relaxed dinner while my child might be alone and frightened in a strange place.

I was never a perfect parent but we never left the kids alone in a hotel room. With two parents along what possible reason could there be to have both parents gone at the same time?

I think Miko has it right in saying that any given situation is a matter of risk assessment and I can't see how leaving very young children alone in a hotel room could ever be seen as an acceptable risk.

As well as a babysitting service, the resort where the McCanns were staying offers a creche attached to the restaurant where they were eating.
≡ Click to see image ≡

The McCanns did not take advantage of any of these facilities.

As the oldest kid in my birth family, I was responsible for my brother and sister, for hours at a time, from about the age of 8.

Me, too. And I kind of resent the hell out of my parents for it. Most adults would be overwhelmed trying to take care of a five-year-old, three-year-old and an infant. It was too much to ask of a third grader. And while it made me more cautious and independent, it also made me bossy and anxiety-ridden.

That being said, I'm far from a perfect parent and I understand that certain parenting decisions don't translate well in the telling. The fact that there was a "room listening" service available tells me that it must not have been that terribly uncommon for people staying at the resort to leave their kids. I wouldn't do it, though.

I did, however, a few months ago leave my cranky five-year-old and her sleeping infant brother in the car while I ran in to pick up a prescription. Car off. Parked right at the entrance, visible from inside the store. Doors locked. Instructions not to open the door or get out of the car under any circumstances short of fire. I came out a few short minutes later to find my daughter's nursery school classmate and her mother talking to her through the closed windows. I'm sure that incident made the gossip rounds.

To be honest, the layout of the resort where they were staying would have made a huge difference to me in terms of how I might have interpreted risk. Having not seen a picture or a plan of where the restaurant was in relation to the hotel room, it's difficult for me to judge.

I once left my son sitting with his toys on the front porch while I mowed the lawn. He was about 2 and a half. I got a patch a few square feet done before I found him, a minute later, standing at the bottom of the porch stairs with a gash over his eye that took four stitches to close. He knew how to navigate those stairs and did so on his own regularly-- but just this one time, he fell. I have other stories too, but all I can say is that I find it very hard to call judgement on the McCann's. And why should I? I feel compassion for them-- they will likely never recover from this. There, but for the grace of god, go I.

I just hope for their sake they find the body, as I believe there is little chance she is still alive.

jokeefe, here's a picture/map. The apartment was out of sight of the restaurant.

Again, really - I'm not asking if anyone ever made mistakes. Everyone does. Everyone. Many.

And I'm also not trying to say they were horrible parents, or anything like that. I was/am just truly curious how many people would leave kids that age on their own for a significant period of time. I realize that the way I'm asking may not leave it open much for people to say that they would/have, so it's probably a useless thing.

I did hear from sasshat that she was a kid who was left alone much more than most people would feel at all good about, so that's information. Several of you have said that you wouldn't ever do it, and that's information... But I suppose I still don't really have a clear picture of whether this is at all normal.

When all the first reporting first came out over this, it seemed like everyone was totally accepting it as a normal thing that tiny kids would be left alone like that, and I wondered if I was kind of nuts and entirely out of touch with what is supposed to be normal currently... and basically came to the conclusion, that, yeah, I must be.

But then the tide of public opinion unaccountably turned against them and people acted like they were bad parents, at the very least, for leaving their (really young) kids alone. And then I thought, well, maybe I'm not so crazy after all. Or am I? What changed? I really don't know.

Occasionally my wife and I have had disagreements about the circumstances in which it's ok to leave our 8 year old alone. He was probably 7 when we had our first discussion of this. I like to give him as much independence as possible, while she is more cautious.

That said, I would never consider leaving a child under 6 alone for more than a minute.

while it made me more cautious and independent, it also made me bossy and anxiety-ridden

Don't worry, jrossi. That's not from being asked to look after the sibs, that's just the natural birthright of the oldest child.

jokeefe, here's a picture/map. The apartment was out of sight of the restaurant.

Ah, okay. Thanks, Jan.

It looks to me as if the resort is the type of environment-- village-like, enclosed-- that could lead people to a certain sense of security. The restaurant is just across the swimming pool-- it would feel, from looking at the diagram, that the apartment was just within sight. If the children were sleeping soundly, and tended to be the kind of children who didn't wake too often, then I might feel safe too.

I very well might have judged that they would be fine, given the environment, and if I was checking on them every ten mintues, at least. Of course, that ten minutes, seeing that I might have been drinking wine with friends, and that I was on holiday and more relaxed because of this anyway, might turn into half an hour.

Bottom line: I would not intend to leave my children alone in a room while I traipsed off somewhere else. But I just might leave them in what I thought was a secure enough place, if I felt that the resort was in essence a little self-contained village, and that I was just a few steps away. I bet you that the McCanns aren't the first to do so, under those circumstances... and given how rare stranger abductions are, I myself could easily have judged that the worst thing that could happen under these cirumstances could be that the kids could wake up and cry. And, if at home the children slept in their own rooms and were used to waking up without parents around at least sometimes, I might not think that too terribly bad.

So I might very well have left my kid alone under these circumstances. I would never have left my child alone in a more intimidating environment, such as a high-rise hotel, or a hotel that was not a separate resort but was on a city street, but I bet you there are numbers of parents out there who are counting their blessings after having -- in that particular environment where they were lulled by feelings of safety-- done exactly the same.

I don't think it's at all common, taz. Age 7 or 8 and up, yes, then it's much more likely, but 3 kids and the oldest one is 4? No. No way. It's the ages and not the leaving the kids alone that bothers me the most. If she was older and you were only 120 yards away, then, sure. But 2 year old twins and a 4 year old? No. Much too young. Too young to even use the phone reliably. I don't know anyone who would leave children that small alone.

I agree with mgl, it's not common. Personally, I've never known a parent to leave their kids at this age. Unless you count my bipolar, alcoholic, extremely lost friend.

I don't think it's normal to leave kids this age alone at any time.

Maybe at the age of 9 or 10 I would be comfortable. My parents used to get adjoining rooms when we went on vacations at this age. I was around 12, my sister 10. We had our own rooms from then on, and we were theoretically alone.

Going off topic and away from the question again:

This is purely anecdotal of course, and I have my share of problems and insecurities, but I find that my wealthier friends that grew up with wealth are more relaxed in their parenting. I always thought it was strange that they let their kids roam in their Suburbans unrestrained. I thought it was strange that they would allow a fourteen year old to take care of their infant. Or, send their five year old away to week long overnight camps. It's like they thought nothing bad was ever going to happen to them, that they were above it all. Or probably that's how I judged them. Like I said, I tend to worry about things going badly more than the average bear. Maybe these friends are more confident in their parenting and were conducting a risk assessment as Miko stated. Maybe that's how they were brought up.

What changed? I really don't know.

When parents come on television, who've just lost a child, it's completely cruel to say, "You're terrible parents who should have expected something like this to happen."

As time passes the public, I guess, gets tired of them and starts to treat them rather callously.

I think, at this point, there's a general opinion that the McCanns may have been involved somehow. This probably causes more finger-pointing, too.

that's just the natural birthright of the oldest child.
*sigh* 'Tis true.

I agree with MGL. I don't know anyone who would be willing to put a four year old in charge of two year olds. You can't take your eye off a two year old. That's the Age Of Much Danger. They've got grown-up mobility, but still have baby minds. And they're stubborn and near impossible to control.

On re-read of my post: "opinion" is too strong a word. "suspicion" is probably a better one.

LoriFLA, I definitely know what you're talking about, but I don't think it's attributable only to thinking nothing will ever happen. At least in my experience, it's that the very wealthy parents I've known were oddly distant from their own children. They just didn't take as much direct hand in raising, disciplining, or setting parameters for their kids as middle-class folk did.

I think this is partially because so much of the child care of the wealthy is outsourced, to nannies, teachers, and sitters. The parents aren't used to being the central examples, the parameter-setters, or having total oversight.

Growing up as I did (lower-middle class), even when I babysat, once the parents arrived back home I knew my authority and primary role immediately defaulted to theirs. Mom was home, babysitter now useless. So I was taken aback when, in my early 20s, I did some babysitting for an extremely wealthy family whose children went to the school in which I taught. The family had a full-time live-in housekeeper/nanny, but occasionally I'd pinch-hit on her day off - I liked the kids and needed extra money. The nanny usually bathed the kids, dressed them, put them to bed, took them to playdates, fed them and ate with them, etc.

One evening, the mom came home while I was reading quietly with her daughter. She smiled at us as she entered, but breezed onward to her desk and started to make a phone call. The daughter, who had been eagerly awaiting mom's arrival, went into full meltdown, while the mom continued dialing the phone. Then the mom kind of rotated her daughter by the shoulder, gave her a little push toward me, rolled her eyes and mouthed "do something!".

Whoa.

That's one incident that remains in my mind. They weren't always like that, but they weren't like parents I was familiar with. That strange detachment is something I've observed several times in the very rich. They seem to enjoy the idea of being 'a family,' cuddling and having family rituals, but they are not that involved with one another's care, maintenance, and daily routines. Parenting is a bit more of an abstract proposition - with the right staff support and correctly chosen services and institutions, it sort of happens, just like the house getting clean and the mail getting taken in and the lawn getting mowed sort of happens. They don't see to the details.

Even if you never left your kids alone, I bet there's a whole load of other stuff that in retrospect you look back and cringe at. Stuff that most "right-minded" parents would consider dangerous and stupid and which in all probability you do now too. Come on man. 'fess up.
Oh, of course. I still do things that a lot of people would think are irresponsible - I often take my kids (and any of the up to 6-8 or so who hang around our place) for rides in the trailer behind the car, both on our property and along the (quiet cul-de-sac) street. There are certain rules that the kids have to follow during this (sit down, hang on etc) and there is some risk involved for sure, but I refuse to let my kids grow up to be these coddled beings that have never experienced a moment of danger or thrill in their lives. I drive very carefully and slowly, constantly keep watch in the rear-view mirror etc, but I'm sure many people would be horrified by me doing this.

We sometimes leave our kids in the playground at Bunnings (hardware store) for up to 5 minutes or so, but only if the eldest (of the three that still live at home, anyway) is with them - I'm not sure why, but we are comfortable leaving them if the 9 year-old is there but not if only the 7 year-old and the 4 year-old are. I have some level of comfort where there are constantly other parents coming and going and our kids are well-drilled in "stranger danger" - we make them repeat the rules every time we leave them there before we go and don't leave them too long.

my kids have been in and out of bars and taverns and poolhalls all their lives with me and it hasn't hurt them one bit.
When I used to travel around to boat race meetings regularly, my eldest daughter used to come out with me to dinners etc (as did everyone's kids, because there are no babysitting facilities that you would trust in strange towns). She spent many a night sleeping for a few hours in a quiet spot on the floor with a bunch of other kids while the parents enjoyed themselves. But the kids as a whole were being watched at any given time by any number of adults because everyone looked out of everyone's kids. The same applied at race meetings - kids would be running around the pits and everyone was aware they were there, so acted accordingly and watched out for all kids, not just their own. Actions like that would bring cries of outrage today, but the kids were probably just as safe as if they were tucked up in their beds at home with mum, dad and the family Doberman watching them. The loss of community we have experienced over the past 15-20 years has made the task of parenting much harder, because we are not "allowed" to trust anyone else to watch out for our kids any more.

We've covered this ground a few times before and it seems that most agree that kids these days are too protected from life. No doubt there is a continuum between neglect and total protection of kids and we are all at different places on that continuum. I'm not sure that we have the right to criticise any parent who makes a mistake. All parents do things that could conceivably lead to injury or death of their child at some time.


I don't judge the McCanns for what they did, I just say that it's not something I would be comfortable doing.

This story is at the top of the news again today because a blurry, shitty-looking snapshot was taken in Morocco.