Are some mothers really so stupid?

Mojisola

pukkamum wrote: »

But if said strangers were so concerned about baby's welfare that they would publicly lambast her, could they not have been concerned enough to help her?

I would go out of my way to help someone in need. In this case, I don't think she needed any help. There was nothing stopping her staying downstairs with the baby.

Aimless

I'd say there's more to the Katy Perry mum story than we're seeing. She says he's depressed because he's missing other children, and will have to go down a year because of the break, but has turned down two school places as 'too far' to go? I used to walk half an hour across the fields with my son when I decided the local school was not good for him. My thought is, is she hoping the publicity will get him a free pass into what she sees as a 'good' school?

shellsuit

pukkamum, aren't you missing the point a little?

The children are the mother's responsibility. Not the responsibility of the other passengers.

If the Mum was fine with leaving her child downstairs where everyone could see what she was doing, what on earth could she do when people aren't there?!

It speaks volumes that she was totally oblivious of the concern she was causing, surely anyone with half a brain would sit with their small baby and not leave it out of sight.


I saw the Katy Perry Mum thing and think if she doesn't want her boy to get bullied, she needs to put her norks away and stop splashing themselves all over the rags. How embarrassing!

Georgiegirl256

pukkamum wrote: »

Men who were not strangers but known to the victims as are most perpetrators of crimes against children.

True, but I still wouldn't like to risk it, would you?

Georgiegirl256

Janepig wrote: »

Far and away the vast majority. I can think of many cases over the years of abuse/murder/abduction and I struggle to think of more than one or two where the victim didn't know their attacker.

Jx

The boys who abducted and killed Jamie Bulger, the person who abducted Madelline McGann to name but 3. I'm sure there are many more too.

coolcait

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

The boys who abducted and killed Jamie Bulger, the person who abducted Madelline McGann to name but 3. I'm sure there are many more too.

BiB is a case which remains unsolved. So not the best choice to illustrate the point you are making.

The first risk which came into my mind when I read the OP was the risk that the pram might topple over if there was no one there to keep it upright.

Especially if it was festooned with bags full of shopping - as so many of them often are.

Maybe it's because I've seen too many prams and buggies nearly come a cropper on buses.

Abduction is a risk. But other, more mundane, risks are much more likely to happen if the child is left unattended - and could lead to the child being injured, possibly seriously. That's the main reason for not leaving children alone, IMO.

Which sort of brings us full circle as far as your post is concerned.

Georgiegirl256

coolcait wrote: »

BiB is a case which remains unsolved. So not the best choice to illustrate the point you are making.

The first risk which came into my mind when I read the OP was the risk that the pram might topple over if there was no one there to keep it upright.

Especially if it was festooned with bags full of shopping - as so many of them often are.

Maybe it's because I've seen too many prams and buggies nearly come a cropper on buses.

Abduction is a risk. But other, more mundane, risks are much more likely to happen if the child is left unattended - and could lead to the child being injured, possibly seriously. That's the main reason for not leaving children alone, IMO.

Which sort of brings us full circle as far as your post is concerned.

It may remain unsolved, but the fact remains, she was abducted after being left unattended by her parents.

Sarah Payne is another one. Yes, a lot of crimes are committed by people known to the victim....but a lot of them aren't.

tayforth

I'm horrified by this story! :eek: How on earth could any mother go upstairs on a busy London bus and leave her baby in a pram on the bottom deck?????

HOW??????

The child could have been abducted.

To say nothing of the other risks that fellow posters have pointed out.

fabforty wrote: »

Or somebody could have watched the mother go upstairs, wait a while until other passengers who had seen her get on had also got off the bus and then walked off with the baby. It happened once with a passengers luggage. He left his suitcase downstairs and when he came back down later it was missing. I saw the man who took it, but I had just got on the bus and had no idea that it didn't belong to him.

Exactly.

Unbelievable that she got off the bus like a sulky adolescent as well.

As for the other children whining to get up the stairs, she is their bl00dy MOTHER. She should tell them NO. She is responsibility for their safety, first and foremost.

She probably feeds them all sorts of carp as well and bleats, "I've tried to get them to eat healthily, but they'll only eat chips."

Yes, because young children get to make all the decisions. You're a cool mum who's their friend, not a boring mum with stuffy rules and discipline and whatnot. Yawn.

Words fail me.

Lou67

tesuhoha wrote: »

I'm not talking about her changing the way she dresses. I'm talking about her getting her photo plastered all over the local paper. In fact, its even worse, its the Daily Mail. It is no ones business how she dresses but she has made it our business by drawing our attention to it in a newspaper. By posing in a top like that its not the child who is getting the attention but her. This might not have been so bad but he's in the photo as well. This could have far reaching effects for him in his future school and in public.

I must admit, that girl looks nothing like Katy Perry and I can't believe she gets work as her lookalike! She is just after the publicity, and she looks gross on that picture. I actually feel sorry for her son, and seriously question her parenting skills. She is a much worse mother than the one in the original post. Anybody that sells their tawdry little tale to the press is pondscum IMO...

coolcait

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

It may remain unsolved, but the[STRIKE] fact [/STRIKE] prevailing theory remains, she was abducted after being left unattended by her parents.

Sarah Payne is another one. Yes, a lot of crimes are committed by people known to the victim....but a lot of them aren't.

Prevailing theories may well be correct. We can't really call them 'fact' until a trial has been held, and a verdict delivered.

It is a fact that the parents have made statements acknowledging BiB.

There have definitely been instances where a child has been abducted by someone they did not know at all. Or who was unknown to the child's family.

Nevertheless, it is much more common that the abductor is known to the child/the child's family. Or that the abductor is a member of the child's family.

There is a risk that a stranger could abduct an unattended baby from a bus. However, it's a fairly low risk compared to the other risks.

It's still a phenomenally stupid and irresponsible thing to do.

And it does raise the question - as others have pointed out - 'if she see nothing wrong with leaving her baby unattended in that situation, what else is she doing with/to the baby when there are no witnesses?'