How far is too far to be from a toddler?

The Corinthian

metrovelvet wrote:

Does anyone know what the motives are for these abductors? What do they do with the children?

Depends upon who the abductor is and the age of the child. In many cases the motivation is sexual, a lone male or couple looking to sexually abuse or rape the child. In such cases the child will most likely end up dead shortly thereafter, or in a minority of cases may even find themselves imprisoned, for years on end.

Otherwise the motivation tends to be financial. Ransoms are one possibility, however so are sale (illegal adoptions) or for use in pornography (though I think this is quite rare). The third and possibly most disquieting motivation is body sharking. There's been a thriving World market in human organs since the early nineties, and demand for compatible child organs exists just as it does for adults.

When I was seven I was walking, alone, from school when a car pulled up and a woman (in the passenger seat, I think a man was driving) offered me a toffee to get in. I refused, partially as I don't like toffee much, but mainly because I had grown up in Rome which has always had problems with child abductions, especially with parts of the gypsy community who are known to trade in it - so I knew exactly what was going on. I politely declined and they drove off. My mother was naturally horrified, and relieved, when I told her.

IMHO, Kid's can take care of themselves (more correctly be aware of the dangers) once they reach a certain age age and have been educated, and until then they should be watched closely and be taught to trust nothing and no one outside of family.

In the Madeleine McCann case though, the parents seemed to be taking reasonable care - they were only 100 or so metres away and were checking every twenty minutes or so. Ultimately unless you decide never to let them literally out of your sight and never sleep, there's a limit to what any parent can do, and even then that is no guarantee that a child will not be abducted from right underneath the parent's nose.

metrovelvet

Seven is vastly different from 3 years old. At three in a foreign country do you think she could have called 999 if something happened in the house or she choked on something? She may not even have been able to read or reach the door handle.

What I also find intriguing about this case is the media attention it gets. Do you have to be the white middle class daughter of professionals to scandalise a nation with your disappearance?

The Corinthian

metrovelvet wrote:

Seven is vastly different from 3 years old.

A fair point - discussing seven as an age is OT here as the tread is about toddlers.

What I also find intriguing about this case is the media attention it gets. Do you have to be the white middle class daughter of professionals to scandalise a nation with your disappearance?

I do think that it also raises the point that you simply cannot be too careful - more precisely, all the care in the World will not protect your child. The McCann's appear to have been reasonable in their care, for the distance they were from the child they could have almost been in their back garden and the same thing could have happened.

metrovelvet

^ That's interesting. Is the estrangement/alienation of the context, in that it is not familiar what draws our attention to it or is it too undigestible to think the same thing can happen at home so we dont pay much attention to it when it does happen "in our own backyards" because it's too indigestible?

I know when some blonde co ed goes missing in Aruba the american media goes bananas but people disappear every day of the week and no one cares when it's on home ground.

I also know that in Guiliani's NYC in 1997 a Danish woman on holiday was arrested for leaving a buggy with child outside of a restaurant while she was on the other side of the glass pane having lunch [restaurant probably didnt allow her in with buggy]. I think the formal charge was child endangerment. Zero tolerance - you know.

BaZmO*

metrovelvet wrote:

What I also find intriguing about this case is the media attention it gets. Do you have to be the white middle class daughter of professionals to scandalise a nation with your disappearance?

The Jamie Bolger case and the Holly and Jessica case had just as much coverage and their parents certainly weren't middle class.

I don't think class is the reason why stories like this get so much coverage. I think it's more to do with fact that it taps into the fear that most people have, a fear that something awful will happen to their children regardless of how unlikely it may be. And it sells papers, unfortunate but true.

Deliverance

metrovelvet wrote:

Seven is vastly different from 3 years old. At three in a foreign country do you think she could have called 999 if something happened in the house or she choked on something? She may not even have been able to read or reach the door handle.

Your totally correct on that point metro:
Choking hazards are everywhere and seem to just appear out of the blue, I watch my little one 24/7, as you do, and instinctively know when she is out of sight if something is not quite right by the sounds I'm tuned into.

A few days ago I knew something was wrong and quickstepped into the room she was in and straight away, calmly said 'ta ta' and put my hand under her mouth, she promptly spat out a plastic inch long cover of a bottle top perfect for choking, where it came from I really don't know as I constantly scan for objects like this.

On another point. I heard a shocking story lately where a little girl whoes mother lost sight of her for a moment in a supermarket turned around to see her gone, the supermarket was locked down and all exits were blocked very quickly due to the quick action of the market and the mom.

They found the little girl in a toilet with her hair cut and she was wearing a baseball cap, she looked like a little boy and the plan was to take her out as a boy in the panic and confusion as such.

These evil bastards are extremely devious and obviously live for abducting kids for whatever reason. Something needs to be done to warn all parents about how devious they are and the publicity around poor little Maddy will help towards this at least. At this stage I hate to say it but I have a feeling that it is not looking good.

metrovelvet

Statistically most of these accidents happen when BOTH parents are watching the child because one assumes the other is paying attention.

That's really frightening about the abductors!

RainyDay

Deliverance wrote:

On another point. I heard a shocking story lately where a little girl whoes mother lost sight of her for a moment in a supermarket turned around to see her gone, the supermarket was locked down and all exits were blocked very quickly due to the quick action of the market and the mom.

They found the little girl in a toilet with her hair cut and she was wearing a baseball cap, she looked like a little boy and the plan was to take her out as a boy in the panic and confusion as such.

I heard this story too, apparently about the Dundrum centre, with the added spicy detail that the abductors were Nigerian. I just don't believe it.

For one, if this had happened, I would expect it to be all over the broadcast & print media in huge detail. If any supermarket of significant size was 'locked down', many, many people would be aware of this, and you'd have mobile phone coverage on Youtube and TV3.

It really did seem like racist scaremongering to me.

simu

RainyDay wrote:

I heard this story too, apparently about the Dundrum centre, with the added spicy detail that the abductors were Nigerian. I just don't believe it.

For one, if this had happened, I would expect it to be all over the broadcast & print media in huge detail. If any supermarket of significant size was 'locked down', many, many people would be aware of this, and you'd have mobile phone coverage on Youtube and TV3.

It really did seem like racist scaremongering to me.

Ah but you're killing the drama.

A good parent is a fearful parent.

gonker

http://www.snopes.com/horrors/parental/kidnap.asp

metrovelvet

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6696497.stm

The McCanns are now getting to visit the Pope. Im sorry but these people are guilty themselves of child endangerment and they get rewarded with celebrity promises of rewarding people who find their child and papal visits?

They must have some PR machine behind them.

If you scroll down the page on that BBC article you can see the distance between the restaurant and the hotel room.

littlebug

I doubt the Mc Cann's feel that anything that is happening to them at the minute is any kind of reward. Not knowing where their child is, or whether she is alive or dead is about the worst punishment they could possibly get. If the celebrity/ pope connections help in any way towards getting her back then great. The plight/ fate of the child is the most important thing just now.. time enough for criticism if and when she is found alive. (IMO)

simu

metrovelvet wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6696497.stm

The McCanns are now getting to visit the Pope. Im sorry but these people are guilty themselves of child endangerment and they get rewarded with celebrity promises of rewarding people who find their child and papal visits?

Would you not lay off them? They made a bad judgement call but they're going through hell now and I don't think visiting the Pope is much of a consolation to them.

\m/_(>_<)_\m/

simu wrote:

Would you not lay off them? They made a bad judgement call but they're going through hell now and I don't think visiting the Pope is much of a consolation to them.

leaving your 3 kids in a ground floor apartment while you go out for dinner is not a judgment call, what it is is criminal...

simu

\m/_(>_<)_\m/ wrote:

leaving your 3 kids in a ground floor apartment while you go out for dinner is not a judgment call, what it is is criminal...

I wouldn't do it but it takes far worse for a child to be taken into care. Anyways, the moral outrage is pointless.

nesf

\m/_(>_<)_\m/ wrote:

leaving your 3 kids in a ground floor apartment while you go out for dinner is not a judgment call, what it is is criminal...

It's not criminal, it's a dumb thing to do and one of those "why would you do that?" situations, but it's not criminal.

metrovelvet

Where I come from it is criminal. They would have been arrested or the foster care would take them.

BaZmO*

metrovelvet wrote:

Where I come from it is criminal. They would have been arrested or the foster care would take them.

Where's that then? Michael McDowell Land?

metrovelvet

New York City.

Gyalist

Yep. I remember this story quite well. I was working in Manhattan at the time and remember the outrage expressed by my co-workers. I tried to explain that in the more family-centric Scandinavian societies that was acceptable behaviour but they were having none of it.

\m/_(>_<)_\m/

nesf wrote:

It's not criminal, it's a dumb thing to do and one of those "why would you do that?" situations, but it's not criminal.

are you sure...
well it should be.
you need a licence to drive a car, but ant idiot can be a parent

Jotter

Gyalist wrote:

Y I tried to explain that in the more family-centric Scandinavian societies that was acceptable behaviour but they were having none of it.

I can see why it was considered an overreaction but at the same time I wont leave my dog outside my local shop to nip in and get milk and i certainly wouldnt leave my baby. If a rest or shop wont accept buggys or are too full or whatever I just go somewhere else. Leaving a baby outside in NY, sure theres that many people there you could be sitting by the window looking at the buggy, turn around to get waiters attention, look back again and buggy gone.
Id rather have the police called on me then to be calling the police.

In saying that though I would have said it to the parents first rather than called police on them straight off.