2 year old daughter slips from mothers grip

by freedom96 34 Replies latest jw friends

  • frenchbabyface


    that reminds me that when Tony was about 2 weeks (didn't let me sleep all that time) also I didn't want to sleep with him in my bed because of the story in the bible that said the woman slep on her baby and he died (Salomon case) ... I was so tired that I thought it could happen ... So each time I got him asleep I was putting him back in his bed and each time he was waking up after a minute or 2 crying if not yielling ... for hours as usual took him back trying to no fall asleep myself and put him back to bed ... But it was a neveranding try again and again and again ... I got nervous VERY ... I'm just lucky my baby had a very, very, very STRONG NECK (a few hours after he was born he could hold his BIG head himself and on a long time ... quiet rare as the nurse told me ... that's 1/3 of a baby weight ... well we all have strong necks comes from my mother's familly)

    I've shack him in a way that "IF" his neck wasn't THAT strong it would have break his neck and detached his brain off to death - cause I was olding him under his arms while shaking ... NEW MOTHERS TAKE CARE, rather let him crying till he can't no more - that's what I did after that ... no more troubles)

    I don't like to remember that story, and for the love I have for my babyboy and the position I was in, the only alternative for me would have been to kill myself ... (or it would have drive me crazy anyway !!!) ... I feel lucky !

    I hope she won't ... she have other kids !

  • jwbot

    As sad as her loss is, I see it as neglect. She should be charged for that. Murder? No way, murder implies an intent to kill, she certainly did not intend to kill her baby (from what I have read).

  • DazedAndConfused

    I feel bad for the loss this woman has but I believe she should be charged with the death of her child. More than that I feel sorry for the child who was lost and others also effected by this tragedy.

    Here where I live we have a law specifically dealing with going around barriers set up to stop motorists from going into flooded areas. It is called the "Stupid Motorist law." This woman made the decision to go around this barrier fully knowing that it was there for a reason. She was stupid enough to make her own decision apparently thinking she knew more than the experts who put up the barrier. Here you are responsible for any adverse consequences that occur from this action. You are responsible for property damage, harm done to others, the cost of rescue and then you get fined or jailed (as in cases that involved a death).

    I compare this with a person who makes a decision to drink and then drive. Then went on to break the law further and get a ticket or worse... by bringing harm to others. This person in their "saner" moments chose this action. I have heard of many cases where the defense in a jury has tried to say this person was not responsible for their action because they were impaired. I say they ARE responsible because they were not impaired when they chose the action they took.

  • Balsam

    I think it sounds worthy of investigation. To see what kind of attitude the Mother had in endangering her children in that way. It was stupid not follow the directions that one was not to enter the area. She will likely get of with little punishment and hopefully learn a valuable lesson. Her attitude will be what the detectives will be looking at.


  • Eric

    So what about her two other older children! She endangered them as well, didn't she?

    Whatever else this woman suffers from her own internal aches over this, she ought to have to pay the financial costs of her rescue and her drivers licence must be revoked.

    I'm sick and tired of people who think that traffic controls are for everybody else.


Share this