[phamilyman]

Originally Posted by noopster

Others have replied quite convincingly so let me not belabour the point. But I would urge you to reconsider. Simple rule of thumb is: Do not leave a child under 6 unattended for any duration. It may vary depending on the child in question (some kids are more/less mature than others) but in case of infants and toddlers, this should be non-negotiable.
True it is a personal choice but one that you are assuming on behalf of the child. As such you are responsible- legally and morally- for any consequences of the action. Even if it is a "low probability event", I'd be very very circumspect before doing this, much less advocate it to others.

Aside from the strong emotion, I did not find a single post convincing - every single post was like what if XYZ happens, without REALLY comparing both risks. Everyone reads and responds in line with their individual beliefs. I have had my set of experiences, one of which I wrote about. Quite conveniently - that aspect was not responded to, by anyone, including you That convinced me!

As a responsible parent, I weigh both pros and cons in my context. I am conscious of when I leave my kid in the car and when I don't. To each their own, I say

I will now go back onto silent mode on this thread and not question the majority view!

[Technocrat]

I am pretty paranoid about not leaving my son alone in car, not even in my car parking.

If he is sleep on my way to an errand, i either wake him up (he can sleep anytime he wants later ) or I skip that task & do it later.

The only time I have left the car running with a/c is when my wife is also in the car with him.

To each his own but I wont play the probability game for this situation.

[Neil Roy]

Originally Posted by phamilyman

GTO,

- leaving kids for extended durations is a bad idea. Short 3-4 mins is not. I'm not convinced yet. Sorry.

I too am guilty of leaving my son unattended for 2-3 mins for the sake of convenience/time saving etc, so my post is hopefully not preachy, preachy here .Leaving kids alone anywhere(not just in a car) is not a safe practice, even for small amounts of time.
The day of my enlightenment came after reading this
http://www.mumbaimirror.com/mumbai/o...w/16221807.cms
Even though it is a totally different scenario, and cannot be compared to leaving your child alone in a controlled environment, the very thought of two boys struggling and panicking and gushing blood through their nose was enough of a deterrent for me.It was then that I realised that I had a choice and by leaving my son alone in the car, I am choosing convenience over safety, no matter how small the risk.
Mind you, we are discussing safe practices here for not just ourselves but for the future. The law of probabilities or hypothetical situations apart, safe practices are meant to be followed in letter and spirit. We can argue all we want, but there must be a reason why they are called SAFE practices, right? The closest analogy I think of, is jumping signals, right or wrong.... Some do it, some dont, but regardless of personal opinion, jumping signals is wrong.

[phamilyman]

Originally Posted by Neil Roy

I too am guilty of leaving my son unattended for 2-3 mins for the sake of convenience/time saving etc, so my post is hopefully not preachy, preachy here .
Over time however, I realised that leaving kids alone anywhere(not just in a car) is not a safe practice, even for small amounts of time.
The day of my enlightenment came after reading this
http://www.mumbaimirror.com/mumbai/o...w/16221807.cms
Even though it is a totally different scenario, and cannot be compared to leaving your child alone in a controlled environment, the very thought of two boys struggling and panicking and gushing blood through their nose was enough of a deterrent for me.
It was then that I realised that I had a choice and by leaving my son alone in the car, I am choosing convenience over safety, no matter how small the risk.
Mind you, we are discussing safe practices here for not just ourselves but for the future. The law of probabilities or hypothetical situations apart, safe practices are meant to be followed in letter and spirit. We can argue all we want, but there must be a reason why they are called SAFE practices, right? The closest analogy I think of, is jumping signals, right or wrong.... Some do it, some dont, but regardless of personal opinion, jumping signals is wrong.

Sorry. That is grossly incorrect. What I outlined is nowhere near the same as jumping signals.

Like today - while dropping my son to school, he had a cough and the syrup was finished at home. So I parked the car properly outside a chemist (yes at the door step, <1 feet, not blocking traffic, out of the way etc), set hazard lights on, killed the engine, opened the windows (driver/navigator) one inch, then went, bought the medicine, came back and then drove off. Total time was <2 min. This cannot be compared to the badlapur/other incidents.

Ditto for buying paneer at a milk depot on the way back home last week. (no there were no queues) The car is never practically out of sight - I am within 5-15meters of the car.

But if it is like any longer than 2-4 mins, say to the supermarket to pick up multiple things - sir comes along every single time, and in fact, first he buys his favorite juice, before I can get down to shopping.

There is a distinction, a mindful approach, and a clear method. What I am saying is a practical shortcut, thoughtfully applied, far removed from the example in the video. What you're saying is valid for the video, NOT me. Sorry.

Emotional appeals repeated over and over by a multitude don't become any more fact. Sorry.

PS: Again, you too have selectively quoted out the actual incident I narrated. What are your thoughts on that? I chose safety and instead almost became a statistic of the gurgaon traffic. Mind you - I would've been in agreement with the majority if this were USA. In India, sorry.

[rnidumolu]

Guys, thanks a lot for all your suggestions. They are very much valid and I have not thought through them in this detail. I was wrong and would never leave my kid in the car alone at whatever the circumstance is.

Thanks,

[Neil Roy]

Originally Posted by phamilyman

....... None of what you ascribe has happened to me, or even come close. What did happen when my son was ~15 months old was the exact reverse. I had to do a ~5 min errand of picking up door mats from the market. This was old gurgaon, gurudwara road around noon on a saturday. I was crossing the road, son in arm, door mat in the other (after waiting patiently for traffic to clear) - when one biker that was coming from the wrong side came very close to us suddenly and I stopped. At the same time, an alto that was taking a U turn moved to avoid him and banged into me at a slow speed. I lost my balance enough that my son fell down onto the road - I only had enough presence of mind to try and break his fall by landing on my elbows but my son hit the ground almost flat but still impacted the head first. It was sheer luck that there was no third runaway vehicle.

Originally Posted by phamilyman

Sorry. That is grossly incorrect. What I outlined is nowhere near the same as jumping signals.

Emotional appeals repeated over and over by a multitude don't become any more fact. Sorry.

PS: Again, you too have selectively quoted out the actual incident I narrated. What are your thoughts on that? I chose safety and instead almost became a statistic of the gurgaon traffic. Mind you - I would've been in agreement with the majority if this were USA. In India, sorry.

Hi,
We can debate all we want but we should never argue because all of us here are responsible parents and our children's safety is our primary objective.That's the principle I live by.
I have read your post and empathise with the gurgaon incident in its legal context and especially on the emotional context when you know that there is only so much that you can do to protect your child and still come short despite your best efforts .Only in India do you suffer whether you follow rules or not.Hence my analogy to jumping signals and their legality and their practical nuisance value. I will rather break the law and jump signal at 4 am on the saidapet signal than follow the rule and be rear ended by speed maniac dump trucks doing their sorties for whom red is just a color. The fact is, it is legally wrong but I do it rather than be a statistic.
However, the debate here is whether it is morally right to leave your child unattended in a car, regardless of how small the risk. My contention is not just on suffocation alone, but a whole lot of factors like handbrake release, gear release etc. Unless we go around carrying boulders and spend time taking anti-climb precautions, we cannot guarantee that the car will not ascend/descend on its own. And dont get me started on what kids do to buttons and knobs when left alone
To summarise, Iam not trying to join the herd and apply emotional pressure as you perceive it, but rather explain my views on why I will not leave my child alone unattended in a car. I just hope that my logic is useful to whoever reads this thread before taking up his informed decision.
If I came across as being selective in interpreting your post, Iam really sorry. That was not my intent.

[lone_driver]

A recent incident from Bhopal .

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/c...w/37841840.cms


BHOPAL: In a tragic incident, a two-and-half-year-old kid, Atishay Jain, was found dead in a car outside his father's shop in New Market on Friday afternoon. It is believed that kid died of suffocation after getting locked in the car for around two hours. Matter is under investigation, police said.

Atishay's family informed the kid opened car's lock after picking up keys from the shop and got inside it. Later they found him unconscious in the car and rushed him to a hospital where doctors declared him dead.

Meanwhile a police officer told TOI, "It appears the kid accompanied his parents to a temple but later slept in the car while they returned and his parents got down and got busy with work. By the time his parents realized the infant was missing, it was too late. Kid probably died of suffocation inside the car."

Surprisingly, information about the incident was passed on to police by media as the family cremated the kid without informing police or getting an autopsy done. Police said statement of grieved family would throw some light in the case.

Kid, Atishay, son of Deepak, resided in New Market and his parents owned a shop named, Navrang Saree House located at the front row of market. They stay on the first floor of the shop.

Infant's grandfather, Kamal Jain told that his son and daughter-in-law returned from temple and got busy with their routine jobs. Meanwhile, Atishay picked up car keys kept on shop's counter and got inside, without being noticed by anyone. After failing to find him, family started looking for him and found him in the car, he said, adding the boy was taken out using duplicate keys.

Police officials said it has been confirmed that the kid had accompanied his parents to temple as he was seen playing there. However, he was left in the car after they returned.

Kid's body would now be exhumed for autopsy to ascertain exact causes that led to his death, police said, adding that they would also search inside Maruti Dzire car in which the incident took place.

Atishay was the younger child and his parents were planning to send him to a play school later this week. Police officials are puzzled over family's statement pointing if the kid got inside the car by opening central lock, he could have also come out. Secondly, if he opened the car and got inside, its original keys should be in the car.

Meanwhile, family members of the kid misbehaved with media persons gathered on the spot. When police asked the family why they did not report the matter to police, they told police they could not think of legal issues and in a state of shock got engaged in consoling grieved parents and later cremated body.

In the evening, a complaint was lodged at the TT Nagar police station where officials said they would initiate a probe and take all necessary action in the case.

Shops adjoining Navrang Saree were closed on Friday. Grieved family's relatives also have shops in New Market.

[luvDriving]

As an extension to the current discussion topic, I find it worthy to mention that any child in this age range (0-2/3) should be constantly monitored be it at home or in a car or anywhere else. Even a moment's distraction could lead to an unwanted situation.

This situation may be something minor or it may be something major. Nevertheless it is unwanted and considering this is a child we are discussing about, I would want to err majorly on the side of caution.

Hence even if you know your child, your car, your surroundings you never know what can amuse or interest the curiosity of a child or in other circumstances the child is not capable of recognizing the dangers of fiddling with something inside the car. A simple loose nut can ruin your experience.

So thats my take and being the father of a very active daughter aged 2 years, my family and I abide by it everyday.

[bblost]

Found this video on upworthy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuCtadNRAeA

[tifosikrishna]

Originally Posted by phamilyman

Sorry. That is grossly incorrect. What I outlined is nowhere near the same as jumping signals.

Can this whole argument be paraphrased to "can I ride my bike to a nearby shop without a helmet?" Or can I Jump a signal when I am 100% sure that there's no traffic"?

From a case to case basis it could be perfectly right, but a general rule cannot allow such individual discretion. It is better rules are followed strictly without applying our logic, intelligence.

[phamilyman]

Originally Posted by tifosikrishna

Can this whole argument be paraphrased to "can I ride my bike to a nearby shop without a helmet?" Or can I Jump a signal when I am 100% sure that there's no traffic"?

From a case to case basis it could be perfectly right, but a general rule cannot allow such individual discretion. It is better rules are followed strictly without applying our logic, intelligence.

Disagree. Nice examples but I disagree with the very choice of the example.

Put it this way - this is NOT a rule. If it was a rule, I'd say, let's follow it irrespective of how stupid and inconvenient it is.

This is all about shades of gray. Everyone agrees leaving kids (or anyone else) unattended for hours in a closed car is bad. Using that to say leaving kids for 2 mins with the windows slightly down is bad, is a logical stretch, however strong the emotional appeal will be.

Again, we can only agree to disagree on this one!

[tifosikrishna]

Originally Posted by phamilyman

Disagree. Nice examples but I disagree with the very choice of the example.

Put it this way - this is NOT a rule. If it was a rule, I'd say, let's follow it irrespective of how stupid and inconvenient it is.

I see the argument here in this thread as those who look at it as a 'rule' on one side and you on the other.

And by saying that you will adhere if it is a 'rule',

1.you follow it for sake of following the rule (though it doesn't make sense to you) or
2. you respect it because you think there must be a valid reason for it to exist.

If it is latter, you may have to reconsider your decision as I just now read that the rule is imposed in 18 states in US.

[phamilyman]

Originally Posted by tifosikrishna

I see the argument here in this thread as those who look at it as a 'rule' on one side and you on the other.

And by saying that you will adhere if it is a 'rule',

1.you follow it for sake of following the rule (though it doesn't make sense to you) or
2. you respect it because you think there must be a valid reason for it to exist.

If it is latter, you may have to reconsider your decision as I just now read that the rule is imposed in 18 states in US.

We don't follow every single law enacted anywhere around the world, do we? Same for this "rule". Neither do I accept the logic behind the "rule". Since its not a rule in India thus far I'll interpret it sensibly - the way I've been doing it all this while!

PS: Following a rule doesn't mean one accepts the reason. It just means a bunch of law makers reached consensus, in many cases, without much logic or understanding.
PPS: Since we're taking oblique references - here's one from my side!
Would most of us eat exactly as per the FDA diet pyramid even if we see our bodies bloat up and gain weight? I've chosen not to. Ditto on this rule. As long as its open to interpretation in Chennai, I'll do the thing that fits most with my experience, not something twenty other folks advise, even if its completely at odds with my practical experience! Mind you - I'm not open to changing my beliefs if I see practical experience to the contrary. I've seen zilch thus far outside of emotional appeals!

[ampere]

A related news. 4 kids die of suffocation.

http://www.ndtv.com/article/south/fo...-lateststories

[vb-saan]

Safety video: Dubai police rescuing a child from a locked car:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yG4uksmNjT4