mom leaves kids at McDonald's while having nails done

Jul 08, 2010 00:56

:blows dust off community: (dang, where is everyone? lol)

full story

for linkophobes )

Leave a comment

Comments 15

kayla_la July 8 2010, 07:59:11 UTC
Simply put, McDonald's is not a babysitting service.

She deserved what she got. Maybe it'll teach her to pay for a babysitter next time.

Reply


zimtkeks July 8 2010, 08:49:45 UTC
I think a 10 year old can spend 90 minutes alone at a playground or a bookstore or whatever. A 5 year old? Too young.
And they should be taught what to do in an emergency, e.g. accepting authority and giving their phone number to the police etc., before they are left unattended.
Furthermore, it's totally up to McDonald's (or every other place) to decide whether they allow for unattended children to be there or not. That mother could at least have asked if it's ok.

Reply


alopex July 8 2010, 10:11:14 UTC
If it was just the 10 year old and not the 5 year old, I might be more sympathetic. However, it's not fair on either the kids or the staff at Mc Donalds. What happens if the kids hurt themselves. Are the kids well behaved or did the staff have to put up with them misbehaving?

I'll admit that when I was 10 I was walking a Kilometer to school on my own with my little brother but at the time the village we lived in was rural and everyone knew each other and every other kid walked home from school :O

Personally I wouldn't leave a kid unattended anywhere. My mother would leave myself and my brother in the car while she went shopping but times are different now and there is no way I would leave my daughter alone in the car.

Reply


draiochta_faol July 8 2010, 12:10:04 UTC
In this day and age, with all the crazy people out there. I wouldn't leave a 10 year old or a 5 year old unattended for any length of time. The 10 year old I would give some leeway to, due to the age, but still. That was totally irresponsible in my opinion.

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

kayla_la July 8 2010, 18:53:00 UTC
That's a big part of why it sucks. What do you think would've happened if something had happened to those children? I bet she would've sued them, and might've won, too. The employees probably would have ended up fired because of the suit and there'd be a big media stink about how McDonald's lets kids get hurt/kidnapped/whatever.

At the very least, the employees would have felt obligated to keep an eye on the kids which would have affected the entirety of the store. All because of one woman.

There's no excuse, really.

Reply

sio July 9 2010, 07:06:46 UTC
so what about the other example i posed....such as older kids whose parents allow them to walk/bike themselves to [insert public place] alone? i see that a lot here where i live (well, presumably they have their parents' permission..no one knows for sure :P). are they to be treated the same way?

Reply

maniacalshen July 9 2010, 14:08:45 UTC
This argument is pretty area-dependent. When I was ten, I certainly wasn't allowed to go roaming around by myself anywhere. I couldn't leave the view of the house until later that year, when we moved to a safer neighborhood. And then I couldn't leave the 3-street neighborhood. And as a five-year-old? Forget about it.

But in a safer area, I'd say this: If a ten-year-old is allowed to go to the snowball stand and buy something, or run to the store, or to go eat at McDonald's - anything where they go and then leave shortly afterward - that's one thing. But being left in a Playplace for an extended period of time is treating the McDonald's like a babysitting service. There's so much more time for things to go wrong, and so much more guilt if something happens to the little one. Plus possible (unjust, but possible) legal liability. And again, for a five-year-old, forget about it. Kids that age should always be supervised when not in or around the home.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up