Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Forgetting a Child in a Car Is a Horrifying Mistake. Is It a Crime? (2009)

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 234 posts

Re: Forgetting a Child in a Car Is a Horrifying Mistake. Is It a Crime? (2009)

#171

Post by m_mueller »

cjbprime wrote: post #155
m_mueller wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For anyone worried about SIDS I'd suggest looking into [1][2]. The counterarguments summed up in [3] seem rather weak to me. If the claim is true that in 10 years no parent following Sprott's method have had a case of SIDS (which no-one seemed to follow up on, even though the study seems quite solid to me), then the counter would have to explain why one should wait instead of just adopting that method. It seems a sim…

Looks super quacky. US cot deaths have also massively declined, and the trajectory of the decline matches up with the uptake of back sleeping for infants. http://www.npr.org/2011/07/15/137859024/rethinking-sids-many...

1.) SIDS still occurs at a rate of around 0.5 in 1000 in the Western world [1]. To compare, the probability of death in a traffic related accident over an 80 year lifespan is 0.85 in 1000 in the US. So it's still far from negligible.

2.) Sprott has at least a hypothesis to explain the correlation between back sleeping and decline in SIDS. His skeptics on the other hand have no explanation for why there is no confirmed case of SIDS for wrapped mattresses, other than it being a statistical fluke. That may be the case, but why is no-one investigating?

3.) Compare the SIDS rate of Japan and Asian Americans to Europe / European Americans. Why has it always been lower? Genetic prevalence? Bedding culture? It seems simple enough to do much more statistical studies on this, but when searching for it there seems to be a very low depth of knowledge.

To put it differently, what you're saying is quite close to "hey, we've figured out traffic related deaths, and it's all solved with safety belts and air bags, case closed, QED". Calling something quacky because of the journal is nothing more than an ad hominem fallacy. If someone's research stands on its own then it doesn't matter where it's published, it could as well be Arxiv - if not, then it should be easy enough to disprove based on facts.

[1] https://www.ncemch.org/suid-sids/statistics/

Re: Forgetting a Child in a Car Is a Horrifying Mistake. Is It a Crime? (2009)

#172

Post by dis-sys »

rayiner wrote: post #31

This is a great way to analyze the purposes of the criminal justice system. Typically, there are three: punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation. Prosecuting someone who forgot their kid in the car can't have deterrent effect--to the extent the event was avoidable, the possibility of prosecution couldn't possibly match the deterrent effect created by the risk of harm to the child. Likewise, there is no rehabilitati…

You didn't offer anything concrete on why it doesn't have deterrent effect. Your entire argument seems to be based on the assumption that _all_ parents care about their children, sadly we all know this is not true.

Re: Forgetting a Child in a Car Is a Horrifying Mistake. Is It a Crime? (2009)

#173

Post by mcappleton »

0xbear wrote: post #116
mcappleton wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe it's better that some guilty go free if it means that the innocent are not wrongly punished. Wrongly punishing the innocent is terrible and causes so many psychological problems. That's why we have innocent until proven guilty

The key phrase here is "some", and not "all". I mean why is it even an argument that killing your own kid through negligence should be a crime? The perp may or may not be convicted, but they _must_ go through a trial for something like that, and the jury of their peers must decide. Anything else would cause a spike in "negligence". Because let's face it, there are a lot of people out there who have no business having…

It's a tough situation. The parents are already wracked with grief over their mistake. Anybody can forget. For something truly accidental it's not right to punish harshly. Obviously in the case of intentional neglect or intended murder punishment is appropriate.

Re: Forgetting a Child in a Car Is a Horrifying Mistake. Is It a Crime? (2009)

#174

Post by lend000 »

dheera wrote: post #164
u801e wrote: post #146

Since 1998, the number of children who died of heatstroke in vehicles has been around 30 to 50 a year [1]. Before that, the number was a bit lower (10 or less) [1]. Around that time, the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) mandate on new vehicles having passenger side airbags as standard equipment came into effect. To address the issue of children dying due to airbag deployments (which were designe…

We have keyless entry, lane departure warning, cruise control, and even autopilot. Can't we have a stupidly simple system that if a human is detected in the car and the temperature is over 37 degrees C: - 0. Call the car owner's phone or alert them through any communication app they use - 1. After 5 minutes, call the police Ether or both would save lives. It doesn't seem like a very difficult technical task to me.

I wouldn't trivialize the reliable detection of people, especially small children. I think we are just now getting at the point where that technology could be reliable, and from an automaker's perspective, it could be a similar level of investment as autopilot, and a much smaller benefit (more people would be saved by reliable autopilot, and it's also much more desirable to consumers). Even if they had such a technology, the automaker would certainly be afraid of the legal consequences of their system failing a real scenario, opening itself up for liability lawsuits and bureaucratic investigations.

Re: Forgetting a Child in a Car Is a Horrifying Mistake. Is It a Crime? (2009)

#175

Post by veidr »

veidr wrote: post #159
rrdharan wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many children were dying as a result of the airbag deployments before the recommendation I wonder?

EDIT: Oops, I didn't initially notice that the chart in the grandparent post actually lists both airbag and heat fatalities... --- Good question. As of 1996, it was only 21 total, according to the NY Times[1], but more than half of those were killed in the first 9 months of that year. In 1999, Car and Driver magazine reported a total of 99 child fatalities. So, low "first-few-google-hits" data quality aside, that see…

An update from my coffee break:

Here's an IIHS/HLDI refutation of the study by Mary Meyer and Tremika Finney of the University of Georgia, that I mentioned above: http://www.iihs.org/iihs/sr/statusreport/article/41/2/2

Re: Forgetting a Child in a Car Is a Horrifying Mistake. Is It a Crime? (2009)

#176

Post by derefr »

mysterypie wrote: post #153
Sleeep wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, Safe Haven laws are only for newborns. Nebraska had an accidental experiment by omitting an age limit on their Safe Haven law. Parents drove thousands of miles to abandon their older children until the loophole was closed. https://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/us/03omaha.html

Good article. The most relevant quote: "Mr. Landry, the state director of children and family services, said parents and guardians were mistaken if they thought they could walk away from their responsibilities. The courts might even order them to pay child support." Furthermore, Nebraska has since changed the law, as you already noted; they permit only babies up to 30 days old.

> The courts might order them to pay child support.

Now that's intriguing; it almost sounds like the state is willing to take possession of children in exchange for a monthly fee.

Re: Forgetting a Child in a Car Is a Horrifying Mistake. Is It a Crime? (2009)

#177

Post by turc1656 »

mcguire wrote: post #134
mikeash wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree about deterrence. There are a lot of shitty parents out there who fear prison more than they fear losing their child. There are even parents who want to kill their children. If it becomes common knowledge that you can get away with murdering your kid as long as you use this technique... I don't really want to think about that. People are also really bad about evaluating potential consequences. A person mig…

"There are a lot of shitty parents out there who fear prison more than they fear losing their child. There are even parents who want to kill their children. If it becomes common knowledge that you can get away with murdering your kid as long as you use this technique... I don't really want to think about that." I believe we're going to need a citation on that. What exactly does "a lot" mean? 1% of the population of p…

Based on the definition you provided, it seems fairly obvious to me based on how I interpret that definition. "acting in a particular manner" = leaving the child in the car, that is the act. "foreseeable outcome" = death. "reasonable care to avoid consequences" = anything that the parent could easily do which would prevent the foreseeable outcome. There are a few things parents can do, and could even combine them. And let's be honest, all are very, very simple. A quick look where you actually lean back and physically see inside the car seat to verify it's empty is enough. That literally takes 2 seconds and about as minimal of an effort as I can think of and it's 100% accurate in prevention, so long as you work it into your routine when exiting a vehicle. For example, I have a system of making sure I never forget any important item that I regularly carry with me anywhere (key, wallet, phone, etc.) The details aren't important and could be considered specific to me, maybe. But it works 100% of the time and I never forget to mentally check for it. I also have never forgotten/lost any of the items I check for in about 12-15 years (since I started using it). And make no mistake - I'm not doing this because I'm naturally organized. I do because I an not. I'm scatterbrained and forget things all the time. My system is designed to ensure that I don't forget anything critically important like, oh I dunno, my kid in a car in the blazing heat.

Same for the front/backovers. I've had my kid do both of these. The rule on my side is simple. The car doesn't move if I don't have eyes on my child. If I can't visually confirm my kid's location, I assume they are in one of these spots and the car stays in park and then I mildly panic until I can locate them again. Only then does the car move. How is any of this hard for people to make into a habit?

This is entirely avoidable in every single case, but it requires creating unbreakable habits for yourself.

Re: Forgetting a Child in a Car Is a Horrifying Mistake. Is It a Crime? (2009)

#179

Post by kurthr »

dheera wrote: post #164
u801e wrote: post #146

Since 1998, the number of children who died of heatstroke in vehicles has been around 30 to 50 a year [1]. Before that, the number was a bit lower (10 or less) [1]. Around that time, the NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) mandate on new vehicles having passenger side airbags as standard equipment came into effect. To address the issue of children dying due to airbag deployments (which were designe…

We have keyless entry, lane departure warning, cruise control, and even autopilot. Can't we have a stupidly simple system that if a human is detected in the car and the temperature is over 37 degrees C: - 0. Call the car owner's phone or alert them through any communication app they use - 1. After 5 minutes, call the police Ether or both would save lives. It doesn't seem like a very difficult technical task to me.

Agreed, a reasonably designed 2W 2.4GHz radar in your car can detect both breathing and heartbeat. It couldn't tell the difference between a large dog and baby, but maybe you should be dealing with it either way...

Now I can see the car manufacturers don't want the liability for the a monitor failing to go off (false negative) due to any malfunction, when the number of false positives will be much higher. Thermometers and radars do fail, but humans will become dependent on them, and blame them and the manufacturers for anything that goes happens.

Re: Forgetting a Child in a Car Is a Horrifying Mistake. Is It a Crime? (2009)

#180

Post by turc1656 »

As for the major question the articles raises, I think it's somewhat straightforward. There are a number of different legal types of negligence (criminal, gross, culpable, etc). I'm not a lawyer, but I believe these people should be charged with some type of negligence-related crime. Whether it's manslaughter or something else, I cannot say because I don't know enough. But to me, it's clear - these parents had a responsibility and they failed in a major way. Sure, it may have be unintentional, but it still happened. Drunk drivers don't intend to kill people. But I don't hear anyone coming to their defense. Everyone seems perfectly fine demonizing them and holding them to account for their negligent actions. Why should it be any different here? Hell, I might go so far as to argue it is worse here because statistically the odds are not all that likely that any one particular instance of drunk driving results in an accident or death. The odds are just increased. However, the odds are insanely high that if a parent makes this error that their child will die in each/any instance.

I do understand the desire to not prosecute because people feel they are already suffering and that it was not intentional and that these people aren't likely to ever make this mistake again. I get it. But like I said, it's an issue of a mistake so horrendously bad that someone died. They need to be charged. Let a jury decide on a case by case basis whether or not a person needs to be jailed for their actions. Also, let's consider the other side of this. What if by charging and jailing these individuals it actually helps them in the long run emotionally? What if these people feel that they are serving their time and paying their debt to society? What if that helps them feel like they can move on because society has deemed their punishment now satisfactory and complete? And wouldn't it make them less of a pariah in society because people would know they served their time and didn't just get off without punishment?

Lastly - I want to talk about that idiot juror Colin Rosse who said, "It may have been negligence, but it was an honest mistake." I'd really love to see if that sentiment held up if, for example, Colin Rosse's child was put in jail and was forgotten for 5 days and received no food or water (like what happened with Daniel Chong in 2012). I'm sure Rosse would be ok with everything because it was an honest error, right? And what if someone was daydreaming or just very tired while driving and ran their kid over and killed them? Rosse sees no issue with this, right? As long as there was no intent all is well, yeah? I'm sure that fool would be the first one on the news demanding legal action and that the person/people be held accountable.

Post reply on HN