My wife has helped me realize that women exist to make sure men don't kill the offspring by doing stupid things like chasing buffalo and riding motorcycle. My confidence in women was shaken just a bit by a woman at the park this morning who evidently babysits more kids than she can handle.
After scooting my little one off to swimming lessons, I hoped to settle down with Zane Grey under a tree. Alas, a baby was crying. I looked around and spotted a one-year-old strapped into his little stroller parked in the sunshine on the bright concrete. A two-, maybe three-year-old girl was standing uselessly next to him. The nearest adult, a couple benches away, was not the woman who brought him. Sure Mom's radar would pick up the cry soon enough, I stepped out of the pool area for some shade.
A couple minutes later, I heard the child crying again. The woman in charge of this child had moved him to another sunny spot. She was several yards away, talking with a girl near the pool. She was a tan, stocky woman. I didn't recognize her.
Even my scrawny dad instincts could tell the child was hot and needed shade. The woman in charge was not getting this message. I watched the child and the woman, hoping I wouldn't have to say something... and wondering if I could.
Eventually the woman in charge looked toward the child and walked over. She stopped, glowered down, and said, "Stop!"
Good grief. Not the answer, lady.
She reached down, grabbed the child, and sat him up roughly in the stroller. She jabbed his chest with her stout hand, then clipped his chin.
Good grief! Definitely not the answer, lady!
Finally she wheeled the child off the concrete pool deck, with a couple-three other older children in tow. But she didn't take the child to the shade. She took him with the other kids to the swingset nearest the pool entrance, the one that in the ten-o'clock hour sits fully in the sun. She plunked him in the baby swing, gave it a hard push, then stepped away to watch other kids. The swing wound down, and she'd step to the child and give the swing not so much another push as a smack, hard enough to make it go for another minute or so without her having to make any ongoing effort. This cycle repeated a couple times. Once she pushed hard enough that the swing went up and just barely reached the scary tipping point where the chain hints at going slack and the seat leans to leave the baby almost perpendicular to the ground. Then the woman actually stepped away, out of sight with other children behind the little kids' slide.
This is the dark horror of my soul: the vision of a child in a park, a place where everything should be bright and green and happy, trapped in sadness and pain, unable to understand what is wrong, unable to fix what is wrong, unable to do anything but cry for someone to make the bad go away... and getting no answer.
At this point, another mom came up to me and asked if I was worried about that child in the swing. This mom said she'd seen the same neglect I had, and had seen the woman behaving this way at the park on past occasions. She said she knew the woman was not the child's mom, just a babysitter.
The swing was winding down. The child started to cry again. The social calculus changed instantly. The mom and I walked over to the child, slowed the swing to a stop, and made little concerned mommy and daddy sounds to calm the child. The mom offered the child some water; remarkably, the child shook his head no.
The babysitter came over and picked the child up with something less than affection. She said whenever she steps out of the child's sight, the child cries. I suggested maybe that was a sign. I told her the child was clearly hot. I told her to take the child in the shade. She told me to mind my own business and go. She did not move from the sunshine. I told her to do her job and take the child to the shade; she continued to stand her ground... as if defying this nosy little busybody was more important than taking care of the child's needs.
The mom at my side explained to the babysitter, calmly, rationally, that little children can't talk, and that crying is the only way they have to communicate their needs. The babysitter gave her the same obstinate, defensive response. After maybe another half-minute of arguing, my asking the babysitter's name, and her naturally refusing, the babysitter stepped away with the baby to the shade by the slides.
I walked away with jitters. The good mom and I chatted. Another mom said she's seen similar behavior from the babysitter on other days. One of our conversants said that woman is fine with older kids but just doesn't handle little ones well. The babysitter supposedly holds a state license to do daycare. We may be making some calls today to see if that's the case and to see if some action is necessary to investigate whether she should keep that license.
I can say this: if I need someone to watch my child, I will not hire anyone who displays such behavior toward a hot, helpless one-year-old. If any parents ask, I will tell them privately not to risk their children's welfare with this woman.
But here's your unpleasant question for the afternoon, fellow citizens: put yourself in my situation. You're in a public place. You see an adult you don't know treating a child you don't know poorly. What are your obligations to the child and to the adult? Do you speak up? Do you wait and back up someone else who speaks up? Or do you avert your eyes, walk away, and hope neither you or the child will remember this bad day in the park?
You speak up no question.
The only way there even would be a moral quandary was if it was the actual mother, but even then its doubtful your complaint will make them take the child.
I would have recorded the incident on my smartphone camcorder. Portable nanny cam.
You have to step up and say something. The parents of the children in her care MUST know and the caretaker must be reported for her borderline (if not over the line) abusive behavior.
Good job, Cory.
And yeah, shooting a video on your cell phone is a good idea for several reasons, not the least of which is that I suspect you would have gotten cooperation (...and the child, relief from the heat) twice as quickly. There are some cognitive reasons for this (and some CYAs) that I won't go into here, except to say that it's an excellent idea. Good thinking, Justin.
That good old First Amendment.
Isn't it just grand?
Video it with your cell phone and call the police. You can only get into trouble by actually confronting someone. When the officer arrives tell him what was happening and make sure he files a report regardless of if charges are pressed. Get names and submit your video evidence. Then, you can submit the report to the licensing agency.
WWJPD? (JP=Joe Paterno)
You intervene in some fashion. One must. Circumstances will vary, so the nature of the intervention will vary, but to simply divorce one's self from the human race and ignore it? No.
One must also have a care to avoid becoming the "guilty" in this picture. We live in a litigious society, I'm afraid. The video/police path may be the best option if the day care provider is unwilling to listen, but it is hard not to try to achieve the necessary result without always involving the police.
I'll trust the person on the scene and not second-guess.
You speak up. I hope that someone would speak up if my child was in a similar situation with a trusted adult.
But if you are the Dad in divorce they would just say you are causing trouble. So in your situation you need to do something because there is at least a chance that you might be able to do some good.
Most everyone will respond to your question that you should get involved or they will get involved. However, in reality, most will not. Most will watch in disgust...much like you did until you were confronted by another person who was watching the same thing. The two of you garnered the courage to tend to the child's needs and eventually confront the babysitter. Clearly people have seen this babysitter act inappropriately prior to this occasion and have not interjected themselves. I would hope that after being confronted she will do some internal inspection of her actions and see that she is not treating the child well.
In any event, I don't know that what she did broke the law but I would hope that the child's parents are well aware of her actions on this occasion and on prior occasions so they can make an informed decision going forward.
You did the right thing. Period.
CCorey, as it was happening, I was asking myself, "Why am I not speaking up?" Much as I consider myself independent and non-conformist, I needed the affirmation of one other person to take action. We don't think much about the social pressure that keeps us in our place until something provokes us to push against it.
CCorey raises an interesting legal question. Being mean, being irresponsible, and breaking the law are different things. I'm not convinced this woman crossed a legal threshold. So I'm left wondering what threshold she crossed that authorizes me to confront and upbraid her? What other behaviors might we see a stranger performing that would warrant our intervention?
you don't have to speak up RIGHT away.
I just meant let somebody know if you see it again.
I don't think it would be a good idea to tell the girl off.
What's sad is that it was just the two of you that saw the need to step in and help the child.
There is no sin in worrying about a child's best welfare....(Oh crud...here comes a Sibby rant on one thing or another)
This is a great example of how everyone needs to be willing to step up for kids in jeopardy. (hello Penn State!)
Just guessing (and praying) that you and the other mom made an impression on the child's temporary caregiver and she will think about that it in the future...even if it isn't out of concern for the child.
Call 911 video tape what you can. Heat stroke kills.
Better than speaking up, record and report to child services. This child, and perhaps others treated in this manner are candidates to seamlessly age into the juvenile justice system - a hideously necessary, expensive, and barely marginally effective system that is all but hidden from public view "for the needs of the child". If more citizens KNEW details of abuse, neglect, or delinquency there likely would be a lot less of it. It's important to set in place a documentation of cases or reports to preclude "the big one [report]" from being the first and only report. Cumulative reports, or their absence, are a key metric of progress, regression, or status quo in cases among parents and care-givers.
WWJPD. Nice touch, JMN.
In addition to a potential for heat stroke, bad sunburns at early ages can contribute to later development of melanoma.
Good analysis Cory. But the threshold of behavior that warrants intervention is nebulous and differently interpreted by different people.
What other behaviors might we see a stranger performing that would warrant our intervention? Well as a teenager my neighbors in Ocheyedan Iowa used to intervene every time they saw me mowing my lawn on a Sunday. Didn't stop me from doing it, and my intransigence didn't stop them from complaining to my folks about it.
"The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing." ~ Albert Einstein
Well, John, we definitely have a textual record of the behavior here. Believe it or not, I stepped out without my camera today... and I might not have had the wherewithal to switch it on even if I had. I wouldn't have started recording until I was sure I would intervene... and by the time the good mom joined me and pushed me past the threshold to intervene, I was heading straight for the child; I wouldn't have taken time to get out the camera.
Curious: with all this encouragement to video the event, are we accepting the idea of a surveillance society, where Big Brother is really all of us?
Barb, I appreciate your thought of keeping the analysis simple. I mentioned to the babysitter that you don't leave a kid in the sun when it's 95°F. She replied that it wasn't 95° out.
I remember reading a story years ago about a little boy who was terribly abused, people knew, but no one did anything, and he ended up dying of the abuse. I couldn't believe that could happen. Kids can't or don't know how to ask for help. It should fall to the rest of us to act, as you did, when we see such cases of abuse, whether willful or out of ignorance. It's a sign of the times that we hesitate to do so because of fear of litigation etc. But it is still our responsibility to do something. I'd have no qualms reporting such babysitting behavior to social services,especially since it seems to be ongoing and she didn't seem to realize she was doing anything wrong. I would step in and say something too, even if it was to offer to sit by the baby in the shade and in her sight.
95?
Must be nice.
Isn't there some type of good samaritan law for interveners? Most states have that.
Also, who are Mandated Reporters in SD? Teachers? Clergy? Social service workers? Law enforcement? Any public employees?
IMO everyone ought to be mandated reporters. I am, and in many ways it makes the decision easier. I have to intervene, period. That means that I don't have to question whether it is "bad enough." My neck is on the line if I Don't Intervene.
Maybe if everyone considered themselves a Mandated Reporter, it would be easier to take action.
Oh yeah, in a situation like this, I don't care about who's being surveilled. It's a potent tool to stop bad behavior. If you point a phone or camera at someone who is misbehaving, they stop immediately. Or come after you. You have a better chance of outrunning the perp, or defending yourself, than a child.
we don't have good samaritan laws that I could find.
there was a good samaritan bill to give drunk kids free rides proposed.
most good samaritan laws protect the intervener and don't require intervention.
Cory, your hesitation was just wisdom. One should make sure they have facts before stepping between which could have been mommy bear and her cub. The affirmation only gave you confirmation you knew enough. If the danger had been more dire, the crying would have been worse.
D.E., I believe the mandated reporters you seek are listed in SDCL 26-8A-3. They include teachers. Read by itself, this statute seems to indicate I could be charged with a Class 1 misdemeanor if I didn't report suspected abuse or neglect in any setting; however, SDCL 26-8A-7 appears to clarify that my reporting obligation exists only in situations where I come into contact with the child as part of my teaching duties.
Linda, interestingly, litigation did not pop into my head as I considered whether or not to intervene. I was simply wrestling with the question of whether it was my business or not.
But Linda's mention of litigation gets me wondering what I could get nailed for... hmmm... so picture me in the park, by the pool, camera in my hand, at the ready. I point it at a group of kids and their caretaker and start recording. Do we have a statute that says you can't go to a public place and make videos of other people's children? Could someone hit me with some child-stalker law?
Who knows. You can secretly record somebody over the phone here, but I'm not sure using a phone's camcorder.
You can bring a gun there.
It's easy to make this a complicated situation by wondering if it's any of your business or worrying about legal action that could be taken against a person who intervenes in a situation like this. Quit worrying and call 911. This heat can cause an infant to become dehydrated very quickly. It doesn't take long before it's too late. Always err on the side of safety. You don't even have to give your name if you don't want to but the child will get the help they need. I'm glad you talked to her Cory, maybe she will make better decisions from now on but I doubt it.
Hot and bright as it was here today..107.., having any child out in the sun with any bare skin is also a skin cancer waiting to happen. Anybody in a public place is fair game for photography.
Not only would I have videotaped with my cell phone,I would have immediately called the police. I've intervened in situations in grocery stores when parents or babysitters are out of line and I'm not afraid to do it again. I don't care who the offender is or how rude or how big they are. That sort of behavior is totally unacceptable.
I understand your initial hesitation and observations Cory,but I simply will not let something like that happen without doing everything that I can to make sure that the proper authorities are made aware.
I've even had people threaten to beat me up. My response? "If you think that you can get away with assaulting me,then please give it your best shot. Not only are there witnesses,but there is video evidence." Typically,their attitude changes dramatically. Of course,there are the types of people like the woman that you encountered,but I don't scare easily and I always speak to them in a calm rational manner which makes them look even worse.
Doug, I am not sure that is true. I think children have a higher degree of privacy protection even in public. Child porn, kids kidnapped and sold, and stalking might be the rational.
Cory, I think you handled it perfect. Even though she might not have moved the child to shade that day, you can pray she does so tomorrow and might just do it because of you saying something gently and prudently.
Troy makes a good point that we don't want to leap too quickly into other people's lives. I recall the distaste I felt when a granny (in Russian, babushka on the street shouted at me, "Molodoy chelovek, gde pal'to?—Young man, where is your coat?" I took offense at the innate Russian busybodiness by which the babushki assume jurisdiction over the life choices of pretty much everyone on the street. I know my coat and child care are very different things; if the babushka had been riding my case for not putting a coat on my baby, that would be a different issue.
Each of enjoys a certain boundary of liberty, even in public. I'm pretty confident that babysitter's action didn't fall within that boundary. But we should be cautious about piercing that boundary.
Chemical toilet is 17th in child well-being:
http://missoulian.com/news/state-and-regional/montana-behind-neighbors-in-children-s-well-being-report/article_efbd0398-d60c-11e1-87b1-001a4bcf887a.html
That good old First Amendment.
The First Amendment does nothing to protect private citizens speaking to or filming other private citizens.
It's good, and it's old, but the First amendment is inapplicable to interactions between or among private citizens.
The 1st Amendment guarantees Cory the right to interview people on the street and shoot video of the interaction. In fact, it allows him to say anything he pleases to anyone he pleases, Julie. You too. Me too.
Julie, you seem to be stretching for a disagreement where none is needed. Are you trying to suggest that the babysitter could have me prosecuted for speaking to her? Or are you simply saying there is no First Amendment point to be made in this interaction? What is your point?
The First Amendment has everything to do with our private spoken interactions as well as my actions as a participant in the press. It protects you from my suing you for saying stupid things to me on this blog or face to face. As Bill says, it protects my right to approach you, speak to you, and record and publish the content of our interaction.
The First amendment has nothing to do with your interactions with another individual--this babysitter in particular. Your words to her or your filming of her do not involve any First amendment issues. There may be some privacy issues but since you're both in public, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy by either party. The First amendment says nothing about privacy.
Bill said: That good old First Amendment.
He's wrong. the First amendment is wholly inapplicable to anything that you've described. The First amendment does NOT protect you from approaching her, filming her or publishing the conversation that may have occurred.
Will someone please read the First Amendment.
You can sue me all you like for what I may say in a blog--but that's not a First amendment issue.
The use of a photograph taken in a public place can be a factor, but in the case of documenting abuse with no intention of publicly posting or printing would seem to be something less likely to be a factor than restriction of child pornography.
The First Amendment is applicable to videotaping an interview with the babysitter, as per my comment about about Justin's suggestion that Cory do so. Clearly Julie is the one with the reading problem here. No sense distressing her further.
Wow, Julie, really committed to being wrong today just to disagree around the edges, aren't you? Suing someone for a comment on a blog, or really any civil or criminal action arising from a speech act, would revolve quite centrally around the First Amendment. In yesterday's confrontation, the thought never crossed my mind that my speech wasn't protected by the First Amendment; it quite obviously is. As CCorey got us thinking above, my hesitation wasn't so much legal as moral.
Cory,
I think there are a number of us parents that have seen this activity at the pool this summer. I know my wife and I have witnessed it on various occasions. I think this individual has been approached by a few parents. Give me a holler offline and we can talk about it. I think some intervention is needed. I wish the pool staff or Carol or someone there would say something too.
Unfortunately, there are way to many parents that also drop their kids off and leave them at the Pool all day with no supervision. The pool is not a substitute for proper daycare. Nor should a daycare provider use the Pool as a crutch for not doing their jobs. Children need supervision.
-Ashley
Corey, I'm glad you and the other mother spoke up. I would hope someone would speak up if that was my kid, or one of my nieces or nephews.
The public needs to speak up for this child. As adults we are all responsible for the safety of children in our presence. I was involved with an inncodent with this same woman at the pool, she told me to mind my own business. I offered to help her with the child she refused. The child cried the entire time he was in the pool. When they got out for the break he was falling asleep and layed on the concrete she came over and made him sit up. She would not let him lay down. He slept sitting up and when the whistle blew, she paraded him back into the pool through the sprayers. The water was spraying right in his face.It made me sick and the thought of him being treated so poorly makes me angry.
Please, if any of you witness this situation again, call 9-1-1. That is what we're here for.
It seems we have a lot of witnesses to clear examples of poor child care. I appreciate all who are willing to add their voices on this issue to protect the children involved. Two suggestions:
1. DSS directed us to contact the Brookings Child Protection Service office: 688-4334. That agency oversees five counties, including Lake. If you call, refer them to a report made from Madison on Tuesday. Refer to this blog post, and make sure we're all talking about the same babysitter.
2. Share this information with parents you know. Make sure they do not leave their children with this daycare provider. If you can't do the job right, you shouldn't be in the business. We can put an end to this woman's substandard childcare pretty quickly, if we just talk to each other.
- Suing someone for a comment on a blog, or really any civil or criminal action arising from a speech act, would revolve quite centrally around the First Amendment
The First Amendment is only relevant when the GOVERNMENT compels or prohibits speech-related activities. Read it.
In an interaction between two private parties in public, there are no First Amendment issues.
Still on this, Julie? You should let it go. You're not scoring any points on this topic.
If I sue you for something you say to me in public, I'm asking the government, via the judicial branch, to punish you for a speech act. Such punishment, if meted out, creates a precedent whereby government declares certain speech acts outside the protection of the First Amendment. If I win and you appeal, I guarantee the first twenty words out of your lawyer's mouth and mine in orals before the Supreme Court will include "free speech" and "First Amendment."
Your scenario is ludicrous for no court will come to any such conclusion.
While anyone may sue you for any reason, the First Amendment does not protect your from the simple act of someone filing a lawsuit--any knowledgeable judge will soon toss out such a lawsuit, not based on the first amendment, but because ANY ONE, including a judge, recognizes that your oral interaction between private parties in public has NOTHING to do with gov't action.
There's no basis for any judgement against you, and no court would ever find such a thing.
You could delete my posts at will. You could ban me from posting. There's no First Amendment issue involved in your action for neither the actor or the affected party were acting as the gov't or on behalf of the gov't. The First Amendment protects NO ONE in such a scenario for it is wholly inapplicable.
Are you in law school?
You just don't get it, Julie. You can sue me for my speech. I can face civil and criminal penalties for certain speech acts, especially speech acts in public places. Determining those penalties hinges profoundly on the First Amendment and long body of precedent built around it.
I'm not in law school. Are you? How does that question advance either my point or your absurd pursuit of argument for argument's sake on an issue mostly tangential to the subject of the original post that really matters to the community?
I happen to remember a babysitter like this. My younger siblings used to go to her for daycare, but I never did. The ones that were older didn't have as much trouble. But she would force them to eat things they weren't supposed to eat and put them in the "naughty corner" for hours at a time for something as silly as forgetting to take their shoes off before stepping on her tile. The little ones had it worse. I remember them coming home and not seeming like themselves. They would walk around like zombies and would open the refrigerator and ask for milk and various other food items. I suspected she was starving them for crying. I remember also going to the pool one day with my friends and she would be there with her hoard of children. I saw one of my brothers sitting in the sun unsupervised. I went to him and picked him up. The woman who babysat him walked out of the pool where she was playing with the older children. I asked her why my brother wasn't swimming with the rest of the children. He loved swimming and I didn't understand why he wasn't permitted to swim. She said that he was too young. He was three. She took him from me and I was expecting him to start crying as he always did when he was taken from a loved one. I was puzzled when he didn't wail. I mentioned it to her. The next thing she said to me was chilling. "Oh, he doesn't do that anymore, I took care of that." She walked away; leaving me stunned. She went and put him in a even sunnier spot then before and went back to the pool. I looked back at the other small children in bathing suits; being tormented by the heat and wanting to cool down in the pool like the other children. That night when my mother brought my brother home, he was sunburnt. This was an immediate red flag that she doesn't even bother to put sunscreen on any of the babies' skin. I told my mother this and she never took the children to her ever again.