Facebook killed privacy on the Internet.

Right!! I came home from work one day and saw this toddler walking down the street in a diaper. I got out and got the baby and after knocking on a lot of doors finally found the mother. She had been watching TV. You should always have a latch at the top of the door.

i live in Colorado and this story has been huge here. the point is not that she was on FB ... the point was she was upstairs, on the internet allowing her three children to play outside, having her 7 year old be responsible. they were supposed to be in a gated area, but the gate was unlocked.

it is unfathomable to me that anyone would put their 7 year old in charge of their younger siblings, the youngest being the victim who was almost 2.

would you let your 7 year old baby sit children? i think not.

this woman was grossly neglectful of her kids and it's incredibly sad that a little one had to die because of it.

if kids crap your style, impose on your FB or TV time, don't have them. they deserve to be loved and protected 24/7.

Karen Pena, 30 of Denver, CO---what have you won? A new car? Nope--5 years. I don't think you will be able to keep up with your BFF for a while.

If parents don't kill their kids--their negligence does.

Where was the father?

obviously he wasnt there.... could be he had a job, could be he was a skipper on the kids, could be the kids each had a separate das, and she was one who would get knocked up to stay on welfare...could be a lot of things. my guess... by the sounds of the place being trashed and more than 1 kid....welfare mom, putting bread in the oven every time they got to the point of saying she had to look for work.

Nice trolling.

As usual...

if referring to my comment as "trolling", and i hope you are not, in case you are however....

i call it as it is, not just how i see it. if the truth hurts some people, it is only because it is the truth. It is not up to myself or anyone to coddle people as not to hurt their feelings, simply because "the truth hurts". it's a fact of life, if you dont LIKE your life, or how others fell about your life, you have the option to change most things about it.

I may not like my life at this present moment, basically scraping every red cent i can to keep things working in the house, but i do what i can every day to change it. eventually at some point i can change that, as long as i keep looking for that job.

The roads of humanity are paved with the skeletons of the innocent. I hope she remembers the laughter of her baby every minute of her remaining life.

Meg, he was referring to Southern Democrat... you know, the person who WAS trolling.

Some people are so sensitive.

not really insensitive, there was no saying as to who the refrence was in regaurds to, and SD's comment, deleted.

lynseypug

Where was the father?

Honestly--that's a good question. I know of kids sending father's day cards---year after year-- to men that had never taken the time to get to know them, let alone support them. Being there and sacrificing is what it's all about.

Hey now what are you talking about precisely because what I'm doing is Social Networking through Social Media. Something MSNBC has promoted as being an effective way of encouraging people to take action and express their concerns in Public Matters you need to reconsider your action since the ACLU would love to grab this one and if you do censor me I will take action.

Even The President Is Behind Me ON THIS I'm not spamming what ever that is if I'm Social Networking for a cause. My cause is Americans For America what do you have against Americans or America?

Better Yet what does MSNBC have against Americans? I know NBC has a serious problem with GOD. Check with some of your legal staff before you silence me. I will be contacting the ACLU and imagine you silencing me when you denounced Mubarak.

But hey I could use the money and so could my great great great great Grandchildren. So Go Ahead Make My Day Day of Reason 6-25-11

Tyler after seeing you I know the other Networks will eat this up.

It's a sad day whenever a child dies I know. Even Sadder to offer their organs for tansplant and told they just are not good enough.

By the way when you have lived half as long as I have think about this and that.

That's an awful lot of posting for someone who's been suspended for a month...

tyler, if you think that promising to sue for violating freedom of religion , is a threat, feel free to pack your bags and leave this country with it's scary constitution. the flagging option is not for communists to attempt to undermine freedom of speech. if you are actually ignorant of what 'threatening' is, google the legal definition of harrassment. i'm sure you already know that promising to protect one's own rights in court, is absulutely not a threat harrasment, offensive, or distasteful comment, (except of course for being distasteful to to people who hate everything America stands for). And those people are not being forced to stay here by mr. southern demicrat; in fact, the borders are only obstacles to people trying to enter America, not people who want to leave. .

Agreed.

Toddlers need to be monitored every second they're awake.

Have to wonder though. Would there be charges or such criticizisms if she had been scrubbing a toilet or cleaning the bedroom like a "good" little housewife when it happened?

I agree some, had she been baking a pie for her husband, she would not be in as much trouble, that little kid would have just "slipped away from her" then

Toddlers need to be monitored every second they're awake.

No, that's not enough! They have been known to wake up in the middle of the night and wander around while their parents sleep! They must be watched 24 hours a day, seven days a week!

A single parent obviously cannot manage that, so the state should take custody of all single parent children. Then the state can monitor these children with the same unwavering dedication with which they monitor off-shore oil drilling, nuclear safety, and the banking industry.

Trying a parent for anything less than gross negligence in the death of a child is an abuse of state power and a waste of tax dollars. Every healthy child has wandered away from an attending parent at some point, the vast majority return unharmed.

When will people learn that the government can't fix everything.

Thank you!!! Common sense. I have two 15-month olds... try keeping an eye on both of them every single second. During the 10 seconds it takes me for to change my son's diaper my daughter has managed to destroy or get into something- less than 6 feet away from me. You can't watch toddlers every second of their lives unless you keep them chained to you. And I am very paranoid about my kids' safety so I really do try to keep my eyes on them at all times.

There is still no excuse for this mom though Who would let a toddler play outside or even in another room without adult supervision??

I don't even let my dog and cats play outside without adult supervision.

My daughter is 12 and I only let her start playing outside by herself when she was 10 and we moved to a more rural location. I use facebook, have for a little over 2 years. I was also a single mother until she was 8 years old. My dogs only go outside on leashes. My cats NEVER go outside. My husband and I are full-time students with part-time jobs and we're either on the dean's list or the president's list at school. We're involved in various clubs on campus. We have friends and social lives. We are still able to take good care of my daughter. Leaving a toddler outside without supervision (and a 7 year old needs supervision, so that doesn't count) is gross negligence. What was that woman thinking?

The roads of humanity are paved with the skeletons of the innocent. I hope she remembers the laughter of her baby every minute of her remaining life.

... not on MSNBC it wouldn't be.

Southern Dem,

Are you HERE, TOO?

At least try to stay in the political threads with your advertising ... gee ...

well gee, you tell me..where are your kids right now as you're posting comments?

That was my initial reaction as well Lyrica. Feeling sympathy to the driver of the van. When I was only 7 years old my Father accidentally ran over a small neighborhood bulldog's head when coming home. I watched as it happened and to this day I can't look at a bulldog without recalling that horrible vision. And this was just a friggin bull dog! I can't imagine the scar it would be to witness that happening to a small child.

I also have sympathy to the family as well as the Mother of this child. Horrible , horrible tragedy for all involved though it does support the fact that far too many people have children that shouldn't.

I think that any parents, Father and Mother, expecting a child should be required to take a 'basic parenting' skills exam and if it they fail that they should be required to take a class teaching those skills. True, you would still have those that don't practice those skills but then you would have due course to prosecute for neglect when terrible things like this occur.

StackDat...we already 'recourse' for endangering children. They're called laws. As to a 'parenting exam'? (shaking my head as I roll my eyes) Don't you have anything productive to do this afternoon?

mystic- WTF? I think it's a great idea for people to take parenting classes, it takes more education to get a drivers license then to pop out a kid! Besides stakdat has a very nice thoughtful post!

Agreed humm and Stack`

There really should be parenting classes, my mum does a baby boot camp for military families and I was privileged to attend one of her classes. It was surprisingly insightful and I think all parents should be required to take a class on raising children.

I have to say that requiring someone to take a so-called "parenting class" just to have children would not only be unconstitutional, it would be ridiculous. Who decides who is qualified to teach said classes? And what exactly will they teach? Diaper changing. Bottle-feeding? Fundamentals of breast-feeding? Don't shake babies? Don't beat them? These are all things that an average hospital teaches you anyway before you even leave the hospital with the baby; it is common sense that beating or neglecting a baby would have bad results. And what about other issues such as discipline? What if you simply don't agree with some of the parenting techniques taught in the class? Are they going to fail you and keep your baby from you?

I am a parent and I don't need another person who may or may not even have kids teaching me how to raise mine. My children are happy, healthy toddlers and my husband and I managed to achieve that without being forced to take parenting classes. I would imagine that many other parents feel the same way.

A class will not stop people from neglecting or abusing children. These people know right from wrong. They just don't care. And a class isn't going to change that.

It's great you're a good parent and all but that doesn't speak for the masses. Shaken baby syndrome is on the rise with about 50,000 cases of it per year in the US and one of four result in the death of the infant. So apparently the hospitals aren't giving enough of a 'lesson' in it.

If you have to take classes to drive then you should take a class on babies. No, I'm not saying that you have to adhere to what they say but some information is genuinely interesting with good points and lessons, but if you close your mind to it all and assume you already know everything then sure, it won't be useful to you.

StackDat, my ex-husband, the biological father of my daughter, was required by the court to go to a parenting class as part of our divorce (as was I). It was only a few hours of our time, didn't cost us anything except a few hours off of work, and was "required" by the courts. As far as I know, he didn't go. He wasn't held in contempt. The divorce wasn't put on hold until he showed up. The only thing that happened was I was awarded sole custody... which essentially means nothing because I still had to ask his permission to move out of the state once he moved here and I couldn't change her surname as she requested without his permission (which he wouldn't give out of spite). He has spent the last four years paying his court ordered child support grudgingly and as inconveniently as possible and refused to use his visitation if I wouldn't agree to him not paying for child support while she was in his care. Last month he gave up his parental rights because he'd rather not be connected to her than pay support. My husband is adopting her. While your scenario sounds good, it wouldn't be enforced if it legally could be enacted. Laws meant to protect our children which are currently in place aren't being enforced. The system should start there.

Tori, i call BS on you, you might want to remember what you post?

ToriLynne

My daughter is 12 and I only let her start playing outside by herself when she was 10 and we moved to a more rural location. I use facebook, have for a little over 2 years. I was also a single mother until she was 8 years old.

then reading the above post 4.7.....your time line is a bit off there.

He has spent the last four years paying his court ordered child support grudgingly and as inconveniently as possible and refused to use his visitation if I wouldn't agree to him not paying for child support while she was in his care.

child support for you, while she is in his care? really?

Last month he gave up his parental rights because he'd rather not be connected to her than pay support. My husband is adopting her.

now, seeing how I have een paying MY child support oh.... for a lot longer than you have been able to concieve them, let me point out this.... 1st off, being a FATHER myself, the state does not LET you give up parental rights, just because you dont want to pay your childsupport, lol. if this were the case, there would be a lot less deadbeat dads out there. Most would flock like geese to the oppertunity to be able to just "walk away", even tho i am not one of them. Actually talking about giving up aprental rights,(to nullify your thought on a comback i am sure just came to you), i already told my ex when she asked, be a cold day in hell i'd give my daughter up freely. not out of spite, but because she is my daughter, and i made her a promise, to this day i keep.

now we have the formalities out of the way as to why i called BS on you. I suppose after dealing with what i would guess, be most of what i went thru concerning my kids, i can understand perhaps WHY he didnt show up for your, parenting class. I been to those as well. kind of a joke when you listen to other parents whine how their now adolecent teen tells them what to do, and where to go. MAybe more of a shame...take your pick. However , before you or some go on your blame the Dad kick, when i went to get joing custody of my oldest, her mother used every trick in the book the courts would allow and them some. to include not showing up, and so on. so i guess consider yourself lucky you were the woman in this whole thing, otherwise its my guess you'd be singing a different tune, and handing over your parental rights as well.

almost forgot.... Happy Fathers Day to you Dad's out there.

Nickidrea is actually right. Hospitals have classes and lessons before leaving the hospital. What each individual does with what they learned is up to them. Obviously, this woman decided she knew better and this is the result.

Until one person is deemed appropriate as the "teacher" of moms and dads to be, (again as already stated: who determines this? and who regulates them?) mandated classes will do little to change or stop things like this from happening as there are too many outside forces or events that alter these peoples thinking later on. This woman failed her responsibility. Classes would not have changed this fact. FB is not to blame here either. Nor even being on a computer at all. She.just.failed.her.job.as.protector.of.her.children.

Megalodon,

I left her biological father when she was 2 (2001). He only spent a total of about a year in her life even while we were married. We didn't divorce until 2007 and that's when the court order was put in place. We've been living with her step-father since 2006. She'll be 13 in November. Does that better explain the timeline for you?

And you're right, the courts do not just grant you the ability to give up your parental rights. He's been asking... demanding, really... that I do so since I left him. I have refused for years. When we divorced, he once again demanded with the insistence that my boyfriend (now, husband) adopt her. I wasn't in the middle of planning a wedding at the time, we weren't engaged, and I felt my daughter should have some say in the situation (not that any of this is your business), and she didn't want that. She still thought her father was going to spend time with her when he was back in our home state. It was only when he had been in our home state for a year and still refused to participate in his visitation unless he didn't have to pay child support for the time he was with her that she no longer wanted anything to do with him. He recently decided that he didn't like that the visitation was left open-ended and he wanted to pay less child support. He has spent an hour with her in the last six years and that was an hour set up by me with me driving the 90 minutes to meet him and him only staying for an hour because he apparently had better things to do. I left him because he was abusive to me and I was starting to see him doing some of those things to her. I didn't have any record of abuse as much of it was psychological, so I couldn't use it against him in court. I did what I had to do, I offered him the opportunity to give up his parental rights (with my daughter's agreement) and my husband is adopting her. He jumped at the chance because he doesn't want her and doesn't want to pay child support for her. I loved her enough to listen to what she wanted and to protect her from a potentially abusive situation and I gave up child support that was helping pay bills to do it. I never kept her from him, I wasn't a gold digger, I didn't put him down. I'm just stating facts.

The parenting class was not MY parenting class. It was ordered by the courts and is required in the state we divorced in if you divorce and have children from the marriage. I did not expect him to go to that one to begin with, he lived in another state. However, he didn't go to one there because he didn't want to, which should have been held against him in court. It wasn't, which was my point in regards to the idea that parents should have to go to parenting classes to have children. I didn't like the class, I thought it was ridiculous. Good parents would have known all of this stuff already. Bad ones wouldn't care.

You apparently are a good father. I'm sorry you have this knee-jerk reaction when women have actually experienced a situation where the father of their child is not a good father. I am not down on men, as is apparently what you think. My husband is an amazing father to two girls who are not biologically his. One of them is his ex-wife's daughter and we have her over as often as we can. You still had no right to jump all over me just because you didn't have the rest of the story. Hope you enjoy it, it's true and none of it was made up to make a point.

By the way, I've been able to conceive children for 26 years, I was just smart enough to wait until I was 29 to have one. So have you really been paying child support for 26 years or was that a way to demean me based on how old you thought I was?

I also did not use "every trick in the book" to get sole custody. He failed to maintain a relationship with our child. He tried to say she wasn't his (I assure you, she is). He didn't show up for court, didn't get a lawyer, didn't send in paperwork on time. All I did was hire a lawyer and do what was asked of me by the court. My attorney wanted to stick it to him, I refused. That isn't who I am. Just because your ex-wife was doesn't make us all like that any more than my ex-husband being what he is makes all men like him.

i wont nor will i go as far to say every father is a good one, great one, or what have you. yes i know there are a lot of tools out there who could give a rats azz about anyone but themselves. yet to make my point a bit more clear i guess, it does seem more than a bit one sided from your point of view. not even sure there is even a possible way to get into court a way to demand ask, or have even a plausable reason to get into court, ask the court, child support or any other a means to reliquish your paternal rights. even if asked on behalf of the parent with sole or joint custody, the only way possible i have ever heard outside of that person being married, it doesnt even make it past the clerk of courts, and no lawyer in the world would waste the time to try, he would be more tha likely disbar'd or take the risk of having to defend himself. I had to deal with my ex trying threating me with it, so i went to seek legal council. Now, i'll go this far, and say ok maybe most of what you say is correct, still there is doubt about other stuff. needless to say, this is from my point of view, and mine alone. I happen to have been thru a lot for my kids, and i'd do it all over and over again, till time makes a stop, because they are my kids. I have seen other father dropped into the wringer, and if there was a way to be an advocate for others like myself, i would do it.

nuff said i hope? thank you for the compliment as it was, and do hope it all works out in the best for your daughter.

No, no one can force anyone to give up their parental rights unless they want to give it up and they can only do so if the other parent agrees to it and in my state, only if there is someone to take the surrendering parent's place (ie, adoption). Essentially what happened was that I received the rule Nisi for a hearing about specific visitation and lowered child support. I hired an attorney who told me that although they can say he has to go through a period of adjustment where he gets to know our daughter supervised by me or someone to mediate, they will grant him visitation as he requested. They will also grant him lowered support based on his income if his story is accurate. My child didn't want to see him and I mentioned his demands over the years that I allow him to give up his rights. My attorney asked if that could be put on the table if my husband would adopt her. My daughter agreed after years of saying no. My attorney called his attorney, asked if my ex-husband was interested, my ex-husband jumped at the opportunity as long as he no longer had to pay child support effective the end of May (which is when the offer was made). My attorney wrote up several different legal forms... a voluntary act of surrender for adoption which states he gives up his rights to our child, is aware of what that means, and is of sound mind to do so; affidavit of counsel to show that his attorney explained what all of it meant; waiver of pre-surrender counseling denying the need for mental health counseling; statement of family medical history so my child knows what she may genetically be pre-disposed to; and an affidavit stating the medical history was complete and true to his knowledge. It was received by his attorney on a Friday and was signed and received by my attorney the following Friday. The paperwork for the adoption was emailed to my husband the following week (he's in another state working on an externship for his bachelor's degree).

My daughter is very excited about this because now she is able to change her last name from that of a family who abandoned her to my maiden name (my parents took us in when we had nothing and nowhere else to go and my father was the father-figure in her life for the four years we lived with them). We are really into genealogy and she wants her name to reflect her heritage rather than an adoption, though she loves my husband and he's been an amazing father to her. He understands. It also means that when that we both graduate from college, we can leave the state without having to request my ex-husband's permission (which I'm sure he wouldn't have given without some demand to not have to pay child support). Both of us chose fields that we would do better in another state with and our state is one of the poorest in this country, so leaving makes sense even if this is home.

And yes, I realize this is all one-sided. I'm curious as to his side of the story, myself. I'd love to know how he's explaining this away to his parents (who probably paid for the attorney) and to his wife and the mother of his third child. My daughter's his oldest, I didn't have any way to know what kind of father he would be. She has two other women before her with a child each who he never sees and only grudgingly pays child support for. It is unlikely I'll ever know. I doubt even if he explained it that I'd ever understand. Especially since she was planned. How do you just not want your child?

i think our conversation on this topic has ended......

I am not an immature person and I use FB. I admit that I only check it a couple of times a day but it is a great way for families who are separated by long distances to keep in touch and see pictures of their family. Facebook is not the problem. It is the irresponsibility of SOME people and far from all who use social networking. Immature and irresponsible people can be found anywhere.............maybe in your own home since you are acting immature with your prejudice.

Agreed Sharac, those of us seperated by distance genuinly appreciat FB. Problem is, Clearly, ability to parent is not inherent. I'm all for not allowing precreation until a person proves they have the where-with-all as far as maturity and intelligence, to raise a kid. Too many are popping kids out like puppies with no clue as to the future. Blaming the tool for the stupidity of the user is fallacy.

@Sharac @Kitty

I said by immature people for immature people. I did not say that ALL people who use FACEBOOK were IMMATURE. If the shoe fits wear it.

If you are not immature, obviously I was not writing about you. What is your problem? If I mention the words "poor white trash", why would it bother you if you are not?

I am not allowed to express an opinion? I have to think in"goose step" with everyone else? Is this a REPRESSIVE COUNTRY now?

Why would you single yourself out behind a general statement I made?

Facebook was created by IMMATURE COLLEGE KIDS to NETWORK with EACH OTHER. If a PARENT can not MONITOR their CHILD because FACEBOOK is more IMPORTANT, I would think that parent was IMMATURE and IRRESPONSIBLE TOO.

If your family is intact and having fun, good for you.

Your right but calm down, deep breath it was a good post! I checked it!

I agree. It has nothing to do with FB and everything to do with the mother. FB does not chain you to your computer and force you to do anything. It leaves the responsiblity to the USER as it should be. You should be smart enough to know when it is a good time to use FB or not. Sadly we are a nation slacking in not only basic understandings of the world, but common sense as well. It's a good thing we live in 1st world comforts it does not mean you can turn off your brain. Texting isn't the problem, FB isn't the problem, beer is not the problem, gambling isn't the problem. It's the abuse of them via the users, because if you use them without abusing them then only the inteded purposes at the expected price is the result. You are very well capable of being stupid in this nation, but I would only hope people will stop glorifying it. And that is my rant for today.

CAPS LOCKS MAKES YOUR POINT MORE VALID.

Cathee, did you not expect somebody to defend themselves from your rather narrow opinion? Or was it just fodder for your ridiculous soapbox?

Since the article doens't mention if the woman works, that is not a valid argument. Not everyone works the proverbial 9-5 shift.

What does that have to do with anything? Your reading comprehension skills suck Tom. I think you are just looking for anywhere to post your inane comment. Well done.

yeah tom, because you are the authority on child bearing. irrelevant to this story.

I believe Tom is correct. How are you going to support a child & take care of them & you can't even support yourself?

Tom... some people lose their jobs AFTER they have kids

Stop spamming.

Stop spamming.

At whom was this aimed?

Southern Democrat-964645

What happens when the economy fails and you had a job when you had your child but that job was lost? The economy has made it difficult to find a job and you are stuck... so now what? Retroactive abortion? Give the child up for adoption and perhaps start over when you have another job and can afford the child? I had a job and was supporting my family alone when I had my daughter. My husband, I soon discovered, couldn't be counted on to hold down a job. He was eventually told he was bringing us down and if he couldn't keep the house clean and take care of the baby while I was at work, he could either find a job or move out. He joined the Navy. He also became an abusive ass, which I discovered when I left my job to move to his permanent duty station. My job was gone six months later when I left him while he was on deployment. I found one two months after that but the business shut down six months later. I found another and was let go shortly after because of the economy. I was forced to go on welfare because my husband decided to change bank accounts and not pay support even though he was receiving a dependent allowance from the military based on his wife and child. I was stuck on welfare for nine months. The military found out what he was doing and forced him to support us and I went back to school, which meant I could no longer receive welfare. You never know what will happen in life. Not everyone who needs welfare is popping out kids without a way to support them.

Hey you were the one who said

"How dare you have a child when you do not even have a job".

So why were you allowed to keep a child? You were the one who brought it up. i was just questioning your reasoning.

tom, when you get a life, the rest of us will get a job...

Oh and pattyo, what would the qualifications of parenthood be?

A license? Seriously?

Renewable? Revokable? 1,2 or 5 year licensing? Who issues these and/or enforces these?

I don't think you were thinking...

I couldn't agree more. I recently applied for employment at a computer network company. They emailed me a list of questions that normally would be asked during a face to face interview. One of the questions was "How many Facebook friends do I have?"

Huh? Really?! Really??!! WTF!? How can that possibly have anything to do with a job as a computer tech? Would I be more employable if I had 1000 so called friends on a web site for the 'Look at ME' crowd? All this really indicated was this company was a waste of my time.

Having said that, Facebook should not have been mentioned in this article at all. It did not cause this horrible thing to occur. It just happened to be what the Mother was pre-occupied with at the time instead of tending to her child.

The fact that MSNBC felt compelled to mention it makes it clear there were some ulterior motives involved.

An earlier post says it all.

"Is it also news if Mom is reading MSNBC when her kid gets run over?"

The company probably asked the question because they have been burned by employees spending too much time on Facebook and not on their work. Dumb question to ask in any case but I can understand it to a certain point.

There was a man being interviewed on a radio show. He was angry at Facebook and was lanning oin suing them because he got fired from his job. The reason....he was late too many times, which he attributed to Facebook, wouldn't show up at all, or was spending time on the company computer keeping up with his friends.

@StackDat - the only reason it was mentioned is because SHE told the police that is what she was doing. had she just said she was on the internet, that is how the story would report.

it's not aimed at saying that Facebook is bad, good or anything else.

What if this had happened while she was taking a @!$%#?

Would you be chastising this woman for that?

The point of the story is that she wasn't monitoring her kids. Period.

Everybody certainly is reading a lot into this story... Dirty liberal welfare mom, addicted to FB, unemployed, multiple fathers, drug addict, single mom, WTF people?

All anyone knows based on this story is that she was on the internet at the moment that something happened to her child.

Amen to that! Both mothers totally ignored their responsibility for their children. You do NOT leave toddlers unattended, PERIOD! Anything can happen in the space of a few seconds and both mothers should be imprisoned for a lot longer than 10 years.

i don't think anyone is blaming Facebook.

Except MSNBC

no ... it's all over our local news that way as well .. not just on MSNBC. she told the police she was on FB, that's why it's part of the story. had she just said she was on the internet, the story would say "the internet."

Oh

Big difference in having Facebook being 'part of the story' and having it in bold type for the headline.

Thank you Lynn for pointing out that 22 months is just under 2 years. I get confused about that a lot. That 3 year thing is way beyond me. Is it 38 months?

No...38 months is in the fourth trimester.

Yeah yeah...I overstated that....:P

oh wayne, don't try to bring that into this discussion

I think that's kind of an overboard response. There have been a lot of stories about children being hurt or killed because the parent was distracted or off doing something stupid. This has nothing to do with Facebook, even in the story, other than it was the stupid thing the parent was doing instead of watching the child. It makes news because the child died, because the child should have been supervised, and because Facebook is something that sucks up a lot of people's time. I don't think anyone would come to the conclusion that Facebook is evil from the content of this story - any more than talking on the phone, doing a crossword puzzle, etc.

The evil here is that mom let a 22 month old child wander outside alone. I've seen that happen here in my middle class suburban neighborhood - by parents who are fine upstanding seemingly model citizens. I don't know what goes through some parents' heads, but you don't have to be poor or unemployed to make bad parenting choices.

Sarcasm...

So. Renee and six other people didn't quite get the.....I mean because in the article they constantly dwell on...I mean the photograph they used....my first sentence pretty much.....I....ah never mind.

This story doesn't say so, but other articles on different websites says the mother told the kids to "go outside and play in the yard" (her initial statement to police).

She is neglectful and responsible for this child's death.

Nathalie, I agree. Its not like mothers don't have other things to do. My mom did plenty of things while I was young, and was not in the same 5 foot radius of me 24/7. And whaaaat? A Kiddie pool with water in it??? Get out! Pretty sure mine was always full of water.

OMG, have you people ever heard of something called sarcasm???

LMAO Sophie! Apparently someone needs to come up with a sarcasm font so it won't fly over the heads of some responders, huh? ;)

First sentence. Read the first sentence of my original post. First one. Right there. #13. Hello? "...instead of the person whose fault this really was." Kan u say "reading comprehension"?

Crikey. What are you, a robot or something? Wait. No. If you were a robot, maybe you would miss the sarcasm but actually would have READ THE FIRST SENTENCE.

Also, just a few little things: "skapegoat" is spelled "scapegoat", the first word after a comma does not have to be capitalized, "parents" should be "parent's"(or parents' depending on if you are referring to more than one parent), "ingorant" is spelled "ignorant", the first "whats" should be "what's", and after "...wrong with the world today," you need a semicolon or a period.

"Intelligence" - working for you...and five others apparently. Moron much?

Hehe, too much? Probably the "sarcasm font" would help, but I'm sure many would still not get it.
it just seems so obvious to me!!!

Yes, they noted this is the second time a child was killed "while the mother was on facebook". OBVIOUSLY neglecting how many children died while DAD was watching FOOTBALL or MOM/DAD was watching MSNBC.

True, the first kid cited died from neglect of the parent - the kid was in a tub alone!

BUT, what the parent was doing was OBVIOUSLY selective reporting meant to slam Facebook.

MarineDoc - the reason that it's mentioned is because that is what the mother told the police, that she was on Facebook. MSNBC is not taking a cheap shot at Facebook.

Raven, I can read. MSNBC is absolutely taking a cheap shot. The point is not Facebook, the point is that she was not watching her child close enough. It's an idiotic detail.

Point exactly.

If I have a messy house for the day and my child falls down the stairs and dies, am I going to be arrested for child abuse?

Probably. Apparently to be a good parent you have to have your kid tied within 5 feet of you... but you wouldn't be able to cook or vacuum or do yard work... because all of those things are hazardous to children too. And no matter what you did, someone would tell you that you are parenting wrong. Parents can't win.

22 months post birth or in utero, you're still killing the baby.

Or was it Professor Plum in the library with an abortion device thingey?

Wayne, so my grandpa died last year... was that just a really late abortion too?

I was just going on some of your posts, which I thought were sick but funny, sorry you only have a sense of humor sometimes! My bad!

Actually, it isn't. In fact, they make leashes for children. Not that I suggest anyone get one. It isn't illegal to keep your child locked in your home while you are in it and make sure that the child cannot escape. You need the door open because you don't have air conditioning? Fine, screen door with lock and a baby gate should serve. Want the child to be out from under your feet? Fine. Child probably has a room, baby gate the room, leave the door open, make sure the room is child-proof, get a baby monitor. Sheesh, people... I did it, she's nearly 13 and she's fine. In fact, she's probably a more capable person than most of the people with whom I attend college. And I have had a computer and used social networking (beliefnet, livejournal, and facebook) since she was a baby. The issue isn't facebook. It is bad parenting. You cannot leave children under a certain level of maturity outside without supervision.

yes, i on tuesday saw a woman with her kid on one of those leashes, and i also think any parent that cant teach a child so they dont need a leash, should not have kids in their sole cutody. PLAIN AND SIMPLE! i dont even put my own dog on a leash outside where there is a city ordinance, why would one do that to a child? i will tell you, because that parent is too dysfunctional to teach that child to be safe. not to go running around like an idiot as they please, anywhere they please. Because these parents find teaching their children anything what so EVER, the basics as they rech the age to learn as they grow into adulthood! these are not parents, they are morons, idiots, who dont have a clue to raising, much less teaching anything.