- Blog
- Bios
- Boards
- Classifieds
- DIY
- Gallery
- Vendor Reviews
- Shop Weddingbee
Weddingbee boards
Honestly, I don;t know where I stand.
I just think its a really sad turn of events for everyone involved, especially the baby. :(
The child has no concept whatsoever of what she just did. She, as she simply stated, was trying to get him to stop crying. Is her anger a red flag? Most definitely! And to think that the 5 year old thought this out to put her brother in a tub is unreal too.
I do remember being told that when I was about 2 years old, I put a towel over my brother's face because I wanted him to stop crying. I know that there's a huge difference between the ages and developments. It just goes to show there's no concept of thinking and knowing right from wrong. It really is a young age still.
What a horrible story! I think kids around that age are starting to grasp the concept of death/killing/etc. My stepson (who's 5 now) started saying "I'm going to kill you!!!" when he got angry/frustrated for getting in trouble around the age of 4. We had a long talk about what that means, why it's hurtful and inappropriate and why it's a very bad thing to say that. I think he understood, but I'm pretty sure he thinks death is something that mostly happens in movies or to people/animals who are very very sick. I think he does know that you can hurt someone enough to kill them though.
I really don't know what to think in this case. Likely that little girl should get a lot of counselling and some sort of anger management therapy. It would also depend if she had a history of violent outbursts or anger issues.
I wonder if lots more kids that age are *capable* of doing something like that, they are just not given the opportunity? (how often is a 5 year old and 2 year old left unattended near some water?! I would think most 5 year-olds would do whatever they could to get the baby to stop crying.) So, I'm not sure that this particular girl necessarily has "anger problems." I'm skeptical that she even understood (at the time) what she was doing.
She hasn't actually been charged yet, right now they're investigating her as a suspect in a homicide. I do not think a 5 year old is capable of understanding the consequences of what she did, though I do think she's going to need years of counseling.
ETA: Not neccessarily counseling for anger problems, because I don't know the details, and I don't know that she actually has anger problems, but either way some day she's going to have to live knowing what she did, and I don't think anyone could come out normal after that.
There is no way in hell a 5 yr old should be held responsible for the toddlers death. She does not have the mental capacity to understand her actions would've resulted in the baby dying. Instead, whatever teenager/adult who was in charge of watching those children should be held accountable
Wow - what is hard to wrap my head around is the fact, that obviously the baby was thrashing, kicking, and splashing violently - yet the 5 year old continued to hold him under water; to me, this just shows a great deal of violence in this little girl.
But, whether she knew holding him under water could kill him, or understands the concept of death, i don't know....I think she is too young to understand...
I saw in the comments on foxnews that it's been suggested that the 5yo's parents used to dunk HER head under water to get her to stop crying so she did the same thing. Either way, it's the care-provider's fault.
@firsttimemom: Eesh. If that really is true then her parents definitely hold responsibility for what happened.
@firsttimemom: wow, if that is the case, I certainly think its the parents fault. the little girl did not know any better. I honestly dont see how that could work though. What child would not cry MORE if their head was held under water. Hell, I'd probably start cryng if somene did that to me!
I also read that the 16 year old was mentally disabled so if anyone is to be held accountable it's the parents of the children.
Yeah she isnt actually being charged with murder. I think most likely the 16yr old who fell asleep may end up facing some charge of neglect/negligence. The actual 5 yr old will most likely not be tried for murder. But there should definitely be some consequences
What a tragic situation.
While I don't think that the 5-year old should actually be charged with murder, I also don't buy that she was completely unaware and not understanding what she was doing. 5-year olds can understand death and killing - I just don't know that they are capable of intent.
That said, completely normal children don't just hold their siblings under water while the sibling trashes and struggles to break free and breathe, IMO.
I agree with everyone and I think that the care provider should be held responsible. I do not believe that a five year old understands what the results would be by holding the baby under water. I read somewhere that the 16 year old that was left to care for the children have developmental disabilities. If that is the case (depending on what the issues are), the parents should be held responsible.... Such a sad story!!
I definitely don't think the babysitter should be held accountable. It was a mistake on her part and if she accidently dosed off I think it would be hard to put her at fault. Yes, she should have been watching the children, but unfortunately these "freak accidents" do happen.
I also don't think it would be right or appropriate to charge a 5 year old with murder. Although some children can be quite emotionally and mentally distrubed I disagree even with children as old as 10 and 12 being treated the same as adults. If you haven't hit puberty yet you're still in a stage of life that is learning and it's hard to fault a child for not knowing better.
I do think this little girl is going to need some serious counselling and she will have to be monitored in the future to ensure that she has proper mental stability. From what I have read though, I doubt this child had a full understanding of the crime she was committing. In court, if you are lacking the criminal motive or awareness of the malice behind the crime it's very difficult to be convicted, especially in the case of a child this young.
To me the whole situation reads as a tragedy and a horrible accident. I feel for everyone who is involved. It's a very sad thing.
@linzeelou: didn't see your post until after I hit submit but I said that same thing....
I don't think that a 5 year old is able to fully comprehend death or its consequences. My daughter's guinea pig died when she was 5 of natural causes and we buried her in the back yard. Periodically, for about a year afterward, my daughter would inquire as to how I thought the guinea pig was "doing". While I wanted to reply "I'm sure she's rotting just fine", of course I refrained and only replied the "just fine" part. Eventhough she saw her dead and watched it be buried I really don't think she totally got it.
edit- my daughter was 5 the the above story (not the guinea pig!)
A 5 year old can understand it, but I don't think they are capable of intent.
My 4 year old knows about death/dying/killing. We've shown her our guns and have had a serious talk about gun safety and what would happen if she were to play with it. We made sure she understood what killing means.
She plays with her toys and pretends one of them is being killed, but then she makes it alive again and continues to play. We have told her that real life doesn't work that way and if she killed someone, they would not be coming back.
It's sad that the parents used a babysitter that wasn't fully able to take care of the children and it's sad that she fell asleep with two small children running around.
No jury in the world would convict a five year old... and no police force in the world would charge one. The officer in the story said that they are still "investigating," but what they very well may be investigating is if anyone ELSE needs to be charged... ie, parents, 16 year old. Personally, I actually think they should just let the whole thing go as a tragic accident, and maybe get the five year old some counseling before the horror of what she really did sets in.
And just so we're clear, my own daughter is actually five, and while she has fits and gets mad, even if she ever did something like this I would understand that she didn't know what she was doing. There's a reason five year olds aren't suppossed to be left alone with babies- they're not mature enough, nor do they understand how to take care of them. My daughter still plays with her two year old friend and pretends she's a "dolly". I doubt the five year old in the story was thinking about anything other than getting her baby to stop crying.
A 5 year old does not have the capability of forming intent, which is required for a murder charge. I forget the exact age, I want to say it's around 12, but there is a cutoff where the child is deemed legally too young to form intent. They could charge the parents with negligence or something to that effect.
The person who decides whether or not charges will be brought is the prosecutor, FWIW. Not the police.
I agree with PPs who indicated that most five year olds aren't capable of fully grasping "death" as a concept, let alone forming intent.
This sounds, to me, like a tragic accident.
Wow that is incredibly sad. I do think that the 16 year old should be held somewhat accountable. If you are trusted to babysit then you are trusted to make sure nothing happens to the children you are watching - it is your job.
I don't think the 5 year old should be charged for murder but I'm sure she knew that what she was doing was not right.
A 5 year old can know right from wrong, but I have to believe maybe just for my own sanity, that a 5 year old would not intend to kill.
@PitBulLover: Eh. There are several reports indicating that the 16 year old may have developmental delays or other disabilities, and was tasked with watching multiple children.
If that's true, I think punishing her is unfair.
This is awful! This entire situation is just terrible! Four children is alot for anyone one person to look after, especially for a teenager - if that teenager had developmental issues it would be even more of a challenge for her to keep up with all of them. If a toddler was crying that hard I don't understand how the 16 year old slept through it.
The idea that an adult would hold a child's head underwater to make it stop crying is horrific but for the five year old - she's just doing what she was familiar with. Seriously, what is up with these parents????
@teaadntoast: Oh I didnt realize that. Well in that case the parents should be held accountable. They shouldnt have left the small children with someone who was not capable of caring for them.
I think that 5 year olds can understand death or the cycle of life or what have you. But there is no way a 5 year old understands WHAT kills people or WAYS to kill people. Sure, now, after all is said and done I'm sure the child understands that the baby is "dead" but at the time I highly doubt she knew that what she was doing would kill the baby. I'm sad for everyone involved.
It's a tragic incident, but I think a 5-year-old cannot truly have murderous intent.
Maybe I have a different point of view because I'm from a hunting family, so from a very young age (like 3 or 4) I understood the concept of death. I knew that pointing a gun at someone and pulling the trigger would kill them. I understood that if someone died, they were gone. Their body was buried and you would never see them again.
I fully believe a 5 year old can intend to kill someone. They may not realize it's murder, or a terrible thing, but they can definitely understand the concept of death=the person going away forever. Of course, this is probably not the case for this particular child (let's be honest, if her parents dunked her underwater in place of discipline I doubt they were the kind of great open parents that were having discussions about the life cycle and death with her).
ETA: She did murder the toddler, there is no disputing that. But she probably didn't intend to, and will 100% not be charged. But I'm seeing a life of therapy ahead for this child.
This isn't going to be a popular opinion, but regardless of her intent, the five year old child DID kill the baby. I'm not saying she should be put away for life, but it is something that she did, in fact, do. This is incredibly tragic, and the babysitter should also bear some sort of neglect charge, but the child is not innocent in this case.
@Gingersnap: I don't think we can say she did "murder", since that is legally an unlawful killing with intent, and that is for a jury to decide. What we do know is that she killed. I think most legal cases say that children don't really have the cognitive ability to intend to kill until about 7 or 8. But we will see what happens, I suppose.
@Miss Longcoat: I agree with you completely.
This girl needs to get some serious treatment. And honestly my biggest concern is about rehabilitating her before she becomes a major threat to society more than that I'm concerned about her being upset by the event. This action shows some serious anger and violence issues. Are her parents to blame that she bahaves in that way? Absolutely! But regardless of how she got to this point she is there and she needs to be treated.
The parents should be in the biggest trouble here - who leaves a developmentally disabled 16 year old to babysit a five-year-old and a baby?! But something still needs to happen tot he five-year-old, rehabilitation or something.
This sort of reminds me of the Mary Bell case, although obviously she was slightly older http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/famous/bell/index_1.html
I agree with @Moose1209, probably best that they attempt to sort through whatever issues this child has before she becomes a threat to others as she gets older. She may not truly understand what she did, but that makes it even more worrying IMO.
Have to wonder what has happened to her to make her think that putting a baby's head underwater would silence it.
@AlmostMrsJames: Ahh, I don't think it's similar. Mary Bell obviously had a serious psychological issue, like conduct disorder or something. There's a difference between murder and mutilation, and what the 5-year-old in this case did. But I see what you're saying.
@Leahhh:Yeah I guess the only sort of similarity is that no-one would think a child could be capable of wanting someone to die or even understanding the concept of it.
You're right, there's totally a massive difference between the two.
You must log in to post.
| Visit our sister sites | eHarmony Online Dating |
eHarmony Advice Dating Advice |
Project Wedding Wedding Songs |
JustMommies Pregnancy Calendar |
Create the honeymoon of your dreams.
| User | Posts Today |
|---|---|
| Lyndzo | 46 |
| Brielle | 37 |
| AshleyR83 | 30 |
| mypinkshoes | 28 |
| rebwana | 26 |
| funkymunky85 | 26 |
| fivemonthsnotice | 26 |
| Cady | 25 |
| beargoose | 24 |
| his chippymunk | 24 |
| User | Posts Today |
|---|---|
| JulesSchnooks | 10 |
| BellaDee | 8 |
| HappilyEverAfter54 | 7 |
| mightywombat | 5 |
| SouthernGirl | 5 |
| couawilou | 5 |
| Snowflake011913 | 5 |
| KatyElle | 4 |
| Future Mrs. Martin | 3 |
| MissBoPeep | 3 |
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_kansas_drowning_charge
I believe a 5 year-old is capable of getting mad at someone and trying to "hurt" them, but not capable of understanding the result of "death," and shouldn't be charged.
And what about the 16-year-old?! good grief! (that's a little nap that you're probably going to regret the rest of your life...)