Hypothetical

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-23-2008
Hypothetical
16
Mon, 08-23-2010 - 8:41am

Because I am bored, sitting here waiting for an important phone call (and can't leave the house until it comes.)


TOTALLY HYPOTHETHICAL!!!

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-09-2009
In reply to: ukmom40
Mon, 08-23-2010 - 8:52am

The parent who has charge of the child at the time (in this case the NCP) is the one at fault. They should have made sure that there was someone there to care for the child. I'd say the same thing about a parent who was returning their child's friend early from a sleepover. They have the responsibility to make sure that there is someone at the child's home to care for the kid since the arrangement was for that kid to be under their care for a longer period of time. If they just drop the kid off and leave, and the child is left home alone (for longer than is allowed), then it's not the parents who are at fault, it's the friend's parent who is.

BTW, this scenario could have happened to us soooo many times. I can't count how many times, on BM's weekend, that we'd return from Saturday shopping/errands to unexpectedly find the kids sitting in the living room waiting for us. Like, what if we'd gone away for the weekend. They'd have probably called their mom eventually, but geez...

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-31-2009
In reply to: ukmom40
Mon, 08-23-2010 - 9:03am

Well, legally the NCP would be at fault for not verifying an adult presence.

However, I would like more info on how the CP communicated to the NCP the fact that he/she would be absolutely unreachable for 2 weeks....face-to-face convo, email, certified letter, etc? From this post, it seems as though NCP was unaware that CP was out of the country.

As a further aside: there is no way I would go on a 2 week vacation where I was completely out of range if my children were younger than 18...not just for the possibility of an incident like this, but also thinking of emergency surgeries, accidents, etc.

Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-20-2005
In reply to: ukmom40
Mon, 08-23-2010 - 9:13am

Both are to blame for the communication break down, but NCP is to blame for leaving the child unsupervised.

I camp quite a bit in places where there is no cell service. I give my teenage kids and my exh the phone # to the campground so I can be reached in an emergency. I *always* tell exh when I will be out of town because, now that our kids are teenagers and come and go to each of our houses, I want him to know that he is the only parent in charge.

Meez 3D avatar avatars games
Meez 3D avatar avatars games
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-24-2008
In reply to: ukmom40
Mon, 08-23-2010 - 9:14am

I think they are both to blame. If the child is old enough to have a key to let himself into the house, the child is old enough to be told "we are taking a cruise while you are with NCP for two weeks." At the very least so the child knows that the CP won't be reachable if something is needed. What if the child had been hurt and taken to the hospital, and the NCP couldn't reach the CP and had no idea why? I would say the CP needed to tell the NCP and the child, but gosh, at least tell the child! The NCP is also at fault for ending visitation early with no communication from the CP, and leaving the child there with nobody home. Fine to leave the child home if the CP has been notified, fine to not call if someone is there when the child is dropped off, not fine to refuse to communicate and drop the child off to an empty house.

I think CPS would investigate, discover both parents at fault, and tell them if it happened again there would be more serious consequences. Then the child would be returned to the CP. I think the judge would also find them both at fault, and warn them that out of town trips and cutting visitation short require two-way communication: informing the other parent and receiving acknowledgement that the information was received.

"Life is the art of drawing without an eraser."

John W. Gardner



Photobucket



Ten Rules for Being Human


Photobucket



"The key to good decision making is not knowledge. It is understanding."
Malcolm Gladwell Blink

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-28-2008
In reply to: ukmom40
Mon, 08-23-2010 - 10:21am
If it were me, child would know of vacation plans and would hopefully explain to NCP that if he or she takes the child home, no one will be there to care for them.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-04-2010
In reply to: ukmom40
Mon, 08-23-2010 - 10:24am

Both parents are doinks and at fault.


NCP for leaving the child off knowing CP wasn't there.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-18-2008
In reply to: ukmom40
Mon, 08-23-2010 - 10:31am

Both at fault.

Can't believe the CP didn't let their kid know that they were going to be on holiday whilst kid with NCP.

Unless they did of course and kid forgot. I personally wouldn't send my kid to NCP without letting NCP know i was going to be away just for emergency sake.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-06-2009
In reply to: ukmom40
Mon, 08-23-2010 - 11:40am
They are both morons in my opinion. Obviously the NCP is an idiot for leaving the child at CP's house without making sure anyone was home (especially if then not bothering to check up on child.) And the CP is a moron for leaving town for an extended period of time without telling the NCP. If the CP was still reachable by cell phone, that's one thing. DH and I specifically plan our trips for when the kids are with their other parents, and we don't feel obligated to inform either person of our plans but we always have our cell phones in case of emergency. My DH and I don't stop being parents at any point, regardless of whose time it is.
Meez 3D avatar avatars games
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-18-2009
In reply to: ukmom40
Mon, 08-23-2010 - 11:44am
Real SM's use Jazz Hands
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-26-2009
In reply to: ukmom40
Mon, 08-23-2010 - 11:53am
I'm with Lou. NCP holds the primary fault but CP is an idiot. (Just not the idiot on duty.) If I'm not at home when NCP has DS he always knows where I am, as does my mom so he can call her if he gets confused.

 

Pages