The fact that she was to tired to take a baby to the hospital, but not to follow husband every step is what concerns me.
> “I’m worried,” I told my husband. “I want you to take her to the hospital.”
> “Doctors always tell us to take the baby to the E.R. whenever we call about anything,” he replied, exasperated. (This was true.) “She is fine. She is eating and playing and happy. This is not an emergency.”
> He eventually caved and set out for the hospital a half-hour away. Knowing he was already annoyed by me, I did not want to pepper him with questions about how it was going.
> Instead, I turned to the location-monitoring devices that I had secretly stashed in our car a week earlier.
> “Doctors always tell us to take the baby to the E.R. whenever we call about anything,” he replied, exasperated. (This was true.) “She is fine. She is eating and playing and happy. This is not an emergency.”
> He eventually caved and set out for the hospital a half-hour away.
The next article writes itself doesn't it?
In 2018, the United States spent about $3.6 trillion on healthcare, which averages to about $11,000 per person. Relative to the size of the economy, healthcare costs have increased over the past few decades, from 5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 1960 to 18 percent in 2018. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) project that by 2028, such costs will climb to $6.2 trillion, or about $18,000 per person, and will represent about 20 percent of GDP.
https://www.pgpf.org/blog/2020/04/why-are-americans-paying-m...
Recently during a bout of covid my son's tongue was blue and he couldn't figure out what was up. My wife wanted to the go to ER, the doctor said to go to the ER. I said, "no, there's another explanation for this and nobody is losing a night of sleep over this". The next day we noticed the blue tongue happened after taking some blue-colored vitamin gummies.
Add to that that depending on your health-care plan, it could cost you thousands of dollars!
"Here, let me convince my husband that he needs to go take the baby to the hospital. Now, let's stalk him to see if he actually did it!"
Anyways, this turned me off. It could have been "forgiven" (if this word even applies) had it contributed something meaningful. Sadly, it didn't, so it just comes off as neurotic stalking.
> It could have been "forgiven" (if this word even applies) had it contributed something meaningful
Just because you are aware of the dangers of tracking and how these devices work it doesn't mean others are equally aware.
However, what seems to have happened in reality, is that they had previously played a harmless game of "find the Airtags". Then, some time later, possibly a large period, she uses those Airtags to track the husband. It's hard to say in either direction if the husband knew and expected to be tracked to the hospital. I think that was a deliberate choice - but it still comes off deceptive, if this is just happenstance.
If any of this had contributed meaningfully to the main points, I would tolerate it a lot more - that's my biggest contention. The fact that the author isnt a perfect person is just a side gripe that I have with plenty other articles.
Articles don't normally highlight the virtues of the journalist where that's not relevant to the subject of the article.
Not just "let's find airtags today" and then "boohoo I've been tracking you without permission". Wouldn't make sense. He was not surprised when his phone notified him that a tag was tracking him after a day in Manhattan.
Also, this is an opinion/editorial piece, so whether the author watched their spouse the entire time or if the author pieced the evening together after the fact while writing this article is up for speculation.