Forgetting a Child in a Car Is a Horrifying Mistake. Is It a Crime? (2009)
washingtonpost.com
washingtonpost.com
Blaming the last failure in a chain of failures -- the drunk driver, the tired parent, the 737 pilot --- prevents prevention.
There Are No Accidents.
https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/There-Are-No-Accident...
At the same time, I agree with this. I’ve been thinking a lot about the structural ills of modernity for years. So while others have mentioned this might be gauche, I think these are exactly what we should be discussing as a society.
It isn’t just building a society where we are so car dependent. We have also lost the social net of extended families, village and communities.
Where were the grandparents and extended families that could watch a kid so that they don’t have to go to daycare?
Why are we so driven for material success that we overwork and juggle the care of children with other things?
When that toddler turns to a teen, how has our world of “share this” and “retweets” that changed our sense of truths affect that teen? Gen-Z are already struggling to make sense of this.
> Where were the grandparents and extended families that could watch a kid so that they don’t have to go to daycare?
It's heartbreaking really.
> When that toddler turns to a teen, how has our world of “share this” and “retweets” that changed our sense of truths affect that teen?
While I have an unbridled confidence in my children, I still worry about their teen years. Adolescence has always been hard, how much harder will it be for them, with pervasive social media, and rudderless and overwhelmed adults at the helm.
Yeah, I remember the early years of Wired magazine, and buying into the idea of technology being value-neutral. And it's not. And this has been observed before. Marshall McLuhan lived through mass-electrification, broadcast radio and TV and talked about it extensively with "the medium is the message".
> Adolescence has always been hard, how much harder will it be for them, with pervasive social media, and rudderless and overwhelmed adults at the helm.
I have a teenage stepdaughter and got a view into how destructive social media has been -- close contact with behavioral hospitals. It's worse than the reports about teenage girls having low self-esteem and have suicidal ideation. My wife's aunt has been in special-ed for years, and has mentioned a rise in kids who are not resilient, lack grit and growth-mindset; don't even mention being anti-fragile. An example being, a cell phone was taken away during classtime from a high school kid, who proceeds to roll around on the ground in a toddler fit because his world has crumbled without a cell phone.
Two recent articles that had been posted here on HN comes to mind:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/05/social-...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/apr/14/the-lunacy-i...
That second article describes a fake conspiracy theory that had enough of the Gen-Z markers where the Zoomers know it is fake and ironic, but the conspiracy theorists don't. In a lot of ways, stuff like that is how the Zoomers look like they are coping with a world where we can't agree on basic truths, undermining of social institutions across the political spectrum, and fractured values.
With my toddler, my wife and I are making some conscious choices about values, and even world views and paradigms. Emotional intelligence is just as important as being able to reason; we've been working our way through Daniel Tiger's Neighborhood (the successor for Mr. Roger's). I've been slowly absorbing and integrating the Living Systems World View and Regenerative paradigm (Carol Sanford, Regenerative Life). I've already got things I learned about grit, growth mindset, anti-fragility that's encapsulated by a traditional Chinese cultural value of gongfu, and will be passing on to my toddler. We're already going to implement something from traditional cultures, and expressed in Daniel Tiger's as "everyone's big enough to help with something" (https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2018/06/09/6169288...). That is, I want my kids to grow up knowing they can voluntarily contribute meaningfully to the greater community and society, and that drives the development of growing their capacity to do so.
> Emotional intelligence is just as important as being able to reason
+100
Side-note wrt. McLuhan, I think we'll look back at the 70s as a time when we already had these most perceptive understanding of modernism and its fallout, e.g. it's amazing how relevant Wolfe, Jacobs, Lasch, McLuhan, Baudrillard, ... still are today in understanding the current condition. But then nothing really changed, if anything, we just doubled down for another 50 years. Keeping fingers crossed for grassroots change this time around.
Anyway, you have my upvote. The accidental killing of children with our cars (which forgetting them in the backseat is only a minuscule portion of) is purely 100% because the public realm we've built is unaccessible without cars. Revealing too that the majority of "fixes" to this problem are additional technological layers (cars with cooling mechanisms! occupant alert system! mnemotechnic devices! better code enforcement!), rather than supporting the removal of misapplied technology in the first place.
I can’t even fathom the horror in that moment recognizing what has happened, when it really sets in before the brain kicks into trauma mode.
Hard for me to imagine prison doing any good in these cases, but also understand the risk of neglect or even malice disguised as forgetfulness being unpunished.
Tough one.
>malice disguised as forgetfulness being unpunished
This is kind of a separate issue. If it was malice and proven in court, it will be punished. If it was malice but couldn't be proven in court, it won't be punished. That's true for anything. We can't entertain the thought of punishment "just in case" it was malice.
You could be right
> I have trouble imagining someone so selfish...
Alas, that's not an argument.
On the technology side, I'm thinking of two bluetooth (or similar) enabled wrist bands. One for the kid and one for the mom/dad. When the device loses connection to the other, the parent's band beeps and must be manually silenced. The kid's band could be connected with the car via bluetooth so the only time the alarm can be activated is when the kid's wrist band has been connected with the car in the last 10ish minutes (adjustable). Though if I were a parent I'd be worried about losing a kid in general too.
Trouble is a lot of moms are extremely crunchy and selling something like that would be hard.
If it’s legally integrated in car seat then it’s much easier.
But most of the times these accidents happen, it's due to a change of routine - father taking the kid to daycare instead of mom, an emergency phone call on the way to work causing distraction, etc. It's times when people skip the routine, and make a mistake.
So in the end, criminal punishment ends up punishing people for being human.
A passerby called security who called a locksmith and the police. Both arrived quickly, the cop deciding that my daughter was in no danger so there was no need to break the window unless the locksmith couldn't get in. Sure enough, he was in quickly. He refused to take any money for the call.
That panicked feeling was indescribable, and such a small shadow of what the people in the article must have felt and continue to feel.
Their mistake is burned into their mind. They feel like they let everyone down. Of anyone, it seems they are now the least likely to ever be careless again.
Thomas J. Watson
In most jurisdictions, it is still illegal to put a baby or very small child in the passenger seat. I can't speak for anyone else, but in my own case, I think the risk of forgetting to turn it off when a child is riding in the front seat is going to be much higher than the risk of forgetting my child in the rear seat.
That's really the calculus: How is it that we think we could forget that our child is in the back seat, but remember to disengage the air bag every time we put their seat in the front?
Admittedly, CA is one of the states where it is a regulation, and there are a decent number of people on HN from CA.
Putting kids in the front seat only works for one kid, only if there’s one adult, and only if the front airbag can be disabled.
I am lucky enough to not dependend on a car for my everyday activity, and only using my car a couple of times a week.
I can totally understand people being in the habit of getting in and out of their vehicle without checking the rear seat.
Any child death is a tragedy, and a loss for the whole community.
Because no children would ever die in an accident involving public transportation?
We could just call it an accident and not try to dig too deeply into societal problems to explain it. A little perspective: 3.6M babies/year are born in the US every year. 15-20 accidents like this occur each year. Tragic, yes, but it's not even remotely close to a trend that needs some underlying explanation.
I apologise for an appeal to "common sense" since I really don't have any data, but it seems sort of obvious that it would be safer for two reasons:
1. There's almost always other people there, so someone is likely to warn you that you abandoned your kid.
2. Your kid is there with you, so it's not like you have to remember them.
You're trying to make the argument that "a few kids being locked in cars every year isn't that significant in the larger picture". That's a different argument than "the reason kids are locked in cars is because people are driving in cars".
My point was that those kids die because their parents are forced to use their personal vehicle to do anything (groceries, drop mail, going to work, see friends) that sometimes they forgot they brought their kids with them, because of habits of being alone in the car.
So, yes, so death are the product of a society dependant on personal vehicle.
That is a bold assertion. I have certainly been the only human on public transportation at times.
You are intentionally narrowing your argument to "forgotten in personal vehicle" so you can say that personal vehicles are bad. That does not seem profound. Moving entirely to public transportation would eliminate that precise risk while introducing others. And the net result may actually be more deaths. Keep in mind how rare children dying in cars is today.
> I have certainly been the only human on public transportation at times.
Their are always a driver of a vehicle, or other passengers coming in less than an hour or so...
> Moving entirely to public transportation would eliminate that precise risk while introducing others
I never imply to move entirely to public transportation. The best solution is multi-modal transportation.
> Keep in mind how rare children dying in cars is today.
This is an argument I despise, specially related to cars... Any death is bad, and should be avoided, whatever how!
A simple example, in the USA, is the whole wave of rules, laws, etc. after the attach of 9/11. Less than 3000 died[1] because of it. That's equal to only one month of road death in 2020 or 2021[2].
[1] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm51SPa6.htm [2] https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/...
My guess would be more die from being tramped
Caveats:
• Not saying parents have no responsibility
• Not saying auto makers have sole responsibility
• I understand the “slippery slope” argument that this will lead to parents leaving their children on cars
• This is just an extrapolation into the far future, like 100 years or so, when we have metals far stronger than steel protecting your car door and sentient robots.
Volvo once had a "pedestrian air bag" that deployed on the front hood if the car detected what appeared to be a pedestrian being struck. Maybe that was a slippery slope to reenacting "Death Race 2000!"
I kid, of course. All safety systems lull people into some false sense of security. The question is not whether that happens, but whether the overall result is more or less safety. In general, we are statistically safer with these systems, even if some people become complacent.
I worry that if "dog mode" as it is becomes widespread, it will give the negligent parents an excuse and means to feed their addictions.
I'd be happier if dog mode automatically called 911 after xx minutes of a living creature being left in the car.
Also, Gene Weingarten is a national treasure. His writing in general and this piece in particular make me want to be sure newspapers prosper enough that it's always someone's paying job to be a long-form journalist. Even if I frequently get my news other ways, that is an extremely valuable social function.
I work in the consumer electronics space, so I have a reasonable sense of how hard this would be, but it seems like an air temperature monitor that is on/around your baby would be pretty easy to build and probably sell millions.
All of these gadgets suffer from false positives. Imagine heart rate disappearing three times a night and you’ll throw that product away after first night.
On topic: No, not a crime. Not negligence unless you're taking some abnormal risk that makes it more likely to happen. It is an accident.
Other thing I find weird about cars is how they don’t come with monoxide interlock. Heck some generators do now, why not cars?
Not sure how easy it is to detect if you leave a child alone in the care, and for how long. What if you just go get something from the trunk, or if you forgot something in your home?
I'd be in favor of automatically rolling down windows if interior temperature exceeds 35C. This could work on ICE cars too. I guess it could increase thefts on hot days, but thieves seem to have no trouble breaking windows anyway.
All cars are electric cars if you put a solar panel on the roof!
I believe that Bentley had this as an option some years ago: The solar panel would power enough of the climate system so that when you returned to your car after a heavy shopping session on Rodeo Drive, it would be warm but not oppressive and would quickly reach your desired temperature when you restarted the engine and turned on the AC.
Of course, as a Bentley owner, you need never worry about leaving your child in the back seat. The nanny is back there and will handle everything.
To prevent the death of a child it would be sufficient to prevent the car from getting too hot. If you have a reliable way to detect the presence of a living being in the car, the car could just decide to activate the AC once a temperature threshold is met.
https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/auto-industry-agr...
https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/12/us/hot-car-deaths-infrastruct...
My 2 year old Hyundai Palisade has rear seat detection via ultrasonic sensors - and I believe newer ones are using radar.
https://www.consumerreports.org/car-safety/guide-to-rear-sea...
Which is probably accurate.
I think a little indicator on your car with lights for each seat that is occupied where occupied is done by weight and is able to ignore the weight of a car seat might be a useful portion of an electronic dashboard. Still dashboard real estate is scarce and I'm not sure what indicator we'd be willing to remove to have it. On the whole it still doesn't surprise me that car manufacturers haven't done it.
My car has a "rear occupant alert" system. The problem seems to be that it struggles to differentiate between junk in the trunk and a living thing. Unfortunately, that makes it relatively useless since it's almost always beeping at us.
American society has developed a moral panic/obsession with policing/persecuting parents (especially mothers) in certain ways. While pretty much ignoring systematic dangers to children such as lead (in paint, water, etc.), and the crushing financial penalties (from the medical bills for childbirth right through college expenses) for having them.
At what point should I tell my [great-]granddaughters that I'll pay for them to get their tubes tied at age 18, and that is (sadly) the least-bad deal available in the U.S.?
But as an engineer of machines that test automotive safety systems, including the LATCH restraints that anchored the carseats in which those children sat, and also the window motors that sealed them in, I wonder if there's more we could do here on a systemic level.
We live in a society that uses a mode of transportation which has two characteristics: One, to be safe at speed, small children must be buckled in the back by adults known to be fallible, forgetful, imperfect humans, in such a way that the toddler cannot escape, and two, because the vehicle must be theft-proof and rain-proof, when parked in ordinary sunlight, it becomes a greenhouse which would kill a child in that seat. There are 1.4 billion vehicles in the world, it's only a matter of time before probability will cause these problems to align.
Knowing that this is a thing that could happen - no, poor choice of language, WILL happen again - how could we build a better car that will avoid these issues? Many new cars have infrared temperature sensors for automatic climate control, why not run the fan to keep the internal temperature survivable for the first 24 hours it's locked? It's already a pain dealing with automotive requirements that wiring and circuits be capable of a -40 to 105 C temperature range. Why not relax these for the cabin, and include vents or louvers (or crack the sunroof automatically) to allow air exchange when parked? Cars also have microphones inside the cabin for hands-free phone use, could the mic pick up the distress of a child and sound the horn/alarm or open the windows?
No, I don't want to encourage people to leave their kids in their cars, and I don't want anyone's battery to run dead, or their upholstery to get rained on, or their car to be cold in the snow, or a lowered window to result in thefts, or spurious alarms to annoy people...but those are all avoidable.
On average, once per week, a kid dies in a hot car in the US. Villifying the adults isn't working, therefore, we should try something different. And no, making the climate controls smart today won't prevent the three dozen deaths we're likely to see in the next summer months, but eventually those safer cars will trickle down to parents.
Don't take my word, here they are:
Nevada: A parent, legal guardian or other person responsible for a child who is 7 years of age or younger shall not knowingly and intentionally leave that child in a motor vehicle if:
Texas: A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly leaves a child in a motor vehicle for longer than five minutes
The only reason I wanted to know if you're engaging with the article rather than the headline is that you haven't acknowledged the issues raised by the writer - which struck me as odd in this context.
Willful neglect is awful, a crime, and should be punished. In some cases it's probably necessary for a court to determine if the neglect was willful or not.
But I simply can't imagine the lifelong self-inflicted torment a parent would experience in a situation like the one described. Prison or death would be a respite I think.
Crashing is often non-recoverable, and not really built into the runbook. Some support teams do triage pretty well, but most... not so much. The tickets build up, and often just get flushed.
Our monitoring infrastructure is built on the assumption of uptime. We ignore the technical debt.
The Centennial Light has now been running mostly continuously since 1901, while the oldest living human was born in 1904. The bulb hasn't burned out, but has been shut off briefly a few times, which seems comparable to one's heart stopping but being resuscitated.
I'm not aware of any single "technology," in the broadest sense, operating for a longer continuous period of time.
One-off screw-ups, no matter the outcome, are not "neglect". (Though very similar English words and phrases are often used to describe both a one-off screw-up and actual child neglect.)