MOMania

By motherjanegoose

January 7, 2009 4:22 PM | Link to this

wow…two in one day! What is the mother doing sleeping with a 4 and 6 year old and it is time to go to school? Is there something we do not know here?

By Theresa

January 7, 2009 4:28 PM | Link to this

That’s all AP gave us — we’ll see if more details come out — I will post an update if we learn anything new —

By Jackie

January 7, 2009 4:41 PM | Link to this

I totally agree with motherjanegoose. 6yr olds need good breakfast & maybe a little help with getting stuff ready to go out the door. Shame, shame on this lazy mom!!!

By Tig

January 7, 2009 4:49 PM | Link to this

It’s interesting how the father is also being charged, yet am I missing where the story even says where he was at the time?

Talk about a story missing information!

By cofthenight

January 7, 2009 4:53 PM | Link to this

Oh, you know there is more to this story and more behind the scenes with this family than we’ll ever know. But, YES, it’s their fault. Should a 6 yr. old even be playing Grand Theft Auto??? It’s heartbreaking to have to take the kids away, but you know what… if it isn’t done now, you can only imagine what kinds of things might happen to those kids in the near future. I can only imagine why the mom was not awake in the first place to help the child get ready for school in the morning…

By HB

January 7, 2009 4:53 PM | Link to this

Washington Post had more details than AP. Seems dad had left for work but was under a court order not to leave kids alone with mom (something must have happened before), hence the charges against them both rather than just against the parent at home with the kids that morning. Charges and taking the kids seems to be a no brainer in this particular case.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/06/AR2009010601195.html?nav=hcmodule

By Becky

January 7, 2009 5:00 PM | Link to this

Yes they are to blame..When you have children that young, you should be up with them..

As others have said though, I’m sure that there is lots more to this story than we are being told..

By DB

January 7, 2009 5:15 PM | Link to this

Well, of COURSE they were to blame! No six year old should be unsupervised to the point where they can grab the keys, jump in the car, and DRIVE the car out of the driveway! Good grief! The father was a moron for leaving the six year old without supervision. We don’t know what the story is with the mom — does she work night shift and had just gone to bed? Was she sick in bed etc.? (God knows, I have a rotten cold!) Funny how we all pounce on the mom as “lazy”. (I haven’t read the Washington story, yet, so maybe I’m off base). But it seems to me that the father who walked out of the house, leaving a six year old knowingly unsupervised, can take on a great deal of the blame, here.

By motherjanegoose

January 7, 2009 5:54 PM | Link to this

NOT ON TOPIC but there are still good parents out there.

Front page of Sports today’s AJC Lineman grades out atop his class… Kudos to the parent of a Troup Senior Chris Burnette who is being recruited by Mark Richt. He is Valedictorian of his class with a 5.12 GPA ( AP classes count higher).

I would just like to hug him and his parents. He is the first student to be recruited by Richt that is a valedictorian of his class.

This story makes my day and encourages me that we do have a slight ray of hope for the future in our kids…KUDOS!

By WhoCares

January 7, 2009 6:02 PM | Link to this

The only reason Richt is recruiting ths guy is so that it will raise the collective GPA of his dumb a$$ football team after being embarassed last week due to the story about how low the average GPA and SAT scores of his players are.

By motherjanegoose

January 7, 2009 6:34 PM | Link to this

I do not care who is recruiting him…perhaps you missed my point…a lineman with a 5.12 GPA…THAT is the important part of the story.

By Jeff

January 7, 2009 6:58 PM | Link to this

If you’re going to charge mom in this, you’ll have to charge ANY parent who sleeps later than their kid. My parents did, I’m sure T will at some point (with my getting up around 4:30a every morning right now, I doubt I will), and I’m sure many of you are also guilty of this.

Dad, according to the Washington Post article, may have been a more justifiable charge, if he was in fact under a court order to not leave the kids with the mother. (Though I do question the court’s authority to give such an order, at this particular moment it was evidently allowed and presumably active.)

Of course, when I woke up earlier than mom and dad, it was always understood that I was to remain inside and not cook. (I could make cereal or get a drink, but nothing involving the stove.) Otherwise my options were TV/video games (quietly) or reading until mom and dad woke up.

Again though, you can’t really blame mom because kid woke up earlier than she did, at least no so far as to charge her with a crime. (Yes, she was an idiot for not setting an alarm early enough to make sure her kids were up and at school at the proper time, but that should hardly be considered a crime.)

By lg

January 7, 2009 7:08 PM | Link to this

Agree with some of the sentments here. I have a 12 year old and I am responsible for his complete care until he’s 18. That means I’m up to get him fed and ready for school and ensure he’s out the door on time. No wonder the poor boy was late if his mom was still in bed. That poor kid! I wouldn’t let my 12 year old play GT Auto! That’s an “M” rated game and I wouldn’t have it in my house.

I will tell you my son is expert at Flight Simulator and when I gifted him with a real flight lesson, he downloaded the plane, practiced, and totally awed the flight instructor. Video/Sim games work.

By Jeff

January 7, 2009 7:17 PM | Link to this

On the gaming aspect (is anyone else noticing that this is tieing in quite a bit recently??):

YES, games can be used to learn various skills. To the tune that DoD even uses custom built games for some training. (Everything from driving a tank to flying a plane to basic marksmanship. Heck, knowing of games such as Cooking Mama, I wouldn’t be surprised if they had games to train their cooks!)

That said, I don’t think I would let my 6yo play something such as GTA. Not only am I not a fan of the game to begin with (meaning it wouldn’t be in my house, particularly when the kid was that young), but 6yo really is too young to be playing those types of games. (More cartoony/realistic games such as Halo and Mortal Kombat, I don’t think I’d have a problem with even at that age. No bad language, all the characters are clearly fake, and my position that it helps vent anger/frustration in a non-destructive manner all come to bear here.)

By momtoAlex&Max

January 8, 2009 6:41 AM | Link to this

There’s so much more to this story. Namely: why does a 6 year old have access to GTA? The Washington Post story mentions that the boy did not want to miss breakfast and PE. So in this family, there’s enough money for a game system but not to feed the children breakfast? Number 2: why was the mother asleep instead of helping the kids get off to school? Irresponsible to the core, but I guess question number 1 explain where this family’s priorities are. Number 3: why was there a court order stating the father could not leave the children alone with the mother?

I am so glad the children are in protective custody.

By shaggy

January 8, 2009 6:54 AM | Link to this

This is a stupid question. Of course the morons are responsible. The future convict is 6 not 18.

Oh, I forgot, this is our society today, where so-called parents (really just sperm and egg donors) are “entitled” to shift responsibility to anyone but them.

By JJ

January 8, 2009 8:14 AM | Link to this

Did anyone read the article about a 4 year old boy who got mad at his babysitter, and went and grabbed a gun and shot her? 4 YEARS OLD!

Yes, the parents should be held responsible for this 6 year old driving a car.

But, we don’t know all the circumstances. Maybe mom worked nights, and Dad was suppossed to get the kids ready in the mornings.

There’s too much info missing from this story.

By Numbers Guy

January 8, 2009 10:16 AM | Link to this

The telling parts to me are the fact that the 6YO is playing GTA and the father was already under court order not to leave his kids alone with mommy.

Seriously, I’m a gamer and have no problem with the boy playing as well, but not stuff as adult as GTA is. Stunning lack of judgement there.

The court order intimates that DFACS (and the police?) were already well acquainted with the parents in question, and this was NOT an isolated incident. I can certainly see why they’d react this way under those circumstances.

By Beck

January 8, 2009 1:11 PM | Link to this

Did anyone else notice the age discrepancy between the parents?

Mom was either 19 or 20 when she got pregnant with the 6 year old and the dad would have been 33 or 34.

I don’t think this is their first set of irresponsible choices, and it’s obviously not the first time it’s come to the attention of the court.

By Shaye

January 8, 2009 2:13 PM | Link to this

“But it seems to me that the father who walked out of the house, leaving a six year old knowingly unsupervised, can take on a great deal of the blame, here”—absolutely and obviously. Good or bad mom, provisions had been made and the dad blew off his responsibilities. End of story. Maybe some of that federal money to help create jobs and make sure essential support services remain at decent levels should be sent the way of DFCS (and this is not just an issue in Georgia).

It’s a shame when all systems fail kids. We should be glad he didn’t injure himself or someone else.

By Storm

January 8, 2009 3:23 PM | Link to this

Shaye The System didn’t fail the kids, his idiot lazy parents failed him.

By Shaye

January 8, 2009 5:28 PM | Link to this

On the contrary, his parents AND state systems failed him, as well as any others—grandparents, etc.

A kid should not be the one to pay the price for having the bad grace to be born to idiot lazy parents. :P

By Mrs. Davis

January 9, 2009 6:42 AM | Link to this

This 6-yr-old was not properly supervised. He seemed to have worries about getting adequate food. He had learned to drive from watching inappropriate programming for a child. I wouldn’t knowingly allow my 18-yr-old to play GTA in my home.

By Mrs. Davis

January 9, 2009 6:43 AM | Link to this

This 6-yr-old was not properly supervised. He seemed to have worries about getting adequate food. He had learned to drive from watching inappropriate programming for a child. I wouldn’t knowingly allow my 18-yr-old to play GTA in my home. Yes, the parents are responsible for everything.

By Jeff

January 9, 2009 8:27 AM | Link to this

Mrs Davis:

Inappropriate by whose standards?

When it comes to parenting, outside of clear physical or sexual abuse, I tend to side with the parents on however they want to raise their kids, at least insofar as I don’t believe the government has the right to tell them otherwise. (In other words, if a parent wants to raise their kids to believe that all snakes are Satan incarnate, I’m going to call them idiots but I’m also going to say the government has no right to tell those kids otherwise.)

By momtoAlex&Max

January 9, 2009 9:07 AM | Link to this

Jeff: the government isn’t telling anyone what video games to play in the house. The point to all this is that when YOUR stupid choices affect MY safety, I am going to have something to say about it. In this case, the parents of this boys’ stupid choices (i.e. allowing a 6 year old to play a CLEARLY inappropiate game and not getting up in time to get the boy to school) affected the safety of the entire town. So yes, in this case the government got involved. The video games were part of it; another part of it was that this boy was soooooo worried about getting something to eat at school (indicating that there’s not even a box of cereal and some milk in the house) that he made a stupid choice and could have killed someone(s).

You want to make idiotic choices for your kid, fine. But no one lives in a bubble. Their choices are bound to affect ME.

By Jeff

January 9, 2009 9:41 AM | Link to this

momtpAlex&Max:

The key phrase in your last was that he made the decision, when referring to the 6yo.

As I said earlier, I’ve always been an early riser (lately even earlier than normal). Growing up, I KNEW there were certain things I was not allowed to do before mom or dad got up. (Such as cook, leave the house, play with matches, have friends over that had not spent the night, etc) I will grant that these parents not teaching their kids similar things was a bad thing.

Where I stop is that they should be charged with a crime. (Though as I noted earlier, though I disagree with the court’s authority to issue such an order, the charge against the dad for violating a standing order of the court seems to be a just charge insofar as it goes.)

If anyone - again, other than the dad - is to be charged with a crime in this case, it should be the 6yo boy that stole his parents’ vehicle. drove without a license, and caused property damage.

The mom is an idiot. I’ll completely concur with you there.

But she is not a criminal.

By momtoAlex&Max

January 9, 2009 12:01 PM | Link to this

Yeah libertarians do tend to have the whole every man for himself thing going.

Personally, I feel that society has a moral obligation to care for those that cannot care for themselves (i.e. pets and children). Which is why I support the child seat law, but hate the helmet law. The difference here is that a child is dependent on others to keep him/her safe while if someone chooses to crack their skull on the pavement, it’s their problem.

In this case, the state was correct in separating the children from their parents. None of this would have happened if there have been food in the house, the mother would have gotten up and made sure they were off to school, and it is very likely that playing GTA had a whole lot to do with putting the idea on this kid’s head. So yes, criminals both mother and father.

By Jeff

January 9, 2009 12:58 PM | Link to this

momtoAlexandMax:

All perfectly good arguments…

… for the 6yo boy’s defense lawyer to make in his hearing.

It is highly likely that there was, in fact, edible food in the house. (Unless you are REALLY poor, there is almost ALWAYS something edible in the house, and with two cars I doubt this family was that poor.) Furthermore, again, waking up later than your kid is NOT a crime, and if it were 90% of parents in this country would be guilty of it at some point when their child is a minor. (Heck, babies wake up earlier than their parents all the time!) And again, while I find a 6yo playing GTA to be distasteful, I hold by the parents’ right to allow their child to play video games as they deem fit.

By SAR

January 9, 2009 1:34 PM | Link to this

Each and every thing your underage, minor kids do, both parents should be legally responsible for. With all the kids and gangs on the streets today, the crimes their doing, a person should have to have a permit to have a kid just like I have to have a permit to own a handgun; both have the potential to be deadly and dangerous when not used properly in a guns case, or trained properly in the childs place. Uneducated people shouldn’t procreate, period. Neither should convicted felons. Face it, we have far more kids running the streets than we need and we have an excess of idiots doing shoddy job a being parents, errr…I mean sperm donors. Once your kid has two serious crimes, you should have to give up your fertility rights. I am sick of idiots popping out bad kids like canned biscuits and expecting me to tolerate their criminal behaviors and all the dunces running around having them.

By Jeff

January 9, 2009 2:43 PM | Link to this

SAR:

There is a name for your feelings.

It is called ‘eugenics’.

And it was the basis of belief that led directly to all kinds of human experimentation in the early 20th centurey, but largely died out after it was discovered just how horrible it really was.

You see, eugenics is what was directly responsible for the deaths of MILLIONS of Jews and other ‘undesireables’ in circa 1930s-40s Germany and conquered lands.

Yes, eugenics was the basis of beliefs that resulted in the Holocaust.

By Davona

January 9, 2009 3:42 PM | Link to this

While I totally agree that parents should always be held responsible for their children’s actions, this was a bit extreme. This family needs DEFACS involved, not jail. These children and parents need to be together. What a sad situation.

By Davona

January 9, 2009 3:42 PM | Link to this

While I totally agree that parents should always be held responsible for their children’s actions, this was a bit extreme. This family needs DEFACS involved, not jail. These children and parents need to be together. What a sad situation.

By Joe

January 9, 2009 6:32 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

Honestly, some sort of formal training should be a requirment for having a child. There are WAY TOO MANY unqualified parents out there; just b/c you CAN have a child doesn’t mean you SHOULD have a child. It would be the largest test of our Constitution to date, but you should be required to have a license to have children.

By Susie

January 12, 2009 10:29 AM | Link to this

The kids should be taken from their parents on the grounds of them being allowed to play Grand Theft Auto at the age of 6! The rest is just more nails in those parents coffins. Having that game in their house is indicative of what kinds of parenting they are doing. My boys are teenagers and I won’t allow that game in my house.

By Susie

January 12, 2009 10:37 AM | Link to this

The kids should be taken from their parents on the grounds of them being allowed to play Grand Theft Auto at the age of 6! The rest is just more nails in those parents coffins. Having that game in their house is indicative of what kinds of parenting they are doing. My boys are teenagers and I won’t allow that game in my house.