03-07-2015, 10:23 AM
You're all over the map here, Donovan.
First you insist that had the parents given Trinity a beatdown or locked her in her room sometime in the past, she wouldn't have had a tantrum the night that she died -- essentially, that a lack of appropriate intervention, punishment and discipline by the parents culminated in Trinity's death.
Then you claim that parents should directly intervene very little when it comes to the actions of their children, except if the child puts him/herself in a dangerous or life-threatening situation. If the parent is unable to save the child from the child's own actions at such a time, the parent is a failure and is to blame for the child's death -- no ifs, ands, or buts about it -- in your current view.
Both contradictory parenting philosophies that you've espoused are based on your claimed opinions at the time you posted them, which is not a problem because that's what I was interested in hearing; people's opinions, assumptions, speculations based on what we know.
How you've applied your philosophies and opinions to determine culpability in the death of Trinity Bachmann is based on pure speculation, which is not a problem, though you continue to position your conclusion as based on fact. You do not know how Trinity was parented. You do not know if mom had time to physically remove her daughter from the road before the girl was struck. You do not know if mom had Trinity by the hair when the girl was struck and thus was struck herself.
I agree with you that mom likely blames herself for Trinity's death. Parents often express feelings of guilt and self-blame when their children are killed because they have an inherent desire to protect their children from harm and they weren't able to do so. "If only I'd driven my 12-year-old son to school instead of letting him walk 6 blocks, he wouldn't have been hit by a stray bullet and died." "I should have taken my daughter to the hospital when she first started coughing instead of assuming she had the bug that was going around; the doctors might have been able to save her." The fact that parents often blame themselves when they lose children doesn't mean the parents are responsible for the deaths; IMO, it doesn't bolster your argument that Trinity's mom is to blame if, in fact, she blames herself.
My opinion -- and that's all it is -- is that Trinity, at 13, was to blame for her own unfortunate death. The driver who struck her may also share responsibility; too early to know yet. If it turns out that mom knowingly let or encouraged Trinity to sit in the street before she took action, she also shares responsibility for the death.
First you insist that had the parents given Trinity a beatdown or locked her in her room sometime in the past, she wouldn't have had a tantrum the night that she died -- essentially, that a lack of appropriate intervention, punishment and discipline by the parents culminated in Trinity's death.
Then you claim that parents should directly intervene very little when it comes to the actions of their children, except if the child puts him/herself in a dangerous or life-threatening situation. If the parent is unable to save the child from the child's own actions at such a time, the parent is a failure and is to blame for the child's death -- no ifs, ands, or buts about it -- in your current view.
Both contradictory parenting philosophies that you've espoused are based on your claimed opinions at the time you posted them, which is not a problem because that's what I was interested in hearing; people's opinions, assumptions, speculations based on what we know.
How you've applied your philosophies and opinions to determine culpability in the death of Trinity Bachmann is based on pure speculation, which is not a problem, though you continue to position your conclusion as based on fact. You do not know how Trinity was parented. You do not know if mom had time to physically remove her daughter from the road before the girl was struck. You do not know if mom had Trinity by the hair when the girl was struck and thus was struck herself.
I agree with you that mom likely blames herself for Trinity's death. Parents often express feelings of guilt and self-blame when their children are killed because they have an inherent desire to protect their children from harm and they weren't able to do so. "If only I'd driven my 12-year-old son to school instead of letting him walk 6 blocks, he wouldn't have been hit by a stray bullet and died." "I should have taken my daughter to the hospital when she first started coughing instead of assuming she had the bug that was going around; the doctors might have been able to save her." The fact that parents often blame themselves when they lose children doesn't mean the parents are responsible for the deaths; IMO, it doesn't bolster your argument that Trinity's mom is to blame if, in fact, she blames herself.
My opinion -- and that's all it is -- is that Trinity, at 13, was to blame for her own unfortunate death. The driver who struck her may also share responsibility; too early to know yet. If it turns out that mom knowingly let or encouraged Trinity to sit in the street before she took action, she also shares responsibility for the death.