TirithRR wrote:
Ambrya wrote:
TirithRR wrote:
I was being sarcastic, because apparently physically harmless dragging by a harness is child abuse, yet running with a child in a chest strap and no head support isn't?
I was going to attempt to reply to this explaining why the two aren't even in the same universe with one another, but then realized that if you're so out of touch with the realities of both situations to find them even remotely comparable, you're not worth the effort. So, whatever, dude.
So running with a baby strapped to your back like the man in the picture of the site you linked, which has no neck support, poses no danger to a baby?
1) The Ergo has an
infant insert for small babies who need neck support. If the baby is old enough to hold up his own head, this isn't an issue anyway.
2) The Ergo has a
hood that can be put up around the baby's head to provide support, especially when they are sleeping and their head is lolling around.
3) The Ergo even is built so that it supports the child under their butt, instead of hanging them by their crotch like more well-known carriers such as the Baby Bjorn and Snugli, which means that even issues like hip stress from dangling legs aren't a problem.
4) Running with a kid in the Ergo is just another variation of using the Ergo as intended, and is therefore safe--people go hiking with them, as long as you're upright and the baby is in the prescribed position within the carrier, the pace at which you're moving is incidental. At most, the kid might be a little jounced and unhappy at the bouncing, but the potential for actual harm is negligible and mostly theoretical.
You're honestly honestly attempting to compare that to a situation fraught with extremely real and present potential for harm? Srsly?
Quote:
But dragging a kid on the floor by a harness poses more danger?
Yes, it does. There could be any manner of harmful stuff on the floor--not just dirt, but broken glass or plastic pieces or wooden slivers upon which a child could be cut, he could be hit on a wall or display case being dragged around a corner, he could be stepped on or tripped over. Hell, the friction of being dragged along the carpet, linoleum or cement alone could cause serious burns.
On top of that, even if the leash has a chest harness, it's designed for the child's weight to rest on the harness in front if you're pulling from behind to keep the kid from dashing out into traffic. If the harness is used as intended, a sudden jerk of the leash might result in, at worst, the kid getting a little bit of the wind knocked out of him.
However, that woman was NOT using it as intended...it's not designed to be pulled up under a kid's armpits like that. There are nerves bundles that run through the axillary area that could be damaged by a strap cutting into them like that for even a short period of time. With that sort of dragging, the front part of the harness could (and according to the article, which mentions marks on the child's neck, probably did) ride up and get caught up under the child's neck, posing a very real strangulation hazard.
Now if you want to continue idiotically attempting to equate the two, go right ahead, but it's a really fu
cking STUPID comparison to attempt to draw. Frankly, merely calling the woman dragging her kid "harmless" is moronic. The rest of your lame-brained theory is just icing on the cake.
the article in question if you click on the video wrote:
Woman arrested on child cruelty charge
by Jeff Gable
An Alabama woman was arrested Tuesday afternoon after police say she injured a child while dragging it through a store in Rome.
According to Floyd County Jail records:
Melissa Catherine Smith-Means, 37, of Gaylesville, Ala., was arrested by Rome police around 12:30 p.m. She was charged with felony first-degree cruelty to children.
Police say she was observed by customers and employees at a store on Broad Street, dragging a small child around by a backpack leash. The child had visible marks on the neck from the incident.
That, by you, is harmless?
Quote:
You are overcome by the "shock" of seeing a kid being dragged and can't seem to understand that no harm was being done.
Yes, harm WAS being done--the child had marks on his neck. Moreover, the POTENTIAL for great harm was tremendous and extremely real and present, whereas your hypothetical assumptions about running with a baby in the Ergo are merely theory.
Is seeing a woman dragging her kid along the floor shocking? Sure. But the REASON it's shocking is because she was doing something that was truly dangerous, and the shock is due to the fact that she was so devoid of common sense that she didn't realize how badly she
really could have hurt her child doing that. That he wasn't injured worse than he was was simply a matter of luck.
If your kid is misbehaving, you pick him up and carry him out of the store, you don't drag him along the floor.
Dude, seriously. If you're going to play devil's advocate, at least pick a case that doesn't make you look like an idiot.
Edited, Aug 3rd 2009 8:23pm by Ambrya