Prior history is not relevant in this case since witnesses state they did not observed the mother neglecting her kids. In fact, she was tending for one when the toddler took off behind her back. Fact remains, a fence that can't restrain a mere 3 year old isn't much of a fence.
Of course. I believe CPS has enough information to do an investigation on the parents. Looks like father isn't in the picture. Mother has to take care of 4 kids. Is she able to? If not, could the kids be put in a better situation? Not for criminal charges, but it should be relevant to determine if the parents are fit to raise children. Sure, the fence may need some improvements. But, it's kept children out for its 40-year existence. It's passed every inspection. Outside of making it a fully enclosed jail cell, I'm not sure how you're going to keep someone out that's determined to get in.
It was breached by a 3-year-old. That fence wasn't doing anything to keep anyone out. People didn't fall in because they stayed on the path and kept their kids on the path. It's a credit to parenting that it prevented an accident for 38 years. It seems like the fence didn't do anything a white stripe painted on the ground couldn't do.
America seems to have a really hard time coming to grips with the fact that sometimes, unfortunately, **** happens.
Like I said, it may be in need of improvements. The inspections haven't thought so, and that standard is keeping children out of hundreds of zoos and thousands of exhibits daily. A 3-year old is capable of climbing a fence, but it takes some time. It's up to the parents to make sure their child doesn't get that time.
The argument "it's always been like that" isn't a defense. America would still have slavery with that attitude. Progress is progress, however slow. Apparently, this 3yo didn't take any time at all to climb this fence. Somebody would have grabbed the kid if they saw it happening. Somebody tried, apparently, and didn't get there in time. By all accounts, the kid moved quick. This was not a slow development. Should parents do better? Of course. Will another random parent make a "mistake" again by letting their kid out of their site? Of course. (thousands of time per day) Can zoos make improvements? Of course.
All valid points, but there's also the argument that out of thousands of daily visitors over many decades at the hundreds of zoos with their hundreds of exhibits, only a handful of children have made it into an exhibit. If that's enough to update the industry standard, then so be it.
You're right insofar that I don't believe the Cinci Zoo has been negligent in some way with their flimsy fence. 3-4 year-olds are just about the only demographic you need to worry about simultaneously having the mobility to cross it and the poor judgment to think it was a good idea (well, you also have high teenagers that think its funny to taunt tigers). However, it does get my back up to see the defense that it was inspected. Have you seen the bang up job those guys at the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality are doing? How about those big-shot auditors at Arthur Anderson? When something disastrously fails, bringing up the inspections isn't a defense, it's just an attack on the credibility of the inspector. Now, I don't think I want to blame the inspector either, but he can't absolve the zoo of anything.
Again, the argument "it's always been like that therefore let's not address it" is not a defense. The question is what is the effort required to fix existing exhibits. Modern exhibits already addressed it by using glass. <iframe width="854" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/g5Z9Pq3gXgU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>"] At the Cincinnati zoo, they already made modifications to their "legacy" exhibit to make it harder for toddlers to scale the fence. So your argument that zoos shouldn't bother to update their exhibits isn't supported by reality. Than can and they are.
On the one hand, you want to criticize the mother for letting her child out of her site. On the other hand, as the father of 4 kids... well, sometimes its impossible, frankly. We were at a renaissance fair type thing about a year ago and i was turned around for 5 seconds talking to my eldest when the 3 year old somehow got turned around and was 15 feet away from me looking lost. And when I say 5 seconds... i mean 5 seconds, not it could have been 5 seconds but was really a minute to make myself feel better about parenting. In this case, it sounds like (i) the child had already made it pretty well known that he was very interested in climbing in there... red flag!!!, and (ii) the mother turned around for a minute+. Put the two together and you'd have hoped she would have focused on that kid in that environment... But again, as any parent of young children knows, they can be like little monkeys themselves. I tend to agree that the fact that they hadn't had an incident in x number of years before this is a testament to good parenting previously moreso than the quality of safety of the exhibit. the modification made since also speaks to this. the change in new exhibits for glass enclosures without this even being a possibility speaks to this. etc. Doesn't mean its the zoo's "fault". Or the mom's "fault". All parties deserve blame, and sympathy. Obviously, it was the gorillas fault least of all.
I'm just looking at it from both sides of the coin. I'm not against zoos updating their barriers for safety of patrons and animals. I'm just saying it's been working outside of a significantly low number of incidents that have significant ramifications. But the fence's efficacy to keep children out involves the sense to not intentionally bypass the barriers, and that typically will require proper parenting by watching your kids or teaching them not to climb the fence. I agree with JV that the problem age is 3-4 when kids are capable of climbing the fence but don't understand not to. Personally, I don't blame the zoo for anything they've done. They are certainly welcome to use this as a learning experience to improve upon their fencing to prevent another incident. As for the parents, I've made my stance clear.
I have a solution, just don't save the few kids that fall in and the problem will solve itself. Kids dumb enough to climb into the gorilla or lion pit will remove themselves from the gene pool, win-win.
I can agree with that even if you don't want to use the word "blame". Focus on the result, namely that the zoo makes improvements. I have two household rules for my kids: 1. Communicate respectfully 2. Solve your problems Blaming the mother here breaks both of those rules. Not saying you live by my rules. It's more self validation that my rules work even beyond childhood.
So if you have two boys they could turn out to be The Cleaner in Pulp Fiction and the Marquis de Sade. :grin: j/k
