Texas woman charged with abandoning kids...30 yards away

My friend had CPS called on them in Austin because she let her 8 and 6 year old go to the park by themselves. The Park is less than a block away from their house and there is direct line of sight from her front porch.

 

When I was 6 years old, not only was I allowed to but it was my daily job to walk alone and collect water from the town well. Today, I have strong back.

 

And 30 yrds is a long distance in a crowded food court. I was first thinking it would be like at a park with less people, like she went to get them ice cream or something.

I hate it when this happens.

 

And screw being worried about the interviewer. If it was a "rush interview," tell them you have to reschedule or bring your kids with you. geez. Why the secrecy of hiding them from the interviewer's sight. I can't think of a scenario where a rush interview, requiring a meeting in a food court, would not understand. Hell, you don't even have to tell them you are a single mom. Just say, "Sorry I have kid duty today." They aren't allowed to ask your marital status, anyhow. If they do, just lie about that ... perfectly fine white lie in my book to keep your 2yr old on your lap. They might even like you being diligent to meet them under those conditions.

Actually, the more I think about this, a "rush interview" that can't be postponed ... I'm wondering if the "Interview" was really a Internet first date. She's acting like kids will hurt her chances.

 

I disagree with this. We don't know any of the circumstances of the interview. She's a young woman and we have no idea her work experience or previous experiences dealing with employers. I can see how she might not want to do anything that might risk the job - if they are meeting in a mall, it's likely not a high end job, so rescheduling might result in losing the opportunity entirely (and she still wouldn't have childcare the next time). Or if the interviewer doesn't like kids, then it may result in a poor interview, etc. There's too much we don't know there - and too much she likely wouldn't have known when making her decision. We also don't know anything about the kids' temperment or how crowded the mall was or whether leaving them at a table was a reasonable thing.

All good questions - we don't really know what the arrest looked like. For all we know, the cop never talked to the kids and just watched them and arrested her when she got back. Could be an overzealous cop or a corrupt one or one just doing his reasonable duty. None of the articles seem to have much info on what exactly transpired there.

I did a quick google search and didn't see any updates on the story, which seems a bit odd 6 months later.

 

^^^
see my edit above.... I think it was an Internet Dating first meeting "interview." haha! :grin:

She says it wasn't for a job in the mall. I can't wrap my head around what type of interview has a "rush interview" in a mall food court, when that's not even the location of the employer...on top of why she didn't go attend to her kids when security/cops must have approached them.

very ... very sketchy to me

 

I'm betting there is a bit more to this story -- cops don't arrest/ charge parents with abandonment very often. They usually just stay with the family until CPS arrives then go on with their day.

 

There was no real need to wonder if race played a part in this but it's predictable that you would wonder.

I'm wondering how long the interview was because you've got 2 young kids alone in the mall for possibly an hour or so. This lady had to be paying attention to the interviewer and not looking constantly at her kids to see if they were all right. If not, why not just bring them next to her and tell the interviewer (who btw is interviewing you at a food court at the last minute) that you didn't have child care. Kids that young are not going to sit still and 30 yards is a long way away with a lot of strangers in between.

I wouldn't call this child abandonment by any means. Just a really dumb decision that will likely plead out to child endangerment which it actually was.

 

If the interviewer doesn't like kids..... Wow, that's some deep thinking, Major....

How would the interviewer like you not looking them in the eye as they ask you questions because you are keeping any eye on your kids 90 feet from you? If the lady wasn't constantly looking at her kids then she deserved to be arrested.

So leaving your kids in the mall alone might not be a risk to getting the job? LMAO. Unless...the kid hating interviewer thought those brats better shut the hell up and sit there, huh Major.....

 

Agree with hp that there plain isn't enough information in the story to have a valid opinion on how neglectful it might have been. If she's being charged, the court will be better informed. But, I have to shake my head at the idea that she could have simply taken her kids along to the interview. Just like you're not likely to get hired if you don't have reliable transportation, you're not likely to be hired if you don't have reliable childcare. She was realpolitik about this interview -- put the kids near enough that you can kinda keep an eye on them, far enough away that the interviewer will never know they're there, and take a gamble that nothing happens to the kids for the duration. She just lost the gamble. Fortunately she lost to the cops and not someone else.

 

Maybe not enough information on how neglectful, true. But this was a very bad decision on her part to divert her full attention from kids that young in a mall like that. There's no denying that. You don't gamble when it comes to your kids. Your duty is to always look out for THEIR best interests /welfare and she did not do it in this situation.

What needs to be asked here.... If those were your kids and this lady was watching them for you, how would you feel about what she did? I would be furious at her.

 

Ehh, maybe. People are too quick to pass judgement on how parents choose to raise their children. But then I'm also the guy who let his kid walk a couple of blocks by herself.

 

CPS and the Cops deal with situations where the worst case scenario has happened. Anything that they can do to prevent that from happening again to anyone is their sworn duty. The Cop's delivery of the message to you may have been coarse but his intent was likely to keep you aware and vigilant.

I don't view what she did as having anything to do with raising her kids.

 

I didn't really say she could simply take her kids. I said what kind of interview was this that was a "Rush Interview" in a mall food court, that wasn't even where company's location. Does the company not have an office? Sounds like some kind of Internet job without an office, whereby I doubt they care about kids. Sounds like a reasonable job for her to be looking for,,,work at home.

She just says "Can we schedule another time" If not, "Well, I have kid duty right now, but I'd still love to meet with love." Just be honest. Obviously most people would. I can't wrap my head around what kind of company that was to have a rush interview in a mall, and why they would care if it was indeed a job for a college student working at home. It doesn't sound like they had an office to host the interview?

Rush Interview
No office, meet at food court
= a job that would accommodate a single mother with kids (likely inside or outside sales of some sort, make your own hours)

And if it's largely commissioned based, interviewer has no risk to hire a mother with kids. They usually over hire.

Fear of revealing the kids is weird. But she's young, and doesn't know she probably could have asked for another time or asked to bring her kids to the interview.

 

In my conversation with the cop from my story, his concern was obviously for the welfare of the child and as a police officer he's probably seen and heard about all the worst outcomes. He has a responsibility for the safety of the child on the sidewalk. But, I have a responsibility for the whole child and not just her safety. I have to keep her safe but also raise her to be wise, capable, and self-reliant. So, I made a trade-off, accepting a tiny risk of her being kidnapped and murdered for what I see as a more certain gain in her maturation. The cops (or other onlookers) get no benefit from even conservative bets that parents make with their children's safety and see only the down side when those gambles turn bad. So of course they'll say a 6-year old shouldn't be outside alone (besides he didn't know she was not alone when he saw her) -- because he doesn't have as much responsibility as I do. I don't blame him for his position, but I also don't agree with him.

I see this lady's case in the same light. She needs to keep her children safe, but she also needs to put food on the table. Was she really neglecting their welfare by making a trade-off between maximizing safety and maximizing her opportunity for employment so she can provide for them? I don't have the information to say she made the right choice, or even if that was the calculus going on in her head. But, I can't say with certainty that she wasn't doing what was best for her kids.

I was reacting to bodyslam more than you. You might be totally right, but we'd have to make a lot of assumptions to get there. And maybe I'm making too many assumptions too. But, it sounds like a situation with a wage worker who doesn't feel like she has a lot of power to set the parameters of her employment, including the parameters of the interview. She might even be wrong about it, but it's hard to argue optimal solutions with someone who simply does not feel empowered. That's the vibe I get. Its impossible to say that's what it is.

 

Umm, I suspect a lot of interviewers would not look highly upon interviewing a person with their kids there. It's not exactly far-fetched.

Apparently, the interviewer was OK enough to ultimately offer her the job. On that front, she navigated the situation just fine.

Sounds like you're the not-very-deep thinker here. You're making endless assumptions about things you have no actual knowledge of. You don't know anything about her, her kids, the interviewer, the job, the dynamics or layout of the mall, or the cop - and yet you made judgments about all of them to come to your conclusions.

 

I'm not sure what the "rush" part you're referring to, but lots of job interviews happen outside of the office. I own a coffee shop and people are doing all sorts of interviews all the time there. For my new business, we hadn't set up our offices fully, so we did all our interviews with potential startup staff at the coffee shop.

Without knowing anything about the job or the circumstances, everything is just speculation.

 

SMH . . .. . Fear . . . makes one do alot of things

esp the fear of not getting a job to provide for two kids
a job you desperately need

Seeing so many people dismissive of this
I suspect at the same people that would dog her out for 'being of da welfare'
and stealing out money through the government etc etc etc

Rocket River

 

Agree 100% with your situation as you didn't indicate that you're attention was distracted from your child. The lady had to be constantly not watching those kids in that situation and as HP stated to the point authorities started interacting with them without her leaving the interview to intervene.

There's no need for food on your table for kids taken from you by CPS or some freak. Kids come first, period.

 

Umm.... that's not what you said.

Just fine??? LOL.... Except for the part where she was getting arrested. Did she discuss and get permission for time off for Community Service and Probation Check-In?

Use your head for something besides a hat rack.... You don't leave a 6 year old much less a 6 year old and a 2 year old in a mall alone 90 feet away from you. Especially when you know your attention will be diverted to trying to convince someone to hire you. That's all any adult thinking person has to know.