I'm pretty sure I know the consensus on this but..

Jodi - posted on 03/02/2011 ( 11 moms have responded )

243

7

30

A single father of a 5 month old baby admitted that he shook his baby out of frustration of not being able to get him to sleep. This resulted in the baby suffering from 3 broken ribs. He also admitted to forcefully slamming the babies bottle into his cheek twice.

Although this is absolutely appauling.. that's not the part of the story that upsets me the most. This incident happened a year ago. The man just got sentenced yesterday to a year in prison. Why did it take so long to sentence him? Because he was the only person around to take care of the baby!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Like am I crazy or is this absolutely INSANE?? They had to wait until the paternal grandmother was well enough to take care of the baby! The father had to go to anger management and councilling... but still!!! And it actually said in the newspaper that they decided this because the man had 3 things going for him; he pleaded guilty...he was inexperienced and immature... and the baby had no lasting injuries!!

Now his attorney is worried what damage that spending a year away from his primary caregiver is going to do for the baby.

Now, I am all about second chances.. and I know how frustrating babies can be..but to place the child back in the father's care immediately after the incident, and DURING his councilling, not after... is just obsurd to me. What does everyone think?

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

[deleted account]

Let's shake him until his ribs crack and slam a sledgehammer into his face a few times. Let him truly know how it feels. THEN sentence him to 15 yrs with no chance of getting that child back.
extreme? don't really care. That was uncalled for.

Louise - posted on 03/02/2011

5,429

69

2322

If this took place in the UK that child would not go back to that house it would of gone to long term foster care. The man would be put on the at risk register and the child would not of been returned. Also access to the child would of been very limited and supervised at all times.

What ever country this took place in it should be ashamed of it's self. How could they put that baby at risk again by putting him into the arms of the abuser!

Jenn - posted on 03/02/2011

2,683

36

96

Isn't that what foster families are for? The baby should have been in temporary custody until the Grandmother was well enough to care for them.

11 Comments

View replies by

Stifler's - posted on 03/02/2011

15,141

154

604

Eugh. There is no justice. People like that need to be made an example of.

Jacquie - posted on 03/02/2011

109

43

5

Oh my gosh Amy, how terrible for those babies!!! You guys must be awesome people to go through that for them- kudos to you.

The legal system is pretty screwy. People can lose custody of their children for minor things, and can retain custody of them even if they are abused. It is scary!

Meghan - posted on 03/02/2011

3,169

33

202

There is an actual legal term called infancide. We learnt about it in Crim class and basically it is an explanation for women who kill/harm their babies under a year...I am not sure if it applies for fathers as well.
I am all for a deserving fathers rights, but this again just proves how STUPID North American courts are being in regards to a father's rights because that is what society wants, and what is actually best for children.

Iridescent - posted on 03/02/2011

4,519

272

1080

Our twins' bio mom shook her first baby. She nearly died as a result and has lasting brain damage, had to have multiple surgeries...parental rights were terminated and she was put up for adoption by the state. She can no longer contact the child. So a year later, she gave birth to another. And that baby went home with her. And was damaged. She signed away rights willingly to avoid paying child support and that baby was adopted by the same family. So a few years later, she had our twins. Same ^&*( thing! She got to keep them, until she had damaged them, and we finally got them at 17 months old. They have permanent problems as a result. She still has parental rights, but cannot use them. Yet as the law stands, we are second choice as parents....second to HER! Because she is "still" their mother, and the mother always comes first. So for a period of several months, until the twins were 22 months old, if she had requested to see them we had to bring them to her, leave them, go to the police station, report them being with her, they call CPS, pick them up with police escort, return them to us, and we return home...again and again and again, despite living 3 hours away. If we didn't, we'd get to sit in prison and they'd go back to her...for kidnapping. The laws are messed up. So where was that baby's mother?

Becky - posted on 03/02/2011

2,892

44

93

Wow, I can't believe they left that baby in his care for a year! That is how babies end up dead!
And "he was inexperienced and immature" was something going for him? Seriously, whoever was responsible for these decisions should be fired. They won't be, because no further harm came to the child, but they should be.

Bonnie - posted on 03/02/2011

4,813

22

262

I think it is insane that it took that long. The baby was in his care for that year. Anything could have happened that could have made matters worse. He could have ended up killing the baby.

Katherine - posted on 03/02/2011

65,420

232

5195

Of course the father shouldn't get his child back. There is a big difference between thinking and doing. I have gotten frustrated and wanted to bang my head into a wall, but never have I even THOUGHT of harming my baby.

Now my older one? Different story. Going through the I can do whatever I want stage, not listening, being mouthy etc...Oooooo do I want to spank that butt and shake her and ask her what the heck her problem is. Again, two different solutions. Doing and thinking.

It doesn't even say he feels any remorse! Oh can you post a link?

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms