Posted on 01/10/2005 2:10:56 AM PST by kattracks
A 50-year-old nanny has been charged with child endangerment after she was caught on a nursery Web cam hitting and shaking the infant she was supposed to be caring for, cops said yesterday.Fook Moy of Elmhurst, Queens, was arrested after the 6-month-old's horrified mother watched Moy banging the child up and down on the floor, then placing a pillow over his head while smacking the pillow and yelling, "Stop crying! Stop crying!" cops said.
The parents, who live in Roslyn Harbor, L.I., told cops they hired Moy on Jan. 2 to cover while their regular nanny went on vacation.
Two days later, the parents found bruises on their baby's face and decided to watch the camera, which they had installed to keep track of their child's growth.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Moy claimed the pillow-hitting was a method used to discipline babies in China, a police source said.
And I agree with the other posters that putting in a camera to monitor a child's growth sounds pretty bizarre. I wonder if they meant to capture milestones, like first steps, etc. If so, that's pretty sad.... relying on a camera to see your child's first steps....
Moy claimed the pillow-hitting was a method used to discipline babies in China, a police source said.........ancient chinese secret?
Why don't these parents simply raise their own children?
I am so sick of hearing about "caregivers" and "nannies." A mother is meant to be the one who gives her baby breastmilk, phsyical comfort and security, maintenance, and love. If these women would actually give up their selfish pursuits and raise the children they bring into the world, few of these situations would occur. That poor baby was crying for his mother; in retun he gets physically injure by a person who could not care less for him.
I have no respect for these so-called "parent." Mom, go home and be a mom to your baby, while there is still time.
Pugh!
/JMHO
If they can't act as the parent they share in the guilt.
'I would think that they would have stated they put a camera in to track the child-care provider's treatment of their child while they were away.
Yet, to my surprise, to track their child's growth.'
It does not really matter at all in this story what the parents said the reason for the camera was for, the most important thing is that this low-life was caught and is arrested. May God have mercy on her soul!
The combined governmental tax rate is 57%. Our family gross income is $55,000. Subtract the tax rate (-$23,650), and we're left with a net income of $31,350.
I think poverty level for a family of 4 is $32,000, so we're actually taxed back to poverty level by our own governments!
We are also left with the choice of either trying to squeak by, or making up the difference by having a second income.
Gee THANKS, Uncle Sam!
>>annual property taxes are over $20,000<<
What's the value of the home?
I think the net income & the income taken by the governments should be swapped, but you get the idea. :)
No amount of money parents spend on "things" for their children; the best nannys, toys, pre-schools, etc. will ever give the children what is most important to their physical and emotional health and growth - a full time parent on hand to love, nurture and encourage them.
Now that's some figuring that's worth the attached commentary, thank you. I'm all for small government. And I'm with you on being taxed backward everytime one gets ahead of things. Government trade policy cost me my career and I'm still trying to find work 3 months later.. Can't even find a job flipping burgers here and just about at the end of my rope before taking advantage of unemployment - which I'm on my way to check into now as it happens. One more person on the government's back now instead of taking care of myself - and not by my own choice. I can't tell you how infuriating it is.. But, I'm off.
I don't buy that. It can be done. It is being done on one income. True, the Mercedes and Antigua vacations and fur coats may be scarce, or may have to planned for, and dare we say it--"budgeted" for, but it can be done. After having some "help" in my home, I decided it was far more trouble than it was worth and it really is. How are they ever going to remedy what has happened to their child? One of them needs to stay home.
Good post. It'd be very comforting to ascribe to every misfortune some rational responsibility (they should have known a tidal wave was coming, they should stay home and raise their own kids, etc.). I fall into myself. So does my wife. But sometimes ppl do their best and bad things still happen. Personally, I wouldn't want a kid I couldn't afford, so I don't have any. I don't see how ppl manage. I wouldn't put a kid in day care, but that's just me. I also wouldn't send a kid to a public school.
Well, to me, as a Mom, it does matter. I cannot imagine missing any moment of my children's life, and hope not to.
To have to view "what happened to my child today, and how did they grow and learn" on video is a real sad state of affairs for parenting.
Yes, I believe the temp. caregiver did commit a horrible act and should be punished as harshly as possible. But the bottom line is...parents need to start being parents again.
I am personally of the belief that part of the willingness to blame the parents in cases like this is that everyone wants to believe that it can't happen to them. If you can distance yourself from it, it's easier to convince yourself that it won't happen to you.
We all do the best we can as parents, so I hate to see people get bashed over what happened to their child in this case. The nanny is the one who beat their baby...not them. Having a nanny is not, imo, an irresponsible thing. If you can afford one, though, I have to wonder why you do, kwim?
Yeah, that's probably right. I live up on a hill, and when ppl get flooded, I sit back and say "you shouldn't have built a home on a flood plane." Makes me feel better to think it's avoidable and ppl are just stupid. Then again, I live right next to the highest point in NJ, so if I ever get flooded, the whole state of NJ is already gone. But I digress. You're right. Ppl like to think they can control things that sometimes can't be controlled.
A little bit of day care isn't bad if the child is older, not an infant, and if the child likes it. It depends on the child - some love getting to play with other kids. My daughter LOVED it, but she was 3, an only child, and apparently bored at home. She would have gone full time if we let her.
>>Personally, I wouldn't want a kid I couldn't afford, so I don't have any. I don't see how ppl manage. I wouldn't put a kid in day care, but that's just me. I also wouldn't send a kid to a public school.<<
What? Am I reading a post from someone with self restraint? I don't believe it!
Why don't you want a baby that you can show off to all the relatives after they have hounded you for years to have a child?.......As if they were going to pay all of the costs and dole out the time and energy needed to properly raise the little guy/gal.
When I was in my 20's every dang relative that I had was bugging me 12/7 about getting married. Finally I learned the trick. Don't reply, just put your hand out. When they say, "What?" reply, "Come on, cough up the money. You pay my bills, find me the time to spend with a wife and still let me work 10 hours a day because I want to invest 50% of my paycheck for a few more years.
Amazingly, ask those questions once, they changed the subject and never asked it again! They knew that they were up to their ears in bills and needing time for everything.
When I did get married, at 32 they realized, yup by golly there is two ways for people to do everything. There's the dumb way and the dumber way.
27 years later, my wife and I will take the dumb way, thank you all. My daughters, 24 and 25 have also chosen the dumb way much to the sadness of half a dozen young men who have tried to put a ring in their nose.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.