How about analyzing the series of dangerous conditions that failed leading to a child dying in a car? For example, why have we built a car dependent society where you need to put a child in a car to do virtually anything?
Blaming the last failure in a chain of failures -- the drunk driver, the tired parent, the 737 pilot --- prevents prevention.
I’m a parent of a toddler. Reading this article hit me hard. I could not stop imagining this happening to my child. Stories like this used to be tragic, but now it feels personally tragic.
At the same time, I agree with this. I’ve been thinking a lot about the structural ills of modernity for years. So while others have mentioned this might be gauche, I think these are exactly what we should be discussing as a society.
It isn’t just building a society where we are so car dependent. We have also lost the social net of extended families, village and communities.
Where were the grandparents and extended families that could watch a kid so that they don’t have to go to daycare?
Why are we so driven for material success that we overwork and juggle the care of children with other things?
When that toddler turns to a teen, how has our world of “share this” and “retweets” that changed our sense of truths affect that teen? Gen-Z are already struggling to make sense of this.
100% agreed. Turning a parent a few years ago, has completely changed my personal experience of car-dependent cities, from a more intellectual curiosity into why it came to be, to something that I feel innately as a great malevolent force. Technology is not divorced from value-systems, and car-technology is inherently sociopathic.
> Where were the grandparents and extended families that could watch a kid so that they don’t have to go to daycare?
It's heartbreaking really.
> When that toddler turns to a teen, how has our world of “share this” and “retweets” that changed our sense of truths affect that teen?
While I have an unbridled confidence in my children, I still worry about their teen years. Adolescence has always been hard, how much harder will it be for them, with pervasive social media, and rudderless and overwhelmed adults at the helm.
Yeah, I remember the early years of Wired magazine, and buying into the idea of technology being value-neutral. And it's not. And this has been observed before. Marshall McLuhan lived through mass-electrification, broadcast radio and TV and talked about it extensively with "the medium is the message".
> Adolescence has always been hard, how much harder will it be for them, with pervasive social media, and rudderless and overwhelmed adults at the helm.
I have a teenage stepdaughter and got a view into how destructive social media has been -- close contact with behavioral hospitals. It's worse than the reports about teenage girls having low self-esteem and have suicidal ideation. My wife's aunt has been in special-ed for years, and has mentioned a rise in kids who are not resilient, lack grit and growth-mindset; don't even mention being anti-fragile. An example being, a cell phone was taken away during classtime from a high school kid, who proceeds to roll around on the ground in a toddler fit because his world has crumbled without a cell phone.
Two recent articles that had been posted here on HN comes to mind:
That second article describes a fake conspiracy theory that had enough of the Gen-Z markers where the Zoomers know it is fake and ironic, but the conspiracy theorists don't. In a lot of ways, stuff like that is how the Zoomers look like they are coping with a world where we can't agree on basic truths, undermining of social institutions across the political spectrum, and fractured values.
With my toddler, my wife and I are making some conscious choices about values, and even world views and paradigms. Emotional intelligence is just as important as being able to reason; we've been working our way through Daniel Tiger's Neighborhood (the successor for Mr. Roger's). I've been slowly absorbing and integrating the Living Systems World View and Regenerative paradigm (Carol Sanford, Regenerative Life). I've already got things I learned about grit, growth mindset, anti-fragility that's encapsulated by a traditional Chinese cultural value of gongfu, and will be passing on to my toddler. We're already going to implement something from traditional cultures, and expressed in Daniel Tiger's as "everyone's big enough to help with something" (https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2018/06/09/6169288...). That is, I want my kids to grow up knowing they can voluntarily contribute meaningfully to the greater community and society, and that drives the development of growing their capacity to do so.
Great, thank you for all the links, looking forward to dig more into it.
> Emotional intelligence is just as important as being able to reason
+100
Side-note wrt. McLuhan, I think we'll look back at the 70s as a time when we already had these most perceptive understanding of modernism and its fallout, e.g. it's amazing how relevant Wolfe, Jacobs, Lasch, McLuhan, Baudrillard, ... still are today in understanding the current condition. But then nothing really changed, if anything, we just doubled down for another 50 years. Keeping fingers crossed for grassroots change this time around.
Bingo. The fact that performing routine errands such as food shopping requires a multi ton machine accompanying each human indicates the contributing failures here started long before the specific incidents. Another good book on the topic is Normal Accidents by Charles Perrow.
Sad this is getting downvoted hard. Probably because it feels gauche to bring this up in context of this article. Sort of every time a child accidentally gets shot, you cannot bring up the fetishization of guns as the underlying condition.
Anyway, you have my upvote. The accidental killing of children with our cars (which forgetting them in the backseat is only a minuscule portion of) is purely 100% because the public realm we've built is unaccessible without cars. Revealing too that the majority of "fixes" to this problem are additional technological layers (cars with cooling mechanisms! occupant alert system! mnemotechnic devices! better code enforcement!), rather than supporting the removal of misapplied technology in the first place.
Ugh I remember reading this back when it published (think it won the Pulitzer that year) and now that I have kids I probably think about it every time I’m getting out of the car. “Are my kids back there?” Maybe that’s a good thing.
I can’t even fathom the horror in that moment recognizing what has happened, when it really sets in before the brain kicks into trauma mode.
Hard for me to imagine prison doing any good in these cases, but also understand the risk of neglect or even malice disguised as forgetfulness being unpunished.
>malice disguised as forgetfulness being unpunished
This is kind of a separate issue. If it was malice and proven in court, it will be punished. If it was malice but couldn't be proven in court, it won't be punished. That's true for anything. We can't entertain the thought of punishment "just in case" it was malice.
I think the risk of malice is extremely low. I have trouble imagining someone so selfish that they'd doom their child to this kind of horrible painful death because they were mad at them or wanted to get rid of them. Even if a parent is so horrible that they want to kill their child, few are so sinister as to do it in such a torturous way.
I suppose prosecutorial discretion is the only solution. Biased/unreliable as it may be.
On the technology side, I'm thinking of two bluetooth (or similar) enabled wrist bands. One for the kid and one for the mom/dad. When the device loses connection to the other, the parent's band beeps and must be manually silenced. The kid's band could be connected with the car via bluetooth so the only time the alarm can be activated is when the kid's wrist band has been connected with the car in the last 10ish minutes (adjustable). Though if I were a parent I'd be worried about losing a kid in general too.
If there is one company that has everything aligned it’s Apple - privacy, miniaturisation, health and ethics. Some very low tech version of Apple Watch could do.
Trouble is a lot of moms are extremely crunchy and selling something like that would be hard.
If it’s legally integrated in car seat then it’s much easier.
If someone becomes serious about solving this problem with tech, I want to point out that children are left on buses by schools/daycares with tragic consequences as well. Maybe there is a general solution to both somehow.
I am a parent and have a vested interest in this. That sounds like it can work, though my car and my phone do not reliably connect via bluetooth and I am sure there are other cars like that.
There are lots of mnemonics people use to remember that their kid is in the back, like putting their briefcase/backpack next to the child, clipping the keyless entry keys to the car seat, running a bright cord from the carseat to the front, etc.
But most of the times these accidents happen, it's due to a change of routine - father taking the kid to daycare instead of mom, an emergency phone call on the way to work causing distraction, etc. It's times when people skip the routine, and make a mistake.
So in the end, criminal punishment ends up punishing people for being human.
I once locked my daughter in the car. She was never alone or in any distress, I just somehow accidentally locked the door getting out of the car while the keys were on the front seat and my daughter was in the backseat. I tried to open the back door to get her out and was confused about why it wouldn't open until I figured out what had happened.
A passerby called security who called a locksmith and the police. Both arrived quickly, the cop deciding that my daughter was in no danger so there was no need to break the window unless the locksmith couldn't get in. Sure enough, he was in quickly. He refused to take any money for the call.
That panicked feeling was indescribable, and such a small shadow of what the people in the article must have felt and continue to feel.
First day I’ve moved to a new place I’ve locked my kids in house. Luckily there was trampoline by the balcony so I could climb within a minute. But the sinking feeling is immense.
This reminds me of firing the employee that accidentally causes an outage or data loss. Sure, the person could have been malicious, but the majority (all?) of the stories I've been involved with are normal people trying to do their best.
Their mistake is burned into their mind. They feel like they let everyone down. Of anyone, it seems they are now the least likely to ever be careless again.
Recently, I was asked if I was going to fire an employee who made a mistake that cost the company $600,000. No, I replied, I just spent $600,000 training him. Why would I want somebody to hire his experience?
The real crime is that "safety" regulators still require a child be kept in the back seat. It is an outdated regulation that makes no sense, unless your car is more than 10 years old.
My understanding is that the concern is that the passenger airbag can do serious damage to a child sitting in the front. You seem to be suggesting this is no longer the case. What has changed that now makes this safe?.
Airbags are triggered electronically, not mechanically right? Then it should be possible to disable the passenger airbag only when a child car seat is attached.
They already do that. There are weight and position sensors in the passenger seat that will disable the airbag if it detects an object under certain weight and height parameters. The airbag won’t go off if the seat is empty either. If you want a simple example, put a 40lb box of paper or books in the passenger seat and buckle the seat belt. You’ll see that the light on the dash will indicate the passenger airbag is off. I could describe how the system works in more detail, but if your genuinely interested, Im sure there are some good resources on the internet that explain it better than I would.
Aren't you meant to install child seats facing backwards, if you install them in the front passenger seat? Thus the mass of the seat itself shields the child from the airbag.
backwards-facing car seats for small children are way worse if an airbag triggers, because the airbag basically directly hits it and fires the seat backwards. They should only ever be used if the airbag is deactivated.
What do the new cars offer exactly? I always understood it as to shield a child from the power of the airbags that are present in the front seat. Is there some mechanism that's changed for that seating with respect to air bag deployment?
Some vehicles have a specific method of disabling the passenger seat air bag. Outside of the desire to place a baby seat there, some passengers may have a medical condition such that their risk of death is higher if the airbag deploys than if it doesn't.
In most jurisdictions, it is still illegal to put a baby or very small child in the passenger seat. I can't speak for anyone else, but in my own case, I think the risk of forgetting to turn it off when a child is riding in the front seat is going to be much higher than the risk of forgetting my child in the rear seat.
That's really the calculus: How is it that we think we could forget that our child is in the back seat, but remember to disengage the air bag every time we put their seat in the front?
In the US, the average age of a car on the road is 12 years and and 25% are older than 16 years. Maybe in a decade we can change the regulation but it seems to still have merit now
> This is, in my opinion, a product of personal vehicle dependant society.
Because no children would ever die in an accident involving public transportation?
We could just call it an accident and not try to dig too deeply into societal problems to explain it. A little perspective: 3.6M babies/year are born in the US every year. 15-20 accidents like this occur each year. Tragic, yes, but it's not even remotely close to a trend that needs some underlying explanation.
> Because no children would ever die in an accident involving public transportation?
I apologise for an appeal to "common sense" since I really don't have any data, but it seems sort of obvious that it would be safer for two reasons:
1. There's almost always other people there, so someone is likely to warn you that you abandoned your kid.
2. Your kid is there with you, so it's not like you have to remember them.
You're trying to make the argument that "a few kids being locked in cars every year isn't that significant in the larger picture". That's a different argument than "the reason kids are locked in cars is because people are driving in cars".
I'm saying that it's a stretch to assume that kids dying in personal transportation is a problem that would be effectively solved by moving away from personal transportation, unless you don't care about actual deaths and only that they happened in personal transportation. The death rate is low enough that it makes any such claims suspicious.
No kids would die by being forgotten in a public transport.
And this point as nothing to do with what I said.
My point was that those kids die because their parents are forced to use their personal vehicle to do anything (groceries, drop mail, going to work, see friends) that sometimes they forgot they brought their kids with them, because of habits of being alone in the car.
So, yes, so death are the product of a society dependant on personal vehicle.
> No kids would die by being forgotten in a public transport.
That is a bold assertion. I have certainly been the only human on public transportation at times.
You are intentionally narrowing your argument to "forgotten in personal vehicle" so you can say that personal vehicles are bad. That does not seem profound. Moving entirely to public transportation would eliminate that precise risk while introducing others. And the net result may actually be more deaths. Keep in mind how rare children dying in cars is today.
It feels like you are looking for an argument that I am not making.
> I have certainly been the only human on public transportation at times.
Their are always a driver of a vehicle, or other passengers coming in less than an hour or so...
> Moving entirely to public transportation would eliminate that precise risk while introducing others
I never imply to move entirely to public transportation. The best solution is multi-modal transportation.
> Keep in mind how rare children dying in cars is today.
This is an argument I despise, specially related to cars... Any death is bad, and should be avoided, whatever how!
A simple example, in the USA, is the whole wave of rules, laws, etc. after the attach of 9/11.
Less than 3000 died[1] because of it. That's equal to only one month of road death in 2020 or 2021[2].
It almost seems this is common enough that eventually cars sill have a feature to prevent heat death. I think of Tesla’s dog mode but for humans.
Caveats:
• Not saying parents have no responsibility
• Not saying auto makers have sole responsibility
• I understand the “slippery slope” argument that this will lead to parents leaving their children on cars
• This is just an extrapolation into the far future, like 100 years or so, when we have metals far stronger than steel protecting your car door and sentient robots.
Every safety feature is a slippery slope to sloppy drivers making mistakes. You can make the same arguments about disc brakes, anti-lock brakes, systems that mitigate crossing the center line or running off the road, systems that attempt to bring the car to a stop when a cyclist, pedestrian, or large animal steps in front of the car...
Volvo once had a "pedestrian air bag" that deployed on the front hood if the car detected what appeared to be a pedestrian being struck. Maybe that was a slippery slope to reenacting "Death Race 2000!"
I kid, of course. All safety systems lull people into some false sense of security. The question is not whether that happens, but whether the overall result is more or less safety. In general, we are statistically safer with these systems, even if some people become complacent.
If you listen to the police scanner in towns with casinos (or even just video poker machines in convenience stores), you'll quickly learn that people lock their kids in cars all the time so they can get in a few minutes of "gaming," which too often turns into many many hours with the child locked in the car alone. And yes, often they die.
I worry that if "dog mode" as it is becomes widespread, it will give the negligent parents an excuse and means to feed their addictions.
I'd be happier if dog mode automatically called 911 after xx minutes of a living creature being left in the car.
Trying to play devil's advocate, I thought "What about if someone ends up homeless, sleeping in their car, and dog mode calls the cops on them?" Maybe that would actually be a good thing, if we also provided them with actual housing.
I remember reading this a few years before my son was born. It was a crushing read then, and is not less so now.
Also, Gene Weingarten is a national treasure. His writing in general and this piece in particular make me want to be sure newspapers prosper enough that it's always someone's paying job to be a long-form journalist. Even if I frequently get my news other ways, that is an extremely valuable social function.
As a father of two, this article is so damn horrible I don't have words for how it makes me feel. I don't know why it's on HN's top page again, but I remember the last time it was, and it was the same thing.
I work in the consumer electronics space, so I have a reasonable sense of how hard this would be, but it seems like an air temperature monitor that is on/around your baby would be pretty easy to build and probably sell millions.
I remember researching all sort of safety gadgets before our kid was born (and after reading a choking story from a friend).
All of these gadgets suffer from false positives. Imagine heart rate disappearing three times a night and you’ll throw that product away after first night.
If I were going through that stage of parenting again, I'd do the shoe thing -- take off one of your shoes, toss it in the back seat. Hard to ignore that you're walking away from the car with only one shoe on.
On topic: No, not a crime. Not negligence unless you're taking some abnormal risk that makes it more likely to happen. It is an accident.
Instead of complying car manufacturers, how about changing car seats? They have expiry of 10years anyway - some electronics would easily last that on tiny battery.
Other thing I find weird about cars is how they don’t come with monoxide interlock. Heck some generators do now, why not cars?
Teslas do have a "dog mode". I don't think they should have a "child mode", as that would imply leaving your child alone in the care is fine.
Not sure how easy it is to detect if you leave a child alone in the care, and for how long. What if you just go get something from the trunk, or if you forgot something in your home?
Teslas also have "cabin overheat protection" which limits the cabin to a survivable temperature when parked (unless the battery is quite low). Still not something you want to subject a child to, but it probably saves some lives. I think this is only practical with electric cars.
I'd be in favor of automatically rolling down windows if interior temperature exceeds 35C. This could work on ICE cars too. I guess it could increase thefts on hot days, but thieves seem to have no trouble breaking windows anyway.
> I think this is only practical with electric cars.
All cars are electric cars if you put a solar panel on the roof!
I believe that Bentley had this as an option some years ago: The solar panel would power enough of the climate system so that when you returned to your car after a heavy shopping session on Rodeo Drive, it would be warm but not oppressive and would quickly reach your desired temperature when you restarted the engine and turned on the AC.
Of course, as a Bentley owner, you need never worry about leaving your child in the back seat. The nanny is back there and will handle everything.
The "cabin overheat" is the thing I'm surprised hasn't become standard requirements, it can be as simple as rolling down the windows or as complex as a system of fans.
> What if you just go get something from the trunk, or if you forgot something in your home?
To prevent the death of a child it would be sufficient to prevent the car from getting too hot. If you have a reliable way to detect the presence of a living being in the car, the car could just decide to activate the AC once a temperature threshold is met.
I turned it on once for my teenage daughter in a parking lot on a warm day and she was mightily offended. Teslas now have "camp mode" which also keeps the AC on.
Not sure what you mean by "smart cars" (Telsa, etc.?), but my 2021 Hyundai Palisade already has this feature. It can detect if someone is in a back seat and displays "check rear seats" on the instrument cluster when turning off the car if it thinks someone is back there (seems like it checks the weight on the seat).
They do, just not universally. The infrastructure bill included a section requiring them, so every new car will in a few years, along with systems to detect if you're impaired or drunk and refuse to allow operation if you are.
My car has a feature that will alert you if you exit the car and there's a person in the back seat. Example of it here: https://youtu.be/utEzcyoTk_E I always thought it was such an improbable situation that it didn't warrant a feature but maybe if my lifestyle was more hectic or I got distracted somehow I could forget about my child asleep in the back.
My eyes initially skipped over the "Hyundai Palisade" part of your comment, so I assumed you were saying that your 2-year old in the back emits an ultrasonic scream when she is left in the car.
I drove a rental recently that had a “check back seat” message and a chime when you turned off the car and it detected something in the back seat. I seemed to quickly learn to ignore the chime as it becomes the noise the car makes every time you turn it off. I would be surprised if they had any effect.
It's sadly not very marketable as it happens roughly 15-20 times a year in the US and everyone thinks it won't happen to them. When it was designed as a third party product it was a car-seat based weight detector rather than something that was a direct extension of the car.
I think a little indicator on your car with lights for each seat that is occupied where occupied is done by weight and is able to ignore the weight of a car seat might be a useful portion of an electronic dashboard. Still dashboard real estate is scarce and I'm not sure what indicator we'd be willing to remove to have it. On the whole it still doesn't surprise me that car manufacturers haven't done it.
My car has a "rear occupant alert" system. The problem seems to be that it struggles to differentiate between junk in the trunk and a living thing. Unfortunately, that makes it relatively useless since it's almost always beeping at us.
My car (2020 Ford Explorer) will notify me if there's anyone in the back seats when I open the driver's door. It also constantly bings if anyone's seatbelt is unbuckled, not just the driver and passenger.
My Bolt has a rear seat reminder setting - it's literally a chime + console message to check the back seat after you turn off the car. Not very smart, but it's there.
Prior automotive safety features came up because so many were dying. It's pretty sad that we need more of these incidents before we can develop a technology to prevent it.
Seems like an opportunity for a carseat product that sends your phone a push notification when you get out of range if it detects a child in the carseat.
I wonder how many kids died in cars because we can't as a society trust parents run quick errands while leaving the kiddo alone in the house until they are like, 25 years old.
American society has developed a moral panic/obsession with policing/persecuting parents (especially mothers) in certain ways. While pretty much ignoring systematic dangers to children such as lead (in paint, water, etc.), and the crushing financial penalties (from the medical bills for childbirth right through college expenses) for having them.
At what point should I tell my [great-]granddaughters that I'll pay for them to get their tubes tied at age 18, and that is (sadly) the least-bad deal available in the U.S.?
Trigger warning, the article uses very descriptive and disturbing language to describe the death of a child... not something I really wanted to read today.
But as an engineer of machines that test automotive safety systems, including the LATCH restraints that anchored the carseats in which those children sat, and also the window motors that sealed them in, I wonder if there's more we could do here on a systemic level.
We live in a society that uses a mode of transportation which has two characteristics: One, to be safe at speed, small children must be buckled in the back by adults known to be fallible, forgetful, imperfect humans, in such a way that the toddler cannot escape, and two, because the vehicle must be theft-proof and rain-proof, when parked in ordinary sunlight, it becomes a greenhouse which would kill a child in that seat. There are 1.4 billion vehicles in the world, it's only a matter of time before probability will cause these problems to align.
Knowing that this is a thing that could happen - no, poor choice of language, WILL happen again - how could we build a better car that will avoid these issues? Many new cars have infrared temperature sensors for automatic climate control, why not run the fan to keep the internal temperature survivable for the first 24 hours it's locked? It's already a pain dealing with automotive requirements that wiring and circuits be capable of a -40 to 105 C temperature range. Why not relax these for the cabin, and include vents or louvers (or crack the sunroof automatically) to allow air exchange when parked? Cars also have microphones inside the cabin for hands-free phone use, could the mic pick up the distress of a child and sound the horn/alarm or open the windows?
No, I don't want to encourage people to leave their kids in their cars, and I don't want anyone's battery to run dead, or their upholstery to get rained on, or their car to be cold in the snow, or a lowered window to result in thefts, or spurious alarms to annoy people...but those are all avoidable.
On average, once per week, a kid dies in a hot car in the US. Villifying the adults isn't working, therefore, we should try something different. And no, making the climate controls smart today won't prevent the three dozen deaths we're likely to see in the next summer months, but eventually those safer cars will trickle down to parents.
The problem is, if you forget your them in the way that happened in the article, you would forget to give them the keys too. Or do you mean you give them the keys for the whole car journey? That's got to depend on the age of the kid surely?
I'd suggest just taking off your left shoe and tossing it in the back seat. Unless you drive a manual. Most people don't, sadly, so it's a workable solution.
is there any tech product that could alarm you about forgetting a child or a pet in the car. I know that you should use your brain for that but just a precaution and out of curiosity.
You're saying they actually have a law on the books saying it's okay to do it accidentally? Why would someone write a law to say an accident is an accident?
>You're saying they actually have a law on the books saying it's okay to do it accidentally?
Don't take my word, here they are:
Nevada:
A parent, legal guardian or other person responsible for a child who is 7 years of age or younger shall not knowingly and intentionally leave that child in a motor vehicle if:
Texas:
A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly leaves a child in a motor vehicle for longer than five minutes
When our kids were little it was something I worried about a lot because I can absolutely imagine myself doing it. I would never support punishing a parent further because of an accident. There but for random chance goes any of us. (or at least many)
I know we're not supposed to ask this on HN - but did you read the article? It's precisely examining the topic where most people's immediate response would be to want to punish the person who caused this - but in showing us the tragic human stories involved raises enough doubts to convince me it's an issue that needs a very careful weighing up.
The only reason I wanted to know if you're engaging with the article rather than the headline is that you haven't acknowledged the issues raised by the writer - which struck me as odd in this context.
Oh, I'm sorry if I came across that way. I do agree that our first impulse should be to help rather than harm, and that reality is almost always rather complex. I meant that as a comment upon people calling child protective services and the worry of such an occurrence influencing people's behavior. Sometimes, reasonable behavior can be misconstrued and lead to criminal consequences. I didn't mean to dismiss the issue out of hand.
Can be. But in the scenario described at the beginning of this article, what is the point of punishment here. Does this person need reformed? Can society dole out any more retribution/revenge/punishment than he's already experiencing?
Willful neglect is awful, a crime, and should be punished. In some cases it's probably necessary for a court to determine if the neglect was willful or not.
But I simply can't imagine the lifelong self-inflicted torment a parent would experience in a situation like the one described. Prison or death would be a respite I think.
We could think of it like that, but it seems like we're constantly surprised when humans can't run without crashing.
Crashing is often non-recoverable, and not really built into the runbook. Some support teams do triage pretty well, but most... not so much. The tickets build up, and often just get flushed.
Our monitoring infrastructure is built on the assumption of uptime. We ignore the technical debt.
If uptime is the goal, individual humans are impressive compared to almost all human technology.
The Centennial Light has now been running mostly continuously since 1901, while the oldest living human was born in 1904. The bulb hasn't burned out, but has been shut off briefly a few times, which seems comparable to one's heart stopping but being resuscitated.
I'm not aware of any single "technology," in the broadest sense, operating for a longer continuous period of time.
Neglect is an ongoing pattern of behavior, by someone who is otherwise mentally competent.
One-off screw-ups, no matter the outcome, are not "neglect". (Though very similar English words and phrases are often used to describe both a one-off screw-up and actual child neglect.)
Blaming the last failure in a chain of failures -- the drunk driver, the tired parent, the 737 pilot --- prevents prevention.
There Are No Accidents.
https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/There-Are-No-Accident...