Received Saturday, May 5, 2007
I had a troubling experience at the Franklin Park Zoo on Friday 5/4. This occurred specifically in the restroom near the Outback exhibit. I was taking my child to use the restroom. Walking in the restroom, I witnessed a woman crouching on her knees in front of a little girl who could not have been more than 4. The woman who I suspect was her nanny was squeezing her wrists together and saying, "do you think this is fun for me? do you think I want to be here? Crying because you have to walk a few steps, what you need is something to cry about". (Words to this effect). I came in at the last clip and immediately saw the way she was holding the little girl's hands. The little girl was sniffling, desperately trying not to cry. I don't know what happened before I came in but as anyone knows- it is not unusual for a small child to tire of walking. The nanny looked up at me and stood up. I thought to ask her, "is everything okay" and the nanny made some sort of noise that sounded like "psssssssss" and waved her hand at me (dismissive). The little girl was taking very deep, quick breaths trying not to cry. I smiled at her. My daughter who is 2.8 at that point asked out loud, "mommy was is that woman hurting the girl?" With this the nanny left the restroom, dragging the little girl by one hand and tugging on her floral printed sweatshirt. Additional description of the child would be blond with brown eyes and she had on pinkish "croc" shoes. The nanny was wearing denim jeans in a very light wash and a red pull over with buttons at the top only. Her face was very wide, she wore her hair parted in the middle and wavy and she had a large gap between her two front teeth. She was taller than me (I'm 5'6") and easily over 200 lbs.
For descriptive purposes, please add that the child was Caucasian and the nanny, African American. Thanks.
26 comments:
dear zoo mommy,
i can just hear your tory birches flip flopping on the walk....
she sounds like a d u m b nanny.
Where is everyone today?
cant you find anything silly to say all by yourself, why do you need an audience
I am sure these sadistical nannies have studied ways of inflicting a little bit of pain on a child who might be causing them to actually have to "do something". The hand squeezing that was observed is probably one of the methods found that doesn't leave marks or bruises.
Did you consider calling for a public stoning?
I would think it would have been justified.
instead of posting on every post,
" think that calls for a public stoning", why not just make that your moniker and ad something relevant to the conversation?
I'm just saying...
hiccup...
Ditto, the public stoning thing is getting very tired!
it would take a big pile of stones for this nanny brute
I truly don't see how someone, 8:52, can jump from the poster's statement "the nanny was holding both of the little girl's hands" to "this must be a way to physically hurt a child that won't leave a mark"... Really? Most true sadists don't go around seeking nanny positions so that they may hurt two year olds. I, like everyone besides the op, have no idea what the actual conversation and circumstances were like. But I am willing to consider all possible situations-- maybe the child was TRULY being difficult that day. Perhaps a child cries because the child didn't get a toy or is just cranky?
The sight of a child crying does not mean that the caretaker is abusive-- it means that a child is a child!
If my nanny ever said words such as, "Crying because you have to walk a few steps, what you need is something to cry about", we would have a tremendous problem. A problem that likely resolved itself with her exit from my home. Children misbehave. They whine. They cry. They don't like to walk long distances. How you handle such is the true reflection of your character! There is nothing wrong with disciplining a child, but you need not grab a child nor do you need to rant at the child like a child yourself.
Actually, the nanny wasn't described as "holding the girl's hands" but "squeezing her wrists together". Ouch. Doesn't sound like she handled her own anger well at all.
I think the fact that a young child observing the scene realized something was wrong is of key significance.
Yes! Thank you Maggie. I forgot to mention that. Little kids see a lot.
kathryn who's neither parent nor nanny,
You did not read the OP thoroughly or you would have recognized the words describing the nanny inflicting pain on the child. As for sadists not taking jobs as nannies, think about this- they need jobs too. We all have to make a living.
Kathryn is evidently one of those people who expostulates without the benefit of knowledge pertaining to the subject at hand. Hopefully, since she has no children, she'll learn something from this blog. She's one of those people who rub other people the wrong way, for sure!
Indeed, I do comment without benefit of direct knowledge of the subject. The same as you do, sprak! Neither of us were with the OP at the zoo.
I am not ignorant of the needs of children; indeed I work with a large population of poverty-stricken children in the housing projects of a large city almost every day. (However, I realize that this blog does not deal with those kids.)
I seek not to dissuade you from the subject matter, but rather to offer a different perspective. Given that my opinion is just as valid as anyone else's, it seems correct to remark that upon looking at the factual information provided in the original description (not the op's assesments) I fail to see the bad nanny behaviour.
I generally do not rub people the wrong way at all, and I'm sorry that my opinions offend you so.
I did not say that you had "no direct knowledge of the subject" but I did say that you had no knowledge of the subject at hand since you said you were neither a mom nor a nanny, and the sighting involved a mother and a nanny. You seem to have difficulty processing the written word, and furthermore, if you fail to see any bad behavior on the part of this nanny then I must wonder how you treat the children with whom you work. Yes, Kathryn your opinion is just as valid as anyone else's. You are, however, wrong.
Sprak: you are, however, a bitch.
Like 11:46...if I witnessed my nanny squeezing my childs wrists like that I would definitely show her where the door is! You said the child was no more than 4...I wonder if she has ever brought her nannys behaviour to the attention of her parents....
This is the last time I will comment on this subject, despite any further ill will directed towards me.
I would like to point out that I did not say "there is no problem with the nanny's behaviour." I was simply trying to point out that the situation may not be the Worst Possible Scenario. Of course I don't think it's okay for a person to abuse a child!
My reading abilities, sprak, lack nothing, but is difficult to process tone and meaning when reading short texts written by others.
As for the way I treat the children with whom I work, I am certain there are but few that could work happily in the situations I work in weekly (dangerous housing projects, etc.). But I adore my job because of the kids. I love children and would not so much as even THINK of hurting a child, just helping those that have very little in the way of material goods and parental leadership as much as I can.
My apologies for being confrontational with you. I am not accustomed to being attacked by strangers for my opinions.
Kathryn,
I think you sound super!
Thanks, Heidi. =)
kathryn, thanks for clarifying. Whenever I feel someone is oblivious to the plight of a child, sometimes I tend of overreact. Believe me, I meant NO ill will toward you and hope you'll continue posting as you have an unusual bent for playing Devil's Advocate.
if u were soo worried about the child maybe you should have called the police with a story as disturbing as that now because of you if the child was really being abused like you said the parents may never find out
exactly, this ginormous nanny brute could cause some significant damage
Post a Comment