Hero Nanny - Ana Maria Montano DeGimenez

L.I. Nanny Dies Saving Child from Pool
Hero Nanny - Ana Maria Montano DeGimenez
A nanny died Thursday as she tried to rescue a 3-year-old boy from a family's swimming pool, police said.The woman, 49, was watching three children under 6 years old by the side of the pool outside a private home when the boy took off his life vest and jumped into the water, Nassau County police said. More... Nanny who drowned rescuing toddler hailed. Neighbor Describes Frantic Scene Where Hero Nanny Died-Family asks why help came too late. Family of Drowned Nanny Wants Answers.


1 – 200 of 234   Newer›   Newest»
mpp said...

I don't know if anyone else caught this, but here is a photo of Mom's luxurious Wedding.

moms wedding said...

Sorry, link didn't work. Will try it this way.


Anonymous said...

The mom looks like a bitch. Great dirt.

And to any of you who think to blame the nanny, fuq off. Seriously. I have nannies for people who's homes had no C2 monitors, no batteries in smoke detectors, wires wrapped around wires found smoking, knives left in bad places, glass shards in the grass. THIS IS THE FAULT OF THE HOME OWNER. 100 %. I am sure the non mom bitch told the nanny what to do and that the children were fine.

Fuq her. Stepping over nanny's lifeless body. Failing to even mention possibly dead/dying nanny to the paramedics! You know one of them could have run out there and got her!

mpp said...

"As a live-in nanny, Montano DeGimenez was responsible for three children, two of whom are autistic, said Nassau police spokesman Sgt. Anthony Repalone."

- Good catch yesterday, 4:40.

"The little boy asked for his nanny from his hospital bed, Monserrate said."

- How telling is that?
This Nanny obviously had so much influence on this child's life, that as he lay in his Hospital bed, he asked for HER .... not his Mom.

"Rescuers resuscitated the boy, while Montana was still lying facedown in the water. It's not clear how long she was there, but relatives want answers."

- There were other people there by the time the Mom had dragged the little boy out of the pool, but they didn't want to leave the Mom's side?! How many people does it take to resuscitate a little boy? No one went immediately to the Nannies aid?

"She didn't care for the pool, and she often tried to stay as far away from it as she possibly could," DeLeon said. "So it's very shocking that she would be by the pool with the three children."

"Relatives of Montana believe this tragedy could have been prevented, saying she was put in a potentially dangerous situation because she couldn't swim."

- I want to know why a woman who was as fearful of water as this Nanny was, what she was doing supervising these kids that day by the pool? Did the Mom tell her to?
..... Somehow, I just don't think she would've volunteered .....

Anonymous said...

It was reported that the nanny started screaming as she went to save the little boy, alerting the mom upstairs and neighbors. Why then, didn't any of these people drag the nanny out?
Despicable. I hope the mom gets charged with involuntary manslaughter.

Anonymous said...

Thank you Jane, for posting this sad and tragic news piece, and it's updates.

Jane Doe said...

My thoughts exactly!
So very sad!

Anonymous said...

anyone who loves children
anyone who has ever been a nanny, had a nanny, known a nanny-
get together and stand on the front lawn of this bitch's house.
And then call CPS and report this piece of shit woman for being the negligent bitch she is.

Take those kids from her.
And then throw the bitch in jail.

erics mom said...

Thanks MPP
sorry I went annoymous (4:40) easier to just click the button.

Wow, it shows that nannies are not valued in this world! To not help her one bit

Anonymous said...

According to Newsday, neighbors did come running when they heard the screams and it was very chaotic. One neighbor helped the hysterical mother and the boy while another ran to the back yard and tried to get the nanny out of the pool and held her upper body out of the water until a fireman arrived to help him lift her from the pool.

eunice said...

The mother is trying to get sympathy from everyone around her. She wanted all the attention on her. Comfort ME. Help my son. Look what I am going through. ME ME ME. How could this happen to ME?

Ever watch COPS or any of those shows on FX like "world's wildest car chases"? The "bad guy" who runs off from police and leads police on an hour long chase and finally crashes into a telephone poll- well hello- rescue workers and cops scurry to help him!

But not this nanny?

Something is rotten in SYOSSET.

A word to all of the parents of teenage daughters who babysit- make sure they don't go work for C-NTS. Even if your 18 year old daughter is a lifeguard, trying to save someone's autistic child could cause you to go under. And this could be your daughter's near dead body the C-NT uses as a diving platform to save the child SHE PUT IN DANGER.

Yes, moms-
be careful who you let your children babysit for.

You know damn well that these miserable, disgusting, negligent parents are not going to accept responsibility for causing this fatality.

Anonymous said...

Instead of posting your thoughts about this awful woman on this blog, why not contact her and tell her yourself?

Rubian S. Saunders-Foglia, Esq.

DeSena & DeSena

Attorneys At Law

32-21 Junction Blvd.

East Elmhurst, NY 11369


Fax # 718-732-2847


96-11 101st Ave.

Ozone Park, NY 11416


Fax # 718-738-6103

sprak said...

I guess this nanny was considered to be among the downtrodden that just aren't good enough to associate with the "higher ups" who consider themselves to be "oh so much better than anyone else". Therefore, she simply didn't merit a serious rescue attempt.

To be given responsibility for which you are not trained should be against the law, but it's doubtful that it is. A lawsuit may be the only recourse to get some justice for this brave soul who gave up her life to save a child, having been put in a dangerous situation by her employers. Nannies who are expected to monitor children at a pool or during any water play should be able to swim and should be CPR certified. CPR courses are given often and are either very low cost or free. Anybody should be able to locate a place to get this training and it would great
if caretakers took advantage of this.

Hellcat said...

10:53 AM,
I am CPR certified. I earned my certification in March.
I remember the instructor telling us that if we saw someone drowning, unless we had been certified specifically for water rescue, that sadly we should call help and wait. Do not attempt to rescue them. Even a child.
A drowning person is panicking and very likely to climb on you and take you down. I'm not sure this is totally relevant to the story, but just a sad fact. I think it applies more to bodies of water than pools, as well.
Even if the mom had tried to save the nanny, she may have ended up dead as well. Of course she didn't even try. Didn't even mention the nanny to the rescuers?
This makes me feel sick :(

Anonymous said...

Swimming is another.

Cpr certified isnt going to save your child from drowning. You need a nanny or sitter who is going to climb in that pool and swim to the child and bring that child out of the pool. I don't care what the statistics say, these are children. Anyone who hires a nanny who cannot retrieve a 10 pounds sack of potatos from the bottom of the deep end is an asshole.

sprak said...

Many quick thinking strong swimmers have managed to save the lives of people who are drowning and not all are certified in water rescue. I think at the time of the incident, a person will either make the attempt or not depending on his physical abilities and his will to try.

sprak said...

We agree 3:16, and that is why I mentioned that CPR training and knowing how to swim should be in order for anyone monitoring children around water.

lu said...

I hope that bitch is planning to plunk down some cash for the nanny she killed. She should start with the funeral costs, the whole funeral and she should bury that nanny like a hero should be buried.

Heaven help the next nanny that joins that family. Montana had been with the family for 4 years, taking care of three children, 2 with special needs all day every day. She gave them everything she had of herself for 4 years- and look how that came back on her.

The nanny that is with them for 2 weeks or 9 months. What will they do with her? Use her for target practice?

Anonymous said...

Ana Maria Montano DeGimenez

chick said...

"She didn't care for the pool, and she often tried to stay as far away from it as she possibly could," DeLeon said. "So it's very shocking that she would be by the pool with the three children."

I have to guess that these parents were either completely disconnected from the daily life of their children and nanny and therefore didn't even know nanny couldn't swim, or just didn't give a damn that nanny couldn't swim, because not making nanny go out and watch the kids in the pool would inconveinence THEM.

I believe that if you boil all of the info down, Ana Montano DeGimenez died because she worked for people who completely disrespected her. Who marginalized the issue of her inability to swim because THEY wanted to be able to relax elsewhere when their 3 boys under the age of 7 went swimming. Who cared more for themselves than their children, and who cared not at all for the woman raising their children.


sprak said...

Exactly, Chick
they didn't care about their nanny's life whatsoever, but why would they when she was so much beneath them? They would have the same regard for you or me or anyone not on the "same level" as them, and that's a very sad observation to have to make. However, they aren't alone in their total disregard for what us in the real world have to do to survive and for who we are. We are nothing to them.

mpp said...

See, this is the thing ... I think the Mom DID know her Nanny couldn't swim.
It was NO secret how afraid of water Mrs. DeGimenez was, according to her Family.

What does this tell us?
That Mrs. Foglia didn't give a shit .....

She still had her Nanny supervise those kids, TWO of them disabled, near a pool.
What the hell was Mom so busy doing that SHE couldn't come down and plop her sorry ass in a lounge chair with some high society rag, and watch her own kids?

Sorry. But this whole thing pisses me off.

lindalou said...

this is such a tragic story. my heart goes out to the family of the nanny and i'm glad the little boy is okay. obviously, the parents made a huge error in judgement regaring having a non-swimming nanny watch the kids by the pool. to all the people assuming the absolute worse of the parents, where is this coming from? do you have some inside information? is there someone on this blog who actually knows the parents? :::color me confused:::

Anonymous said...

10:46 AM
"Why blame the parents for hiring the nanny who can't swim when they have a pool?"

Maybe because as the parents, they are responsible for their children's safety and welfare!
I wondered how long it would take for someone to blame the nanny. Shame on you!

Anonymous said...

I think it's more about this mom allowing/making/letting this nanny watch 3 kids near a body of water when this nannies family has said in no uncertain terms that she was TERRIFIED of water. So it begs the question, what the HELL was she out there by the pool for? Mom was home, upstairs, why wasn't SHE watching them instead?

Also, I think everyone is pissed because it has been reported that both the mom AND neighbors came running as soon as they heard the nanny scream (when the little boy fell in the pool) --- so why was the kid saved and not the nanny? One of the "rescuers" (how lame! the kid was already OUT of the water, the nanny was IN the pool, lying FACE down) .... said: I didn't want to leave the mom. I didn't even know if the other 2 children were safe or missing" .... give me a frickin' break. So --- not only was this nanny drowning at that very minute, no one went to check on the other 2 kids???
It all happened so fast, yes .... but there were enough ppl there that SOMEBODY could've helped this nanny FASTER than what they did.
Maybe she'd still be alive .... and enjoying her HERO status!

lindalou said...

one other thing that struck me right away that no one has mentioned: how was the little guy able to get his swimming vest off so easily and without anyone noticing? my three year old wears one of those foam swimming vests when we're at the public pool and he literally cannot get it off on his own. the vests have two buckles in the front that you pull tight and another strap that goes between the legs and buckles tight in the back. since the family seems so well off, i do wonder why they didn't have those sort of vests for all children.

Anonymous said...

Thank you! It was supposedly known that this nanny was afraid of water. How can the parents, after FOUR years not know that?!
This is 100% the parents fault!!

Anonymous said...

Why couldn't these parents, who obviously had a pool, send their nanny to CPR class, and a swim class? You would think they'd want to be sure their kids were safe with her around water.

I don't think she cared. I bet she hardly even paid the nanny a living wage.

Anonymous said...

I am wondering if it was a vest, or water wings ..... if it was water wings, then we know how fast those come off.

Anonymous said...

You are sounding like you think it was the nannies fault? I hope I am mis-reading your comments.

lindalou said...

4:22, i do understand why people are upset and what you're saying makes sense. i'm sure the scene was quite chaotic and clearly there was a huge lapse in judgement resulting in a human being's death. i do think the parents will be sued, and rightly so. some of the posts seem over the top to me, like the ones suggesting we send hate mail to the mother's office or the ones suggesting she must be a killer bitch because she had a posh wedding or the ones suggesting the mother walked right over the nanny in the pool. it doesn't seem like the full story is even out yet and people are calling for a public lynching. also, someone posted that they know the mother is an awful person. that's why i asked if someone actually knew these people.

LindaLou said...

4:28, if you're getting that, i'd say you aren't reading AT ALL> @@.

chick said...

LL, I think people are upset because the general sense of the articles we have all been able to access is that the nanny was basically put in an untenable situation, and then when things went south nanny was left to drown.

Naturally, none of us know what we would have done in the mother's place, but I think most of us would have never ever been irresponsible enough to leave our kids alone in a pool with a nanny that was not only a non-swimmer, but also afraid of the water.

So, that said, the mother's actions during the drowning/near drowning are naturally going to be scrutinized under a very bright light. Let's face it, making an idiotic decision means your other actions following that decision will be harshly judged.

I expect we will learn if nanny was paid legally, was in country legally, what sort of room she had, whether they worked her 60+ hours per week, etc.

I also expect we will hear a lot about what an awful mother this employer supposedly was.

I also bet the father will not be terribly pummeled by people and the press. Because, by all the dieties, it's MOM who needs to take complete responsibility, regardless of the presence of a father who theoretically would have helped select nanny and knew what tasks nanny could and could not comfortably perform.

(ahem) So, yeah, call mom names if you will, but also consider the father's culpability. He is just as liable as mom is.

chick said...

dieties = deities

(smacks head)

mpp said...

Maybe I missed it where someone said something about "she must be a killer bitch because she had a posh wedding" ... but I only posted the Wedding photo for those that were curious. I don't see any other references to it.
My post contained nothing negative about the Wedding .... unless you consider "luxurious" negative.

mpp said...

FireFighter #5803 report:

"Received the call as a double drowning. Mom removed 2 year old from bottom of pool, could not get nanny out. Ex-Captain and Commissioner on scene did mouth to mouth on 2 year old, pulse returned. Infant ventilated by BVM to Syosset via 5891, where he was intubated and transported to Pediatric ICU at Schneider Children's (LIJ) - just got off the phone with them, patient is stable. Nanny was pulled from pool by multiple NCPD, transported in cardiac arrest by 2362, but pronounced at Syosset."

(also had the 911 transcript from the Mom, but it was deleted for some reason)

O.k., so the Nanny officially was not removed from the pool until FireFighters got to the scene.

Wonder why?

mo said...

you are barking up the wrong tree.
Mom is too blame because

1) she was home
2) she was alerted that a child was in peril BECAUSE of the nanny
3) she used the nanny's body to jump off to get to her son
4) she was perfectly comfortable with the neighbors and rescue crew COMFORTING HER and not tending to the nanny.

Sorry, but she should be burned at the stake. I hate evil bitches like this. And how lovely and traumatic for the remaining two children to see their nanny begging for her life and then dying. The nanny who raised those children!

Anyone who has any sympathy for these disgusting and vile people- well you'd have to be crazy!

Anonymous said...

According to neighbors interviewed for the local paper, the firfighters were on the scene within 5 minutes and the neighbor trying to get the nanny out of the pool before they arrived was unable to lift her out on his own so stayed in the water and tried to keep her head out of the water.

Anonymous said...

for more information, very sad.,0,1228913.story

Anonymous said...

The woman had to make a choice, try to make her son breath or let him die trying to get the nanny out. The cops were called by a neighbor immediately and one held the nannies head aove water until the fire department got there. We are getting 4 or 5 different stories from the media. No one knows what happened except the mother and the neighbors.
I think the moral of this story is you do not have a pool and if you don't know how to do CPR. YOu do not hire a nanny that is terrifed of water and cannot swim and does not know CPR.
Do you think it really matters if she was legal or paid on the books?
Does it matter if they had a big beautiful wedding? What has this got to do with the tragedy that happened. You don't know if she is a "bitch". You did not have the choice of getting your son to breathe or get the nanny our of the pool . The woman made a choice. Just like the man that had to make a choice of saving his son or his daughter. He went for the one that was far away from him.
Just be thakful that it was not you that had to make a choice who to save.
I am sure there will be a law suit.
There always is.

Anonymous said...

Here is a map of where it occured:,0,7831013.mapmashup

Nassau County Police Department - 2nd Precinct Serving: Bayville, East Norwich, Hicksville, Jericho, Lattingtown, Laurel Hollow, Locust Valley, Oyster Bay, Plainview, Syosset & Woodbury. 7700 Jericho Tpk., Woodbury (OysBy)....................................................................Tel: 516-573-6200

I would keep after the police and the district attorney in this town until there are charges filed against this horrible mother.

In any other family, the child would have died. The child did not die because of the nanny. Because of the nanny's screams. The mother is too blame. The mother needs to be charged with child endangerment.

Do not let her get away with this. This woman is evil to the core. She spends no time with her children, ever. She doesn't have a maternal bone in her cold body.

ro said...

"The woman had to make a choice, try to make her son breath or let him die trying to get the nanny out."

The woman had to make a decision because she is a dumb bitch who caused a catastrophe and loss of life. What was the whore doing up in her bedroom in the middle of the day while one non swimming nanny watched three children under 6 years of age in her pool?

If anyone should be coddled, it should be Jorge Gimenez, who is mourning his dead wife or Kevin DeLeon who is mourning his dead aunt, not Rubian Saunders who is fretting around her house because she doesn't know where to put all of the flowers she has been sent.


nyc nanny said...

The father knew so much about the nanny that raised and then saved their child that he reported her age as 60 when in fact she was 49.

Anonymous said...

"The mother, who wore a tiara to her wedding, (gag) worked constantly to maintain her size 2 muscular frame. She was very vain and would never have tolerated a young nanny around the house."


Even a young nanny who could swim?

Well, as long as tiara bitch didn't have to feel threatened, well I guess everything is aokay.

t.r. said...

I just read that the family is demanding answers. They will never get the answers they seek. Do you really think anyone is going to be honest about what happened?

Anonymous said...

the cop is already lying in the screenshot posted here saying the nanny was out of the pool. lie,lie,lie.

Anonymous said...

"You did not have the choice of getting your son to breathe or get the nanny our of the pool . The woman made a choice" .....

Sorry, but mommy dearest wasn't saving precious minutes by performing CPR. It is reported that she was sitting in her living room when police and fire came in, holding her son's lifeless body.
THEY performed CPR and defribrillation paddles were used to start his heart.

............ Meanwhile, nanny is still face down in the backyard pool. Only then had a neighbor come to help the nanny -- he was holding the nanny upright on the side of the pool when police and fire rescue came and they helped to pull her out.

I guess the neighbor figured she was already dead, but didn't want to let go -- it would've been disrespectful.

More news on Ana De Gimenez said...

I found another news article. This one includes video of the backyard pool, interviews with the neighbors ....


Anonymous said...

Nanny is being hailed as the Hero that she is on the 7:22 News piece.

Anonymous said...

the first commenter is such an idiot, dont you listen, cant you read geek she was a relative and you are such a c..t

Anonymous said...

guess what i realised from reading these comments. all you parents are just like this mom who let the nanny die needlessly, you are selfish, selfish selfish only thinking about you and your kids, fuck the nanny

Anonymous said...

9:20/9:23, you make no sense. what are you talking about?? nothing anywhere says she was a relative.
besides, 95% of the posts here are in favor of the nanny, so what is up with your second non-sensical comment???

step away from the crack pipe, dear.

a mother? My ass! said...

Speaking of crack pipes- what was that mother doing upstairs in her bedroom in the middle of the day while some old woman who couldn't swim was left by the side of the pool with her three very young children? I think she must have been smoking crack. Notice that when rescue arrived, mom was just sitting there with the child. She hadn't so much as tried to blow in the child's mouth. I see CPR performed nine times a night on ER, CSI, Grey's anatamoy, house, etc. To just sit there and do nothing? And please don't say poor mom was in shock. Mom was probably pissed off that she lost her buzz when she had to jump in the pool. Don't try to tell me that mother gave a rat tail about her children. If she did, they wouldn't have been left in such a precarious position.

I hope her husband divorces her and takes the children. I get a more maternal vive from the cokewhores in Atlantic City...

Hellcat said...

9:23... wanting to save your child over anyone else is not selfish. It is human nature. Instinct. For a mother, anyway.
You could love your husband dearly, but if your husband and child were in a car accident you would pull your child out if you could only save one. That's the way mothers are. The husbands, however, typically go for the wives over the children. Something My CPR instructor told is. Interesting, hm? But who would go for the person who was not related over their own family?
I don't agree with what this mother did... but to say ALL mothers are selfish because they try to protect their children? Ughh!

Hellcat said...

I do wonder if the other two boys saw this happen.
Imagine how they would feel about their mother when they were older. Seeing her climb over the dying woman who raised them to get their brother, then leaving her to die. Surely they will hate her.. and that hatred will be her punishment.

Anonymous said...

I should count off the names of mothers who have assasinated their nannies in front of their children. Cold, dead hatred; permeating fear, seperateness, emptiness. Distance. Death. departed.

It really isn't so unusual.

lindalou said...

i'm sorry, but this thread is so completely hateful and awful. i'm just disgusted...

Anonymous said...

then stay off

UmassSlytherin said...

It is rather a hateful thread, I have to agree with you, LL. :(

That being said, I can see why emotions are running high. I am interested to get more of the story as it unfolds. Sometimes additional information can come out days later.

My heart goes out to this poor nanny and her family: what a senseless tragedy. I wonder how the nanny felt towards her employers. Did she feel bullied by them, and forced to do things she felt uncomfortable with? There must have been a reason why she did not feel assertive or empowered enough to tell her employer that she did not feel comfortable around the pool. I hope in time the parents, especially the mother, can see how such a senseless tragedy could have been prevented. I really hope this mother learns that a precious life has been lost due to her negligence.

Anonymous said...

As long as it wasn't her childs life she may be thinking who cares. At least my child is safe.

Anonymous said...

The mom did call the neighbor to assist and the neighbor got the nanny out of the pool. all of you said, a non-swimming nanny should NEVER have been left to supervise children near water.

UmassSlytherin said...

hopefully she does care: hopefully she is thinking, "my child COULD have easily died." I hope in the future she ensures the safety of her children more effectively.

Anonymous said...

She probably thought the situation was safe because all three of the children were in life vests...except for hte problem that the 3 year old took his off. She did her best to summon a neighbor. I'm assuming she took her child inside to do CPR because the phone was in there and she could call 911 for both her child and the nanny. It's a shame that the nanny didn't just summon the mom because she couldn't swim...and the toddler could have been saved and the nanny's life spared. But...still, a non-swimming nanny shouldn't have been left to supervise children near a pool. But...the reason the mom had the nanny is that a 3 year old and two autistic children is a handful. What an awful situation. We all need to thank our lucky stars that we've never had to make that type of a quick "judgement call" of whom to save in a life or death crisis. Frankly, I probably would have done the same thing the mom did. What's hard is that there are so many ways the tragedy could have been averted.

manhattanmamma said...

All the reports I've heard indicate that people went to assist the nanny almost immediately. Also, I gotta be honest here, if my child had just been plucked from the bottom of my pool I don't think I would even consider the nanny as my thoughts would be focused on my child.

Yes, the parents were wrong for hiring this non-swimmer to care for children while they swam. Don't you think the parents KNOW that now? Don't you think they have to live with the knowledge for the rest of their lives???

As the trained lifeguard pointed out earlier, someone being able to swim doesn't mean they can save a drowning child. The would be rescuer can suffer a heart attack, a cramp, or be pulled under by the struggling victim.

Yes, the parents should have hired a nanny who can swim, and they should have went over procedure in case a child falls in. How may parents actually do? I think to sit in harsh judgement of a woman who just lost her child is cruel and inhumane. You guys know nothing about this woman. Have a little sympathy. None of us know what we would do in that circumstance and let's hope we never find out first hand.

My sympathies to the nannies family and her charge and their family.

UmassSlytherin said...

It is true that we panic when it comes to our own children. A lady I used to babysit for once panicked when her toddler daughter started choking on a cheerio: I had just gotten to their house and it happened while the mother was sitting right there. She turned to me and yelled, "Oh my God, she's choking! What do I do?"

She was a doctor.

But she was also kind of an idiot. So there is that.

And point taken, MM. As I said, I am interested to find out more of the story as it unfolds.

Anonymous said...

I am astounded at how low so many people cam go wht their opinion of this mother. So she was home and had a nanny, is that so unusual? Does it matter what she was doing?

Try replacing the nanny with the grandmother, would so many people be so mean if it was the grandmother who died?

If the nanny is an adult and can speak she had the responsibility to tell the parents and insist that she not be left alone at the pool with the children. As an employee in America everyone has rights. The right to a safe work environment and the right to say no to certain tasks. If she did not like the work requirements she should not have kept the job for four years.

Mom is a normal human being, not the monster she is being made out to be by those here who have speculated and created an environment of hatred.

Ge ahead and try calling her at work, emailing, faxing. But be willing to get arrested for harassment yourselves. Be ready for charges of assault and stalking against yourselves. She works for a law firm.

It would be best to mind your own business and stop making inferences about the mother's values based on her wedding or what she does with her time.

Anonymous said...

My advice to parents is to buy a regulation life saving device for use in an emergency rescue and keep it by your pool. Go over it's use with your childcare provider and both parents and the providers should go over a rescue drill. If you or your provider cannot swim, then keep a life vest on at all times near the water. And no one person, regardless of how strong a swimmer they are, should be attemtpting to supervise multiple children who cannot swim.

UmassSlytherin said...

Yes, you are right. This is America. And thus, we have freedom of speech and freedom of press. This mother, like it or not, will now be under a microscope. It is unfortunate for her children. We don't really know exactly what happened, we were not there. But being that an innocent woman was involved, people care and want to know. The parents and private childcare workers on this site and across the country want answers as to how this happened and why. It is insane to fault people for that.

If you think this is the first case of negligence on the part of an employer in this situation you are naive. Of course people in the "nanny world" are going to jump all over this. Cliches are cliches because it's true, and if this mother fits the stereotypical employer who underpays and over-works her nanny (and to be frank it seems like it to me) then she deserves to be under scrutiny.

But that's just my opinion. I would certainly not call or harass her personally. I don't need to: reporters will be doing that for weeks to come, I'm guessing.

Anonymous said...

I was a lifeguard for many years and can say that it is very difficult to pull an adult out of a pool. Even a strong swimmer can be exhausted by the task. It is especially difficult in a pool with ladders not steps. You have to haul a flacid body over the edge of the pool onto the cement.

As a mother, I honestly would not have taken the five plus minutes necessary to haul the nanny out while my child lay on the pool side not breathing. Maybe mom figured the neighbor would get the nanny out and it proved too much for the neighbor, which may be why she was still in the pool when the EMT's got there. We do not know the communication that happened between the mom and the neighbor.

yes it is very sad, but it happens. people react in a very basic manner when in an emergency. I doubt any mother out there could watch her child dying and not hold that child and focus all her attention there. But for the grace of God go I. So be very careful in your judgments.

Anonymous said...

In the news reports they said the rescuers saved the boy...he was blue when they arrived. They unfortunately, couldn't save the nanny who went into cardiac arrest. Neighbors came, the rescuers came within 3 minutes of being called...everything that could have been done once the circumstances unfolded was done. The unfortunate part was that the nany was put into that situation in the first place.

Anonymous said...

In the news reports they said the rescuers saved the boy...he was blue when they arrived. They unfortunately, couldn't save the nanny who went into cardiac arrest. Neighbors came, the rescuers came within 3 minutes of being called...everything that could have been done once the circumstances unfolded was done. The unfortunate part was that the nany was put into that situation in the first place.

UmassSlytherin said...

I see your point, 12:09, and as I said, we were not there and do not know exactly what happened. I am not really questioning the mother's ability to revive both her child and the nanny. Rather, I am questioning what parent would not realize what an awesome responsibility it is to have a pool and children. As a parent, I would certainly make sure my nanny were comfortable in the water and that they knew emergency procedures. It sounds like the three kids (who could not all swim themselves) were way too much for this woman to handle. It is unfortunate that the mother was not aware of this.

Anonymous said...

The nanny was an adult and therefore responsible for herself and her own well being. The parents are not responsible for her.

They are however responsible for their pool. It should have been closed and covered with the gate locked if no qualified adult was available to watch the children. Are we sure the mom knew the nanny could not swim?

The nanny should have said "no" to the kids and mom. At 49 I am sure she could make her wishes known. If she was in some way being coerced by the family then she needed to be an adult and make her limitations known. Part of being an adult is taking responsibility for yourself. She was not a slave, or captive forced to work under substandard conditions.

Anonymous said...

umass I agree that three kids in a pool, all unable to swim well, supervised by one adult is unacceptable. Even if the nanny could swim it would have been too much.

mom and nanny were not on the same page, weather mom chose not to listen or nanny was not forceful enough. Either way it is sad that every summer we hear about drownings that could have been prevented had just a little common sense been applied.

Anonymous said...

Apparently the mother did not attempt to resuscitate her son, but sat and waited for the paramedics.

The Red Cross of greater NY offers it's infant/child CPR certification classes in both English and Spanish throughout the year in several locations in addition to their Manhattan facilities. The class is seven hours, and the fee is $70. To receive certification you must pass both a performance and a written exam. To retain certification you take a yearly review class.

I hope that this poor woman's death will serve to make parents aware of the importance of CPR training for their nannies, and THEMSELVES! There has been a lot of comment about hiring nannies who can swim, and know CPR. It is equally important for parents who take their children swimming to be qualified!
A Nanny

mpp said...

Thank you for all of your insightful posts. I have had time to think and read through some other posts and even though I hope at the least this Mother suffers the guilt of losing such an important person in her childrens lives until her last breath ...
I however, do not believe she should be harassed about it.
I can't imagine the type of person that would actually contact them from the information provided in this thread.

No matter how much she may be a horrible Mother, maybe even neglectful in some way, or perhaps your remark about her being the "stereotypical employer who underpays and over-works her nanny" could be true .... we still have to remember that she almost lost her child.

This tragedy will be etched in her mind for the rest of her life and she will probably be reflecting all of the "what if's" every time she looks into her son's eyes.

This isn't compassion I'm feeling for the Mom, but her kids, and all of the hell they will probably witness in the fall-out.

UmassSlytherin said...

I agree wholeheartedly, mpp! It is unfortunate for the children, but she will indeed be harassed and forced to re-live this event for a long time to come. It is sad.

shrooms said...

The mother deserves to be harassed. Who cares? How stupid is she to leave her children with a non swimmer. What are those words printed on all floatation and life saving devices??? Oh something about leaving a child unsupervised.

And I'm sorry, but if you are going to have cramps diving in a residential swimming pool to save a 20 lb 3 year old- you are not physically fit enough to be a nanny. Yes, people have cramps. Yes, people are pulled down by drowning victims, but this happens- ohg I don't know- more often AT SEA, when rushing waves and weather and wind are to be considered.

Smarten up, people.

This was a pool in a back yard. I'm not CPR certified. I'm no lifeguard, but you damn bet I could and would bring a three year old back up from the deep end.

And if I had the three year old out of the pool, I would, oh I don't know ATTEMPT CPR. Not sit on my pampered ass with a 'woe is me", "comfort me" expression on my face while I petted my blue son.

This woman is an idiot.
She should be forced to wear a dunce cap and marched all around syosset. Anyone have any infected tomatos to toss at her perfectly coiffed head?

Anonymous said...


go do some more drugs, stoner. the grownups are talking.

Hellcat said...

My favorite eyeshadow is called Shroom.
Am I a stoner too? :'(

UmassSlytherin said...

Totally nothing against stoners, but Hellcat, you sort of do seem like a stoner to me.

No offense.

Hellcat said...

I'm kind of offended...
I never so much as dabbled in the marijuana. I don't even smoke cigarettes. These lungs are pink and shiny!

Hellcat said...

Heh heh. Discussing drugs now.
I should have just left that one alone!

Back to the beastly/saintly mother and the hero nanny.

UmassSlytherin said...

I'm sorry Hellcat. I was only joking.

I believe you. :)

Anonymous said...

beastly/saintly mom?
I think "just beastly" fits.
And I feel for those kids. mom should have bad karma for the rest of her life, but it makes it hard to want her to suffer, knowing those kids will probably suffer right along next to her.

Anonymous said...

'Shrooms, your post is possibly the most idiotic here.

A person can get cramps swimming any time, under any circustances, reagardless of water temperature, physical fitness and depth. Don't you ever get a cramp on land? A Charlie Horse? On the other hand, my Husband, who is about 60 pounds overweight and an strong swimmer, having taken the Red Cross Life Saving course several years ago, can beat most lifeguards at the lake swim club we belong to, who are half his age.

As far as adults making their own decisions, the other day we had one of the guards at our swim club make the third save of the season. Yet another foolish adult jumped into the deep end who didn't know how to swim. They do it all the time!

Mom and dad were wrong for expecting anyone to be able to watch 3 kids poolside, 2 having special needs, especially since she couldn't swim and was afraid of water. Anyone who is afraid of water cannot reasonably be expected to watch children in and around it.

The nanny was wrong as well. Regardless of what the parents might have done (and I highly doubt her job was theeatened) She should have stuck to her guns and explained her reasons. Why didn't she? Because the one thing that can be assumed is she never, in a million years thought this siuatuion would arise. She however, does have a measure of responsibilty which contributed to the horrific outcome. Yes she did a very brave thing and she deserves our respect and praise. and Iv'e no wish to take that away from her.

Anonymous said...

Can the family lose their home over this incident?
Or will their insurance company have to pay?

UmassSlytherin said...

good question, 10:48. It depends on their individual policy, I would imagine. I doubt they will lose their home. I'm sure they will hire a great lawyer.

Anonymous said...

I'm sure they will still pay out through their teeth.

Who wants to hedge a bet that some great Lawyer will take this case .... Pro-bono?

Anonymous said...

Sorry, I mean - for the nannies family.

UmassSlytherin said...

good point!

NVMom said...

Speaking as a Mom, I think it is totally irresponsible to hire a non-swimmer if you own a pool. I asked every Nanny I ever hired if they could swim and felt comfortable in the pool. I also watched my 2 kids with her so they could each have 1-on-1 supervision until I felt they were old enough to be watched by one person. (They both had some early delays). Responsibility starts with the parents.

You wouldn't hire someone who could not drive to drive your kids, why would you risk putting them by the 'loaded gun' of the pool? A tragic mistake that cost a nanny her life.

Anonymous said...

Dont you hate it when non nannies and non nanny employers opine? They have no frame of reference. I would bet big money that the dead woman set out NOT watching the children by the pool due to her inexperience but was goaded in to it by her bitch employer.

Why couldn't the bitch have drowned?

UmassSlytherin said...

Everyone is entitled to express their opinion. Sometimes it is helpful to get an opinion that is non-biased, unlike your own.

Everyone has a frame of reference. We all have had different life experiences. I am not a nanny currently and do not employ a nanny.

And you sound scary. Please tell me that you are NOT a nanny. (shudder.)

chick said...

Seriously people. Wishing the mother had died and planning out how to harass her is kind of....scary, wouldn't you say?

She and her husband will pay LOTS of money to the heroic nanny's family. That'll hurt them a whole lot.

She and her husband will have to live with the knowledge that they contributed to the nanny's death. No matter how cold they might be, that will eventually wear on them.

She and her husband will have to cope with any issues the rescued child may have after his near-drowning. That'll be a bit painful as well, don't you think?

Karmic justice is a wonderful thing. Stop plotting mayhem and just let The Powers That Be deal with these parents, OK?

mpp said...

Excellent post! - but why should I be surprised. ☺

I think you'll be keeping quite a few people's emotions grounded ... (including mine) ... with your statement. It's very powerful.
Thank you.

Anonymous said...

HER life is not worth less.
If she is the kind of human being others have said she is, her life is worth inheritently more (blessed are the golden hearted).

Greenlawn SAHM of 4 said...

PC rhetoric much? Chick?

As lovely as a group hug would be about now, I am not ready to pardon this woman yet.

No one is plotting mayhem. We are the public. They will answer to us and explain why they behaved as selfishly and callously as they did.

You, without knowing them, suggest that they should have a conscience. What is their collective role in the current mortgage crisis? What was mom doing upstairs in the bedroom in the middle of the day? To be sitting outside on a day as hot as that was and not be a swimmer, not be someone who was comfortable enough to dip her toes in the water, why that must have been hot, wouldn't you say? Torturous, almost? As Mrs. X was upstairs in her air conditioned bedroom.

But back to Mrs. X and what she will have to deal with, you do realize that a connscience may not be present?

Anonymous said...

greenlawn sahm,
chick was not suggesting that the mother was not negligent, nor was she suggesting a "group hug." She merely said we should not be wishing death on this woman or harassing her. I agree with her. Why be a monster?

Anonymous said...

right. I agree with chick. we can wish all the bad karma in the world on her, but it won't bring that beloved nanny back. all we can do is hope that when mom's turn comes to be judged in front of those pearly gates, there is but one person who has the right to do so.

chick said...


PC? Seriously? (Excuse me while I LMAO, OK?) And a group HUG? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

I said:

"She and her husband will have to live with the knowledge that they contributed to the nanny's death. No matter how cold they might be, that will eventually wear on them."

I'll re-write for you if you like, using your prefered word:

"She and her husband will have to live with the knowledge that they contributed to the nanny's death. [No matter how much of a conscience they each may lack], that will eventually wear on them."

No one is plotting mayhem? Have you READ these posts? The mother's business name, contact info, and address were published. A MAP to the house is available. Suggestions were made that include:

"I hope people protest and picket her bitch existence. They should fling catsup and red tinged paint on the bitch's car and home."

"anyone who loves children
anyone who has ever been a nanny, had a nanny, known a nanny-
get together and stand on the front lawn of this bitch's house.
And then call CPS and report this piece of shit woman for being the negligent bitch she is.

Take those kids from her.
And then throw the bitch in jail."

"Sorry, but she should be burned at the stake. I hate evil bitches like this."

IMO, that counts as plotting mayhem.

Anonymous said...

Wish death on her? No.
Wish for her to pay mightily and often for the sins she committed, including those against her own children?


This is a nanny board where nanny misdeeds are reported all the time. We now have a nanny who was bullied into a position where she, in order to keep her job had to put three children's life in danger every day she watched them swim. The mother wanted her young children to be able to swim.

The mother needs to be investigated by CPS and charged.

Yes, I encourage all you not to back down until this mother is charged. Stories of nanny's falling asleep and letting children fall in to neighbor's pools, well they pepper the other blog.

But here and now?

We want justice.
We want people to know that it isn't always the nannies that are too blame when children get injured. Parents often create a climate of negligence. Negligent parents, so used to allowing their children to run like maniacs on stairs and through apartment buildings suggest by demonstration that this behavior is okay. The children want to do what mom and dad says is okay.



It's not like we can get her for murder.

Ernest Coli said...

I hope people protest and picket her bitch existence. They should fling catsup and red tinged paint on the bitch's car and home."

I think catsup is contaminated by e coli. some farmer in mexico was doing the dirty by the tomatos and ....

Anonymous said...

Greenlawn SAHM of $ sad 4 kids are being raised by an ignorant witch like you.

UmassSlytherin said...

anon @ 9:21,

I personally don't have all the facts that I need to make an absolute judgement on this story. Of course we can see that the nanny should not have been in charge of those children by poolside. No adult should be. As to the reasons why she was, well that remains unclear. We do not know the facts yet.

and greenlawn sahm, I don't think you really got the point of chick's post.

UmassSlytherin said...

p.s. I mean to say "no adult who does not feel comfortable" should be put in that position.

Anonymous said...

I believe the mom is a lawyer?
I bet she knows the top lawyers to get her out of being held liable.

They will probably say the nanny was an adult and jumped into the pool on her own free will.

From the updated news stories I found on the internet-
The nanny screamed for the mother-and jumped into the pool.
The mom went to the pool- PULLED HER CHILD OUT...then tried to pull the nanny out, but could not-
a neighbor actually tried too- but could not- but held the nanny out of the water until help arrived.
The mom was attending to her child while a neighbor was helping the nanny stay above water.

The mother made the 911 call - about 5 minutes later the police arrived.

What can they possibly charge the mom with? Maybe negligence?
She will have to live with knowing someone died out in her backyard. Would anyone ever want to swim in a pool where someone died? Will anyone want to buy a house where someone died in the backyard?

Many of you here are all so quick to judge- you've never met this mom- were not there that day-
have never been in this situation-
you too have no idea on how you'd REALLY react.

Please learn from this- and go get CPR certified, learn to swim, have a phone near the pool, etc.

Pray for the nannie's family...
be kinder, compassionate human beings...

Anonymous said...

Well said 11:10. I find all this hatred towards and assumptions about the employer disturbing. Do all nannies hate their employers so much? There is no evidence this incident is anything other than a tragic accident, caused by the parents not thinking through allowing the kids in the pool on a hot day. A horrible lapse in judgement that resulted in tragedy.

Anonymous said...

It doesn't really matter whether the nanny should have been able to swim or not. She could have been a grandma and fallen into the pool. The fact is, you ALWAYS call 911 if someone needs help. You never save one person and leave the other person. That is very basic law of humanity. This mother unfortunately gives all parents a bad name in that it seems like the they only look after their own. I know it's not true but it seems that way a lot. That woman who died had no reason to die and she was a friend, mother, daughter and/or sister as well.

cali mom said...

Yoiu better believe she was put into a dangerous situation, and I hope her family pursues a wrongful death lawsuit against her employers. To put one non-swimming person in charge of 3 children under 6, two of whom are autistic, in a swimming pool?????????? They should also be prosecuted for endangering their own child.

Anonymous said...

No its to just nannies that hate their employers. I am a mother and hate the mother for being so ignorant. And too cheap to hire another part-time nanny to help at least for the summer months.

I am sure she could have hired a part-time childcare provider that was able to swim. That way theres two nannies at the pool. Just for the summer months.

Anonymous said...

Hiring another nanny would be cheaper than her kids being enrolled in summer camp. It sounds like the kids were going to be home the whole summer. So with the money saved with not paying for camps, etc. She could have hired someone else to help out.

Where I live its not uncommon for parents to spend 5k-10k a summer for each kid. And special needs camps are not cheap either. A relative of mine is paying for a two week summer camp 9-2:30 $1200.00

Anonymous said...

pools are so dangerous for children, I could never consider having a pool at home and children at the same time. But a lot of people don't think about the safety, more so the convenience and luxury of having a pool at home.

This lady is a hero by all means for saving that little boy's life, and surely she's glad to know he is alright. Still, the family should have had more people on watch. Maybe they should hire a lifeguard for that pool of theirs. The mother is not a terrible person, hopefully not, anyway, but it's sad to think this whole tragedy was entirely preventable with just a little preventative care.

Metronanny said...

What about the nannies responsibility to stand up for herself and refuse to put herself and the kids in this situation?

I'm sorry, she was very brave to have put her life on the line and make the ultimate sacrafice and the end was tragic, but the nanny is just as much at fault.
She accepted the responisibilty of caring for children knowing full well she couldn't swim and was afraid of water. IMO, she shares the blame 50/50 If this nanny hadn't died and the child had you guys would all be calling for her blood saying she was an idiot for doing what she did. This nanny was an adult and made the choice to do a job she wasn't able to.
Of course the mother was wrong for allowing such a person to supervise her children while they swam, but again I say, the nanny was equally wrong. Insurance costs continue to soar through the roof because people sue and win at every turn. IMO, the foolish acts of the two women, the mother and the nanny cancel each other out.
Both women put the children in danger for their own reasons, whatever they may have been and those reasons cost a life. Thank God it wasn't the innocent child at least, who had no part in the folly of the two women.

Hellcat said...

That's an interesting point I'd like to elaborate on.
What *would* the reaction be if the nanny had tried to rescue the boy, but somehow because the paramedics had to recue two people, the boys life was lost and the nanny was saved?

It easily could have been the case... and I'm sure everyone would turn on that nanny sooo fast.

This does not subtract from the fact that the mom's actions were very questionable. I suspect she brought the boy into the house because it was inconvenient and unpleasant for her to watch the nanny die at such a distressing time for her.
We do know that it was NOT to revive him as she would have people believe. The paramedic has stated that she was just sitting there with his blue body.

Kutchen said...

Swimming pool is more dangerous for children as with gun. When it comes to children. there is no comparison. A swimming pool is a lot more deadlier for children. So it is important to take the proper action to prevent this from happening.

Anonymous said...

As for bad karma, will this family ever be able to find a new nanny?

looking for a nanny? said...

Nanny/Housekeeper needed ASAP (Syosset)

Reply to:
Date: 2008-07-06, 10:22AM EDT

Busy family with demanding social calendar seeks nanny for three children under 8 years of age. Must be willing and able to provide adequate supervision to the children and manage and clean employer's impressive residence. Windows, bathrooms, floors, carpets and complete family laundry. Live in or live out will be accepted. Position starts at 730 AM and normal day ends at 730-900 PM.
$400 for exceptional candidate. No taxes taken out. English is essential.

UmassSlytherin said...

I don't think so. I don't see anything about being able to swim/trained in CPR! :(

Anonymous said...

Oh my god! Is that ad for real! They want a slave
$400 a week no taxes taken out. Full housecleaning, and working till 7-9pm. Is it the family?
How do you do full housecleaning and taking care of three boys under 8. If its such an impressive house, they can afford a housecleaner a couple of times a week

Anonymous said...

Dear Miss Judgemental,

You haven't been in a siuation like this. You don't know what you would have done, or what exactly happened. Before you make such harsh remarks, consider all the times someone may have judged you.

In other words, get off your high horse, and stfu. This is a sad story- not one for you to start barking like you often do on here.

Liberal Nanny

erics mom said...

Who are you talking too?

Anonymous said...

I'm talking to every person who imediately says thing slike "mom is responsible", or "nanny shouldn't be watching him", or " cheap to pay a swimmer".

A women died, and it's nobodys fault. Maybe something more could have been done. It's not our right to blame though.

Anonymous said...

8:56 I could not agree more. The nany was an adult and could have, as we alwayw tell the children "used her words" to explain to the mom she just was not up to the job. Hiring a part time lifeguard trained young person to oversee the pool would have bee a great idea but hindsight is....... as the saying goes.

Anonymous said...

12:50 are you the mom who's nanny just died in your pool? How abut some workers comp with that job?

Anonymous said...

This all is disgusting! 1. Who hires a nanny who can't swim.

And 2. Who just leaves a peron you've known for 4 years in the pool?

Something here just doesn't make sense!

Anonymous said...

A whole lot doesn't make sense.
I hear the father had no idea Mom was so uninvolved with the children or that she would ever let Ana watch the children by the pool!

Anonymous said...

Was the mom practicing law or was she a stay at home mom?
Just curious.

And do you think that ad on Craigslist is from the family or just a strange concidence?

Anonymous said...

The CL ad is the Foglia family.

erics mom said...

I don't know. After the near loss of your child and the loss of your of your nanny.... Personally, I would take time to just spend with my family and kids.
Would you hire someone off the bat like that?
And another thing shes a lawyer?! And doesn't want to pay taxes?! I mean come on. They are supposed to be upholding the law and they go against it. Really, what good examples they are going to be for their kids.
Oh wait the nannies in their lives are raising them.

Anonymous said...

everyone one should flag her ad so it gets kicked off Craigslist.

erics mom said...

opps don't mind the mistakes I made when typing

Anonymous said...

Wait wait do we know that it's the same family? Did someone call?

I'm not defending the mother at all regarding what happened to the nanny, but lets not demonize her more than we have to. Stick to the facts.

Anonymous said...

I think she and her husband are both mortgage brokers. But there is a lot of trouble out here on LI with sham mortgages. I don't know if they got caught up in it or not but the mom hasnt been working like she used to, so?

Anonymous said...

I heard she was a sahm.

Anonymous said...

I am in shock at the posts here. I am a nanny. When I was hired a few things were obvious.

My employers had two large dogs.

My employers home had a pool.

My employers home had a hot tub.

My employers had 4 children.

My employers house was built on a lake.

As an adult as well as a person of sound body amd mind, the first thing I did was ask myself," okay can I handle this job?"
I pictured kids in the lake during the Summer and pool parties. I also pictured active dogs.

As a nanny, it is your job to understand what is expected of you.

If you cannot swim, do not take on a job where toddlers or children will be in the water. End of story.
If your boss tells you to take the kids to the pool or lake and you do not know know how to swim..say NO! I am unable to do that.

fear of losing a job because you are unable to perform an assignment while working should never be a factor when lives are at at stake! The loss of a job is much more forgivable than the loss of a life.
Why did this nanny allow herself and those children to be in such a dangerous position? What did she think would happen if a child slipped into the pool??
Regardless of what you might think of the parents..ultimately, it was the nanny's responsibility to care for those children by the pool and if she was unable to do so, she should have never accepted the responsibility!! Period!

I am sorry for her family and for the little boy involved. I wish them all peace.

Anonymous said...

If the nanny was so great why did the child not have the life vest on tight enough that he could not get out of it?

If the nanny was so great how come she did not notice he had slipped out of the life vest?

I think this should be a bad nanny sighting, nanny was clearly not paying attention to the boy.

Anonymous said...

I think someone here posted the CL ad. No one calls their house"impressive". You may call it large or big but the wording os off. Stop harassing this poor mother. Her child is sick and her nanny was negiligent, she has a lot on her mind and children to look after.

Anonymous said...


the nanny probably needed the job so that she could buy food for herself and her family, not so she could buy itunes and diet snapple like you.

Anonymous said...

There are a few things every child should have from a very young age.

Swimming lessons. They are inexpensive at the Y, JCC and other organizations and are invaluable. If begun early your children will have learned how to swim properly and an healthy respect for something that can be fun as well as deadly.

Bathing suits with flotaition devices built in for little ones.
These are costly but can't be easily slipped out of, used incorrectly, forgotten at home or not bothered with. Kid puts suit on, kid has flotation device on, 2 birds-one stone.

Inteliigent parents who realize what they need to do to insure the safety of their children at all times.

Intelligent child care providers when needed, who know their limitations as well as their strengths. I just hope others lean form this tragedy.

sprak said...

I liked your post, 7:52, and you've reminded me of the theory, "it takes a village". Yes, nannies taking on a childcare position must be sure they are up to the tasks at hand, and if there is a pool involved, they should not take a job if unable to swim and perform CPR. On the other hand, the parents should ascertain that the person they hire can swim and is certified in CPR. If everyone had acted responsibly to protect these children, this tragedy likely might have been avoided.

Anonymous said...

There is only one person who knows what happened, and is in a position to assign blame, and that is the mother, the one person who was there the whole time. We don't know who put the water vest, or wings on the children. We don't know if the nanny objected to watching the children in the pool and the mom ignored her. Maybe the mom was out there with them, and ran into the house for something. Maybe she just sent the children out to the pool, and the nanny followed after them because they would be alone otherwise. WE DON'T KNOW.
The only thing we can fairly assume, is that these parents, with a pool and three young children, did not make sure they hired a nanny who could swim.

Anonymous said...

I find this whole situation so tragic. I'm a nanny who supervises a 3 year old, 10 year old and 12 year old in their pool. I found out later that both parents sat inside and watched me from the kitchen for a full hour to make sure I was a strong enough swimmer to properly watch the girls. The three year old has been swimming since she was a baby, but I still don't allow her to be in the pool without me holding her or, when she is wearing floaties, to travel outside the shallow end. I also make sure there are at least 4 floatation devices whenever anyone is in the pool

Anonymous said...

Floatation devices in the pool, I meant

Anonymous said...

Thank you Sprak! I cringed when I went back and noticed all the pathetic typos! That's what I get for not using spell check!

9:18, well we do know that a suit with a flotation device built in was not used, we do know the nanny didn't know how to swim and we do know the mother didn't make sure the nanny knew how to swim.

It's very sad when a series of mistakes are made and result in terrible consequences. Then again, this is usually how tragedy strikes. The nanny isn't a bad person and I don't think the mother is a vile creature that woke up that morning gleefully rubbing her hands together saying to herself "I hope today my nanny will just make my life so much better!" She, like so many others probably thought it could never happen to her, and I am certain the nanny thought the same way. That's usually the first mistake in the series of sub sequential ones, people start out thinking it could never happen to them.

Anonymous said...

I don't appreciate you little dunces flagging my craigs list ad and writing me obnoxios letters. Who in the hell do you think you are? The last I checked this is a free country. I can offer any sort of employment that I like and it would probably surprise you to know that I received at least 3 dozen serious inquiries to my position, nannies who are chomping at the bit to make $400 cash per week. That's more than you would make if you earned $10 an hour and paid taxes and I don't know any company now that is being generous with it's pay. People are creeping back down to minimum wage. You should all cling to your jobs like white on rice because with the chips on your shoulders, you wont have them for long. And you will join the 30 plus nannies who wrote me so tenderly explaining their experience and references, hoping I would give them a chance to interview with me.

It might shock you to realize that there are many families in Syosset. I am not the woman who's nanny fell in the pool and had a heart attack. That was very unfortunate but the nanny was not in the best of shape. It took three adults to hoist her out of the pool.

chick said...

Yes, if only the nanny had weighed less.....then everything would have been so different!

Or, maybe everything would have been different if nanny hadn't tried to save that little boy? I mean, how stupid of her to jump into the water when she was fat and unable to swim! The sheer nerve of her, DYING like that!

Idjit. May you be audited by any government agency related to taxes.

May you go through nannies like I go through rolls of paper towels.

May you be forced to do the job yourself for 2 weeks, and then realize, while crying yourself to sleep, that you have stupid expectations, and a ridiculous salary offer.

chick said...

Also, those of you opining about how nanny should have refused to take the job, or stood up to her employers, or otherwise been all "I am woman hear me roar!"

She was likely dependent on that job to survive. She may or may not have spoken decent english. She may not have been willing, or even capable of "standing up to" her employers. She was, after all, raised in a country other than America, and occasionally other countries expect, nay, DEMAND less forthright behavior from women.

A decent employer would have made sure Nanny Ana either was NEVER alone with the kids at the pool, or they would have hired a summer "helper" to take on pool duty. Or they wouldn't have hired Nanny Ana at all, and instead found a swimming nanny.

Implications that the nanny was at fault make me want to vomit. Employers are ultimately responsible for making sure their employees can do the job they are hired to do.

Anonymous said...

9:55-- Newsflash: Paying under the table is illegal. That right there is reason enough to flag your post. Plus, paying less than minimum wage is also illegal. Strike two.

PS- Perhaps you should add to your criteria, "Weight limit in effect; prospective employees must submit to stepping on a scale before employment is offered."

Get real.

Anonymouse said...

I can just see you sitting there smirking at all those "tender" stories from nannies willing to take your crap and your near-slavery wages. What a power trip you must be on.

BTW, do you ever spend time with your kids? Or take care of your OWN "impressive residence?" I seriously feel sorry for your children.

UmassSlytherin said...

chick I loved your posts, thank you.

And to the woman posting on CL, I too have no patience for employers who pay nannies off the books.

Anonymous said...

to the idiots who are making statements such as" the nanny took the job to feed her family..etc.. well let me tell you..with yopur diet snapple jokes and crap...

while I am terribly sorry about the loss of life in this story..anyone willing to risk other childrens lives to feed their own are horrible people!

Your statements are retched!

If that little boy had died instead of the nanny you would ALL be singing a different tune!

You are a bunch of idiots!!
Do you understand this woman is dead becuase she put her own life as well as the lives of 3 children in a dangerous position..why..just for a paycheck??

I would sooner see my children living with a relative(if I needed $ that badly) than putting someone elses children in that kind of danger!


Sprak said...

Chick, you hit one out of the park with your 10:07 post! You mopped the floor with the Vile poster at 9:55. I'm with you that the nanny may have needed her job and been afraid to set condition upon her employment, and I also believe that neither nanny nor employer ever thought something so tragic would happen, given the swimmers aids used by the children. I do believe nannies should be able to perform all of the duties required by their positions, but ultimately, it is the responsibility of the parents to ensure that this is so.

manhattanmamma said...

9:55 I am very sorry if anyone from this site wrote you and was unkind. But, since you posted here I can say what I want. Yes it is a free country. And of course, that allows you to be as obnoxious and idiotic as you please.

I feel very sorry for the one unlucky soul that gets chosen from "30 plus nannies who wrote me so tenderly explaining their experience and references, hoping I would give them a chance to interview with me." or the "3 dozen serious inquiries to my position, nannies who are chomping at the bit to make $400 cash per week" Your extremely condescending attitude tells me just what sort of employer you will be with your impressive house. I hope, for your children's sake, as I couldn't give a fig about you, one of these nannies who are so eager to do such and important job and be hugely under compensated doesn't put on a great show to get hired only to at best neglect and ignore your kids or worse. Since you are so well-off, one would think you would be willing to compensate the person providing care for the most precious things in your life fairly. But perhaps you are one of those people that have children as accessories. You get the rich husband, the big house, the dog, the cat, the expensive SUV and the kids. I hope, at the very least, you will make sure your underpaid nanny will know how to swim should she be expected to supervise your fashion accessories in the pool.

Oh, and so you know dead weight is much more difficult to handle so it would take more then one person to lift an adult out of a pool. Her weight had nothing to do with her ability to swim or her fear of water. And perfectly healthy people can have heart attacks during a time of crisis...genius.

Anonymous said...

People like 955 should be sterilized and have their children taken away from them.

Lady, you sound like a sad, useless piece of garbage. No matter how 'impressive' your home is, it won't change the fact that you are an asshole of epic proportions.

Anonymous said...

I do have one question. How did the little by take off his floaters and no one notice it?
They were all by the pool, except the mother, the child took off his floaters and the nanny did not see this before it was too late?
If all the adults in the house had been paying attention this whole thing would not have happened.
The other thing is the child seemed to have been in the seep end of the pool and that should not have been allowed either.
It seems to be that no one was really paying attention to what was going on in and around that pool.

Anonymous said...

I think I read that he took off his vest and jumped in the pool and then immediately sunk to the bottom. I can attest to how quickly kids can sink. The little girl I watch is also 3, and one day she whipped off her floatie and jumped into the pool from the shallow end steps.It was literally a matter of seconds. As I was calling out "Stop!" she was already underwater. Luckily, I was right in front of her in the pool and scooped her up, but she took in a big mouthful of water because she still doesn't always hold her breath properly when going underwater.

Metronanny said...

Dear Ms. Impressive House:

I doubt anyone is chomping at the bit to make an unlivable wage. They may accept it because it's the best they can find, they may even be happy they have any job at all because the one thing you were right about-times are hard right now and jobs harder to find. You are clearly taking advantage of that so I hope you feel good about yourself! But don't fool yourself lady. No one is excited about getting a job they will barely make ends meet with. So you may have an impressive house but you, madame are not in the least impressive. In fact, you sound very small.

Anonymous said...

11:30 PM
The parents are the ones who put their children in danger by not providing adequate supervision for them in the pool. The nanny had been with them for four years, they KNEW SHE COULDN'T SWIM!

Anonymous said...

9:55 PM
Yes, there are hoards of desperate women looking for nanny jobs, and you will have no problem hiring someone for long hours, hard work, and a miserable salary illegally. You will not however, get a highly qualified, experienced professional nanny. They easily find families who pay decent salaries, on the books, in order to provide their beloved children with wonderful care.

ADB said...

The bitch did not offer to pay for the funeral services or make a contribution. Fingers crossed that she sent some flowers. At least....

And back to inciting mayhem. This is a public blog. The information I have is from public newspapers. Anyone with an iq of 80 or better knows how to google someone. Anyone is free to google the nanny killer. Anyone is free to send email to the nanny killer at the address she publicly listed. I don't think anyone should send anything mean or threatening or menacing. But you have every right to express your dissatisfaction with her mommy skill. You have ever right to call for her to be investigated by child protective services for child neglect and child endangerment. These are your rights as members of the public. How can anyone who has ever worked as a nanny or anyone who has ever said yes and did something they didn't want to do or were uncomfortable doing just to avoid making waves, how can any of you just do nothing?

This was a grave, grave injustice. It also speaks volumes and volumes to the class system in america, the lack of rights for domestic employees and what appears to be an epidemic in Long Island of keeping nannies as slaves and making them work ungodly hours in unimaginable conditions...

Do not let this go.

This is a human life.

adb said...

La perra no ofreció pagar los funerales o hacer una contribución. Dedos cruzados que ella envió algunas flores. Por lo menos…. Y de nuevo a la mutilación de la incitación. Esto es un blog público. La información que tengo es de los periódicos públicos. Cualquier persona con un índice de inteligencia de 80 o sabe mejor cómo a google alguien. Cualquier persona está libre a google el asesino de la niñera. Cualquier persona está libre de enviar el email al asesino de la niñera en la dirección que ella enumeró público. I don' t piensa que cualquier persona debe enviar cualquier cosa malo o que amenaza o amenazador. Pero usted tiene cada derecha de expresar su descontento con su habilidad de la mama. Usted tiene siempre a la derecha pedir ella que se investigará por los servicios protectores del niño para la negligencia de niño y la peligrosidad del niño. Éstos sus correcto como miembros del público. Cómo puede cualquier persona que ha trabajado nunca como niñera o cualquier persona que ha dicho nunca sí e hizo algo ellos didn' ¿t quiere hacer o era el hacer incómodo apenas a evitar hacer ondas, cómo no puede cualquiera de usted apenas hacer nada? Esto era un sepulcro, injusticia grave. También habla volúmenes y volúmenes al sistema en América, la carencia de la clase de las derechas para los empleados domésticos y qué aparece ser una epidemia en el Long Island de guardar a niñeras como los esclavos y fabricación les del trabajo las horas impías en condiciones inimaginables… No deje esto ir. Esto es una vida humana. Llame a su fiscal de distrito. Escriba una letra. Envíe un email. Este mother' la negligencia de niño de s costó a ser humano su vida. Departamento de Policía del condado de Nassau - 2da porción del recinto: Bayville, Norwich del este, Hicksville, Jericho, Lattingtown, hueco del laurel, valle de la langosta, bahía de la ostra, Plainview, & de Syosset; Woodbury. 7700 Jericho Tpk., teléfono de Woodbury (OysBy) ....................................................................: 516-573-6200

f said...

The family could not be bothered to attend the nanny's wake. She lived with them for four years, cared for two of their children from birth and worked 14 hour days, 6 days a week.

And you people stood up for this asshats? Why?

Anonymous said...

Really, they didn't attend the funeral. WEll in a way I don't blame them. I am sure if they went the family would be screaming at them.

Jane Doe said...

Newsday has an article referencing the wake. The nanny's employers did attend the wake.

"The Foglias arrived early at the wake, approaching Montaño DeGimenez's husband and DeLeon to pay their respects and to insist that they would be paying for the entire service."

Anonymous said...

Thank you Jane for clearing that issue(Wake) up! I am always shocked at the jerks who blab and badmouth without having the facts before them!! Like F & abd above!

F & abd..both of you along with several other posters need to shut your mouths until you have the correct facts.Spreading gossip is a bad, bad habit! It shows signs of ignorance and plain stupidity! Shame on you!

Anonymous said...

abd..stop posting! You don't know what you are talking about! Your posts are not valid!

Your are just angry and posting garbage!

No one will ever trust any of your posts again.

Find another blog to sabbotage!

cali mom said...

9:53, you hit the nail on the head regarding 9:55 and her smug little post comgratulating herself on her generosity for offering to pay someone as much $5.92/hr (IF they are only expected to work 13 1/2 hours a day only 5 days a week, as opposed to 7 days a week). Obviously she cares more about her "impressive house" than her 3 children.

And 9:55, if you wanted people to think you have an IQ over 53, you might avoid blatently advertising the fact that you plan to break federal minimum wage laws and cheat the IRS. Did you really think it was legal to do that stuff? It sounds like your husband got tired of having to pay you and visit you at the trailer so finally married you for some free milk.

Anonymous said...

calimom..what the hell is going on with you. you are just a witch lately!

It is pefectly legal to hire a nanny and not withhold taxes as long as the nanny claims them when she files. It is called Independent Contracting and it is legal.

My employers do not withhold any of my taxes accountant does all of that for me! It is legal and saves everyone $ all around as I have to file my taxes every year anyhow.
While it may not be commonly known or practiced ,it is legal.
I have done it for 20 years.

I do not know what 955's intentions are..neither do you but you sure are bitching and moaning alot Calimom..

Anonymous said...

hey calimom:
$400.00 a week for a live in nanny is pretty damn good..where do you live that live-ins are paid so much more?

Anonymous said...

she doesn't live in northern cali thats for sure!! Maybe down in southern cal but no way..not northern cal 400 plus room and board? I don't think so!

She's just pissin about the taxes and crap

merilou said...

I came out here from Colorado a year ago. Most of my experience was babysitting neighborhood children. I came out here to make $550 a week, paid on the books (but I take home $550- they pay all of the taxes). A month ago was my year anniversary and they are putting me on their family health policy (about $300 a month), raising me to $600 and giving me an extra week of vacation. I'm 21 yrs. old and went to beauty school for 6 months. That's my education. Most of the nannies I know make much more than I do.

Anonymous said...

merilou..where is OUTHERE?

Anonymous said...

Meri Lou, just curious. Where do you live, what state? And are you a live in nanny or live out?

cali mom said...

Well, 1:18/1:32/1:36, I don't know what country you live in, but in the U.S. Federal minimum wage laws apply, and 94 1/2 hours a week divided by $400 falls WAY short of that. Are you able to do the math?

chick said...

1:18, it is completely ILLEGAL for you to file as an IC if you are a nanny. There are certain qualifications one has to meet to be an IC, such as setting your own hours, providing your own materials and work supplies, etc.

IF you file as an IC, you are getting screwed. You are paying ALL 15.3% of SS/Medicare taxes, rather than the 7.65% employees pay.

I suggest a visit to the IRS website, a search there for "nanny taxes", and employment of a new, more capable accountant.

chick said...

As far as minimum wage is concerned, NY state law sets minimum wage at $7.15 per hour. LI nannies do not qualify for OT, so the job 9:55 is so generously offering to all the interested nannies MUST pay $500.50, assuming a 70 hour work week.

Of course, since 9:55 wants one person to do the work of both a FT housekeeper and a FT nanny, she should really at least pay double to minimum wage, don't you think?

Anonymous said...

Excellent advice , Chick!
And right on you are.
Why can't a few of these nannies look out for themselves, just to make sure everything is on the up and up? Don't always trust that your employer has your best interest at heart.

Anonymous said...

You still avoided the question cm.

Where do you live in No. Cal that $400.00 a week for a live in nanny is not acceptable?

Anonymous said...

chick, you must be living high on the hog somewhere there in Georgia!!
$10.00 an hour here sounds fantastic!!Plus room and board??
Some of us need to work and not all of us make 6 figures a year!!!
Those of us that have families to feed work for what we can and are greatful for our jobs! When we pass by the homeless or bagladies on the street we thank God for our 50 hr a week job that pays us $400.00.

Some of you need to get a grip!!
Reality is things are bad right now and only getting worse. thank goodness for Ms impressive..she will be helping a family somewhere pay the rent or the mortgage ! Not all jobs are dream jobs. some of us actually work our asses off and are glad to be able to do so!!

cali mom said...

6:49, San Francisco Bay Area. Federal laws apply in every state though, (as apparently you were not aware of that fact), so why do you ask? Are you one of those ones who considers yourself "lucky" to be working 94 hours a week for $4.25 an hour? Most people have a different name for that.

W.P.N said...

This whole thread shows the fact that there is no rules when hiring a nanny. More importantly there is no safety net for the nannies. For the parents they can basically report the nanny and have them arrested and charged from theft t abuse. Again for the nannies they have nothing unless it is really extreme. Prostitutes in Nevada have more rights! A mother can hire who she wants. A woman in need who needs work will cut corners to secure a job. A woman who is not outspoken will allow abuse. We all have big voices on this board but, we have all probably suffered some form of abuse in this job at some point. IT JUST HAPPENS.Of course this nanny should of had the insight to know she should not be left alone with children in a situation where if a problem should happen she could not handle it. But, she would probably get fired or treated unfairly. Or maybe she just did not want to even say no for the fear of problems ( let us think here for a second that the nanny knew possibly all 3 would be dead if the nanny was not there and the mother was left in charge)!!!!! Who knows!

Now in a perfect world if the mother wanted this particular nanny so much then when on pool days the mother should BY LAW hire a certified swimmer. The nanny would have rights to refuse this particular aspect of the job as it would then not be in her job description. AND the mother would have to be fair or the nanny could bring it up at a meeting with a higher manager. Oh yes! That just does not exist in this world. Hmmmmm.....Maybe the mother would dock her pay for swimming time to pay the certified swimmer!

We all know who is at fault here but, really the nanny should of spoken up and refused. I have refused things in the past. But, when I see danger well ahead of time I address it. I have rules and I set them point blankly at the get go what I do and what I do not do. Most of the issues are issues I just see happening in the future and dangerous to the children. I have in fact quit a temporary position where I saw the children in danger due to the mother's behaviour and that was that. It was not serious but there were way too many staff floating around and overworked and did not have good judgement. I saw accidents being made due to the fact that the mother just did not look after her children and the staff was over worked and tired. I saw clumsiness and could see trouble brewing one day. I could see something going down and no matter how small I knew that no matter what..... I would be the one to blame. I did not want any part of it. I was uncomfortable but, I knew what could happen.

The nanny was putting herself in danger first to agree to this arrangement then the children second. But, hell who knows how reasonable this mother was? I mean 3 children and one 60 year old nanny???? It seems pretty clear where her head was at. If this woman had rights and was in a job where she had somewhere to turn to immediately, life would be better for this woman.
* I am sick of hearing nannies getting away with stuff and acting like victims. Maybe this nanny could of found a better family to work for where she was not put in this position. But, off the back there is abuse here on every side. And they are allowed to do this because no one is fighting for the rights of nannies and regulating this profession. Most parents will pay less and most nannies will take it. That is what I have seen. Now when someone gets hurt suddenly everyone is pointing fingers. What about the workers force here why are they not to be blamed for ignoring a profession that is very common in this country. The system is to blame. This country is to blame for not helping illegal immigrants have rights.......I think I may have to start up a movement and pins!

I hope that this story brings to light issues for parents when hiring a nanny, but sadly it will not change anything long term.

While there is unprotected laws for workers such as nannies there will always be problems. No one should be surprised here at this fine example of what it is like to be a nanny in this country where wealthy people hire cheap labour and abuse their rights and then cry when things do not go well.

I am serious about the pins.


Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Oh, I am quite sure that you don't know Calimom but I am even more sure that you are totally obsessed with her. You've probably printed up all of her posts and made huge posters from them, proudly displayed in your front room. It's clear that you are CaliMom's biggest fan, in spite of what you say. And when the sprak says it's so, it is so.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
cali mom said...

So you admit that you're lying through your teeth. (unless you included your proof in your last post and I missed it?). Thanks for confirming the obvious.

UmassSlytherin said...

cali, this person is a wacko! they are so full of you know what that it is not even funny.

(yawn) and they say I don't have a life!

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Jane Doe said...

Please use the toolbar at the top of the blog and click on "next blog".

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Jane Doe said...

Our full comment policy

does mention our lack of tolerance for ad hominem attacks.

This is why your comment(s) are/were deleted.

Sprak said...

A very sensible decision, indeed, Jane Doe. This particular poster denigrated CaliMom and cast aspersion upon her character, all under the pretense of knowing her. Well, if she knows CaliMom, I suggest she send such proof to you since she does not wish it displayed publicly. I do not believe this person and think her intentions are evil. Thanks Jane.

Anonymous said...

I respectfully disagree with you Jane. While your blog rules are clearly posted, 75% of the posts that I read daily consist of criticizing or attacking the person who proposed the argument.
The post regarding calimom was
a argumentum ad verecundiam.
It was not in anyway threatening oe "evil" as stated.
When manhattan mama was referred to as a stalker everyone was outraged.
This is how the Salem which trial got started.
Talk about hysteria!
What a victorious day for censorship.

UmassSlytherin said...

I think it was evil, personally. Any post that's all like, "I know who you are!" is harassing, in my opinion. It's not the same to disagree with someone, that is just having conversation/arguments. But to say or imply that you know the person, live in their area, and hate them is in my opinion, worthy of having your post removed.

Get your own blog and you can moderate your own comments.
All zero of them.

Anonymous said...

why would anyone let stand someone posting as anonymous and terrorizing a regular commenter?

You clearly have no balls.

Yet you want to fight for free speech? Be accountable for what you say. Leave a name.

You wont. You are just playing games. Attacking MPP, Sprak or Cali Mom. Whoever you feel like attacking in one day.

Angry woman. Get help.

Anonymous said...

terrorizing a regular commentor?
I have never terrorized anyone on this blog!
I disagree all the time and have been disagreed with. I have been called names and told I am ugly, fat or have no friends. I have been told I have no knowledge of laws and or children.Just as many others have.Yet I have NEVER terrorized anyone or threatened anyone!

I have always responded to the argument and only on occassion, after being attacked over and over again,yes, usually by calimom..I come back angry. But, I have never terrorized, threatened or personally attacked anyone.I have called names..generic such as ass or bitch but my posts are tame to some of those from lindalou, miserly bastard, MM or other anons who use obscene and foul language all the time.

And to insinuate that my post was anything other than what it was is ridiculous.
I am not nor have I ever threatened anyone on this blog.
I simply stated that I knew who someone was and that explained why we always butt heads@! That was it!!
Umass, if you have found anything I have ever posted to be threatening I would love to see it!
absolutley ridiculous!
And as for your monikers? how the hell is that any different than posting anonymous?
You are not accountable for anything?
I post anonymous because I simply don't get the whole cutsey moniker thing! Who cares?
I will not apologise for discovering that an aquaintance is also a poster on ISYN. I will also not retract my opinions of her.
I will however state, if anyone took my post for anything other than what is was, then perhaps I will think more clearly when posting in the future.
But to all of you who made it into something it was not..shame on you.
Hysteria feeds hysteria .
and yes, now I am diffrent than you would be if someone took your post and interpreted it out of context.

remember how everyone felt when MM was accussed of being a stalker? It was an unjust call and so was this.

Anonymous said...

2:58, I feel DOES get a little out of hand here from time to time. That's when I take a little break.

Sorry "regulars," but it's the truth. :-/ I like the majority of you, but sometimes this blog gives airs of a very exclusive social club.

anonymous1 said...

do you think the post shouln't have been deleted jj? i didn't see it so i have no idea what made it so bad- -

Anonymous said...

wish I could state things as simply and well put as you do.Thanks

Anonymous said...

Very exclusive club? lmao
I'd say any person with an opinion is welcome to post.
Only angry, hateful people feel excluded.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 234   Newer› Newest»