Posted by:
Ellen Driscoll
New Media
11/3/2009 4:22:20 PM
In recent months the state of NH has charged hikers for the cost of the search when they are reported missing on our state's mountains. The state has examined search cases to determine whether a hiker took reasonable precautions and safety measures when hiking to prevent the need for rescue.
A search of another kind brings this move into question again this week when Manchester police were called to search for a missing 7 year old boy reported missing by his mother. When the boy was "found" (he returned home at 6:30 am the next day)it was discovered that he spent the evening at a friend's house after his mother let him go out to play at 8 pm the night before.
For a mother to allow a 7 year old to travel around his neighborhood in the dark...alone...at night - would not be considered exercising solid "safety precautions" by many people's standards. So the question must be raised - what happens to the cost of the search in cases such as this? Should this mother be charged for the cost of a search that should not have been necessary had she kept track of his where-abouts? And if you believe that she should NOT be charged, how does this case differ from the hiker who lost track of his own surroundings?
See the original story on WMUR.
12/17/2009 4:21:16 PM
Yeah, sure, take the 7 year old away from his mom. There as soooooo many people waiting to take another foster kid. The system is overburdened as it is. Maybe parents should get training before breeding.
11/6/2009 5:35:07 PM
A 7 year old going out at 8 PM and the mother dosen't notice till midnight! I hope the state is looking into taking the child out of that household
11/4/2009 10:51:56 AM
I think it all has to be on a case-by-case basis. Gramps is right - I think even the best of parents can lose track of a little one that zips out the door. But come on...this mother told police that her son left home at 8 pm to "play" - who does this? Especially in these times when a week doesn't go by without an Amber Alert. If your dog gets picked up by the shelter because you failed to keep track of it - you have to pay to get the dog back. The same should be true for children. After all, it's a lot easier to lose track of an animal or at least it should be.
11/3/2009 11:50:04 PM
unless one has had the good fortune of having raised little boys and/or girls, they have no idea how fast one can get away and out of sight. Yes some parents are irresponsible and their kids wander at will but most parents keep track of their little ones. However just when you think all is ok a phone rings or someone comes to the door and zip, out the back door goes the little one. Each case should be weighed and if the parents are found to be neglectful, make them pay. Of course those are the ones who don't have any money. Lost hikers are a different story. If they go into the woods and/or mountains unprepared they should be fined, heavily, but not the full cost of the recovery. In the case of the Scout, he was prepared and was headed for safety when found. He even gave $1,000 to show his gratitude. What does he get in return for being prepared and thanking the rescuers, a $25,000 bill. RIDICULOUS!!