The Louise Woodward case
One mother's thoughts...

Why don't I feel more sympathy for Matthew Eappen's parents? They areliving every parent's worst nightmare. When my daughter was stricken with meningitis while attending boarding school in England, I too was at the brink of that nightmare. But, I was lucky, Amanda pulled through and has recovered fully. She lives with me inCalifornia, no more England, too far away. So why don't I feel sympathy for these parents?

Have I forgotten Amanda's brush with death? Have I re-joined theranks of callous on-lookers, who'll blame the parents foranything?

Why do I find it so disturbing that these two people, who havejust buried their infant son, are smiling so strangely in all theinterviews? They're obviously in shock. On automatic pilot. Possibly on tranquilizers. What right do I have to judge them? There, but for the grace of the Universe, go I.

But something is missing. Something does not ring true. Whereare the self-recriminations? Why are they placing all the blamesquarely on Louise Woodward's teenage shoulders? Why isn't thereeven a hint of remorse at leaving the full care of their infantson with a 19 year-old? Why don't I hear them saying "If only wehadn't ..."

I'm disgusted with myself. How dare I make rules for how peopleshould mourn their dead child? We all have our own way ofdealing with devastation, if we deal with it at all. How dare Ijudge them?

My heart should go out to them. Why doesn't it? Why don't Iemphatize with their rage against the nanny? They're in shockand denial. Yet, I believe that whether or not Louise Woodwardis guilty, Matt's parents have to take some of the blame, and itdisturbs me that they show no sense of guilt. Whether you leaveyour child alone for 18 hours a day or just turn your back forone minute answering the phone, tragedy can strike. But wouldn'tmost of us say: "If only I hadn't ..."

They hired a teenage au pair to care for their two children underthree, full time. As a two income doctor couple, they certainlycould afford more qualified help. Already this tells me thattheir children's welfare was not a top priority. Or maybe theywere just naive. That doesn't mean they deserve to lose theirchild.

Louise Woodward broke her curfew. I can understand why Matt'sparents were upset about that. A girl who's out partying late,getting only a few hours of sleep, is in no condition to beresponsible for the welfare of small children the next day. Whydidn't they fire her?

Apparently, Matt had previous injuries, on his arm or wrist, andit's possible that his head injuries also pre-dated his death bya few weeks. Regardless of how they were inflicted, I believeattentive parents, particularly doctors, should have discoveredthese injuries before Matt died. And fired the nanny. That'stheir responsibility as parents: To protect their children. Howcould they not have discovered these injuries?

What about the other English nanny, who was interviewed beforeLouise? She turned the job down because she felt there wassomething "wrong" with that family. Matt's 3 year-old brotherbit her and pulled her hair. She indicated that the jealousbrother could have inflicted the injuries on Matt. If this isthe case, there was inadequate supervision, either by theparents, the nanny or both.

What parent hasn't at some point shaken a crying child infrustration. How can we expect a 19 year-old teenager to calmlyhandle situations that can send even the most loving, mature,biological parents up the wall? A 19 year-old teenager is notqualified to be the sole caretaker of two small children for 12 -16 hours a day.

Over the years, as my daughter was growing up, she had severalnannies. Some of them from England. They were trainedprofessionals in their mid to late twenties. Still, they werealmost never left alone with her. I worked at home until Amandawas 2 1/2 and started spending 3 - 4 hours a day in a nurseryschool. Even when I started working outside our home, about 6hours a day, I always called several times during the day to makesure everything was OK. In addition, my husband and I alternated going to work late & coming home early, so that weminimized the time our daughter was without one of her parents.

As a feminist, I'll be the last person to suggest that Matt'smother should have put her career on hold to stay at home withthe children. I never ceases to amaze me that in this country,people have trouble with basic math in matters of childcare: 1 mother + 1 father = 1 mother. There are two parents, theyshould share equally the responsibility of caretaking. Matt'sparents should have worked in shifts, with both the mother andthe father alternating spending more time at home with theirchild. And they should have picked a qualified caretaker.

My guess is that Louise might be innocent, I've seen her on TVand she seems sincere. But nobody really knows for sure, exceptLouise herself. The fact remains that Matt died on her watch. Inthe very least, she's guilty of negligence.

Louise's Woodward's parents are also partly to blame, forallowing her to take on such an unusually heavy responsibility atsuch a young age. The innocent victim here, is Matthew. ButLouise is also a victim, both Matt's parents and her own parentsallowed her to take on responsibilities that were way beyond heryears and maturity. Whether Louise is innocent or guilty, thiscase remains a terrible tragedy.

We need laws protecting children, parents and caretakers fromtragedies like these. There has to be a requirement of a MINIMUMAGE for full time caretakers of smallchildren, as well as a LICENSE requirement. You have to have alicense to have a dog, repair a drain, drive a car and to be amanicurist. Why no license for the most important and demandingjob of them all: taking care of small, defenseless children?

Liv Faret is a frequent contributor to The Working Moms' Internet Refuge.

Family | Career | Art of Juggling | Single Moms | Health
Dad's Voice | Bookshelf | News | Recipes | Sports Mom | Discussion Lists
Business Directory | The Boards | Wisdom of Mothers | Postcards | Resources
Search | About Us | Contact Us |Advertising on the Refuge | Home

Copyright © 2000   Working Moms Refuge.