I understand what you're saying but alot of it is tactics to keep up public interest. The whole new approach they are taking to this investigation means they need to keep the public engaged and informed. It is also pretty horrific that Bridger may have known about her condition but still choose to take her iykwim? I don't think it's been reported with the intention to cause any offence.
I understand the need to drip feed information to keep the story public - but its a 5 year old who is missing, that story is going nowhere Sky news managed to fill most of the day from the scene, even though nothing more than searching happened all day.
And why is it more horrific that he knew her condition but took her anyway? Taking ANY child is horrific. But I should be clear, I'm not concerned about the fact its been reported, it is the language used and the commentary about how its somehow a much worse situation because of it. The fact is an abducted 5 year old is about as bad as bad gets.
Also can I just say I believe it was April's godmother who initially gave out this info. And just thinking out loud, it possibly would make her more vulnerable because as we know most 5 year olds are pretty mobile, and if left somewhere would start making their way out of there, supposing there was a way out. What if she can't because the pain is too much? Again, just thinking out loud.
A big misunderstanding of the condition, that kind of pain is rare with CP. There is stiffness for sure, and it can come and go, but if a child with CP is as mobile as April appeared to be (eg, capable of being "out to play" without supervision, on her bike) it is unlikely that any pain would cause incapacity.
Our Abby has CP and until she crawled at 2 and a half she was almost totally immobile. She was capable of bum shuffling but just didn't. She would shout and cry for toys and books or if she wanted to move, but rarely moved herself. Unless there was chocolate on offer and then she would shuffle the entire length of the living room just to get a piece. Make no mistake about it, if a child of 5 wants to get home to mummy, even with a condition like mild CP, they will get out if it is possible and with just as much success as any other 5 year old.
I think they said April's legs some times just give way. So I guess it's an aspect they 'have' to report.
And this can happen, although if that were regularly the case, she'd probably have difficulty riding a bike. And it isn't permanent so wouldn't be relevant to the fact she has been abducted.
As I said, its the way its reported, and the use of phrases like "suffering from cerebral palsy" "very poorly" "sickly child" as if we are supposed to be more horrified because of it, when I'm not sure it's possible to find anything more horrific than the fact a 5 year old has been taken right from under the nose of her parents whilst she was out to play.