Kate McCann releasing a book...

[Baby France]

I've just been briefing reading the thread.

Knowing that the kids asked for them, cried for them the night before eurgh, the feeling in my stomach. Never in a million years would I believe parents to do that anyways....but surely if that happened the night before a right fat kick to reality would have happened and you would have considered (if you were selfish enough to go out again and put your own needs first) to at least use the babysitting service?

I also think that Kate looks completely tortured and don't *buy* into the abduction theory. There are two many 'you really did that?' for me.

 

[emyandpotato]

That absolutely makes sense. The day my brother died I broke down in screaming hysterics... and then got my hair cut off?! Was going around town acting normally. There is absolutely no definable 'right' reaction to a tragedy, whether five minutes after or six years later, and it's offensive and hurtful to anyone who's even reacted in an 'improper' way to something terrible to even suggest that there is.

I am sorry for the loss of your brother. It is strange what shock can do and how we do react isn't it?

I agree about it being offensive. I remember some friends really kicking off because a soap (cant remember which one or the actual story line) hadn't portrayed babyloss 'right' because she wasn't screaming and crying. I didn't with Honey and I got really upset, that this some how meant that I hadn't reacted in the right way. Silly to look back now cos it is just a soap but even that made me feel attacked.

Absolutely, and there is so much guilt surrounding something like a death and so many confused feelings like that you didn't appreciate people enough so how can you have a right to grieve, to feeling utterly guilty when you are happy, that it is just completely wrong of anyone to try and box such emotions. I'm shocked that anyone has, in fact, when certainly everyone must have had something terrible happen to them at some point? I cannot even comprehend the destruction of losing a child.

 

[mumoffive]

Well they couldnt have been that strict considering they had IVF!!!!..twice!

Someone's faith is entirely personal. People do things that aren't okay according to their religion all the time, for various reasons, and still feel a strong connection to their religion. Perhaps after a great deal of thought they decided that despite teachings IVF was something they had to do, but that a psychic was a step too far for them, particularly as it contradicts the Catholic teachings of an afterlife, which they likely found comfort in as, even if they don't know what happened, they probably know it's likely she's dead. Or maybe it's nothing to do with their religion and they just think psychics are a total waste of time.

I would have to agree. Also some believe god gave man the technology for iVf so its still his will for them to have children he just wants them to work harder for it, like a test or whatever. its still up to him if the treatment is successful or not.

I was being general here..just raising a point. Of course people who are religious make choices within that religion. It was just in relation to the psychic comment. Someone said that it may go against their religion to get a psychic in...that then would also be a choice.

 

[emyandpotato]

Well they couldnt have been that strict considering they had IVF!!!!..twice!

Someone's faith is entirely personal. People do things that aren't okay according to their religion all the time, for various reasons, and still feel a strong connection to their religion. Perhaps after a great deal of thought they decided that despite teachings IVF was something they had to do, but that a psychic was a step too far for them, particularly as it contradicts the Catholic teachings of an afterlife, which they likely found comfort in as, even if they don't know what happened, they probably know it's likely she's dead. Or maybe it's nothing to do with their religion and they just think psychics are a total waste of time.

I would have to agree. Also some believe god gave man the technology for iVf so its still his will for them to have children he just wants them to work harder for it, like a test or whatever. its still up to him if the treatment is successful or not.

I was being general here..just raising a point. Of course people who are religious make choices within that religion. It was just in relation to the psychic comment. Someone said that it may go against their religion to get a psychic in...that then would also be a choice.

... Yes, it would be a choice, but the point I was making was that they should not be written off as not caring about the wellbeing of their child simply because they turned down the offer of a psychic for whatever reason. Someone else suggested the reason was that they were Catholic, which may or may not be the reason, but it does make sense. Then you said they couldn't be that strict Catholics because of the IVF, which implied to me, rightly or wrongly, that being Catholic was no excuse not to accept a psychic on the grounds that they'd had IVF in the past, which I don't think is a fair assumption because no one has ever been without fault in following their religious teachings, and of course we cannot then say that no one is truly religious for this reason. If I was wrong, and you were just making a random point about them not being strict Catholics for the sake of it, then the former point still stands: People can be religious and not follow every guideline, and this should not mean that their faith should be questioned. Few people, for example, would question a Catholic's pro-life viewpoint simply because the same Catholic had twice eaten red meat on a Friday.

 

[mumoffive]

Im not questioning anyones faith at all, and i dont have an opinion on this personally. I just thought that it was regarded [ not by me!] that IVF is contrary to the beliefs of the catholic religion. I wasnt passing judgment on anyone not even the McCanns!

Pope Benedict XVI, speaking to members warned against “the lure of the technology of artificial insemination,” which is not permitted by Catholic teaching.

This was taken from here

https://www.catholicworldreport.com/Item/1774/church_teaching_on_in_vitro_fertilization.aspx

 

[emyandpotato]

Yes, IVF isn't considered okay in Catholicism, you're right, but it doesn't give sufficient reason to say they can't be strict Catholics. Anyway this is totally OT so gonna drop it.

 

[Dragonfly]

I would have understood refusing psychics if the rest wasnt against them.

 

[Foogirl]

Even in the depths of my anguish I have never and would never turn to a psychic. And as much as they are Catholics they are also doctors. I can understand them choosing a medical solution to childlessness over a religious faith.

 

[mumoffive]

As time went by, i might have been lured into using a psychic just out of sheer desperation. But the truth is, it may make you even more desperate.
At the end of the day this is only relevant if you didnt know what happened to your child! In the case of the McCanns, all this is superfluous if they are the ones that actually killed her intentionally or not. Infact, if psychics got involved, it might put them in the frame. I read actually on another forum that a psychic came forward at the beginning accusing Kate of the crime! It was ignored as psychics are usually.

 

[sbaker1980]

Just briefly read this.

I have been on a Mark Warner holiday with my 2 boys to a similar resort which offered day and night creches. I wouldn't of thought for a second about leaving my children in a) a strange bed in a strange place and b) without adult supervision. The creche wasn't at all expensive and for the sake of your child's safety- surely you would just spend the money if you really wanted that time alone? They obviously trusted other people to look after them as they used the day creche and back at home they had a nanny. It just doesn't make sense.

I have always thought they have drugged them and unfortunately it killed little Maddie and they have just been too scared to admit it (funny thing is if it happened here they probably would be off the hook by now!) and unfortunately never will.

After watching Crimewatch the other night it has just concreted my belief of what they did- they knew the children were getting up and crying for them so instead of them taking it in turns to go out and eat- they were selfish and took the risk and drugged their children.

Why didn't they just put all the children together from all the families and then 1 adult a night sit for them all?

It just doesn't make sense to me at all.

 

[mumoffive]

Just briefly read this.

I have been on a Mark Warner holiday with my 2 boys to a similar resort which offered day and night creches. I wouldn't of thought for a second about leaving my children in a) a strange bed in a strange place and b) without adult supervision. The creche wasn't at all expensive and for the sake of your child's safety- surely you would just spend the money if you really wanted that time alone? They obviously trusted other people to look after them as they used the day creche and back at home they had a nanny. It just doesn't make sense.

I have always thought they have drugged them and unfortunately it killed little Maddie and they have just been too scared to admit it (funny thing is if it happened here they probably would be off the hook by now!) and unfortunately never will.

After watching Crimewatch the other night it has just concreted my belief of what they did- they knew the children were getting up and crying for them so instead of them taking it in turns to go out and eat- they were selfish and took the risk and drugged their children.

Why didn't they just put all the children together from all the families and then 1 adult a night sit for them all?

It just doesn't make sense to me at all.

Thats exactly what i said. It doesnt make sense why they just didnt get one of them to babysit and take turns. The twins slept through all of the commotion afterwards so further highlighting the idea they had something to make them sleep, they were even moved and still sleeping! Also seemingly Kate came back to the Tapas place leaving the twins in the appartment where her daughter had just being taken to raise the alarm!. Does that seem right? That is very odd behaviour.

 

[sbaker1980]

I didn't know she did that! That is just bizarre. I just can't work it out at all. That poor, poor little girl

 

[WelshOneEmma]

Just briefly read this.

I have been on a Mark Warner holiday with my 2 boys to a similar resort which offered day and night creches. I wouldn't of thought for a second about leaving my children in a) a strange bed in a strange place and b) without adult supervision. The creche wasn't at all expensive and for the sake of your child's safety- surely you would just spend the money if you really wanted that time alone? They obviously trusted other people to look after them as they used the day creche and back at home they had a nanny. It just doesn't make sense.

I have always thought they have drugged them and unfortunately it killed little Maddie and they have just been too scared to admit it (funny thing is if it happened here they probably would be off the hook by now!) and unfortunately never will.

After watching Crimewatch the other night it has just concreted my belief of what they did- they knew the children were getting up and crying for them so instead of them taking it in turns to go out and eat- they were selfish and took the risk and drugged their children.

Why didn't they just put all the children together from all the families and then 1 adult a night sit for them all?

It just doesn't make sense to me at all.

Thats exactly what i said. It doesnt make sense why they just didnt get one of them to babysit and take turns. The twins slept through all of the commotion afterwards so further highlighting the idea they had something to make them sleep, they were even moved and still sleeping! Also seemingly Kate came back to the Tapas place leaving the twins in the appartment where her daughter had just being taken to raise the alarm!. Does that seem right? That is very odd behaviour.

Or, and this may be controversial here - eat with their kids?!

I mean, you have all gone on a family holiday. Why not have a meal earlier in the evening, including the kids (Emilia is nearly 10 months and we go out to a restaurant once a month with her to get her used to it) and then all go back to one villa, get the kids to sleep and have your wine there?

I just don't get why you would go on a family holiday to leave the kids at creches etc? If you don't want the kids with you, leave them at home with family. I remember my mum and dad doing that with us when we were about 8 and we loved it.

I must admit, I couldn't watch crimewatch. As soon as they started showing family videos I burst into tears and couldn't handle it as it made me think how I would feel if Emilia went missing.

 

[baby D]

I didn't know she left the twins when called alarm and to me that just feels odd. But, maybe she just was not thinking right. I doubt I would think straight either if my child had gone missing? Or maybe she couldn't manage two sleeping children single handed lay. Or maybe she wanted the word spread quickly which would be tricky trying to carry two sleeping tots.

I'm not saying that I agree with any of these as good enough to risk leaving them in the very place you think your child has just been abducted from. I'm just considering what thoughts might have been going thorough her mind. I guess it was clear panic. She probably didn't think past the fact she couldn't find Maddie and just ran for help.

 

[R_x]

She surly could of phoned someone instead of leaving them? X

 

[Dragonfly]

The hotel had a nanny service that was offered wasnt it?

 

[R_x]

The hotel had a nanny service that was offered wasnt it?

There was a night time crèche that had the same staff that work in the daytime one that they were happy to leave them with. Yet they claimed they didn't want to leave them with strangers x

 

[Dragonfly]

The hotel had a nanny service that was offered wasnt it?

There was a night time crèche that had the same staff that work in the daytime one that they were happy to leave them with. Yet they claimed they didn't want to leave them with strangers x

So leaving them alone was better

 

[babyjan]

I know! I don't get why they didn't make use of the night time crèche :/

 

[bbyno1]

The parents are guilty for this.
Sorry but so many things don't add up or make sense yet the police never seem to question it. I bet if I did that with my children not only would I most likely be found guilty, but if I didn't I bet my other kids would be taken off of me.

My uncle left his kid (wrong I know) to go across the road from his house to eat with friends too and she woke up crying,next door called the police and social services removed her straight away. The same rules should apply to everyone.