Is the apportioning of blame a coping mechanism?

[Miss Taken Identity]

How do you figure that out?
Danger (risk) is danger (risk). A "listening service" is a control measure aimed at mitigating that risk. The risk remains regardless of the control measure. In this instance they key factor is/was uncertainty.

Indeed Alice, Their daughter told them she was awake and knew that she and her baby brother and sister were alone. Maddie was only 3 years old!!!
Risks:
1.   leaving the children alone
2. leaving a door open in case they need to escape any danger ( not defining what danger is)
3. ignoring a very blatant warning sign (distressed wandering child alone in the flat)

The listening/checking service they provided did not work.

[Mr Gray]

Are you including only professional listening services Davel or are you also including DIY listening services?

I cant find any serious incident for either...therefore the evidence supports they are extremely safe

[G-Unit]

they are relevant when assessing the dangers faced by a child being left asleep in a holiday apartment...the problem you have is the safety record of such is extremely good

I don't have a problem at all. There was no listening service in PdL because it was unsuitable. A group pf people decided they knew better, but they were wrong.

[slartibartfast]

it means no serious incidents happened

No it doesn't, it just means the data isn't available online.

[Mr Gray]

I don't have a problem at all. There was no listening service in PdL because it was unsuitable. A group pf people decided they knew better, but they were wrong.

everyone on here realises that the possibility of a stranger abduction in these circumstances was so remote as to be virtually impossible...that's what the mccanns thought...and I agree with you...they were wrong

[G-Unit]

everyone on here realises that the possibility of a stranger abduction in these circumstances was so remote as to be virtually impossible...that's what the mccanns thought...and I agree with you...they were wrong

You misunderstand. In common with a lot of other people I don't agree with listening services because they can't deal with silent problems or wandering within the room or apartment, only with crying. For the same reason the group were wrong to believe that setting up their own listening service was the answer to their childcare problems. The McCanns took it a stage further and left at least one door open, which added an additional level of risk. All the children were at risk of waking, climbing, falling, cutting themselves etc. The McCann children were at risk of all the above and of exiting the apartment. This group seemed to have no concept of what can happen to children left unsupervised. If they did realise they choose to ignore it and carry on with their selfish behaviour regardless.

[Mr Gray]

You misunderstand. In common with a lot of other people I don't agree with listening services because they can't deal with silent problems or wandering within the room or apartment, only with crying. For the same reason the group were wrong to believe that setting up their own listening service was the answer to their childcare problems. The McCanns took it a stage further and left at least one door open, which added an additional level of risk. All the children were at risk of waking, climbing, falling, cutting themselves etc. The McCann children were at risk of all the above and of exiting the apartment. This group seemed to have no concept of what can happen to children left unsupervised. If they did realise they choose to ignore it and carry on with their selfish behaviour regardless.

all in your very limited opinion. The EVIDENCE shows that listening services are extremely safe...no one counted on an abduction..as all the sceptics claim is impossible...that's exactly what the mccanns thought...bless them

[slartibartfast]

all in your very limited opinion. The EVIDENCE shows that listening services are extremely safe...no one counted on an abduction..as all the sceptics claim is impossible...that's exactly what the mccanns thought...bless them

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

[Miss Taken Identity]

You misunderstand. In common with a lot of other people I don't agree with listening services because they can't deal with silent problems or wandering within the room or apartment, only with crying. For the same reason the group were wrong to believe that setting up their own listening service was the answer to their childcare problems. The McCanns took it a stage further and left at least one door open, which added an additional level of risk. All the children were at risk of waking, climbing, falling, cutting themselves etc. The McCann children were at risk of all the above and of exiting the apartment. This group seemed to have no concept of what can happen to children left unsupervised. If they did realise they choose to ignore it and carry on with their selfish behaviour regardless.

There is also the risk of children getting access to alcohol, prescribed drugs, and  suffering cot death, all of which listening would not be of any use as these occurances would be silent!

It would only flag up child crying or choking.

[Mr Gray]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

yet you never criticise posters who claim listening services are dangerous...based on NO evidence...

if listening services were dangerous we would see reported incidents...we dont

[G-Unit]

all in your very limited opinion. The EVIDENCE shows that listening services are extremely safe...no one counted on an abduction..as all the sceptics claim is impossible...that's exactly what the mccanns thought...bless them

It's immaterial whether listening services are safe or not. There wasn't one because the experts; Mark Warner, felt a listening service was not suitable for this site. The group decided they knew better.

David Payne, of course, didn't join in with the checking. His risk assessment went as follows;

we had chatted about what we felt was you know reasonably err you know safe, and we say safe in the perspective of you know both our children at that stage were in cots, you know I think the two main things that you would be concerned about or you know obviously not retrospectively now but certainly before the holiday was whether the child was gonna wake up crying you or whether the child could get you know away from the area where they were.

His children were both in cots and he took a baby monitor which he felt was enough to make his children safe;

they can't get out their cots and the monitor you know covered the crying issue.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DAVID-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm

Jane Tanner had a monitor also, but it wasn't as good as the Payne's. Her worry was Ella waking and wandering;

one of our concerns was Ella waking up and wandering, I mean like I say we didn’t think she would but that was probably our, you know so she couldn’t get out the actual apartment, that was err so we did make sure that was dead locked every night.”
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

[Eleanor]

Could we get back On Topic, please. 

[Miss Taken Identity]

It's immaterial whether listening services are safe or not. There wasn't one because the experts; Mark Warner, felt a listening service was not suitable for this site. The group decided they knew better.

David Payne, of course, didn't join in with the checking. His risk assessment went as follows;

we had chatted about what we felt was you know reasonably err you know safe, and we say safe in the perspective of you know both our children at that stage were in cots, you know I think the two main things that you would be concerned about or you know obviously not retrospectively now but certainly before the holiday was whether the child was gonna wake up crying you or whether the child could get you know away from the area where they were.

His children were both in cots and he took a baby monitor which he felt was enough to make his children safe;

they can't get out their cots and the monitor you know covered the crying issue.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DAVID-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm

Jane Tanner had a monitor also, but it wasn't as good as the Payne's. Her worry was Ella waking and wandering;

one of our concerns was Ella waking up and wandering, I mean like I say we didn’t think she would but that was probably our, you know so she couldn’t get out the actual apartment, that was err so we did make sure that was dead locked every night.”
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

So at least two people in that group had thought about the 'wake and wandering' issue as a risk factor, both had taken a wee bit more caution.

So why do Kate & Gerry not share this thought and why do they not even take responsibility for their desicion to leave a door unlocked? Who else should shoulder blame?

[Eleanor]

Erm, The Abductor?

[Miss Taken Identity]

Erm, The Abductor?

Oh they knew there was going to be an abduction? oh right.. I thought we were talking about risks and responsibility.

The McCANN family felt it was safe. 'like sitting in your garden' but Jane Tanner and David Payne did a risk assessment,  and took some kind of action they believed to reduce the risk. The McCanns claim there was no risk and Maddie couldn't walk and wander- even though they left a door unlocked! now if they didn't think their daughter could walk  n wander why leave the door unlocked? did they plan this abduction?
Is this why Kate knew right away? but why use  a jemmie and window when a door is left unlocked?