quote:RENO, Nev. - A couple who authorities say were so obsessed with the Internet and video games that they left their babies starving and suffering other health problems have pleaded guilty to child neglect.
The children of Michael and Iana Straw, a boy age 22 months and a girl age 11 months, were severely malnourished and near death last month when doctors saw them after social workers took them to a hospital, authorities said. Both children are doing well and gaining weight in foster care, prosecutor Kelli Ann Viloria told the Reno Gazette-Journal.
Michael Straw, 25, and Iana Straw, 23, pleaded guilty Friday to two counts each of child neglect. Each faces a maximum 12-year prison sentence.
Sounds like these people would have been happier had they not had children at this point in their lives.
That 50k obviously came to them at the wromg moment in their lives.
I thought the article was well written, and I'm glad it pointed out that cases of child neglect based in video games are rare.
Though to be honest, playing D&D online is more or less akin to a forum addiction....hmmm... I seem to have found myself inside a forum, and inexplicaply have almost 5000 posts, better look around to see if I have negleted kids.
edit: Looks like they were playing D&D the MMORPG so that rules out playing normal D&D on a forum. Also they stated that they played in effect, "D&D mainly, among other online video games."
[ July 16, 2007, 01:24 PM: Message edited by: BlackBlade ]
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
Nevada couple cites <insert addictive behavior here> as the reason for criminally neglecting their children.
this story is horrible. I was going to post at how mad I was that the couple tried to use the internet as an excuse to explain away their behavior, but reading that article it never actually states that the couple blamed gaming, only that the authorities said gaming was the reason for the neglect.
Either way, I don't understand why video game addiction has to be diagnosed as an actual disorder. Addiction is addiction, whatever form it comes in. Doesn't it all stem from the same basic place? Or is a video game addiction fundamentally different from something like a gambling addiction?
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
I almost cried when I read "10 lb. 11 month old."
Whatever the cause, neglect like that is reprehensible.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
If they were so addicted, how did they ever even find time to have sex in order to HAVE kids, between their online gaming time?
This is just sick.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
If they were playing Dungeons & Dragons Online, that's only been out since February of 2006, so they theoretically had time to conceive children prior to the release.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by Farmgirl: If they were so addicted, how did they ever even find time to have sex in order to HAVE kids, between their online gaming time?
This is just sick.
That's what this woman said on one of the adoption blogs.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
It's a silly thing to say, though. Conception doesn't necessarily take long at all, and it can be a one-shot event. Taking care of a child takes constant effort. They're not comparable.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
My outrage over the neglect has been adequately expressed by others.
quote:Michael Straw is an unemployed cashier, and his wife worked for a temporary staffing agency doing warehouse work, according to court records. He received a $50,000 inheritance that he spent on computer equipment and a large plasma television, authorities said.
50,000 wouldn't set them for life, but it could have provided a lot of financial security for them and their children.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:50,000 wouldn't set them for life, but it could have provided a lot of financial security for them and their children.
My desire to have similar fortunes as these folks is tempered only by my desire that nobody have to die to get me $50,000.
I can think of so many better uses of their money, but honestly I can think of some very sane and normal circumstances that over time could produce this outcome.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:I can think of so many better uses of their money, but honestly I can think of some very sane and normal circumstances that over time could produce this outcome.
I can, too, but few of them involve an unemployed cashier and a temp warehouse worker.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Honestly I have trouble deciding what is worse if one extreme must be picked.
1: A couple who are so into each other that they ignore their children.
or
2: A couple who are so into their children that they have no time for each other.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
At least the second option presumably doesn't involve innocent children suffering starvation, pain and possible death. Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Puffy Treat: At least the second option presumably doesn't involve innocent children suffering starvation, pain and possible death.
I think there are many things worse then death, even moderately - acute prolonged suffering precluding death.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
I'm not sure what in my statement translates into "nothing is worse than death". But to clarify, that's not what I meant.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
I was merely noting that there are possibilities in the first scenario that could be worse then,
quote:suffering starvation, pain and possible death.
Lets both just agree that both scenarios could profit from the added benefit of the liberal availability of puffy treats
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)