Sprint employee refuses to divulge kidnapped baby's GPS info

In what seems to be more a case of an uninformed CSR blindly abiding by his/her training manual than an institutional hatred of babies by Sprint, sheriff's deputies in Eastvale, CA were unable to coax a Sprint employee to divulge the GPS coordinates of a cellphone that was traveling in an stolen SUV containing a 10-month-old baby boy. After strapping little Wade into his car seat, Jason Cochran went back inside the house to fetch his 3-year-old, and returned to find the SUV gone. When they called 911 and informed them that their Sprint phone with GPS was in the car, Jason and his wife Stephanie assumed that sheriffs would easily be able to track down Wade with help from Sprint. The Sprint employee who spoke with the officers, however, told them that they would need to fill out some forms, pay a $25 subpoena fee, etc., etc. in what was obviously a case in which speed was of the essence. Luckily, it seems that the car was only stolen for a joyride, and was recovered two-and-a-half hours later abandoned but with Wade intact and safe. Sprint claims that they have an emergency protocol for these types of situations, which the unfortunate CSR who fielded this particular call failed to follow, and which we also hope to hear about in the coming hours/days (hint: there's a "tips" link in the upper righthand corner of the page, guys).

[naz @ Jan 12th 2006 2:15PM]

wow. incompetence.



yet another reason for me to drop sprint/nextel...

[Buck Q. Fitch @ Jan 12th 2006 2:15PM]

That is unforgivable

[Artagra @ Jan 12th 2006 2:17PM]

Idiots! I mean, really - in that case, how can the employee *possibly* not break the rules?



Artag

[c.Lake @ Jan 12th 2006 2:22PM]

OMG!!!!!

[E-Rock @ Jan 12th 2006 2:22PM]

Geeze, you'd think they'd at least bump it up to the supervisor if they really didn't think they were allowed to process the request.



I guess that's what you get for paying the minimum possible for some half-wit script monkies in your call center.

[Guy @ Jan 12th 2006 2:24PM]

Well, what's unforgiveable is that the CSR didn't recognize the need for a quicker response and escalate the call to someone who had the power to do that.



Another ridiculous issue is why the Sherrif's office didn't just call and talk to someone else, or have a more direct contact at Sprint already set up.



What is NOT ridiculous is that a CSR isn't willing to just hand out someone's GPS location based on an un-authenticated phone call from someone claiming to be the police. For one, because they might not be the police, and for another, because even if they are the police they could just be lying to get information that they otherwise couldn't legally obtain. Maybe they tried and failed to get legal permission to track the cell phone, so they just decided to get it on pretext instead. The police are under no (legal) obligation to deal honestly and fairly with citizens. You'd think so, but you'd be wrong. And they take advantage of that fact all the time. Anyone holding the keys to the GPS locations of cell subscribers needs to be very wary of pretext calls.

[EDM @ Jan 12th 2006 2:24PM]

I don't know which is worse. The fact that the Sprint CSR didn't know the procedure, or that the guy left the kid in the car with it running in the first place.

[Aaron @ Jan 12th 2006 2:25PM]

I think I know that CSR, was his name "Paul" and speak with a foreign accent? He is such a kidder.

[Mark @ Jan 12th 2006 2:27PM]

Why didn't the cops just say "Let me speak to your supervisor"?

[Joe @ Jan 12th 2006 2:29PM]

This is why computers havn't taken over these jobs, since we can actualy THINK and respond to certain situations that don't arise on a daily basis, or at all. Even if this was the CSR's first day on the job, lack of experience doesn't excuse this, since every emergency situation should be taken seriously, they should have consulted their supervisor for help.

[Digger Phelps @ Jan 12th 2006 2:32PM]

Soooo... leaving your kid in the car is OK?

I don't see why, if Mom was brushing the teeth of child #2, Dad would leave child #1 in the car with the keys inside (apparently), instead of waiting for Mom to bring the kid out.



I'm all for saving babies as well, but saving babies is not Sprint's job.

The parents need to be raked over the coals here, not Sprint.



Had the idiot Dad not left his cell phone in the car, or had a phone w/o GPS, who would he blame then?

[spryguy @ Jan 12th 2006 2:35PM]

From Sprint Nextel:



A carjacking that occurred in Riverside, Calif., more than three weeks ago has thrust Sprint into the national spotlight because of initial reports that we were not cooperative in helping track the car (with a Sprint phone in it) using global positioning satellite (GPS) technology. A 10-month-old, who was later found safely, was in the car.



However, the Riverside sheriff's department said in a Tuesday hearing that they do not blame Sprint.



Within the last two weeks, local and national media have picked up on the story. Emotions are high, and the parents of the child have spoken negatively about Sprint. The issue is clear: How does Sprint respond to emergency situations vs. protecting the privacy of our customers?



We are required by law to protect our customers� personal information. This information can be very harmful in the wrong hands. Unfortunately, we receive many fraudulent requests by unscrupulous persons trying to gather illicit information and location of our customers.



And yet we also have a policy to work diligently with law enforcement officials when they request our help. We always will be responsive and sensitive to the urgency of emergency situations.



Sprint�s emergency procedures allow police to receive customer information in �a matter of minutes� by filling out a special form and faxing it back to Sprint.



The process is quick and simple. �In fact, in more than 99.9 percent of cases, the process performs well,� says Paul Taylor, Sprint Security.



Regarding all types of requests (emergency and non-emergency):



Sprint is required by law to provide information to law enforcement, and we cooperate fully with an office that is staffed 24/7. In the normal course of business, Sprint processes thousands of these types of requests each year as part of investigations. In 2005, Sprint assisted in 2,091 exigent (emergency requests in which life or limb is threatened) cases.

Legal documentation and/or appropriate law enforcement identification is required to follow the processes.

Providing information to law enforcement results in time and monetary savings for law enforcement because it shortens the length of investigations and reduces the number of man-hours required.

Both the ability to move quickly and our customer privacy are important. Sprint has a balancing act to follow.

Sprint has received hundreds of letters thanking Sprint for effectively providing this potentially life-saving assistance. The letters typically state two things are positive: the technology (GPS) and the electronic surveillance technicians at Sprint who help them.

Sprint has an Emergency Response Team (ERT), which is an experienced and dedicated group of employees that provide wireless telecommunications equipment, infrastructure and personnel operations support to federal, state and local public safety, law enforcement and military agencies during declared emergencies, field training exercises, agency-specific events and National Special Security Events.



The ERT fully supports high-volume, short-notice equipment needs of emergency and disaster personnel with its portable cellular sites, microwave facilities and inventory of several thousand rugged handsets. Examples of their disaster support include the Space Shuttle Columbia Recovery, Oregon Wild Fire Containment and relief efforts for hurricanes Charley, Frances, Ivan, Jeanne and Katrina.



Our company also has joined forces with the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC) by supporting Team Adam, an on-site response and support system that provides assistance to local law enforcement agencies, and by offering a free wireless AMBER Alert service. Issued in the most serious child abduction cases, an AMBER Alert is an emergency broadcast communication designed to instantly mobilize the entire community to assist in the search for, and safe return of, an abducted child.



Official alerts are sent as text messages to active Sprint and Nextel phones and wireless devices that have been signed up for the service. Nextel was the first wireless carrier to develop a wireless AMBER Alert service for its customers beginning in July 2004. Sprint Nextel also provides free handsets for Team Adam field volunteers.

[djSyndrome @ Jan 12th 2006 2:37PM]

Unmentioned in the article is the fact that pops committed a crime himself:



http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=veh&group=15001-16000&file=15620

[ZM_Scotland @ Jan 12th 2006 2:42PM]

as usual, you americans show the world why many people consider you all as dumb f()cks. You know its little things like this, and a few people and now people around the world are gonna have a laugh at this and say to their friends next mornin "guess what those dumd americans did......" it only takes a few really stupid people and now your nation are considered even dumber

[Chris @ Jan 12th 2006 2:43PM]

"5. I don't know which is worse. The fact that the Sprint CSR didn't know the procedure, or that the guy left the kid in the car with it running in the first place."



According to the article, he left the child in the car, while he ran in to get his other kid. That's a much better choice than letting the 3 year old run around the car while he's putting in the baby seat. Almost all parents with more than one young kid do this.

[Adam @ Jan 12th 2006 2:45PM]

^ he's right. My brother works for "Sextel" and he tells my all about this kinda stuff. Rules are rules. Deal.

[Grant @ Jan 12th 2006 2:47PM]

Well, I personally think we can take away the true lesson from all this, which is SPRINT HATES BABIES.



Somebody should reserve www.sprinthatesbabies.com right this very second. And then put a blog on it. That way I won't accidentally read it, ever.

[Mojo @ Jan 12th 2006 2:48PM]

I agree that the CSR was right not to give out the information without an authenticated call from law enforcement. He definetely should have kicked it up to a supervisor, but we still have the larger issue - under what circumstances SHOULD personal info be given out? Does it usually require a warrant? While this was obviously a real case, there honestly is nothing to stop a cop from calling and making up a story to get tracking info on anyone. Or someone pretending to be a cop. Of course I don't want to see any kidnapped babies, but we do have civil protections and procedures in place for a reason.

[snowpuff @ Jan 12th 2006 2:51PM]

Sprint, you have the absolute worst customer service of any company I have ever encountered. Your corporate culture hasn't changed in 20 years.



Go fuck yourselves with your corporate excuses.

[Don Syrokosz @ Jan 12th 2006 2:53PM]

Was the CSR in India.

[Thummim @ Jan 12th 2006 2:57PM]

I am neither for nor against sprint as a business but, in this situation, they responded appropriately. If anyone is to be criticized, it is the law enforcement officials for doing something as lame as calling a customer service number. At my business, we don't respond to anyone who calls into the customer service number and claims to be law enforcement. We would have responded the same way.

[Stephen @ Jan 12th 2006 3:03PM]

Thank you for calling sprint. For account information press 1. For stolen babies press 2. For english press 3.

[patrick @ Jan 12th 2006 3:05PM]

Some people (sprint) are COMPLETE IDIOTS!

[Beowulf @ Jan 12th 2006 3:05PM]

This is not an ongoing refusal by Sprint ... the title should use "refused" instead of "refuses".

[Nushio @ Jan 12th 2006 3:05PM]

Everyone: I just to work as a Sprint CSR. Yepp, thats right.



If that call had been handed to me, I really dont know what I would have done. We really have absolutely NO access to GPS systems, and I wouldnt know who to transfer the call to since the whole GPS technology is out of CSR's reach.



Sadly, Theres nothing more any Sprint CSR could have done, since there really isnt a routine during training. There isnt even a small hint on 'what to do'.



Personally, I would have empathized with whoever is calling, and told them that sadly, we (CSRs) have no access to GPS, and neither does our trainers nor supervisers. I would have wished him good luck and hope he hanged up and call somewhere else... :(

[LC @ Jan 12th 2006 3:23PM]

"According to the article, he left the child in the car, while he ran in to get his other kid. That's a much better choice than letting the 3 year old run around the car while he's putting in the baby seat. Almost all parents with more than one young kid do this."



You left out the part where the car was running. He could have done all of that and had the keys with him. This would have avoided the entire situation. Almost all parents would not leave a child unattended in a running vehicle.

[mettmann @ Jan 12th 2006 3:26PM]

First OFF - it was Stephanie - NOT Jason, who left the 10 mo in the car - it was HIS cell phone that he left in it.. This was stated in all the local TV stations - BUT almost all the wire reports have it turned around.. no mater...



in the "defense" of the mom - she buckled in her 10mo baby in the car seat - and went back in the house to retreive the older child that was dragging their feet to go to school - not even 10 seconds later - her car was lifted..



Agreed - that she shouldn't have even done THAT - but how many of us have left our car running in the driveway to grab something in the house?



It gets better - according to the local paper - "The Cochrans' other car, a GMC Envoy, was stolen Dec. 27; the same thief apparently used a set of keys found in the Aviator to steal the Envoy, according to sheriff's reports."



yeah - leave your kid, your cell , and your other car keys in the car - brillant!!!

[Samuel Febres @ Jan 12th 2006 3:30PM]

I think # 4 has made a good point about this scenario.

[G Money @ Jan 12th 2006 3:30PM]

Interesting something like this happened on COPS last week. They found a dead body in the sewer. they pulled the bones out, (there was nothing else) and the skeleton was wearing a champion hooded sweatshirt. Inside the hoody they found a sprint phone. They called up sprint CSR and requested the name/info that was registered with the phones ESN. That rep had no problem dishing out the information. Identity solved. Strange.

[Nobuyuki Idei @ Jan 12th 2006 3:43PM]

"What is NOT ridiculous is that a CSR isn't willing to just hand out someone's GPS location based on an un-authenticated phone call from someone claiming to be the police"



Well, if Sprint had caller id, they would have noticed the 911, and known it was the police. Duh!

[neil @ Jan 12th 2006 3:45PM]

I work in a 911 dispatch center and no matter what we ALWAYS have to fill out the subpoena paperwork and fax it in, but they're very quick on it and turn around time is usually about 4-5 minutes. As for the $25 ... I've never heard that, I'm certainly not giving them my credit card number.



Not requiring a fax opens them up to all kinds of problems caused my social engineering and the like. The subpoena numbers are fairly well known and if they didn't require a fax they would have no way of knowing who's legit and who's not.

[Dan L @ Jan 12th 2006 3:48PM]

This is why when dealing with Nextel.. right after the CSR says "how can i help you?" you say "transfer me to your manager" when he/she answers.. repeat the request.. continue to do so until you feel you feel comfortably high up the totem pole.. and then proceed to ask your question. Otherwise you will be strangled by the stupidity of Nextel's CSR.

[djSyndrome @ Jan 12th 2006 3:48PM]

"Agreed - that she shouldn't have even done THAT - but how many of us have left our car running in the driveway to grab something in the house?"



Never.



Anyone stupid enough to do this shouldn't be allowed to posess a motor vehicle license. Period. There is *no* defense.

[Dan @ Jan 12th 2006 3:52PM]

Wasnt there a story last week or so about a lady who had her cell phone shoved down her throat? Now that would have been a fun phone to track... "

[pud-box 360 @ Jan 12th 2006 3:59PM]

Criminal calls Sprint disguised as Cop ... Yells, Screams, Uses Big Words to confuses CSR ... Gets Homeowner's GPS Whareabouts, Robs their home when told that Homeowner is out of town ...



btw ... I'm sure if the Gerber baby was kidnapped, this would never have happened ... celebreties can get away with anything ...

[demonwolf @ Jan 12th 2006 4:02PM]

Sprint emp here



i have been with sprint since 2000. I have been an agent and a supervisor. I'm definately not going to say that sprint has the best customer service, believe me there are some morons that work there, but that is the case with every customer service division i have ever dealt with.



unlike what #20 stated agents are trained to transfer any calls dealing with law enforcement to our corporate security.



i think that this story is missing some facts. Even if the agent was not aware of tranfering to corporate security i cannot beleive that the sherrif would not just try another agent or ask for a supervisor.



i think that #4 had the right of it. I'm just glad i'm not that CSR :)

[dan @ Jan 12th 2006 4:08PM]

You guys are missing the whole point of this thing. It's illegal for Sprint to give out customer information. If Sprint doesn't have the proper paperwork they can't give it out - IT'S AGAINST LAWS PROTECTING CONSUMER PRIVACY!



The process to get authorization to release such information as stated above takes only a few minutes and is so easy. The $25 is farse - the police department doesn't have to pay that, as far as I know that has been misreported. Sprint probably does have to set up a protocall that when a normal CSR receives a call like this, they can transfer them quickly to the correct department so they can get help.



Don't get me wrong - I'm all about saving babies. But before you criticize Sprint for something, know what you're talking about.

[Madison @ Jan 12th 2006 4:09PM]

I think the CSR was in the right for not divulging info to someone who 'claimed' they were the police? If you had an account with sprint, would you want them handing out info to any random person pretending to be the police?



And why the hell would the police call the customer service line?! And...why would you leave your baby in a car...a running car...alone?!



There is more than one stupid thing wrong with this whole story. I almost feel like it was made up just to piss us off! So many people in one senario can't be that stupid? Can they?! Only in the USA!

[Freak @ Jan 12th 2006 4:10PM]

some people will take any opportunity to bash a compnay because they didn't pay their phone bill and didn't believe it was their fault for failing to write a cheque.



I've been int he call centre and i turned away 4 people in 3 months who atempted to use social engineering to get ex-girlfriends, or boyfriends, or whatever the relation. Address, credit card numbers, SINs... people will try anything. Any law enforcement office should already know how to proceed in a situation like this by now. They have been doing this stuff for years.



If they had packs of gum with GPS systems in them they'd be trying to sue Trident right now!



one in a million scenario, over reaction to the whole case because Sprint/Nextel was trying ot protect their personal information. Seems fair to me! That's what the contract states they are going to do!



and as someone already mentioned, GPS info is not available to CSRs. and besides.. the GPS on most sprint/nextl phones suck and don't work half the time.

[Cloud @ Jan 12th 2006 4:10PM]

I think most of what was needed to say has been said so I will just say this....





The Gerber baby is the uglyest baby that has ever been born.

[Matt @ Jan 12th 2006 4:23PM]

Yeah, the CSR is an idiot for not knowing how to handle the situation, and the dad is an idiot for leaving a baby unattended in the car, but let's not forget that the cops didn't do everything they could to get the information they needed. First of all, I can't imagine that as long as this technology has been available, nobody involved in Eastvale law enforcement has ever needed to track a cell phone before. Somebody had the phone number for the Sprint Corporate Security Office. Sounds like the cops just pretty much took the boneheaded CSR's 'no' for an answer. Didn't ask for a supervisor, or check with anyone else at HQ, did they?

[Faffy @ Jan 12th 2006 4:26PM]

IDIOT parents. i have a baby boy and never would i leave him outside with the car RUNNING. Just think how idiotic it would be just to leave your precious LAPTOP on the sidewalk? how many people would do that? let alone your own child. Yes the Sprint guy could've handled it better since there was guidelines, but the big goofs in this story is the parents, they're just blaming Sprint to cover their own asses. again, IDIOTS.



p.s. Oh lets not forget their OTHER car was stolen earlier! what needs to happen for them to learn!

[Marochka @ Jan 12th 2006 4:51PM]

"And why the hell would the police call the customer service line?! And...why would you leave your baby in a car...a running car...alone?!"



My husband has a medal from his time in the Navy; walking past the base post office he noticed smoke coming from a running car. Naturally, he and two other passers-by ran over and began trying to remove the three small children they discovered trapped inside. One guy, whose arm was in a sling, was working on extricating a belted-in kid in a belted-in car seat. Screams of "get out of the car, kid, get out of the car!" met with dripping melted plastic and a seven-year-old saying, "I can't. Mommy told us to stay here." He was going to sit there while he and his siblings burned to ash because his stupid fucking lazy mother parked illegally in a captain's parking spot, left her children unattended in a running car while she "just ran in for a second". It only takes a second to find yourself in a living hell (literally!).



Oh, the best part? I found out later from a friend at base police that she'd been called out on a welfare concern call for this woman and her kids before. Sorry, lady, your crocodile tears about how upset you are over this and how concerned for your kids' welfare just don't wash with me. A one-armed guy saved your baby. Deal with it.



Good thing so many parents can't be bothered to supervise their children appropriately or their little demon-spawn might survive to adulthood and pass their stupid little genes along to ruin the next generation.

[Buzz_Kill @ Jan 12th 2006 4:55PM]

Bottom Line - Sprint customer service sucks. The hold times are insane. The CSR you get is often poorly trained. Sometimes you are better off hanging up and calling back to see if the next CSR you get has a clue. I can't tell you how many times I have had to instruct the CSR what to do to restore service or complete an ESN change, or do PRI resets, etc. Is any other carrier any better? I've had my fill of Sprint.

[peel @ Jan 12th 2006 4:58PM]

Well now I'm upset. I leave my baby in the car, with the engine running and my laptop and a bag of cash on the front seat, all of the time, and no one has ever tried to steal it. These guys leave their kid in their car once and it's stolen right away. I guess I'll need to move to Eastville, CA in order to get my baby stolen.

[mike fontana @ Jan 12th 2006 5:10PM]

I'll bet Sprint will gladly sell co-ordinates to McDonald's, so you can get pestered by Text-Message advert/coupons when you're close to one. In 9-1-1 situations, there should not be a fee.

[Ian Jardine @ Jan 12th 2006 5:17PM]

I have 3 Sprint cell phones in a family plan under my name. About a year and a half ago my daughter had an engine sieze on the I95 going north in North Carolina and she called me in panick ( I am located in NJ) as it was going dark and the car was half on and half off the highway. She was confused as to what her location was on the I95.

I called Sprint and spoke to a CSR Supervisor, after identifying myself and giving my personal acct inmformation, they immediately gave me her approx location, along a specific a 10 mile stretch of the I95.



I am HUGELY grateful to Sprint for this assistance.



The story has a happy ending. She was found 4 hours later by "AAA" who towed her car and gave her a ride to a hotel. Well done AAA.

Totally unsatisfactory was the non perfomance of the NC State Police. Because of the dangerous location of the seized car and darkness my daughter called 911 (insisted by AAA) and they advised ALL their patrol cars to look for her and provide assistance. They never found her (my daughter said they merely drove by her, many times, at high speed never stopping). Even worse was the NC State Police eventually told me directly that I was completely mistaken and that she wasn't possibly on the I95, as their troopers had thoroughly searched the road for hours and she wasn't there. During this conversation I got the call from the AAA hauler who was actually towing the car from the I95 location, exactly where I had told the NC Police she was located, as advised by Sprint.



SO fine job by Sprint and I will always be grateful. Less so by the NC Police sadly. When I had taken the AAA call I still had the Police on the line and I told them that the car had been found by the AAA ON the I95 as per the info I had given both of them. The Police responded by cutting the phone connection to me:(



Back to the specific subject of this thread.The problem would have likely been solved IF the cell phone owner (can car and child owner) had jointly called Sprint and the acct holder had given his personal details and PW to the CSR Rep, IMHO.

[Ian Swanson @ Jan 12th 2006 5:33PM]

I can't believe how stupid this Sprint CSR was!



My company works with many companies on getting GPS hooked up on their Nextel or Sprint phones. The process is very quick and the GPS is accurate between 50 to 100 feet.



Sprint should have been able to get the location details quickly to the proper authorities.



http://www.tracelogic.net

[TrackZero @ Jan 12th 2006 5:50PM]

So those of you saying the company acted irresponsibly and has horrible processes and should have provided the information...what would you be saying if the headline was slightly different? Such as "Man calling CSR claims to be law enforcement official investigating kidnapping; uses GPS information to track down, kill ex-wife."



I bet you'd be saying they acted irresponsibly and should never give out the location information.



And yet, you can still vote or serve on a jury.



Wild.

[Killjoy @ Jan 12th 2006 6:43PM]

There's plenty of blame to go around.



First, I've worked in phone tech support (I'm out now, thank God) and I can tell you that front-line customer service / technical support is about the worst job you can get besides flipping burgers. Average employee retention period is less than a year. In fact, when I interviewed with the last place, they wanted a one-year commitment as part of the interview process. Also, training is usually abysmal, too short (Often as little as 1-2 weeks) and not nearly informative enough. The first month out of training, new techs/CSRs almost always have to be re-trained, and it usually takes three to twelve months before a trainee is proficient enough to not have to put every (other) caller on hold while they go ask someone higher up.



Many companies like it that way. If they can't shuffle their customer support off to another company to cut costs, who will in turn outsource it to India or Guatemala because they get paid by the phone call and can pay people $5 a day, the company will hire at about $7.50-9.00 an hour and doing so will get them people who don't know squat but need a job and don't want to go home every night reeking of McFries.



Second, supervisors are nearly non-existent in most front-line call centers. They're schmoozing their boss's boss in an attempt to climb the corporate ladder; they're stuck in endless meetings because they received no training when "promoted" to supervisor; or they're screwing off because they did their time as a phone jockey and now have "more important" things to do. In some places it's so bad that second-level techs (Who are the same as first-level techs except they get stuck in a "resource" queue or resource pod in addition to taking inbound calls) are instructed to state that THEY ARE supervisors and that there's no one above them to whom the customer can speak.



In "good" companies, they have a queue specifically setup to handle law-enforcement calls, but often the techs are not told about it until they go to "resource" with their first call. It still boggles my mind how they can't seem to devote 5 minutes during a 1-2 week training course to saying: "If someone calls up claiming to be a law-enforcement officer, dispatcher, etc. transfer them to queue 5555 (Or whatever)." Often the company will also have a direct-inbound number for law enforcement to call, so they can bypass the hold on the front-line queue.



Finally, I have a son and my sister has two children. At no time have I EVER left my son in an unattended car, let alone with the engine running. My son is my pride and joy, and my job as a father is first and foremost to protect and nurture him. I always require that he hold my or his mother's hand when crossing a street or parking lot; I always keep an eye on him in a store, ANY store. Five seconds is all a kidnapper needs to take a child. I NEVER leave him alone in the car. It's part and parcel with being a parent. My sister loads her children into the car simultaneously for similar reasons.



And really, it was the older child that needed to be in the car in the first place (to go to school), so there wasn't a reason to load the baby until the older child was at least buckling up (And any child who is old enough to go to school--even pre-school--is old enough to know how to at least partially strap themselves into their car seat).