Can You Sleep Your Way to Conception?
Expert Q & A
The TTC Community
Sing, Sing a Song? 
Real Mom Tips
Celebrity Parenting
Your Baby Book
1st Birthday Recipes
Baby Shower Fun
Good Toddler Apps
Gifts for Newborns
Baby Slings
Snooki Says... 
Work-Life Balance
WHAM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/22/amanda-nejat_n_1620465.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl7%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D172665
Summary for non-clickers: A woman in California left her 11 month old twins locked in her SUV while she went into a Nordstrom store. Another shopper heard the babies crying and called the police. The woman pleaded no contest to the charges that resulted and was released with orders to attend 26 parenting classes, seek counseling and not leave her children unattended. Her record could be expunged if she complies for 2 years. In addition to the legal consequences, the manager of the Nordstrom where the incident occured has banned the mother from the store.
WDYT? Was the manager right or wrong to ban her? Should private businesses involve themselves in public legal matters like criminal prosecutions? Is it appropriate for Nordstrom to impose penalties beyond those imposed by the court?
- BabyZone
- Community
- General Topics Zone
- Hot Topics
- by rgle14
- Posts 2558
Sat Jun 23, 2012 12:35 pm
- by MasterNinjaKitty
- Posts 156
Sat Jun 23, 2012 2:28 pm
If a crime endangering others is committed on their property, I see no reason why they cannot ban the woman from the store.
- by maybaby10
- Posts 2284
Sat Jun 23, 2012 6:36 pm
If that is their typical policy, then it wouldnt be a problem.
Btw, how do they enforce that?
Btw, how do they enforce that?
[/url- by rgle14
- Posts 2558
Sat Jun 23, 2012 8:17 pm
Penny, they certainly can. I was wondering if people thought they should.
Ashley, the article did not say anything about usual policy or how bainning is enforced.
All, I apologize for a typo in my OP. The babies were 11 weeks, not 11 months old.
Ashley, the article did not say anything about usual policy or how bainning is enforced.
All, I apologize for a typo in my OP. The babies were 11 weeks, not 11 months old.
- by MasterNinjaKitty
- Posts 156
Sat Jun 23, 2012 9:43 pm
rgle14 wrote:Penny, they certainly can. I was wondering if people thought they should.
Ashley, the article did not say anything about usual policy or how bainning is enforced.
All, I apologize for a typo in my OP. The babies were 11 weeks, not 11 months old.
I guess my phrasing was vague. I agree that if they want to, they should.
Ashley, when you ban someone usually they are too ashamed to show their face again. Security usually knows what the individual looks like, though, in case they do come back and they may be able to tell from CC processing. It's not 100% effective but it usually works.
- by celinesoleil
- Posts 366
Mon Jun 25, 2012 12:52 pm
No I don't think they should. Private businesses should not be involved in public legal matters like criminal prosecutions.
I understand it is certainly their prerogative to do so but I don't think they should.
I understand it is certainly their prerogative to do so but I don't think they should.
- by mommy2elijah
- Posts 2463
Mon Jun 25, 2012 8:11 pm
Often, one braindead activity begets another. I don't think it's a far-fetched jump to think a person who would lock 11 week old infants unattended in a car would do so in order to rob me blind uninterrupted. I don't fault them for banning her. They are now associated with her negative press.
3 angels, Ashley, Elijah's twin Alison, and Baby October.
- by MasterNinjaKitty
- Posts 156
Tue Jun 26, 2012 11:43 am
celinesoleil wrote:No I don't think they should. Private businesses should not be involved in public legal matters like criminal prosecutions.
I understand it is certainly their prerogative to do so but I don't think they should.
Even if the crime was committed on their property? If someone committed a crime on your property, do you not think it acceptable to tell them that they are not welcome back?
- by celinesoleil
- Posts 366
Tue Jun 26, 2012 1:09 pm
MasterNinjaKitty wrote:celinesoleil wrote:No I don't think they should. Private businesses should not be involved in public legal matters like criminal prosecutions.
I understand it is certainly their prerogative to do so but I don't think they should.
Even if the crime was committed on their property? If someone committed a crime on your property, do you not think it acceptable to tell them that they are not welcome back?
I see your point but what she did not not affect them directly. The infraction was committed in their parking lot, not in their store. I would be surprised if they banned everyone who committed an infraction in their parking lot.
I also understand bad publicity but in this particular situation her actions did not reflect badly on the store itself and I really doubt that it will affect people's decision to shop there or not.
- by mum2one
- Posts 2898
Tue Jun 26, 2012 3:02 pm
celinesoleil wrote:MasterNinjaKitty wrote:celinesoleil wrote:No I don't think they should. Private businesses should not be involved in public legal matters like criminal prosecutions.
I understand it is certainly their prerogative to do so but I don't think they should.
Even if the crime was committed on their property? If someone committed a crime on your property, do you not think it acceptable to tell them that they are not welcome back?
I see your point but what she did not not affect them directly. The infraction was committed in their parking lot, not in their store. I would be surprised if they banned everyone who committed an infraction in their parking lot.
I also understand bad publicity but in this particular situation her actions did not reflect badly on the store itself and I really doubt that it will affect people's decision to shop there or not.
Actually, it could affect people's decision to shop there. There are people who think that Nordstrom's caters only to the wealthy. Their mentality could well be "Well, isn't this typical of someone shopping there? Only care about their needs! Forget their children." By doing this, the manager of that store shows that they will not put up with it.
I will say I fully support Nordstrom's in this. I think it's great. And good for that manager!
- by MasterNinjaKitty
- Posts 156
Tue Jun 26, 2012 6:30 pm
celinesoleil wrote:MasterNinjaKitty wrote:celinesoleil wrote:No I don't think they should. Private businesses should not be involved in public legal matters like criminal prosecutions.
I understand it is certainly their prerogative to do so but I don't think they should.
Even if the crime was committed on their property? If someone committed a crime on your property, do you not think it acceptable to tell them that they are not welcome back?
I see your point but what she did not not affect them directly. The infraction was committed in their parking lot, not in their store. I would be surprised if they banned everyone who committed an infraction in their parking lot.
I also understand bad publicity but in this particular situation her actions did not reflect badly on the store itself and I really doubt that it will affect people's decision to shop there or not.
"Everyone who committed an anfraction" in Nordstrom's parking lot probably wasn't leaving an 11 week old child in their car. I'd consider that enough of an "infraction" that they can do as they like. If human endangerment isn't bad enough, what is?
- by mommy2elijah
- Posts 2463
Tue Jun 26, 2012 10:35 pm
celinesoleil wrote:MasterNinjaKitty wrote:celinesoleil wrote:No I don't think they should. Private businesses should not be involved in public legal matters like criminal prosecutions.
I understand it is certainly their prerogative to do so but I don't think they should.
Even if the crime was committed on their property? If someone committed a crime on your property, do you not think it acceptable to tell them that they are not welcome back?
I see your point but what she did not not affect them directly. The infraction was committed in their parking lot, not in their store. I would be surprised if they banned everyone who committed an infraction in their parking lot.
I also understand bad publicity but in this particular situation her actions did not reflect badly on the store itself and I really doubt that it will affect people's decision to shop there or not.
I disagree with the bolded.
3 angels, Ashley, Elijah's twin Alison, and Baby October.
- by maybaby10
- Posts 2284
Tue Jun 26, 2012 10:54 pm
Any retailer has a right to refuse service for anything, but I am interested to know if they ban all people who commit any type of crime on their property. The article doesn't say. I also don't get why this is a news story reported on national news sites. Do people not think that white people who drive Escalades and shop at Nordstrom have the capacity to be negligent parents? Is Nordstrom the first store to ever ban a person from their store for this?
- by celinesoleil
- Posts 366
Wed Jun 27, 2012 4:22 am
MasterNinjaKitty wrote:celinesoleil wrote:MasterNinjaKitty wrote:celinesoleil wrote:No I don't think they should. Private businesses should not be involved in public legal matters like criminal prosecutions.
I understand it is certainly their prerogative to do so but I don't think they should.
Even if the crime was committed on their property? If someone committed a crime on your property, do you not think it acceptable to tell them that they are not welcome back?
I see your point but what she did not not affect them directly. The infraction was committed in their parking lot, not in their store. I would be surprised if they banned everyone who committed an infraction in their parking lot.
I also understand bad publicity but in this particular situation her actions did not reflect badly on the store itself and I really doubt that it will affect people's decision to shop there or not.
"Everyone who committed an anfraction" in Nordstrom's parking lot probably wasn't leaving an 11 week old child in their car. I'd consider that enough of an "infraction" that they can do as they like. If human endangerment isn't bad enough, what is?
The question was not whether Nordstrom could do what they like, we all know that legally they can, the OP was asking what we thought about it. And I simply said I do not support their decision for the reasons mentioned above.
- by celinesoleil
- Posts 366
Wed Jun 27, 2012 4:30 am
maybaby10 wrote: Is Nordstrom the first store to ever ban a person from their store for this?
Good point. This would help put things in perspective.
- by mum2one
- Posts 2898
Wed Jun 27, 2012 1:59 pm
celinesoleil wrote:maybaby10 wrote: Is Nordstrom the first store to ever ban a person from their store for this?
Good point. This would help put things in perspective.
I don't know about for this, but I know that certain stores have banned people for other reasons. My sister & her friends, punks in the '80's were not allowed in our Nordstrom because "they scare people".
- by mommy2elijah
- Posts 2463
Wed Jun 27, 2012 2:09 pm
celinesoleil wrote:MasterNinjaKitty wrote:celinesoleil wrote:MasterNinjaKitty wrote:celinesoleil wrote:No I don't think they should. Private businesses should not be involved in public legal matters like criminal prosecutions.
I understand it is certainly their prerogative to do so but I don't think they should.
Even if the crime was committed on their property? If someone committed a crime on your property, do you not think it acceptable to tell them that they are not welcome back?
I see your point but what she did not not affect them directly. The infraction was committed in their parking lot, not in their store. I would be surprised if they banned everyone who committed an infraction in their parking lot.
I also understand bad publicity but in this particular situation her actions did not reflect badly on the store itself and I really doubt that it will affect people's decision to shop there or not.
"Everyone who committed an anfraction" in Nordstrom's parking lot probably wasn't leaving an 11 week old child in their car. I'd consider that enough of an "infraction" that they can do as they like. If human endangerment isn't bad enough, what is?
The question was not whether Nordstrom could do what they like, we all know that legally they can, the OP was asking what we thought about it. And I simply said I do not support their decision for the reasons mentioned above.
And you said it on a debate forum, so it's going to get challenged.
3 angels, Ashley, Elijah's twin Alison, and Baby October.
- by celinesoleil
- Posts 366
Wed Jun 27, 2012 8:01 pm
mommy2elijah wrote:celinesoleil wrote:MasterNinjaKitty wrote:celinesoleil wrote:MasterNinjaKitty wrote:celinesoleil wrote:No I don't think they should. Private businesses should not be involved in public legal matters like criminal prosecutions.
I understand it is certainly their prerogative to do so but I don't think they should.
Even if the crime was committed on their property? If someone committed a crime on your property, do you not think it acceptable to tell them that they are not welcome back?
I see your point but what she did not not affect them directly. The infraction was committed in their parking lot, not in their store. I would be surprised if they banned everyone who committed an infraction in their parking lot.
I also understand bad publicity but in this particular situation her actions did not reflect badly on the store itself and I really doubt that it will affect people's decision to shop there or not.
"Everyone who committed an anfraction" in Nordstrom's parking lot probably wasn't leaving an 11 week old child in their car. I'd consider that enough of an "infraction" that they can do as they like. If human endangerment isn't bad enough, what is?
The question was not whether Nordstrom could do what they like, we all know that legally they can, the OP was asking what we thought about it. And I simply said I do not support their decision for the reasons mentioned above.
And you said it on a debate forum, so it's going to get challenged.
I am ok with that
- by celinesoleil
- Posts 366
Wed Jun 27, 2012 8:08 pm
mum2one wrote:celinesoleil wrote:maybaby10 wrote: Is Nordstrom the first store to ever ban a person from their store for this?
Good point. This would help put things in perspective.
I don't know about for this, but I know that certain stores have banned people for other reasons. My sister & her friends, punks in the '80's were not allowed in our Nordstrom because "they scare people".
This actually makes more sense to me, many places have a dress code.
- by mommy2elijah
- Posts 2463
Wed Jun 27, 2012 11:35 pm
celinesoleil wrote:mum2one wrote:celinesoleil wrote:maybaby10 wrote: Is Nordstrom the first store to ever ban a person from their store for this?
Good point. This would help put things in perspective.
I don't know about for this, but I know that certain stores have banned people for other reasons. My sister & her friends, punks in the '80's were not allowed in our Nordstrom because "they scare people".
This actually makes more sense to me, many places have a dress code.
It makes more sense to you that patrons should follow a dress code than a moral code? I honestly can't fathom your flippant attitude toward a mother leaving 11 week old infants unattended in a car, but violating a code of dress strikes a chord with you.
3 angels, Ashley, Elijah's twin Alison, and Baby October.
- by mum2one
- Posts 2898
Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:14 am
celinesoleil wrote:mum2one wrote:celinesoleil wrote:maybaby10 wrote: Is Nordstrom the first store to ever ban a person from their store for this?
Good point. This would help put things in perspective.
I don't know about for this, but I know that certain stores have banned people for other reasons. My sister & her friends, punks in the '80's were not allowed in our Nordstrom because "they scare people".
This actually makes more sense to me, many places have a dress code.
At the time they did not. They might now, but at the time they did not. No one in our mall did. We're talking a high end mall here, at all! Nordstrom was our high end store.
- by mum2one
- Posts 2898
Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:15 am
mommy2elijah wrote:celinesoleil wrote:mum2one wrote:celinesoleil wrote:maybaby10 wrote: Is Nordstrom the first store to ever ban a person from their store for this?
Good point. This would help put things in perspective.
I don't know about for this, but I know that certain stores have banned people for other reasons. My sister & her friends, punks in the '80's were not allowed in our Nordstrom because "they scare people".
This actually makes more sense to me, many places have a dress code.
It makes more sense to you that patrons should follow a dress code than a moral code? I honestly can't fathom your flippant attitude toward a mother leaving 11 week old infants unattended in a car, but violating a code of dress strikes a chord with you.
I have to agree with this.
- by mum2one
- Posts 2898
Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:19 am
mum2one wrote:celinesoleil wrote:mum2one wrote:celinesoleil wrote:maybaby10 wrote: Is Nordstrom the first store to ever ban a person from their store for this?
Good point. This would help put things in perspective.
I don't know about for this, but I know that certain stores have banned people for other reasons. My sister & her friends, punks in the '80's were not allowed in our Nordstrom because "they scare people".
This actually makes more sense to me, many places have a dress code.
At the time they did not. They might now, but at the time they did not. No one in our mall did. We're talking a high end mall here, at all! Nordstrom was our high end store.
And the reason I know that there was not a dress code was because when they felt that the ban had been violated & there was a huge fight between our mother & the store manager they flat out told us that there was no dress code. That incident, btw, would have gotten them sued hard core today.
- by celinesoleil
- Posts 366
Thu Jun 28, 2012 2:25 am
mum2one wrote:mommy2elijah wrote:celinesoleil wrote:mum2one wrote:celinesoleil wrote:maybaby10 wrote: Is Nordstrom the first store to ever ban a person from their store for this?
Good point. This would help put things in perspective.
I don't know about for this, but I know that certain stores have banned people for other reasons. My sister & her friends, punks in the '80's were not allowed in our Nordstrom because "they scare people".
This actually makes more sense to me, many places have a dress code.
It makes more sense to you that patrons should follow a dress code than a moral code? I honestly can't fathom your flippant attitude toward a mother leaving 11 week old infants unattended in a car, but violating a code of dress strikes a chord with you.
I have to agree with this.
It is interesting you see it this way. I never implied that what the mother did was acceptable. She has already been convicted and sentenced.
Lots of places have dress codes you have to abide by their rules if you wish to patronize their establishment, it seems like a fair rule because it can be applied across the board. In this particular situation the manager made a decision for something that happened outside the store. As pp mentioned it would interesting to know if a similar situation has happened at other Nordstrom stores or other department stores.
- by mommy2elijah
- Posts 2463
Thu Jun 28, 2012 9:46 am
celinesoleil wrote:mum2one wrote:mommy2elijah wrote:celinesoleil wrote:mum2one wrote:celinesoleil wrote:maybaby10 wrote: Is Nordstrom the first store to ever ban a person from their store for this?
Good point. This would help put things in perspective.
I don't know about for this, but I know that certain stores have banned people for other reasons. My sister & her friends, punks in the '80's were not allowed in our Nordstrom because "they scare people".
This actually makes more sense to me, many places have a dress code.
It makes more sense to you that patrons should follow a dress code than a moral code? I honestly can't fathom your flippant attitude toward a mother leaving 11 week old infants unattended in a car, but violating a code of dress strikes a chord with you.
I have to agree with this.
It is interesting you see it this way. I never implied that what the mother did was acceptable. She has already been convicted and sentenced.
Lots of places have dress codes you have to abide by their rules if you wish to patronize their establishment, it seems like a fair rule because it can be applied across the board. In this particular situation the manager made a decision for something that happened outside the store. As pp mentioned it would interesting to know if a similar situation has happened at other Nordstrom stores or other department stores.
I never said that you implied what she did was "acceptable." I said your attitude toward what she did was flippant. Your word choice is downplaying and softens the impact (calling it an "infraction," for example). I don't agree or disagree on the fairness of a dress code. It's irrelevant. And you keep saying that the "infraction" occurred outside the store. Actually, that's incorrect. The babies being in the car wasn't the infraction. Her walking her happy butt into their store without the babies is the issue. As I stated earlier, it also says something about her character that she would opt to leave newborn infants in a car while she shops. Something is askew in her assessment of right and wrong, there.
3 angels, Ashley, Elijah's twin Alison, and Baby October.