Imagine this: your baby daughter is at her grandparents’ house for some quality time, but instead of actually spending time with her, they’re glued to their phones and the TV. Next thing you know, the TV is broken, and they’re blaming your baby! Now they’re demanding you buy them a new one. What would you do? ♂️ This is exactly the dilemma one dad is facing, and he’s wondering if he’s in the wrong for refusing to replace the TV. Let’s dive into the story and see what happened.
The Unexpected Call
Quality Time Gone Wrong
Baby’s Playtime
The Excuse
TV Takes a Tumble
The Dilemma
Not Feeling Responsible
Clarifications
Concerns for Baby’s Safety
Taking Action
Appreciating Advice
Who’s Really to Blame? ️♂️
So, we’ve got a dad who’s understandably upset that his baby daughter was left unsupervised, leading to a broken TV and a potentially dangerous situation. He doesn’t think he should have to replace the TV, as it was the family’s negligence that led to the incident. But they’re insisting he should foot the bill. It’s a tricky situation, and opinions are bound to be divided. Let’s see what the internet thinks of this debacle…
RELATED STORIES
Livid over in-laws’ negligence with electrical cords endangering baby. NTA.
NTA – Negligence led to TV breakage, lucky no injuries.
NTA: Baby breaks TV, lucky it didn’t fall on her. Professional childcare?
NTA: Don’t let these morons watch your child again!
NTA. Family may have set up a video to scam you.
NTA. Family demands new TV after baby breaks it.
Irresponsible family endangers child, demands new TV. ♂️
NTA. Baby playing with wires leads to TV disaster.
NTA: Baby breaks TV, commenter suggests buying a new one!
NTA: Family demands new TV after baby breaks it
Judge Judy’s ruling: Who’s responsible when kids break things?
NTA defends leaving child alone, demands new TV. Drama ensues.
Incompetence and negligence: NTA for prioritizing child safety over TV
NTA: Buy them a new TV, but never trust them again.
NTA. Offer an old CRT combo TV/VCR as replacement. Watch out for the VCR!
Parents offer to watch daughter, blame TV break on them. NTA
Baby almost crushed by TV! NTA, no more babysitting!
NTA: Caregiver negligence, no need to pay for new TV.
Infant breaks TV, parent not at fault. Watch your babies!
NTA! TV accident caused brain damage. Don’t buy them anything!
NTA! Don’t let them babysit again. TV danger!
Parent demands new TV after near-death incident with child.
“Completely NTA. Babysitter’s fault. Lucky to avoid ER bill!”
NTA, adults prioritize TV over child’s safety?
In-laws’ babysitting disaster: NTA, be protective of your child
NTA: They should be grateful nothing happened to the baby!
In-laws’ TV mishap: NTA, but what other baby dangers lurk?
Responsibility for child’s actions debated. Luck prevents injury.
NTA: Protecting the baby from a TV disaster!
NTA: Baby’s safety is more important than a TV.
“If your kid breaks it you buy it” doesn’t apply here.
Adults responsible for child’s actions.
NTA. Irresponsible babysitters put baby at risk. Trust issues arise.
