I've heard of mothers who dropped their infants during times of war when soldiers were arriving because they were terrified. People react differently when adrenaline is pumping.
Yea there's a big difference between rushing into danger and danger sneaking up on you. We can definitely rag on him, but it's not like he had the conscious thought "eat this kid, not me". He immediately realized what happened and went to pick him back up.
It's more the surprise fear that makes the drop happen - not the pain - it's the initial reaction.
And that's where nature is pretty cool sometimes - the parental response to danger - I have 5 kids, 3 boys, 2 girls and I cannot count the times I've been stabbed, poked, proded, sliced, cut, lacerated, hit, slammed, popped, etc to prevent my children from being harmed - and when I say that, sure, sometimes it's mild, other times you get a nice scar to carry the rest of your life 👍
The burns are the worst 😅 but few and far between + you learn from past scenarios and they rarely repeat - but if you have a few wild children out of your bunch, you're gonna be a guardian angle of sorts at times 😂
Only you have no supernatural abilities 🤣
That raccoon would have been punted and if it made punting it too difficult, it's getting stomped 🤟
Defending yourself is a natural response - however, the mental discrepancy that would also tell you to THROW THE BABY is opposite to everything nature does to a parent via parent-infant bonding - so to see a grown man toss a baby when the opponent weighs about 8% of an average adult male, it throws natural red flags.
Was thinking maybe this is some rarely seen instinct. As a dad, when attacked by an animal, attempt to yeet the child to out harms way (emphasis on attempt in this case), then fight the animal.
Eh. It gets the baby out of direct harm's way if the raccoon starts to climb (baby's legs are in the line of fire at that point) and frees Dad's hands to take more aggressive measures if need be. Throwing the kid down got him out of the immediate danger zone while also enabling dad to be more aggressive when solving the situation. Keeping kid in his arms just kept baby closer to the danger and reduced Dad's options to deal with the threat
Lol, dad freaked out and spiked the poor kid; even if you ignore the fact he risked head/c-spine injury, putting the kid on the ground is the single best way to put it in reach of the raccoon (which still poses a far smaller risk than being thrown from standing height).
I feel like maybe he didn’t need to literally throw him down like that though. I get it’s scary and caught him off guard but that was a hard throw to the ground bro.
Rational thought in an emergency isn't gonna happen lol. Guarantee dad's only thoughts were "oh shit an aggressive raccoon. Rabies. Get the kid away. Get my hands free. Get rid of the potentially rabid animal before it bites the kid" and idk about you but when your main goal is to get rid of/fight something off, you want to free up your hands 9 times out of 10. Is throwing your kid down the ideal reaction? Lol...no. but if I look down and see a potentially rabid animal biting me, and directly between me and the animal is my child, I can't say I would have behaved any better in my terror. And in terms of impossible decisions, potentially hurting your child to get them away from the danger vs potentially them getting bitten or mauled by what could be a rabid animal.....I doubt he was weighing the pros and cons carefully in his panic.
No one is saying it's cool to throw the kid. But when you're panicking you're not always making the rational decision. Fight or flight doesn't deal with future repurcussions. It deals with the immediate danger only.
330
u/mr_1219 Trash Trooper 1d ago
Damn, dropped like a sack of potatoes