national

1-year-old girl falls to her death from 6th floor apartment

35 Comments

A one-year-old girl fell to her death from the balcony of a sixth-floor apartment in Edogawa Ward, Tokyo, on Sunday.

According to police, the incident occurred just before 4 p.m. at a condo in Higashi-Kasai. A passerby called 119 to report that a child was lying on the ground outside the building. The girl was taken to hospital where she died a short time later, Fuji TV reported.

Police said the girl lived with her parents and two-year-old brother. At the time of the incident, her mother was out and her father was quoted by police as saying he was inside and didn’t realize his children were playing on the balcony.

Police said there is a 20-cm gap between the bottom of the balcony railing and the balcony floor and that the girl apparently crawled underneath the railing and then fell.

© Japan Today

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

35 Comments
Login to comment

That's terrible. I feel  so sad for her parents. Nothing can be worse than the loss of a child.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Scary with so many condos. And sorry for the kid and family. They need to review construction regulations to make this 20 cm gap smaller.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Completely avoidable if he had taken a few minor precautions.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

Nothing can be worse than the loss of a child except when that loss is caused by somebody's carelessness

2 ( +8 / -6 )

He was responsible for supervising two small children but he had no idea where they even were

2 ( +9 / -7 )

If there was a gap large enough for a small child to crawl through, the building architects are liable. However, my thoughts are, there was a table or chair on the balcony that the infant climbed over. Either way, it's a totally avoidable death. I guess the father was busy with his phone and didn't notice his child crawling to her death.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

Ignorance is no excuse. As a dad it was his responsibility to know where his "infant" children were playing and to make sure the area was safe for them to play in... No excuses.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

At the time of the incident, her mother was out and her father was quoted by police as saying he was inside and didn’t realize his children were playing on the balcony.

Um, that could lead to another similar fall incident. Aside from reviewing the building regulations, families with a infant or two have to be aware of the danger and take every possible measure to prevent accidents. RIP.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Having said what I did I still hope the family can heal and I know I would go insane if that happened to me

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

A 20 cm gap would be relatively easy for a 1 Year old to roll over through.

I feel sorry for the Parents, they will now have to live with the "What if we had done this, or I had done that" for the rest of their lives.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

What if he had locked the balcony door

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

I gotta say, I live on the 10th floor of a large building and as I walk fro the elevator to my apartment the hallway is lined by a gate looking fence of sorts, not a thick wall. This is quite normal Inthink as I’ve seen it many times in all sorts of buildings.

When my friends come from other countries they are shocked at how flimsy it looks. There is also a gap between the bars that would make my heart stop if a baby or 1 year old walked up to it. Now the fence isn’t flimsy or weak in reality, but it certainly doesn’t inspire confidence.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Horrible thing to happen, and they deserve our sympathy with what we know. I am sure that all of those who criticize the father with their limited information live exemplary lives of perfection. We at JT are blessed to have such amazingly perfect people posting their wisdom.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

And yet again further proof Japan is in dire need of actual child-proofing. I asked an elderly friend of mine after Respect for the Aged Day (when his family visited) if he child-proofs the house for his one-year-old grandchild and he looked at me like I was crazy. I asked him, "So, what do you do, then, with him crawling around and touching everything." And he said, "We keep an eye on him."

I didnt point out that that's when most things like this happen... when parents or grandparents are "keeping an eye out", so to speak.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

"Toasted Heretic", your meaningless "pity" is the ultimate hypocrisy. Yes, Michael had gone overboard assuming the reasons, but he properly evaluted the result. We can all say "oh my what a tragedy, the child's life was lost je suis ..." but that changes Nothing. Michael, me, we are very saddened and angry that this happened. And we are angry because it COULD BE prevented. If the responsible people had shown slightly more concern, not take the life for granted but did just slightly more to provide needed security for the little children, who neither know of the world rules nor can fathom them perceptively at their age. Your hollow, automatic condolences are nothing.

There is no new low. There is that old low when something happens, everyone is sad for a moment, and then the lives go on. But the child was lost, the parent failed to protect him, and the tomorrow will come, when another parent either fails or succeeds in preventing this tragedy. And your superficial regret helps them not.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

@ comanteer - no matter how much sarcasm you use the fact is the father neglected to take minimum precautions to ensure the safety of his two infant children, otherwise we wouldn't be having this conversation

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

"Toasted Heretic", your meaningless "pity" is the ultimate hypocrisy. Yes, Michael had gone overboard assuming the reasons, but he properly evaluted the result.

No, he didn't. He made judgements about a parent and the tragic loss of his baby. And just in case he didn't make it as clear as a sledgehammer he did it again and again and again.

Michael, me, we are very saddened and angry that this happened. And we are angry because it COULD BE prevented.

Sounds like crocodile tears. Your anger means nothing except capitalise on tragedy in a mean-spirited way. And I can only hope the family is not reading the smears people here are casting.

If the responsible people had shown slightly more concern, not take the life for granted

How do you know there was no concern? Were you there?

but did just slightly more to provide needed security for the little children, who neither know of the world rules nor can fathom them perceptively at their age. Your hollow, automatic condolences are nothing.

Hollow? And what do you know of such loss? So quick to judge what must be a grieving parent. How can you?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Lucky it didn't happen with the older child! Did the parents never hear of child proofing their place!!!

3 ( +3 / -0 )

As I say every time this type of tragedy occurs, it was one of the reasons I moved out of my old apartment and into a house. Raising small children, I chose not to live in a tall building or on a busy street. One quick move and my World could come crashing down.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

He made judgements about a parent and the tragic loss of his baby.

No judgements at all. It's a matter of fact (not my opinion) that he didn't take actions to protect the safety of his very small children.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Where did he think they were? A 2-year-old and a 1-year-old should always be playing near or very near a parent and in the same room. Unless they live(d) in a huge apartment, it seems strange he didn't know where they were.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

That is the the problem, Serendipitous1. He never considered that something like this would happen. Most do not until it does and alters their lives tragically. The living is taken for granted by many, and this is a terrifying result. No ill intentions, no neglect. Just a lack of responsibility for the world and the rules we live in. This is yet another example why some should take such thing more seriously. But do they? We will never know. Until the next such thing happens, it will all seem alright.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

What a tragedy. There is clearly a building code issue that needs to be addressed if it hasn't already been changed. Where we live the building code prescribes that the maximum opening in a balcony guard is 100mm (to prevent passage through but also to prevent childrens' heads getting stuck) and the design must not "promote climbing" ie effectively there can be no horizontal members. It scares me greatly how many parts of the World allow horizontal members, we recently worked on a brand new apartment building in Malta which was many many stories tall and effectively had balcony guards which were like ladders......and accident waiting to happen. The parents will never recover from this, as a father of a young child my heart bleeds for them whatever the circumstances.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Any responsible parent child proofs the home. If you have stairs, then a baby gate. Child proof locks on lower cabinets. Plastic plugs for electrical outlets. Rubber corners for coffee tables etc.

How could the parents not see and secure the gap on the balcony? That is gross negligence. Not just a sad accident.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

It's a matter of fact (not my opinion) that he didn't take actions to protect the safety of his very small children.

um no it's not. It's a supposition by you, not fact.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Um, yes it is. If he had, the baby wouldn't be dead.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

This world of ours is full of tragedies concerning children every minute of the day.

Children are killed running out onto the street, they go missing after wandering off in the supermarket or park, they get hold of daddy's gun and shoot their sibling, they drown in a paddling pool.

Sure; maybe it can all be avoided if you have eyes in the back of your head and are watching 24/7. But kids have a habit of wandering off, not realising danger. It's what they do. You can be devoted to your kids and accidents can still happen. This doesn't automatically make you a bad parent.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Um, yes it is. If he had, the baby wouldn't be dead.

Logic isn't your strong point, is it.

He could have taken plenty of actions to protect his children. Sometimes accidents happen. Sometimes people try to foresee anything they can think of, and don't think of that one thing that matters.

You literally know nothing about this man, nor how he parented his children, beyond a couple of paragraphs written about an incident in his life by a third party, and yet you make a judgement that cannot logically be made from the information provided, and that's assuming all the information is in fact correct.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

If he had taken any precautions at all, a two-year-old and a one-year-old wouldn't have gotten out on the balcony without his knowledge, and the baby wouldn't have fallen. Or what kind of precautions could he have taken that a two year old and one year old defeated so readily without his knowledge.?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If he had taken any precautions at all, a two-year-old and a one-year-old wouldn't have gotten out on the balcony without his knowledge, and the baby wouldn't have fallen.

And again, that cannot be determined from the limited details in the article. Maybe he had child locks on the door, and someone forgot to set them. Or maybe they broke, or were defective. Or maybe it was left open on purpose and he was watching them, but got distracted (anyone who tries to claim that can never happen doesn't have kids).

But you seem to have declared him guilty of negligence. So tell me, since you are able to determine through logic that he is guilty, do you feel that a trial is unnecessary, and that a judge could simply be handed this article upon which he could base his judgement?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Maybe he had child locks on the door, and someone forgot to set them.

negligence

Or maybe it was left open on purpose and he was watching them

The article itself states "he didn’t realize his children were playing on the balcony", so he couldn't have been watching them very well

And again, your own argument makes my case

3 ( +3 / -0 )

negligence

Maybe the doors were changed before, and he hadn't had a chance to put the new ones on. Maybe they were there but broke. Maybe an infinite number of possible alternatives to negligence.

The article itself states "he didn’t realize his children were playing on the balcony", so he couldn't have been watching them very well

Or maybe he was watching them well, but an angry neighbor showed up at the door yelling at him, and in the confusion he didn't realize the kids went on the balcony. Or maybe an infinite number of other possibilities.

But please, if you can explain away an infinite number of other possibilities, please start listing them.

Face it, you made a baseless judgement without enough information to logically come to the conclusions you made, and now you are annoyed because I'm calling you out for it.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Readers, this ends the bickering.

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites