I generally agree with the idea of not criminalizing an honest mistake. I change my tune when it comes to mistakes that show a lack of fitness for the general task/required skills. In some cases I think a civil action like a fine or some type of legal mark that can identify serial 'mistake' makers.

If you 'forget' to wear your motorcycle helmet 7 times maybe you just don't get to operate a motorcycle anymore. Or if you 'forget' to wear your seat belt enough times the fines escalate and require mandatory safety classes. Especially in the case where the harm is generally only to the mistake maker, I think these are reasonable.

Where I completely change my tune is when the lives of other are in your care, including animals. If you forget to feed your pet or children to the point of harm, you're clearly not a suitable caretaker. If you cannot seek timely medical attention and your child dies, you should be held accountable. If you leave your child in the car and they die, you should absolutely be held accountable.

I've got three kids under five, I cannot imagine a world where I forget that they're there (partially because they make a ton of noise). I think there's an infinitesimally small percentage of people who actually forget, I think the likelihood is that: a) they thought it would be ok, but oops, and b) they just don't care- maybe even want the worst to happen. This goes back to my point of showing signs that you are unsuitable to care for others.

I want to draw a clear distinction, I'm not one of those people that believe children need to be bubble wrapped and monitored 24/7. I don't think people should be admonished if there's a couple of kids in the car and they ran in to the 7-11 and grabbed a (whatever) quickly while the kids were in plain view the whole time. I think kids that show the ability to go to the neighborhood park by themselves should be able to. I think we've taken a lot of the learning you get from free-roaming and seriously stunted our kids growth and resilience.

The distinction is, the kids don't get a say in their treatment or care. If you're ability to care for them is so diminished that they are harmed by a neglectful act, you should be punished harshly, if it's found that a reasonable person would have acted differently.

I'm willing to give that in all these negligent care cases we should look at the totality of the circumstances and make judgements based on that, as none of this can be black and white.

For example, say mom had a slip and fall a couple weeks ago and got a concussion. No one realized it, and she's got memory issues. She forgets the kiddo, and the kiddo dies. Now it's going to be a long, twisted, painful road, but I would think the right outcome is that the mother isn't punished anymore than she already will be for the rest of her life. The hard part would be getting that concussion post-diagnosed and recognized as an extenuating circumstance.

I'm still okay with negligent care cases defaulting to a presumption of guilt, because you HAVE to fuck up to get in to this position, now we just need to see if it was a reasonable mistake or not. A reasonable person does not forget their child(ren) in the car.