The zoo did what it had to do. Risk legal ramifications for allowing a child to, possibly, be killed by one of their animals, or put the animal down n save the kids life? Katch 22 in this kase, but whats done is done. Yeah the mother should be held accountable for the negligence on her behalf, but not by taking the kid away. Thats not even how CPS works, in most kases. Theyll do checkups every now n then to make sure the child is being raised in a safe environment (living konditions, shelter, klothing, etc). Also, the zoo needs to reevaluate the safeguards used to prevent people, especially children, from entering the exhibits. Its sad all around, from the child being placed in danger to the gorilla being killed. Personally, if it was an adult in there, i wouldnt mind the zoo looking the other way, which they wouldnt due to liability, i presume. However, when it is a child, that childs life takes priority over the gorillas, no matter how kalm it may seem, kuz there is no way in knowing the outkome.
