Parents Sue Zoo - For or Against?

InnerConflict

Just saw the headline that the local zoo is being sued by the parents of a boy that was mauled to death in an exhibit of wild African dogs. The boy fell into the exhibit after his mother lifted him on to a railing so he could get a better look. The mother was not charged with negligence.

ETA: The lawsuit claims that zoo officials had ample warning that parents routinely lift their children onto a rail overlooking the exhibit so that the children can see the dogs better, according to the report. The lawsuit states that zoos across the country have more and better safeguards in place to keep children safe.

ETA: Please be respectful with your answer.

For or Against the lawsuit?

MassiveDelta

Just saw the headline that the local zoo is being sued by the parents of a boy that was mauled to death in an exhibit of wild African dogs. The boy fell into the exhibit after his mother lifted him on to a railing so he could get a better look. The mother was not charged with negligence.

For or Against the lawsuit?

Against

coliema

Against.

TylerJ76

Against.


Accidents happen.
This is not the fault of the zoo, or the parent.

pastryari

Based on the info you've provided, against.

_Calvin_

against

dennik15

Zoos have wild animals. There are fences, gates, walls, and moats around them to protect both the animals and the general public. Being stupid enough to put your child somewhere dangerous and having something horrible happen does not give you the right to sue. I feel awful for the family, but grief and anger are not lessened with money. I'd feel differently if the zoo were negligent and the animal was out of it's enclosure.

jordanlell

It's really sad that it happened.. but not the zoo's fault. How could you expect the zoo to prevent this from happening? The railing was obviously there for a reason and the mother chose to ignore that. I mean, I could see lifting your kid up to see above the railing, but not ONTO the railing, which is clearly not safe. The dogs are wild animals, and the zoo has no way of controlling their behavior in response to negligence like that.

brower47

Against.

HotCuppaJo

Zoos have wild animals. There are fences, gates, walls, and moats around them to protect both the animals and the general public. Being stupid enough to put your child somewhere dangerous and having something horrible happen does not give you the right to sue. I feel awful for the family, but grief and anger are not lessened with money. I'd feel differently if the zoo were negligent and the animal was out of it's enclosure.

Against. I totally agree with this comment....

JenAndSome

Against. It was a rail, not a bench. I can't imagine how that mother feels, but displacing blame will not help the healing process.

wolverine66

i remember when this happened. it was an awful thing to hear about. I know of someone who worked at the zoo, but she had nothing to do with the exhibit or anything. she was just in the park when it happened.

i know a few more details, they showed diagrams and such on the news.

I am against the lawsuit. The dogs were down in a pit. The fence was high enough that the child would not have fallen had it not been lifted. I believer there were also signs posted.

beach_please

Against.

I feel for the mother though. She'll relive that day (and the decision to lift him on the rail) for the rest of her life. I can't imagine how she's been dealing with what happened. Probably countless kids have been lifted on that very same railing to get a better look.. it was just a horrible, horrible mistake. A mistake many parents could have made. Yet, I don't really think the zoo is at fault. As parents, we have to make choices that affect our childrens' safety. She made a poor choice IMO but one that many parents could have made. And it had catastrophic consequences. That story still makes me sick to my stomach... that poor family.

thecakelocker

She lifted the kid up over the railing and then dropped him. I'm sure the zoo was not expecting people to chuck toddlers into wild dog enclosures. Come the eff on.

Mustang_Susie

What are the parents claiming was the zoo's liability?

mommy1126

Against. As a mother, I can't imagine what this woman is going through and will continue to go through. However, the zoo bears no responsibility for the fact that she chose to lift her son up on to the railing.

KANGOOJUMPS

against of course.

Alex_is_Hawks

against.

it won't bring the boy back and the zoo did nothing wrong. Neither did the mother (at least according to a court of law. that being said I wouldn't have lifted my daughter to stand on the railing when she was a young child but that would be MY choice.).

mostly, it won't bring the boy back.

DalekBrittany

She lifted the kid up over the railing and then dropped him. I'm sure the zoo was not expecting people to chuck toddlers into wild dog enclosures. Come the eff on.

To be fair, she didn't just pick him up and chuck him in there. :huh:

BflSaberfan

Incredibly sad. I cant imagine what that mother is going through but she has absolutely no right to sue...but she will probably win...and that is why we pay ridiculous amounts for insurance.

Jerrypeoples

id like for them to take raw meat, place it on the mothers belly and let the dogs have a go at it