Parents Sue Zoo - For or Against?

brower47

Maybe in some sense you do have to protect people from stupidity. Why is it a requirement to have seat belts in a car? Because dumb people get in a car and cause accidents and death.

Yeah, but we don't sue the automobile company for deaths that result from not using their seat belts just like the zoo should not be responsible for the parent sadly ignoring the fact that the railing was not meant to rest your 2 year old on.

LissaK1981

The fence the mother lifted the child over is see through by the way. There was also a deck below she could have taken her kid to see through a plexiglass window. Do you let your kid take off their seat belt while driving to get a better view of the road? Would you lift your child onto a balcony rail? Like Micheal Jackson? Common sense

MyChocolateDiet

A lot of people are saying how stupid the Mom was, but if she was so stupid then how come millions of parents have no problem lifting their children up on railings. How many of us are really guilty of doing that? Did any of you ever take a kid to the zoo, and you know those exhibits are not easy for short kids to see, and pick them up even to peak over the railing. I see kids on top of shoulders in crowds sometimes and they almost get their head cracked on a wall because Dad is too tall. Most of us are just lucky we survived childhood.

Maybe in some sense you do have to protect people from stupidity. Why is it a requirement to have seat belts in a car? Because dumb people get in a car and cause accidents and death.

I'm actually for and against. I can see both sides of the argument. Ultimately it's not up to us to decided, but I can bet we've all been stupid with our lives or the lives of others at one point or another.

PS-zoos are terrible places to take a young child. They are hot, crowded, the animals are always hiding, and kids cant see into the exhibits most of the time.

You said that before and now I'm gonna have to ditto you. I'm not mad at anyone who chooses to take their child there, but me personally no. I even opted my kid out of the school field trip cause 1) this thing had JUST happened, 2) last time my nephew went to the zoo one of the monkeys got out and everyone had to evacuate 3) everything you said in bold, and 4) when I see what the economy has done to the condition and quality of the stores and restaurants I used to frequent what makes me think places like zoo's and etc. may not be succumbing to similar laxity due to a bad economy. I think Johnnythan hit the nail right on the head when he said, they were hedging their bets and lost. Only a little boy lost. His. Life.

What316

It's really sad but the animals just doing what it was born to do like me and dancing when drunk

ldrosophila

I am personally against the lawsuit, the mother made the dangerous choice and now should live with the consequences of that choice and not blame the zoo for her own mistakes.

I am a mother myself, and I lift my daughter onto my shoulders or seat her on my chest shortly to see the animals in the exhibit better or just take a picture that she can look at later if there is no safe way for her to view the animals. The mother should be charged with negligence as she knowingly put her child in danger.

Even on your shoulders is dangerous someone could bump into you and you could lose your grip on her or she could do that weird jerk thing kids do when she was on your chest and fall off that way. I think it was a stupid mistake on the mother's part and she wasnt thinking but I think it was a common occurrence and other's dont think about the danger.

JennaM222

Against.

Parent lifted kid onto raining where i am sure it clearly states all over the zoo not to do that.

Some people.

ElyseL1

Against. That mother should be thrown in jail, its her fault that her child died. Sad as it is to say that, it's also true.

Becoming_A_Butterfly

A lot of people are saying how stupid the Mom was, but if she was so stupid then how come millions of parents have no problem lifting their children up on railings.

Just because a lot of people do it doesn't it make not stupid.

crimsoncat

Against. While I feel awful that a child has died I feel that the zoo took reasonable precautions. While people may lift their children on the fence, I believe that the a reasonable adult is aware dangers of teetering on a fence over a large pit filled with wild carnivores.

Can the zoo take more precautions? I suppose they could put netting up or make the wall solid concrete with viewing glass for the public, but I don't think they were negligent. The precautions they had were very reasonable.

chubby_checkers

Against. And I'm keeping the rest of my thoughts/comments to myself.

Curleycue0314

SO far against this it isn't even funny. This to me is like the Hot coffee and McDonald's being sued for it burning a customer. The idiocy and the ill use of common sense is one of the biggest diseases in America now. The simple fact that they want to hold the Zoo responsible for something that they did is asinine. My heart goes out to them for their loss, but it was their stupidity that caused it. Your actions are your responsiblity... no one elses.

I suspect you know little about the McDonald's case. Like, for instance, they were fully aware that the coffee as served was unfit for consumption.

But again, let's not bring the coffee case into it.

3rd degree burn to the bone in your crotch...that's all I'm going to say

But again, who would put hot coffee in your crotch! I don't even try and drink the stuff if my Hubs is driving because he is crazy!

ldrosophila

A lot of people are saying how stupid the Mom was, but if she was so stupid then how come millions of parents have no problem lifting their children up on railings. How many of us are really guilty of doing that? Did any of you ever take a kid to the zoo, and you know those exhibits are not easy for short kids to see, and pick them up even to peak over the railing. I see kids on top of shoulders in crowds sometimes and they almost get their head cracked on a wall because Dad is too tall. Most of us are just lucky we survived childhood.

Maybe in some sense you do have to protect people from stupidity. Why is it a requirement to have seat belts in a car? Because dumb people get in a car and cause accidents and death.

I'm actually for and against. I can see both sides of the argument. Ultimately it's not up to us to decided, but I can bet we've all been stupid with our lives or the lives of others at one point or another.

PS-zoos are terrible places to take a young child. They are hot, crowded, the animals are always hiding, and kids cant see into the exhibits most of the time.

You said that before and now I'm gonna have to ditto you. I'm not mad at anyone who chooses to take their child there, but me personally no. I even opted my kid out of the school field trip cause 1) this thing had JUST happened, 2) last time my nephew went to the zoo one of the monkeys got out and everyone had to evacuate 3) everything you said in bold, and 4) when I see what the economy has done to the condition and quality of the stores and restaurants I used to frequent what makes me think places like zoo's and etc. may not be succumbing to similar laxity due to a bad economy. I think Johnnythan hit the nail right on the head when he said, they were hedging their bets and lost. Only a little boy lost. His. Life.

So maybe I think the zoo should assume some culpability. Do they need to protect the idiots from themselves? Doesnt seem like a bet I would want to take. That would be like saying well we know we have this dangerous road that overlooks a 1000 foot drop, but so far we havent had an accident so lets not change the road.

IDK scary horrible tradgedy. Whatever they do, youre right, that child is dead. Even if they win the case no amount of money will bring him back.

crimsoncat

Just because a lot of people do it doesn't it make not stupid.

I want to second this. Lots of people text while driving and look how many people get killed. We know this is bad and yet we do it anyways because we think "not me, I'm only do this one short message. I'm not like the others".

I'm sure the mother thought she had an excellent grip on her child and that he would only be up there fore a second.

I feel she was probably a smart person in other aspects of her life (we all have a talent or two) which is why she felt that she was doing something dangerous as safely as she could. I would imagine she knew she was doing something dangerous, but she felt she would be the exception to that danger.

Should she have done it? Absolutely not.

Have we all done something stupid and reckless? Absolutely.

I just feel awful a child had to die from this scenario. That should never have happened.

All that said, I have some other thoughts on the mother which I will keep to myself. I still side with the zoo on this one.

ldrosophila

SO far against this it isn't even funny. This to me is like the Hot coffee and McDonald's being sued for it burning a customer. The idiocy and the ill use of common sense is one of the biggest diseases in America now. The simple fact that they want to hold the Zoo responsible for something that they did is asinine. My heart goes out to them for their loss, but it was their stupidity that caused it. Your actions are your responsiblity... no one elses.

I suspect you know little about the McDonald's case. Like, for instance, they were fully aware that the coffee as served was unfit for consumption.

But again, let's not bring the coffee case into it.

3rd degree burn to the bone in your crotch...that's all I'm going to say

But again, who would put hot coffee in your crotch! I don't even try and drink the stuff if my Hubs is driving because he is crazy!

She was actually parked putting the cream and sugar in when it spilled. I for one know I've spilled plenty of things in my car. I'm just lucky none of it was hot enough for me to have to spend a week in the hospital and get skin grafts.

moosegt35

A lot of people are saying how stupid the Mom was, but if she was so stupid then how come millions of parents have no problem lifting their children up on railings. How many of us are really guilty of doing that? Did any of you ever take a kid to the zoo, and you know those exhibits are not easy for short kids to see, and pick them up even to peak over the railing. I see kids on top of shoulders in crowds sometimes and they almost get their head cracked on a wall because Dad is too tall. Most of us are just lucky we survived childhood.

Maybe in some sense you do have to protect people from stupidity. Why is it a requirement to have seat belts in a car? Because dumb people get in a car and cause accidents and death.

I'm actually for and against. I can see both sides of the argument. Ultimately it's not up to us to decided, but I can bet we've all been stupid with our lives or the lives of others at one point or another.

PS-zoos are terrible places to take a young child. They are hot, crowded, the animals are always hiding, and kids cant see into the exhibits most of the time.

Because millions of people are stupid. It's dumb to do what she did and that is backed up with evidence of a dead child.

red_road

For it, sue them for millions!!!! Its the corporations responsibility to protect us from our own stupidity. That's why we have cigarette warning labels, caution this coffee is hot, oh and the best little packets that come in shoes they say do not eat. If I didn't have Corporations and Government looking out for me I might fall into a pit of wild dogs myself.

PS for those that don't get sarcasm this is it ^^^^

:flowerforyou:

JingleMuffin

Agianst, another reason to oppose zoos. Its allways so sad to go there.

moosegt35

SO far against this it isn't even funny. This to me is like the Hot coffee and McDonald's being sued for it burning a customer. The idiocy and the ill use of common sense is one of the biggest diseases in America now. The simple fact that they want to hold the Zoo responsible for something that they did is asinine. My heart goes out to them for their loss, but it was their stupidity that caused it. Your actions are your responsiblity... no one elses.

I suspect you know little about the McDonald's case. Like, for instance, they were fully aware that the coffee as served was unfit for consumption.

But again, let's not bring the coffee case into it.

3rd degree burn to the bone in your crotch...that's all I'm going to say

But again, who would put hot coffee in your crotch! I don't even try and drink the stuff if my Hubs is driving because he is crazy!

Why do people keep bringing this up? These aren't even in the same category at all. BTW, it had nothing to do with warnings on the coffee, the coffee was entirely too hot to be served and has sense been reduced in temp.

moosegt35

Just because a lot of people do it doesn't it make not stupid.

I want to second this. Lots of people text while driving and look how many people get killed. We know this is bad and yet we do it anyways because we think "not me, I'm only do this one short message. I'm not like the others".

I'm sure the mother thought she had an excellent grip on her child and that he would only be up there fore a second.

I feel she was probably a smart person in other aspects of her life (we all have a talent or two) which is why she felt that she was doing something dangerous as safely as she could. I would imagine she knew she was doing something dangerous, but she felt she would be the exception to that danger.

Should she have done it? Absolutely not.

Have we all done something stupid and reckless? Absolutely.

I just feel awful a child had to die from this scenario. That should never have happened.

All that said, I have some other thoughts on the mother which I will keep to myself. I still side with the zoo on this one.

Great example. I think I will sue apple for not making it so that my phone can't text while it's moving. I mean people do it all the time and the signs aren't doing anything so obviously Apple is responsible.

ldrosophila

For it, sue them for millions!!!! Its the corporations responsibility to protect us from our own stupidity. That's why we have cigarette warning labels, caution this coffee is hot, oh and the best little packets that come in shoes they say do not eat. If I didn't have Corporations and Government looking out for me I might fall into a pit of wild dogs myself.

PS for those that don't get sarcasm this is it ^^^^

:flowerforyou:

think about it though all those warnings happen for a reason. It's not PC but I laugh when I see the picture of a baby and a big X circle on the side of a bucket, but I shouldnt because that means at some point a child drowned in a bucket. We have signs all over our cars to remind us to turn off the airbags if we have a kid up front because at some point a child was killed when the parents ignored all safety precautions and put their child up in the front seat. Corporations arent stupid they dont want to be sued for million, but these signs we all see usually go up after something has happened. There were no warnings on cigarettes until they got sued for billions for the deaths of idiots who decided smoking was cool. It makes me laugh too about the silica packets, but once again that means at some point someone, probably a child, ate them.