Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Injured child gets 11.5 million euros

Options
12357…27

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    micropig wrote: »
    Renovated house, car, holidays, car insurance..you might say they're for the child but she will benefit from them too, why should she benefit at all?

    (And I'd nearly guarantee all the money won't be spent on ramps etc.)

    see here's the thing. You say "nearly" because you don't know for sure. You don't know for sure because you don't know how the system works.

    You see a situation like this and all you can think of is how the money can be abused - that's fine, that reflects on your experiences. Maybe you think that the mother will do it because it's what you'd do - I don't know.

    The problem is, I *can* guarantee that every penny of that money will have to be justified, accounted for, verified and approved before it gets spent. Why? because the primary concern for the fund administrator is ensure that the money lasts for the rest of the childs life.

    how will the mother benefit from a renovated house? Wheelchair ramps? disabled toilets? Oxygen lines? is that what you'd want in your house? for your child?

    And yeah - she'll get to go on holidays, possibly. She'll get to see her son, the son she crippled, sitting in his chair, looking at all the other children running around in the sun enjoying themselves, knowing that it's her mistake that means her son can't do any of that. I'd say she's rubbing her hands in glee isn't she?


  • Options
    #123
    UrbanSea
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,335 ✭✭✭✭UrbanSea


    jasonwarren wrote: »
    every one that was happy for the child should be shot

    What do you mean by happy for the child?


  • Options
    #124
    UrbanSea
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,335 ✭✭✭✭UrbanSea


    philstar wrote: »
    thats up to the parents or next of kin, surely

    I know. Yet if a parent compassionately killed their child who was in that scenario they get done for murder as far as I know


  • Options
    #125
    stovelid
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,252 ✭✭✭✭stovelid


    micropig wrote: »

    What's the betting, the child will need a 70' telly, gold taps in the bathroom etc..even if the mother doesn't?

    That's just a mean-spirited and pretty distasteful surmise.


  • Options
    #126
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    goose2005 wrote: »
    Isn't that a bit like the joke where a boy is on trial for murdering his parents, and the lawyer asks the judge to be lenient - after all, his client is an orphan?
    Not unless you think the mother wanted to disable her child.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    doubletrouble?
    Closed Accounts Posts: 310 ✭✭doubletrouble?


    mickydoomsux wrote: »
    Not while i was driving. It's a pretty simple thing to focus on because concentrating on your driving is all you should be doing in that situation.

    Getting so distracted that you veer into oncoming traffic shows you aren't fit to be in control of a vehicle. It's a pathetic excuse, frankly.

    "Distracted" in this case probably means she was playing with her phone or the radio or somesuch. You know, the usual behaviour for idiots you see swerving about the roads.
    according to the mother it was her son who distracted her. as in human society she's blaming someone else for her own actions and stupidity. fact is as i already pointed out. she was uninsured. there was nothing to distract her mind when she put her son into the car and made that fatal move of driving out of her house uninsured. was going to say mistake or error neither of which is the case. she deliberately and knowingly got into her car without insurance.
    now all of you posting in this thread. i ask you.
    take her child out of her car and put him into the oncoming car she hit doing exactly the same damage and injuries. would you still have the same sympathy for her. personally i'd be on here calling for her head on a block.
    she could've easily done the same thing to someone else child.


  • Options
    #128
    MagicSean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,897 ✭✭✭MagicSean


    micropig wrote: »
    Renovated house, car, holidays, car insurance..you might say they're for the child but she will benefit from them too, why should she benefit at all?

    (And I'd nearly guarantee all the money won't be spent on ramps etc.)

    And yes, I'd question the parenting skills of any parent who drives with their child uninsured, Has she been ordered to undertake parenting classes?

    Edit: and the fact she blames the disabled boy for distracting her says it all really

    While you might decide to spend this payment on yourself instead of your disabled child there is nothing to suggest that this mother would.

    You still haven't explained how her having insurance would have changed anything at all in relation to this case.


  • Options
    #129
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    doubletrouble? wrote: »
    according to the mother it was her son who distracted her. .

    where did you hear that?


  • Options
    #130
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,215 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    stovelid wrote: »
    micropig wrote: »

    What's the betting, the child will need a 70' telly, gold taps in the bathroom etc..even if the mother doesn't?

    That's just a mean-spirited and pretty distasteful surmise.
    It smacks of "I don't like someone else getting a load of money" despite the circumstances. Much as I despise the word and accusation usually, "begrudgery" seems to be at play here.


  • Options
    #131
    damienirel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 949 ✭✭✭damienirel


    11 million quid - don't see how they came to that figure?
    Looks like the judicial system thinks that the minimum one could survive on without legs is 11 mill?

    Maybe the young lad could buy that house in Killiney for his mum - sure she deserves it!

    What about all the disabled people in Ireland that have been born without legs etc. Do they get 11 mill aswell?

    Judicial system out of touch? - Whats new?

    Ireland = The Ultimate Banana Republic


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    doubletrouble?
    Closed Accounts Posts: 310 ✭✭doubletrouble?


    tbh wrote: »
    knowing that it's her mistake that means her son can't do any of that.
    this was no mistake she deliberately put her son in danger by driving an uninsured car. if my cars not insured i dont drive it no matter what circumstances i'm in. i get someone else to help or a neighbour or someone driving to the school to drop him there.


  • Options
    #133
    Ellis Dee
    Registered Users Posts: 2,512 ✭✭✭Ellis Dee


    UrbanSea wrote: »
    This case also raises a question about ethics.

    I for one would rather die than be unable to breathe for myself nor move. Death would be better than sitting motionless all day for the rest of your life, unable to communicate

    I see where you're coming from, all right. The thought of being in that situation made a cold shiver run down my spine. As for the ethics of the matter, I wholeheartedly support the idea of people being able to opt voluntarily out of life (i.e. undergo euthanasia) if that is genuinely their informed choice, and no religious or other organisations should be allowed to meddle in the way that some have done here in the past in cases of patients in a persistent vegetative state.

    But, piling horror upon horror, there are cases when a functioning mind is trapped within a paralysed body, and the poor person isn't even able to communicate his or her wish to die.:eek:


  • Options
    #134
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    UrbanSea wrote: »
    The interest of the public can differ.
    Dangerous driving perhaps? I'm sure that there has been people prosecuted on less evidence than that.
    What evidence for dangerous driving are you aware of?
    The newspapers are reporting that she 'suffered a momentary lapse of concentration'. Do you know something about this case that the rest of us don't?


  • Options
    #135
    UrbanSea
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,335 ✭✭✭✭UrbanSea


    damienirel wrote: »
    11 million quid - don't see how they came to that figure?
    Looks like the judicial system thinks that the minimum one could survive on without legs is 11 mill?

    Maybe the young lad could buy that house in Killiney for his mum - sure she deserves it!

    What about all the disabled people in Ireland that have been born without legs etc. Do they get 11 mill aswell?

    Judicial system out of touch? - Whats new?

    Ireland = The Ultimate Banana Republic


    I don't think you understand the full extent of his injuries. Yes he is in a wheelchair, but he is unable to breathe without the use of a tube, and as far as I'm aware (may be wrong) he cannot talk or move requiring 24 hours a day care. A little worse than losing the use of your legs.


  • Options
    #136
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    damienirel wrote: »
    11 million quid - don't see how they came to that figure?
    Looks like the judicial system thinks that the minimum one could survive on without legs is 11 mill?

    Maybe the young lad could buy that house in Killiney for his mum - sure she deserves it!

    What about all the disabled people in Ireland that have been born without legs etc. Do they get 11 mill aswell?

    Judicial system out of touch? - Whats new?

    Ireland = The Ultimate Banana Republic
    No. Just you.


  • Options
    #137
    tbh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    doubletrouble? wrote: »
    this was no mistake she deliberately put her son in danger by driving an uninsured car. if my cars not insured i dont drive it no matter what circumstances i'm in. i get someone else to help or a neighbour or someone driving to the school to drop him there.

    I don't think you understand how insurance works. The risk was exactly the same, whether she was insured or not.


  • Options
    #138
    UrbanSea
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,335 ✭✭✭✭UrbanSea


    dvpower wrote: »
    What evidence for dangerous driving are you aware of?
    The newspapers are reporting that she 'suffered a momentary lapse of concentration'. Do you know something about this case that the rest of us don't?

    I said that I'm sure people have been prosecuted for it on less.

    The fact that she drove without insurance should equate to dangerous driving, just a suggestion.


  • Options
    #139
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,568 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    If it hasn't been mentioned already, the woman involved will in all probability, never get insurance again for driving in her life or will be heavily penalised in that respect alone.

    As for other penalties she might be suffering or as some would see, should be also be suffering from additionally, I cannot comment.
    I suspect however that for the rest of her natural life, she alone in dark days will cry for the rest of her life and suffer mentally for that which happened when she took a vehicle out in the wrong.

    Who can really say what punishment is enough or not enough in this case?
    I can't. I don't know the full details.
    She might deserve some form of state punishment as part of the state officially stating that she did wrong but what that further possible punishment should be, I don't honestly know.


  • Options
    #140
    damienirel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 949 ✭✭✭damienirel


    UrbanSea wrote: »
    I don't think you understand the full extent of his injuries. Yes he is in a wheelchair, but he is unable to breathe without the use of a tube, and as far as I'm aware (may be wrong) he cannot talk or move requiring 24 hours a day care. A little worse than losing the use of your legs.

    Yes but how do they arrive at such an astronomical figure??
    Is it because they (The Judicial System) are so out of touch with how normal people live. Because they're so well paid themselves?


  • Options
    #141
    UrbanSea
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,335 ✭✭✭✭UrbanSea


    Ellis Dee wrote: »
    I see where you're coming from, all right. The thought of being in that situation made a cold shiver run down my spine. As for the ethics of the matter, I wholeheartedly support the idea of people being able to opt voluntarily out of life (i.e. undergo euthanasia) if that is genuinely their informed choice, and no religious or other organisations should be allowed to meddle in the way that some have done here in the past in cases of patients in a persistent vegetative state.

    But, piling horror upon horror, there are cases when a functioning mind is trapped within a paralysed body, and the poor person isn't even able to communicate his or her wish to die.:eek:

    That idea would genuinely frighten anyone


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,215 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    dvpower wrote: »
    UrbanSea wrote: »
    The interest of the public can differ.
    Dangerous driving perhaps? I'm sure that there has been people prosecuted on less evidence than that.
    What evidence for dangerous driving are you aware of?
    The newspapers are reporting that she 'suffered a momentary lapse of concentration'. Do you know something about this case that the rest of us don't?
    And there is distraction you're in control of, like texting, and distraction you're not in control of, like something giving you a fright. Fair play to those here who are never affected by the latter - you must be some types of gods or something.

    Also, what's the stupid Killiney house strawman about? Where is it even implied she or the kid are looking for luxury?

    Ireland - not the ultimate banana republic to be realistic.


  • Options
    #143
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    dvpower wrote: »
    What evidence for dangerous driving are you aware of?
    The newspapers are reporting that she 'suffered a momentary lapse of concentration'. Do you know something about this case that the rest of us don't?
    A "momentary lapse in concentration" to the extent that you cross into another lane with oncoming traffic is surely dangerous driving.


  • Options
    #144
    UrbanSea
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,335 ✭✭✭✭UrbanSea


    damienirel wrote: »
    Yes but how do they arrive at such an astronomical figure??
    Is it because they (The Judicial System) are so out of touch with how normal people live. Because they're so well paid themselves?

    I'd only be guessing as to how they came to that figure.

    Though I'd imagine medication costs, the cost of carers, hospital bills are not cheap. And this is for his entire life.


  • Options
    #145
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 25,611 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Biggins wrote: »
    If it hasn't been mentioned already, the woman involved will in all probability, never get insurance again for driving in her life
    She really seemed to give a **** before.


  • Options
    #146
    Seachmall
    Registered Users Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭Seachmall


    damienirel wrote: »
    Looks like the judicial system thinks that the minimum one could survive on without legs is 11 mill?

    He's not paraplegic, he's quadriplegic. He has no feeling in anything from his neck down. He didn't just loose the use of his legs, he has lost the feeling of his arms and torso as well. Depending on if it's a result of spinal damage or brain damage it could have other serious complications down the road, and that's only the damage that has been reported on (because it's a major one). He probably had other damage done too (anything from broken bones to failing organs).
    Yes but how do they arrive at such an astronomical figure??
    Is it because they (The Judicial System) are so out of touch with how normal people live. Because they're so well paid themselves?
    Or because they have professionals take the various costs into consideration and you have no idea what you're talking about.


  • Options
    #147
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    seamus wrote: »
    We don't know the reasoning behind it. His young age (and therefore a long life of care) and the level of care required are probably the primary determining factors.

    That's what I would like to see a breakdown of the award for.

    If a total stranger had knocked him down and caused the same injuries, the same need for carers (the parents) and the same requirement for level of lifelong care etc I wonder if the award would have been quite so high. It would also be interesting to know if the €11.5m award is an interim payment or a once-off, I know there was legislation supposed to be done up dealing with how to go about providing for lifelong care by making awards on an on-going basis.

    http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/cork-teen-secures-16m-settlement-in-medical-negligence-case-454196.html

    Should read €1.6m in the above.


  • Options
    #148
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    UrbanSea wrote: »
    I said that I'm sure people have been prosecuted for it on less.
    How are you sure if you don't know what the evidence is in this case?
    UrbanSea wrote: »
    The fact that she drove without insurance should equate to dangerous driving, just a suggestion.
    No it shouldn't.


  • Options
    #149
    blackwhite
    Registered Users Posts: 8,488 ✭✭✭blackwhite


    tempura wrote: »
    Oh for gods sake, it was an accident, Im sure she feels bad enough and more then likely will for the rest of her life.


    It was an accident that she got into the car and drove it whilst knowing that she had no insurance?

    Hope MIBI sue her for every cent of the award.


  • Options
    #150
    micropig
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,366 ✭✭✭micropig


    Dudess wrote: »
    It says nothing really - did she actually say it?
    Btw, on what basis would you "almost guarantee" what the money won't be spent on seeing as you have never even met the woman? And are you wilfully ignoring the fact that the spending of the money will be controlled by the courts?
    The child needs those facilities to help manage his disability - where exactly is the proxy benefit to his mother who hardly wants her child to be disabled?

    Horrible attitudes on this thread - not a fuk given about the kid, only punishing the mother. Always the way in these discussions...


    Actually, if you read my posts, it is the child I'm thinking of

    Is it in the child's best interests to be left with an irresponsible mother, especially given the fact that he is quadriplegic and incapable of defending himself?

    Has the mother been given parenting classes?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    Deleted User wrote: »
    A "momentary lapse in concentration" to the extent that you cross into another lane with oncoming traffic is surely dangerous driving.
    Why?


Advertisement