osarusan wrote: » Since the 2012-13 season, so at least 4 years. You would think that at some point in that time, they'd realise how utterly stupid the case was.
jackwigan wrote: » Can we as a society agree to ban the term "snowflake"? Makes me twitch a little every time I read it.
DonkeyDick1992 wrote: » I was just about to post about this . I seen in an article that the father was the couch before the other man was so obviously jealousy got the better.. And I think Ireland is now the new country for sueing.. everyday there is a story on the paper about a stupid case.. It's ridiculous what some people are like.. Money money money... I pity the poor young lad,just imagine the bullying he has to go through for his parents greed,
Paulzx wrote: » What was the name of that "psychologist " again?
pauliebdub wrote: » It's outrageous that there isn't some mechanism in place to prevent such petty frivolous cases coming before the courts in the first place.
biko wrote: » Seems the dad is a "my way or the highway" kinda guy.
Taxburden carrier wrote: » Google that psychologist
222233 wrote: » With all due respect the Psychologist, I believe actually a Psychiatrist (correct me if I'm wrong) was doing her job by assessing a child and presenting that information to the court. Psychiatrists are responsible for their patients, not the court cases their patients are involved in. She diagnosed PTSD on the back of this event, the actual case itself has nothing to do with her work, she provided information on a patient she assessed, as is her job.. Psychiatrists are HIGHLY trained specialists in their field, irrespective of my opinions on the case I think it's most likely her assessment of PTSD being caused by the events is accurate, if that is the information she presented to the court.
languagenerd wrote: » Jesus. As others have said, sports is an area where kids learn to deal with setbacks. You don't always get to win, you don't always get to play, you're not always the best person for the role (or sometimes, you are, and another person gets it over you anyway). That's where parents are meant to step in, acknowledge the child's disappointment and teach them (a) to be proud of what they achieved even when they don't win and/or (b) how to work harder for the next time. You don't just tell them they were wronged, they're the best and you'll get back at the person who didn't choose them/beat them. He's 18 now - how will this kid deal with not getting the job after an interview? Getting overlooked for promotion? Not getting his first choice in college? Not getting a house/flat he puts in a bid for? Getting turned down by a potential date?
Anita Blow wrote: » The psychologist that diagnosed this kid with PTSD needs to have their license to practice reviewed. Not only is it extremely unfair on a family to give them a false diagnosis, but it is extremely negligent to make one. There is absolutely no way the psychologist could have deemed this kid meeting the criteria for PTSD at any point.
A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: » The fact that it didn't happen appears to suggest the existence of some psychiatric evidence in terms of the boy (as he was) suffering from PTSD. As the above poster said, I don't necessarily doubt that the boy had PTSD, but that may be moreso a reflection of his weak coping abilities than a breach of the club's duty of care.
storker wrote: » The only problem with that is that people could end up afraid to take cases even if justified, because of fear of having to lose their home in order to pay costs, which can mount up very quickly. That doesn't mean, however, that they couldn't at least make some contribution based on their income and assets.
Big Bag of Chips wrote: Don't forget he was 13/14 when all this happened. Very young and very much under the influence of his parents who did seem to have big problems with the team management. I'm sure the child wasn't brought home, and the matter dropped. I'd guess he was brought into a house where he had to listen to his parents raging on and on about how he was being singled out and bullied, how upset he was, how he lost his chance to play in the UK etc. If you tell a child something often enough, they will fully believe it. Especially coming from the two people they trust most.
pontoonz wrote: » he'd be at home at liverpool
Sofiztikated wrote: » Wonder will they take a case against the courts, for PTSD of the case being dropped? You just know they're at home, seething about the unfair treatment they received. Lose? LOSE? THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT!
skankkuvhima wrote: » That's rubbish though, is there no onus on the solicitor to pipe up and say "ahh, this hasn't a chance in hell of winning, don't do it. If you do it you will be stuck with all the costs"? Or is it the case that no matter how daft the case I'll find a solicitor to represent me? If I want to sue the state because the lizard people running the world are out to get me will I be able to find a solicitor to stand up in court and argue this?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e0a528cbc0a6c66fda22b51f3da0d9d1.svg)
