
Tree Branch Kills 6-Month-Old: Who Is to Blame?
Filed under: Your Kids, Big Kids, Opinions, Health & Safety: Big Kids, Development: Big Kids, Behavior: Big Kids, Nutrition: Big Kids, Education: Big Kids, Activities: Big Kids, Gear Guides: Big Kids, Research Reveals: Big Kids, Expert Advice: Big Kids
On a sunny Saturday about a week ago, a healthy, leafy branch fell from a tree in Central Park and the unthinkable happened: It killed a 6-month-old girl who was in her mom's arms, just as the dad was about to take their picture. The mom was gravely injured. The dad is now taking the first steps toward filing a lawsuit.
Most likely it'll be against the city, the park, the maintenance crew, but it won't be against the real culprit, because it's a culprit we no longer acknowledge:
Fate.
When New York's Mayor Bloomberg called the accident "an act of God," a local paper jumped on him for being "glib." National Public Radio wondered if the $1 million or so the park spends on maintenance is enough. It quoted one vendor in the park who said he loves all the greenery, "But if it is going to kill people, cut it down."
Which is, of course, exactly where this kind of thinking takes us: A tragedy occurred. It must be the fault of someone -- the park staff, or even the trees themselves. So to make sure nothing like that ever happens again, let us cut down all the trees to make the park safe for children.
Even though, of course, it won't be a park anymore. I suppose it could be a big rectangle of grass, but if it rains and the grass is slippery, a kid could fall and break a leg, which could get infected and the child could die. So let's pave it over, just to be safe.
When you take it to extremes like that, this kind of, "Let's be absolutely safe!" thinking sounds silly. But the real consequence of believing all accidents are someone's fault is that it leads us take excessive precautions. And it leads us to blame.
Some of the excessive precautions our society takes are funny, like the warning labels on everything: "Do not fold stroller while baby is inside." "Do not iron clothes on body." Duh. But excessive precaution also to leads to things like removing all merry-go-rounds and see-saws from playgrounds, because a kid could get hurt. It's like chopping down all the trees in the park: We've gained safety ... but at what price?
The blame side of things is even more corrosive. In the olden days (when I was growing up), if a kid ran away from his mom at the carnival and ended up tripping and maybe breaking his arm, other grownups would sympathize with ... the mom! "That kind of thing happens," they'd say. Today it's, "Why weren't you holding his hand? I would never let go of my child. It's all your fault!"
The perception is that things always go right if we do everything right, and also that we can do everything right. (Ha!) Which means that if something goes wrong, there is always a person to blame. Not God. Not fate. Some heinous human. Maybe you.
But bad things do happen. Branches fall. Children trip. Life happens. The only way to avoid it is to avoid life itself.
Which seems to be the direction we're heading.
Related: The Real Reason Your In-Laws Don't Want You (and Your Baby) to Visit











ReaderComments (Page 2 of 2)
7-12-2010 @ 3:54PM
angelina said...I agree with Lenore's article that bad things happen in life, and sometimes at no fault of anyone. However, using this particular example, at this time so soon after the fact, was insensitive.
I also believe we should not stand in judgment of this parent for using whatever avenue he feels he should to mitigate damages due to this tragedy. It is clear he suffers damages. His baby died, and his wife is seriously injured because they were in a public park at the wrong place and at the wrong time.
It is because of these unforeseen accidents that the city, and home owners, carry insurance. Not to mention that he is within his rights to pursue this course of action should he be inclined to do so.
Reply
7-19-2010 @ 8:16PM
Jahn Ghalt said...In comment 6, "T" said:
"Should these poor folks have to take out a loan to pay for the funeral/burial of their child who was killed (by an accident) on city property?"
I recommend cremation - since it costs less, and not suing, since Attorney's at $200+/hour will soon overwhelm cremation costs.
Finally, I would suggest they go make another baby - after mom recuperates.
Reply
7-23-2010 @ 7:27AM
Dana said..."Finally, I would suggest they go make another baby - after mom recuperates. "
Oh, yes. Because you can always make another one, and so the pain from the first dead infant goes away!
The original article was not heartless, in my opinion. This comment, however, is.
7-19-2010 @ 8:26PM
Jahn Ghalt said...Comment #22, angelina said:
"It is because of these unforeseen accidents that the city, and home owners, carry insurance. Not to mention that he is within his rights to pursue this course of action should he be inclined to do so."
No doubt, illegitimate suits are within ones "rights", but that don't make it right. I would rather that first plaintiff's attorneys, then judges, then juries would consider that mischance (Skenazy calls it fate) is NOT something that we must all collectively pay for. Insurance companies are not the ultimate payors - the insured are. As for the City of New York, if they, like my hometown, self-insure, then all from whom the city takes taxes will ultimately pay.
Better to start an aid fund - then monies paid would by voluntary, rather than coercive as through taxation and/or the courts.
Reply