I started diving off of starting blocks when I was eight years old. I am now 51, and train at the Y, almost always alone, as there is no Masters program in the county where I live, or in any of the immediately adjacent counties. (There are several age group programs.) I want to work on my starts, but none of the Y's where I swim will let me use the blocks - saying that a national Y policy prohibits anyone from using the blocks unless a team/club coach is on the deck.
I have never heard of anyone suing a YMCA because of an accident on a starting block.
Yes, perhaps a coach would be valuable to me in this regard, but I'm not looking for a coach - I need and want a cooperative facility. The age groups' program schedules are not conducive to my schedule, and besides, the age group coaches already have enough on their hands during those times with lanes full of kids working their programs. I also am not excited about having to dodge those kids to do the work I need to do.
Anyone find a way to conquer this litigation-fear-induced insanity yet? Thank you.
Parents
Former Member
To Aquageek: You write: "You'd almost have to agree that your livelihood depends solely on the existence of insurance, huh?" No I would not. I am not a personal injury lawyer. My practice is civil rights and employment law. My decisions regarding tactics are never based on the presence, or lack thereof, of insurance. I can tell you, however, that cases where there is no insurance tend to resolve much more quickly and efficiently than those where there is an insurance policy. I could explain why, but it would be a treatise. If you want to continue this discussion off-forum, I'd be happy to directly email you.
To Leonard and Tom: Please re-read the facts of the case. McDonald's sold coffee at temperature that was not fit for human consumption. McDonald's had notice of multiple injuries from their practice. McDonald's could have paid her medical bills and been done with it, but decided to press the matter to trial. So a jury of citizens, with full knowledge of all of the facts, made the call. What is so outlandish about that?
carl botterud
To Aquageek: You write: "You'd almost have to agree that your livelihood depends solely on the existence of insurance, huh?" No I would not. I am not a personal injury lawyer. My practice is civil rights and employment law. My decisions regarding tactics are never based on the presence, or lack thereof, of insurance. I can tell you, however, that cases where there is no insurance tend to resolve much more quickly and efficiently than those where there is an insurance policy. I could explain why, but it would be a treatise. If you want to continue this discussion off-forum, I'd be happy to directly email you.
To Leonard and Tom: Please re-read the facts of the case. McDonald's sold coffee at temperature that was not fit for human consumption. McDonald's had notice of multiple injuries from their practice. McDonald's could have paid her medical bills and been done with it, but decided to press the matter to trial. So a jury of citizens, with full knowledge of all of the facts, made the call. What is so outlandish about that?
carl botterud
