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
It seems that this argument comes down to 2 camps.
A - Those who believe that that McDonalds bears no responsibility for the 3rd degree burns suffered by the 80 year old lady and that the temperature of the coffee is of no relevance. In addition that the history of other cases of spills causing burns should be ignored.
A - "It was her fault for being stupid, that she got 3rd degree burns"
B - Those that feel that McDonalds did not exercise due care in serving scalding hot coffee at a temperature that would cause 3rd degree burns within 3 seconds. Already knowing that people could spill this on themselves, had in the past, and that the temperature was unsafe.
B - " Yes it was her fault that she spilt coffee on herself, BUT that the company knew that this could happen AND that the coffee was served at an unsafe temperature. "
In my business life, and also when i am coaching kids, it is my responsibility to ensure that my actions or inaction does not cause an uneccessary degree of risk to others.
McDonalds have a duty of care to take reasonable steps to ensure the safety of their customers. In this case their inaction in not lowering the coffee temperature, despite previous cases, was negligent in this duty.
The 80 year old lady deserved to have messed up clothes and some skin redness from the coffee spill, she did not deserve to have skin grafts and 3rd degree burns.
It seems that this argument comes down to 2 camps.
A - Those who believe that that McDonalds bears no responsibility for the 3rd degree burns suffered by the 80 year old lady and that the temperature of the coffee is of no relevance. In addition that the history of other cases of spills causing burns should be ignored.
A - "It was her fault for being stupid, that she got 3rd degree burns"
B - Those that feel that McDonalds did not exercise due care in serving scalding hot coffee at a temperature that would cause 3rd degree burns within 3 seconds. Already knowing that people could spill this on themselves, had in the past, and that the temperature was unsafe.
B - " Yes it was her fault that she spilt coffee on herself, BUT that the company knew that this could happen AND that the coffee was served at an unsafe temperature. "
In my business life, and also when i am coaching kids, it is my responsibility to ensure that my actions or inaction does not cause an uneccessary degree of risk to others.
McDonalds have a duty of care to take reasonable steps to ensure the safety of their customers. In this case their inaction in not lowering the coffee temperature, despite previous cases, was negligent in this duty.
The 80 year old lady deserved to have messed up clothes and some skin redness from the coffee spill, she did not deserve to have skin grafts and 3rd degree burns.
