Is this really the Shop's fault?

[LoftyLottie]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20090922/tuk-boy-four-dies-in-somerfield-supermar-45dbed5.html

Should this boy have been swinging on a rail inside the supermarket? Is it not the fault of the parents in charge, who are now suing Somerfields. Personally I think too many children run around supermarkets misbehaving and causing havoc. A very sad story.

[albaqwerty]

hate to ask but if they were"so protective" of their little boy, why was he playing on the rail.
The next thing we'll hear is all supermarkets are removing tinned produce in case a can falls and breaks someones toe, will this insanity never end?

[LoftyLottie]

Quite!

It seems to me that there are parents that blame everything on everybody else. The person at fault was the parent.

[jackthehat]

Tragic accident.
But that's the thing about most accidents............they're accidental; no-one is at fault.
Unfortunately, these solicitors use reductive reasoning..........and they reach the end point that if the rail hadn't been there, the child would have lived, therefore the owner of the rail is liable.

I hope the case is thrown out..........

[craft1948]

absolutely agree........too many parents nowadays put blame elsewhere, when in my opinion the mother should have been in control of the child..........I do feel very sorry for her as she must feel guilty but fail to see why she should be suing the supermarket.....

[ludwig]

Nothing more or less than a tragic accident.
It's diffficult to see how the supermarket were negligent.

[redcrx]

very sad story, but what use will suing be?

The boy hit his head on a hard floor, the floor is meant to be hard, its not a play area.

A tragic accident and hopefully his parents will realise that perhaps suing the store is a knee-jerk reaction, looking for someone to blame for their terrible loss

[LoftyLottie]

I feel sorry for the family too Craft. I don't mean to be hard. But kids should be controlled in supermarkets. A lot seem to be rushing around treating the shop like a playground whist their parents shop. Poor little boy.

[Gromit]

A four year old should be supervised inches or feet from the parents not "yards away". Unless the rail was defective, I do not see how it can be the supermarket's fault.

[Rosetta]

I agree with everyone's comments that the supermarket could hardly be seen as negligent. Accidents do happen but a supermarket is not a playground and the parents should have been supervising more closely.
Suing the supermarket sadly is a reflection how litigious a society we have become.
Of course we all feel desperately sorry for the parents but suing the supermarket seems to be a way of not taking responsibility.

[ELVIS68]

Blame Culture,

They should be thinking of their son, not ££££££££s

[smudge]

I do feel for this family at losing such a beautiful little boy, however, if you don't keep your eyes on your children when shopping, etc., then you must face the consequences, 'specially if accidents such as this should happen.

If this rail had been faulty/loose & fell on him, then that would be another story - but he was swinging on it, (albeit innocently).

The 7 year old brat next door to us climbs all over his Dad's 4x4, hanging on the windscreen wipers, but his parents don't bat an eye lid. No doubt if he fell off & broke his neck, they would complain that the car body or wipers were at fault!

RIP the Somerfields little boy.

[LoftyLottie]

I wonder what the rail was for? Certainly not for swinging on! Does everything have to been child friendly everywhere. As albequerty implies if a child climbed up a shelf and the tins fell on top of him that wouldn't be the supermarket's fault. Mind you, I did see a mother letting her child sit on top of the french sticks in a bakery section!! I didn't buy any bread!!

[LoftyLottie]

Children can also cause others to have accidents by their bad behaviour. I have seen a mother with her three children on their trikes riding through a branch of Budgens. I was amazed that the staff didn't turn her out.

[albaqwerty]

tragic accident yes. very sorry for his parents and siblings.
but why sue the supermarket, why not the architect or the builders?

[smudge]

I was in Sainsbury's a couple of weeks ago & a toddler was standing inside, constantly making the automatic doors open & close. His Mother & friend stood there laughing their heads off at/with him.

Now if this toddler had caught his fingers in the same doors, I wonder what his Mother would have done about it?

[LoftyLottie]

Exactly, Smudge!

[smudge]

Don't agree albaqwerty - why sue the architect or the builders??

This poor child was swinging on a rail - there are lots of rails in lots of shops, but they aren't meant for swinging on.

[ELVIS68]

Sue the parents for neglect?

[albaqwerty]

twas a poor attempt at sarcasm on my part
The supermarket wouldn't be there if it hadn't been designed by an architect or built.

The safety shutter at my local Somerfield collapsed on a 2yr olds head a few years back.
Fortunately child was fine (rushed to A&E) Manager of shop was mortified. Parents didn't sue.
New style of shuttering was subsequently installed.

[smudge]

Oh ok, I see what you mean alberqwerty!

Also, it's a bit like when you go for a meal & 'some' parents allow their 'bored' children to run around the restaurant! Grrr!

If the child falls over & knocks its head on a step/chair/table - it's the parents fault - not the restaurant's furniture!