Planet Fitness Lawsuit

Off Topic
21

[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:

[quote]bdocksaints75 wrote:
he might not have been able to save her or do anything anyway, who is to say 911 would have reached her in time[/quote]

But does that justify not really doing anything at all? He might not have been able to save her, but he also might have, he let his job security get in the way of his humanity and now he’ll have to live with that.[/quote]

Except they’d slap on some sex offender charges and sue him for blablabla, and his life would have been effectively ruined.

22

[quote]bdocksaints75 wrote:

[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:

[quote]bdocksaints75 wrote:
he might not have been able to save her or do anything anyway, who is to say 911 would have reached her in time[/quote]

But does that justify not really doing anything at all? He might not have been able to save her, but he also might have, he let his job security get in the way of his humanity and now he’ll have to live with that.[/quote]
I can agree with that 100% he should have tried to do something. But even if he had and she died anyway there might still be a lawsuit saying that he shouldn’t have done anything.[/quote]

That’s arguably more insane that he would be sued for trying to save her life, everything about this is insane, I give up on all of these funky lawsuits y’all have. The guy should not have to be in an environment where he’s scared of losing his livelihood because of something written down and tossed into a file years ago, there should be exceptions, if not an outright re-interpretation of the law. I’m glad I don’t have to look over my shoulder at the risk of getting a lawsuit thrown at me.

23

It seems today in America that whenever a tragedy happens or something that shouldn’t happen people always look for someone or something to blame and they want to change a rule, law or whatever. Bad stuff happens that’s a really shitty way too look at it but there isn’t always an answer and a way to fix everything.

24

Planet Fitness Employee’s Fear Of Ladies Room Allegedly Caused Woman’s Death, Lawsuit Claims…

^That is the headline…now please explain how that employee’s fear had caused her death…his fear…‘caused’ her death…

25

[quote]goldfingers25 wrote:
Planet Fitness Employee’s Fear Of Ladies Room Allegedly Caused Woman’s Death, Lawsuit Claims…

^That is the headline…now please explain how that employee’s fear had caused her death…his fear…‘caused’ her death…[/quote]
because they assume that if he had gone in he would have saved her life…after all he is an employee of planet fitness and they don’t just higher anyone.

26

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:

[quote]bdocksaints75 wrote:
he might not have been able to save her or do anything anyway, who is to say 911 would have reached her in time[/quote]

But does that justify not really doing anything at all? He might not have been able to save her, but he also might have, he let his job security get in the way of his humanity and now he’ll have to live with that.[/quote]

Except they’d slap on some sex offender charges and sue him for blablabla, and his life would have been effectively ruined.[/quote]

…Which is ridiculous, that kind of shit should be revised immediately, hell multiple staff members should have run in there and done everything they possibly could. If his life isn’t already ruined having to deal with the chance that his recommended inaction may have solidified that lady’s death, then something there is very, very wrong.

27

hire*** disclaimer I never proof read anything

28

[quote]bdocksaints75 wrote:

[quote]goldfingers25 wrote:
Planet Fitness Employee’s Fear Of Ladies Room Allegedly Caused Woman’s Death, Lawsuit Claims…

^That is the headline…now please explain how that employee’s fear had caused her death…his fear…‘caused’ her death…[/quote]
because they assume that if he had gone in he would have saved her life…after all he is an employee of planet fitness and they don’t just higher anyone.[/quote]

That’s invalid…he still didn’t cause her death…it ‘MAY’ have resulted in her death, the fact he did not go in, however the fact still remains, he didn’t ‘CAUSE’ it.

Put it this way…if he caused it, then everyone in there caused it…

29

[quote]bdocksaints75 wrote:
It seems today in America that whenever a tragedy happens or something that shouldn’t happen people always look for someone or something to blame and they want to change a rule, law or whatever. Bad stuff happens that’s a really shitty way too look at it but there isn’t always an answer and a way to fix everything.[/quote]

When something that shouldn’t have happened, happens, there should always be something to blame. It’s not entirely unreasonable to expect a law that commends employees for standing and waiting for a person’s life to slowly fade away with the caveat of losing their money and jobs has some inherent fucking errors because of it’s generality. If there needs to be some kind of law involved, then the guy should have helped, and assuming the lady happened to live, she could then decide to create a court case or continue on with her newly restored consciousness and chance at life. But it’s insane that it’s recommended for an employee to stand by and avoid helping because some may think he’s being “too forward”.

Maybe you guys couldn’t snap your fingers, scribble out a sentence in a book and make sure this never happens again, but your lawmakers could at least try to make this more malleable to exceptions when it’s appropriate. At the very least, try.

30

[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:

[quote]bdocksaints75 wrote:
It seems today in America that whenever a tragedy happens or something that shouldn’t happen people always look for someone or something to blame and they want to change a rule, law or whatever. Bad stuff happens that’s a really shitty way too look at it but there isn’t always an answer and a way to fix everything.[/quote]

When something that shouldn’t have happened, happens, there should always be something to blame. It’s not entirely unreasonable to expect a law that commends employees for standing and waiting for a person’s life to slowly fade away with the caveat of losing their money and jobs has some inherent fucking errors because of it’s generality. If there needs to be some kind of law involved, then the guy should have helped, and assuming the lady happened to live, she could then decide to create a court case or continue on with her newly restored consciousness and chance at life. But it’s insane that it’s recommended for an employee to stand by and avoid helping because some may think he’s being “too forward”.

Maybe you guys couldn’t snap your fingers, scribble out a sentence in a book and make sure this never happens again, but your lawmakers could at least try to make this more malleable to exceptions when it’s appropriate. At the very least, try.[/quote]

I don’t exactly know what the case was or if he had done anything it would have mattered but I do agree that he should have done something.

31

I guess the point I was trying to make was that even if you make a law it may not always change the outcome of situations maybe the company should have training for there employees on situations like this. Its easy to be an armchair QB and say what you should have done or who should be responsible.

32

[quote]bdocksaints75 wrote:

[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:

[quote]bdocksaints75 wrote:
It seems today in America that whenever a tragedy happens or something that shouldn’t happen people always look for someone or something to blame and they want to change a rule, law or whatever. Bad stuff happens that’s a really shitty way too look at it but there isn’t always an answer and a way to fix everything.[/quote]

When something that shouldn’t have happened, happens, there should always be something to blame. It’s not entirely unreasonable to expect a law that commends employees for standing and waiting for a person’s life to slowly fade away with the caveat of losing their money and jobs has some inherent fucking errors because of it’s generality. If there needs to be some kind of law involved, then the guy should have helped, and assuming the lady happened to live, she could then decide to create a court case or continue on with her newly restored consciousness and chance at life. But it’s insane that it’s recommended for an employee to stand by and avoid helping because some may think he’s being “too forward”.

Maybe you guys couldn’t snap your fingers, scribble out a sentence in a book and make sure this never happens again, but your lawmakers could at least try to make this more malleable to exceptions when it’s appropriate. At the very least, try.[/quote]

I don’t exactly know what the case was or if he had done anything it would have mattered but I do agree that he should have done something. [/quote]

Yeah, don’t worry man I’m not trying to bury you alive here, it’s just the idea of the law (which I haven’t really heard the specifics of in itself) and how it stopped a potential rescue of a person’s life. If he didn’t properly know CPR (which he should have if he works in such a physically stressful environment as a gym [I know, I know, barely a gym]), then he should have stood back because there’s no guarantee that any of his efforts wouldn’t hinder her chance of survival out of ignorance. But if he knew how to properly apply CPR until the arrival of an ambulance, then he should have done it regardless of what that law states, because it’s the right thing to do and ethical reasoning seems more appropriate in that situation than a rigid and unchanging slew of words on a sheet of paper.

33

[quote]bdocksaints75 wrote:
I guess the point I was trying to make was that even if you make a law it may not always change the outcome of situations maybe the company should have training for there employees on situations like this. Its easy to be an armchair QB and say what you should have done or who should be responsible.[/quote]

Yes, my point is that the law has it’s faults and in that environment and many like it there should be specific exceptions. Hell, in any real business establishment an employee (or even customer under the supervision of an employee/manager) with a respectable knowledge of basic medical practice should have the green light to attempt to save the victim’s life or at least keep her in a semi-stable condition until on duty medics arrive. Sometimes making a law may change the outcome of a situation, and whether that outcome would be rendered better or worse would be dependent entirely upon the law, how it is written, and it’s intent.

34

[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:

[quote]bdocksaints75 wrote:
I guess the point I was trying to make was that even if you make a law it may not always change the outcome of situations maybe the company should have training for there employees on situations like this. Its easy to be an armchair QB and say what you should have done or who should be responsible.[/quote]

Yes, my point is that the law has it’s faults and in that environment and many like it there should be specific exceptions. Hell, in any real business establishment an employee (or even customer under the supervision of an employee/manager) with a respectable knowledge of basic medical practice should have the green light to attempt to save the victim’s life or at least keep her in a semi-stable condition until on duty medics arrive. Sometimes making a law may change the outcome of a situation, and whether that outcome would be rendered better or worse would be dependent entirely upon the law, how it is written, and it’s intent.[/quote]

I agree, its just sad that a law is what is needed in certain cases.

35

[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:

[quote]stokes1989 wrote:

[quote]stefan128 wrote:

[quote]Stiglitz wrote:
I heard she was black and he was a “white Hispanic” [/quote]

Hahahahaahah, good one!!!

Seriously though, he has no lawful duty to go and help that woman, correct??[/quote]

I’m pretty sure he doesn’t. administering aide to someone is a choice, on both ends. If the person who is at the scene does not feel comfortable administering aide, then they are not required to. Also the victim has the right to deny the responder the right to administer aide. However the responder is protected from any retribution by “Good samaritin laws” which prohibits any legal retaliation from the victim towards the responder.[/quote]

Is that really a thing there? That people suffering from heart attacks and strokes actually deny aid? Who the fuck ever wilfully denies aid unless it’s a suicide attempt? That’s insanity.

The gym employee might have felt uncomfortable entering the changing rooms and applying aid to the woman, but I’m sure the woman was a damn sight more uncomfortable in the throws of a slow and agonizing death. It’s incredible that the gym employee would be too scared of the poster rules of the gym to stop some ladies memories, actions and future from being snuffed entirely out of existence, even if he’s lawfully constrained, he’s morally obligated, and that should precede some mundane blanket law for the situation.

It’s a shame that he’s been sued, but it’s even more of a shame that he probably would have been sued had he saved her life as well. Sometimes people are too scared of lawful retribution to actually do the right thing, that saddens me a lot.[/quote]

If someone is conscious they can deny aid. The second they are incapacitated then you are protected under the good Samaritan law to give aid without legal retribution. Giving CPR, however, isn’t something that I would just run in and immediately perform. I have a professional CPR certification and wouldn’t give mouth to mouth unless I had a protective mask and if there were any body fluids involved I wouldn’t do chest compressions without gloves. You have to consider your own health in these situations. That being said, I don’t know why this guy didn’t go in, and can only assume that PF had gloves and face masks available.

36

There is no reason a person should be FORCED to save someone else’s life. Especially not by way of law. That is ridiculous.
I think the issue here was not that he didn’t want to help, and if he had helped, and something had gone wrong…he would have been protected by this: Good Samaritan law - Wikipedia

However, entering a lady’s bathroom/change room was the game changer. The U.S. is a shit pit when it comes to stuff like this. The good Samaritan law only applies to the action of saving a person’s life, it says nothing about location. He probably figured they would have gotten him one way or another.

37

[quote]CroatianRage wrote:

[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:

[quote]stokes1989 wrote:

[quote]stefan128 wrote:

[quote]Stiglitz wrote:
I heard she was black and he was a “white Hispanic” [/quote]

Hahahahaahah, good one!!!

Seriously though, he has no lawful duty to go and help that woman, correct??[/quote]

I’m pretty sure he doesn’t. administering aide to someone is a choice, on both ends. If the person who is at the scene does not feel comfortable administering aide, then they are not required to. Also the victim has the right to deny the responder the right to administer aide. However the responder is protected from any retribution by “Good samaritin laws” which prohibits any legal retaliation from the victim towards the responder.[/quote]

Is that really a thing there? That people suffering from heart attacks and strokes actually deny aid? Who the fuck ever wilfully denies aid unless it’s a suicide attempt? That’s insanity.

The gym employee might have felt uncomfortable entering the changing rooms and applying aid to the woman, but I’m sure the woman was a damn sight more uncomfortable in the throws of a slow and agonizing death. It’s incredible that the gym employee would be too scared of the poster rules of the gym to stop some ladies memories, actions and future from being snuffed entirely out of existence, even if he’s lawfully constrained, he’s morally obligated, and that should precede some mundane blanket law for the situation.

It’s a shame that he’s been sued, but it’s even more of a shame that he probably would have been sued had he saved her life as well. Sometimes people are too scared of lawful retribution to actually do the right thing, that saddens me a lot.[/quote]

If someone is conscious they can deny aid. The second they are incapacitated then you are protected under the good Samaritan law to give aid without legal retribution. Giving CPR, however, isn’t something that I would just run in and immediately perform. I have a professional CPR certification and wouldn’t give mouth to mouth unless I had a protective mask and if there were any body fluids involved I wouldn’t do chest compressions without gloves. You have to consider your own health in these situations. That being said, I don’t know why this guy didn’t go in, and can only assume that PF had gloves and face masks available.[/quote]

Ah, I get it now. I guess if a conscious individual does indeed deny aid and it leads to their demise, then that’s entirely on them…

Of course the situation has to be right and the action taken upon analysis of her condition would have to be appropriate for said condition. Yeah, I would assume Planet Fitness would already have the necessary emergency medical equipment in place to prepare for such an event, otherwise that brings a whole new grand issue with the particular gym and it’s manager, but I would have to assume that those were already in place and the only real thing left of interest is the inaction of the employees. At the very least somebody should have checked on her condition, even if they weren’t under enough confidence or the capability to apply CPR (which they then shouldn’t do, of course).

38

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
There is no reason a person should be FORCED to save someone else’s life. Especially not by way of law. That is ridiculous.
I think the issue here was not that he didn’t want to help, and if he had helped, and something had gone wrong…he would have been protected by this: Good Samaritan law - Wikipedia

However, entering a lady’s bathroom/change room was the game changer. The U.S. is a shit pit when it comes to stuff like this. The good Samaritan law only applies to the action of saving a person’s life, it says nothing about location. He probably figured they would have gotten him one way or another.[/quote]

I, personally am not talking about obligation through law, I’m kind of fed up with all these laws, I just wish he would have recognised it as the right thing to do and realised that the proper course of action would have been to at least check on her.

The gender issue of the bathroom is insanity, under any reasonable state of mind, something like that should not be a concern when centred around a situation like this. It seems the U.S. can be entirely too dependent on it’s laws and sometimes an over-encumbrance may lead to something like this, which should be immediately and justly rectified by legal authorities.

He shouldn’t have to live under this much fear of a rulebook when faced with this amount of cost to an individual. I guess this won’t ever really be stamped out, and there will always be some fucking thing where people are too in fear of being flanked by some legal loop to actually be a “good Samaritan”, and I’m very much glad that nobody in the country in which I reside, will have to deal with as much bullshit legal hounding as someone in a mirrored situation over there. I guess this is just what the country has now and it’s too engrained to really scrub out all of it’s stains, which depresses me.

39

[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:

[quote]Swolegasm wrote:
You guys sure love to sue each other.

Movies don’t lie do they?[/quote]

As much as I don’t want to, I will always remember the ending to this trailer because of Americans and the hilarious suing stereotype. The rest of the movie maybe doesn’t have so much truth to it though.[/quote]

THAT’S the only part of that shitty movie I remember too!

40

[quote]Nards wrote:

[quote]Big Kahuna wrote:

[quote]Swolegasm wrote:
You guys sure love to sue each other.

Movies don’t lie do they?[/quote]

As much as I don’t want to, I will always remember the ending to this trailer because of Americans and the hilarious suing stereotype. The rest of the movie maybe doesn’t have so much truth to it though.[/quote]

THAT’S the only part of that shitty movie I remember too! [/quote]

I know, why is it so god damn engrained?? There’s like some voodoo low budget exploitation magic that forces me to remember that shitty U.S. legal system joke.