This is the most likely situations. Divorces are utter wars with no prisoners taken or mercy given. Yeah the guy is prick, but his wife is likely a c*nt not a saint. This real life, there is no "good guy" and "bad guy". Also, what expert witness will he call to value the kidney? A member of the Organ Black Market?
Well, the court is promising to conceal my identity and comp my travel expenses. oh shit i've said too much
Almost everyone has kidney issues later in life, so now he no longer has another one to carry the load and protect himself. I have heard conflicting scientific reports on both sides about the longterm effects. I tend not to believe the people who say donating a Kidney has zero impact because they have an agenda to get people to do it. The other side (no one is anti-organ donor) have very little to gain from publishing their effects except so people have a clear picture of what they plan to do. Some of the most common side effects are going to be increased blood pressure and risk of diabetes. Since most americans are well on their way to this by being fatasses, removal of a kidney is going to contribute. I also know people who have donated and it is not at all a good process and the process is full of psychological side effects. (this guy's reaction as you can see is one) Besides, Bioethics is an evolving situation now. Saying people don't buy organs is absurd because "directed transplants" is a huge moneymaking industry based on who can market their sob story to the most amount of people and not necessarily who needs it the most. Actually what he wants is visitation with his kids and the divorce to be settled, but she is drawing things out. This is a publicity stunt to get attention and to force her to settlement. He gave her life which she supposedly used to betray him and destroy his family and everything dear to him. And he is the asshole...? I honestly doubt 90% of you wouldn't have the same exact reaction if you were in his shoes.
Your "stats" are all conjecture. As someone who has kidney disease, and has studied the benefits and disadvantages to kidney donation, I can sling actual stats with you back and forth all day. The result would be pointless. You are speaking in absolutes in regards to his health. A man you have never met, nor do you know his medical history. No one is saying he doesn't have the right to be upset at the circumstances. We are calling him out on the audacity he has to file this lawsuit, and to make this ridiculous demand. If you are not getting proper visitation rights to your kids, there are proper avenues to take. This is not one of them.
Have you ever been through a divorce? This seems tame to some of the stuff that happens... It only makes news because it's a unique request.
Heh, that would be fantastic. "Ok, Dr Twat, we've decided your ex-wife has to give you half your kidney back. You in turn have to give her half of all your organs. Do you want to keep the tip or base of your penis?"
Actually, the industry has very little real statistic because the number of people to actually provide statistic is so small and recent, and no real 'control' base to compare to they can't draw any real conclusions. But the simple fact is, you are better off with two healthy kidneys than One Kidney. He sacrificed something that causes harm to him in order to help her live... And she won't even allow him to see his kids after 14 years of marriage. By suing her, he can basically drag into the street, and the courtroom that he donated a kidney to her and she lives because of him. In a court system stacked against men when it comes to custody issues it is actually a pretty good idea to help him get some traction. Everyone knows he has no legal claim and won't get shit, but if it helps pressure her to end the divorce settlement and possibly cave-in on custody so he can see his children, then so be it. Frivolous civil suits are done for this sole purpose. He doesn't care about winning he cares about making life hard on her so the alternative is an out of court settlement on the divorce. It is his right to sue for the kidney even if he can't win and it is his right to bitch about his wife and publicly humiliate her.
Shit article is shit Better: Doctor to ex-wife: Give me my kidney back | World News | News.com.au Keiichitron was right.
I would like to point out that there was a LOT more to that case than someone suing over hot coffee being spilled on them. McDonald's kept their coffee as hot as possible without it boiling, much hotter than it needs to be, and the woman suffered serious injuries. She deservedly won that case. As for the story at hand. I don't think the guy really has a case, but I can certainly understand what he is doing.
God I am sick of reading that friggin whine. How about you get a clue, do some research and find out exactly why Stella Liebeck deserved to win that case. In fact lets home school you: *She wasn't driving, she was a passenger. Popular misconcoption here. *She DID spill the coffee on her lap. The coffee was hot enough to cause third degree burns on 6% of her body and other burns on 16% of her body. Skin grafts and over two years of treatment followed. *She sought a settlement of $20,000 from McDonalds to cover her medical and rehab fees. McDonals would offer her $800 (yes, hundred). *Through a lawyer, Liebeck filed suit against McDonalds who refused time after time to settle. It went to trial. It was found: *McDonalds kept its coffee and an extreme temperature. At around 185F it was far hotter than it needed to be and far hotter than other establishments kept their coffee. McDonalds argued taht they kept the coffee so hot because people would usually wait to get home from Drive Thru etc before drinking the coffee. It was revealed that McDonalds own research showed people would consume the coffee immediately. *The heat of the coffee was enough to cause third degree burns in 12 seconds. Lowering the heat would cause burns to take 20 seconds, a bit more time to react. *McDonalds had settled more than 700 cases of their coffee causing scalds and major burns previous to Liebeck, but never made attempts to lower the temperature. The McD's QC manager at the time said McD's was aware of the problem with the coffee heat, but didn't view it as serious enough to warrant changing their practice. *A jury found McDonalds 80% at fault in the case, and ordered punitive damages of $2.7million, the price of two days worth of coffee revenue. Even the guy who created the 'Stella Awards' awarded to stupid frivolous lawsuits and named after Stella Liebeck said he never viewed her case as frivilous. That piston you were gunna use? maybe jam it in some ignorant persons eyeball? Any idea whose?
Lolz at Twilight. But yeah, that's all there is to be said about this. Dude's a prick, kidney was a gift, case closed.
And the wife cheated on him and is being a bastard when it comes to custody. And since she has destroyed his family and stolen his kids, this was his only option. He sounds perfectly justified to me. I think wanting to stay in his children's lives is an admirable quality. And for all that he has done for her, at least she can do is let the man have visitation. I mean, from past experience, having him around won't KILL her... But it is easier to internet lynch than it is to find out more about the situation before passing judgement.
Although there's no way in hell he's going to win his case, I empathize with this doctor. The way the divorce system is set up, there's really not much a guy can do if a woman is screwing him on custody/visitation without causing a scene (so to speak) and drumming up some media attention for the case. Maybe, if there's enough of this, it'll raise more awareness about the problem and changes will be made to the system Good luck to him in his case. And I'm not sure what the Stella Liebeck case has to do with this exactly, but a few points... Technically, no one was driving; the car was stopped at the time of the incident. The National Coffee Association (trade association for the coffee industry) recommends coffee be maintained at 180 - 185 F if not drunk immediately (source) and should be brewed/drunk immediately at 190 - 195 F. So, McDonald's was following their guidelines. 700 cases over 10 years represents an injury rate of 1 burn (of some kind) per 24,000,000 cups of coffee sold. 1/23,999,999 = 0.000004167% of people who bought a coffee over that 10 year period being injured. I can kind of understand why McDonald's didn't get too concerned over that. A verdict the judge reduced to $480,000 (3x the actual damages the jury awarded) for a total of $640,000 (punitive + actual). The case was later settled in secret negotiations between McDonalds and Liebeck, rather than go to an appeal. So, no one knows what she was actually awarded. Source please? I'm looking at The True Stella Awards book and website write-up on the case and, while the author's web write-up does cite unfair reporting on the case (which I agree with), he makes no conclusion as to whether the lawsuit was or wasn't frivolous; that's left for the reader to decide.
But are you not doing the same thing? All this is his story. Who knows what the actual truth is. The only thing we know for sure is that this guy gave a kidney to his wife, and now is suing to get it back or get $1.5 million. At best he is exploiting the judicial system, and his lawyer is a sleazebag. At worst, he actually wants this woman to die. Either way it is pretty douchy. This lawsuit is absurd, that's why people are calling him a twat. He is lying about this being his only option. If he has been awarded visitation rights, then he can take her to court over that. Not over his fricken kidney. The whole story isn't being told here.
Yeah I guess I'm in the minority and non common sense side, but fuck her, she should go find another kidney to replace it. Pay up or wait in line or whatever she needs to do and give the dude his kidney back.
