Massive Door Recall!

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

filed under: family

Recalls are getting WAY out of hand. And by that I mean there aren't enough of 'em.

Momlogic's Momstrosity: It's happening again. It happens at least once a month. Recalls. This time, Maclaren is voluntarily recalling millions of their strollers over 15 cases of children's fingers getting caught in the hinges -- 12 resulting in amputation. Remarkably, in Europe -- where Maclaren sells more strollers than in the U.S. -- there have been NO amputation claims.

Yep, in the spirit of that woman who took a stand against McDonald's when they dared to serve her a hot cup of coffee, America once again leads the pack in shifting the blame.

Don't get me wrong ... if it were my kid whose fingers had been chopped off, I wouldn't be writing this post. On the contrary, I would be beside myself for being STUPID ENOUGH TO ALLOW MY CHILD NEAR THE STROLLER WHEN I WAS FLINGING IT OPEN OR SHUT WITH ALL MY MIGHT.

So while we're bringing down the Maclaren Stroller Corporation, why not set our sights on an even more menacing danger: doors.

Doors, according to the National Safety Council, are responsible for more than 300,000 injuries requiring emergency room treatment each year. Children, especially those under the age of 4, suffer the most door-related injuries that ultimately require amputation.

This door statistic is very scary, and the NSC offers little solace:

"Door-related finger injuries are traumatic and potentially debilitating, but unfortunately they're
often impossible to prevent. There's rarely someone at fault when such an accident takes place."

People, that is not good enough! Until the manufacturers of ALL doors come up with a better designed and safer product, I want my money back. Nay, demand it back. Let's take down the door industry! Who's with me?!

Sure, it's going to be very inconvenient to not have doors around. They're pretty indispensable when it comes to keeping our dogs and kids in -- and keeping thieves and door-to-door religion peddlers out. But -- WHEW -- won't we all feel much safer knowing that our little ones' hands and fingers will never be injured when someone accidentally slams a door?

The point is that sadly, tragically, accidents happen. It's life.

Do we really have to recall a product every single time someone has an accident? Enough, already! Common sense is a good rule of thumb (sorry for the digit analogy) to keep our kids, and ourselves, safe.

filed under: family

| Bookmark | Permalink |

Email | Comments (6)

6 comments so far | Post a comment now >>

The woman who sued mcdonald’s gets an unfair reputation. Firstly, Mcdonald’s serves their coffee about 20-30 degrees above the industry standard. The reason they do this, somehow it cuts down on costs. Secondly, she didn’t immediately sue Mcdonalds. She filed a claim asking for around 800 dollars in medical expenses. Mcdonalds denied the claim leaving her no choice but to seek legal recourse. The court was the one who awarded her the astronomical punitive damages. All she wanted was the 800 dollars so she could pay her medical bills.

- Ben

Posted 11/10/09 04:16 PM

This story is ridiculous. It’s blatant corporate propaganda masquerading as populism. I know that to be the case because the author uses the “McDonald’s” case as an example of out-of-control, “frivolous” law suits in this country. That case involved a woman that received second and third degree burns after spilling McDonald’s coffee on herself. Yes, we all realize coffee is hot but McDonald’s was serving it at a temperature well above the industry standard. Also, I have spilled coffee on myself and it didn’t melt my skin away like it did to the plaintiff in that case. The burn victim made a reasonable request to McDonald’s (which they turned down), asking them to pay for her medical bills. The jury awarded her a huge settlement because McDonald’s instituted its “hot coffee” policy with the knowledge that some people would be seriously burned but determined that to be acceptable in light of higher profits. This brings me to my point, without tort litigation corporations would be accountable to no one. They could (and would) manufacture increasingly dangerous products in the absence of tort law. It is well known that corporations manufacture products they know will cause harm to people but decide not to recall them because the cost of settling the claims is cheaper than the recall. Even if a company sells millions or billions of a product but it will seriously injure thousands, is that a risk we are willing to accept? I guess to a corporation we are just numbers anyway. That’s disgusting behavior. I’m completely certain that if this author’s child was ever hurt by a product that was known to be faulty by it’s manufacturer she would be looking for a lawyer. I think the author should have exhibited some “common sense” before posting such a ridiculous article.

- MzBr3nT

Posted 11/10/09 04:30 PM

should we include car doors in the recall?

- Anonymous

Posted 11/10/09 04:49 PM

MzBr3nT- I’m glad i’m not the only one on this side

- Ben

Posted 11/10/09 05:03 PM

Ben and MzBr3nt - you’re not alone! Also interesting in the McDonalds case is the fact that they were warned repeatedly during inspections that the coffee was well beyond the acceptable temperature range. America IS, without a doubt, far too litigious a nation. But this is probably one of the worst examples you could use to illustrate that fact!

- Kirstie

Posted 11/11/09 06:29 AM

You answer your own post when you say you would not be writing this article if your child was injured. To learn about all the recalls in the world today try www.totalrecallinfo.com

- chris

Posted 11/11/09 11:36 AM