Alligator dragged 2 year old into 7 seas lagoon

[desamnik]

My thought is that a lawsuit won't be necessary, it seems to me that Disney will take ownership of this situation and probably made a settlement with this family already. Why wouldn't they? a 2 year old got drowned by an alligator on their property. Some things, you just have to own.

 

[Magpie]

I'm not really into lawsuits, like the gorilla incident should not lead to a lawsuit...this to me the family deserves compensation. It will only make a difference in as you said alleviating the pressure to work or worry about day to day tasks that they can now hire others to do for several years so they have a chance to heal themselves and their family as best as they can.

In both of these cases you can easily argue that safety measures were inadequate.

This was the fence separating the child from the gorillas...

This was the sign warning people that Florida waters are infested with alligators...

Both, IMO, are inadequate. Though, I think Disney had FAR more cause to reasonably believe that there was no danger from alligators (considering that people used to swim in that location), than the zoo had to believe that their fence was in any way adequate (they've since erected a new fence: http://sandrarose.com/2016/06/cincinnati-zoo-erects-new-fence-around-gorilla-pit/).

The zoo's fence was obviously inadequate to the point where people were blaming the boy's mother for not having an iron grip on all four of her children, at the mere sight of that fence (similarly, I suppose, to folks who thought that the parents of the toddler should have known immediately that "no swimming" means "no wading"). Whereas, I think the Grand Floridian's signage is only really inadequate in hindsight.

I certainly don't hold either parent responsible. In the one case, the parent had no reason to believe that wading was a risky activity, and in the other... well, children are unpredictable and it only takes a moment for them to bolt into danger. I don't think anyone (much less the boy's mum!) expected the child to dive through the fence and over a cliff.

Inadequate fencing versus inadequate signage.

I'm not at all sure one case is more worthy of compensation than the other. Both families will need to heal, from very different traumas.

All I can say is, I have the deepest compassion for both families. And I'm very happy for the one, that her son survived.

 

[mom2rtk]

My thought is that a lawsuit won't be necessary, it seems to me that Disney will take ownership of this situation and probably made a settlement with this family already. Why wouldn't they? a 2 year old got drowned by an alligator on their property. Some things, you just have to own.

Agreed.

Even if they somehow won the lawsuit, they would lose in the court of public opinion.

Just go make another Star Wars movie and give the family a pile of cash. And yes, I know that will not make them whole but there aren't other alternatives.

 

[mom2rtk]

In both of these cases you can easily argue that safety measures were inadequate.

This was the fence separating the child from the gorillas...

This was the sign warning people that Florida waters are infested with alligators...

Both, IMO, are inadequate. Though, I think Disney had FAR more cause to reasonably believe that there was no danger from alligators (considering that people used to swim in that location), than the zoo had to believe that their fence was in any way adequate (they've since erected a new fence: http://sandrarose.com/2016/06/cincinnati-zoo-erects-new-fence-around-gorilla-pit/).

The zoo's fence was obviously inadequate to the point where people were blaming the boy's mother for not having an iron grip on all four of her children, at the mere sight of that fence (similarly, I suppose, to folks who thought that the parents of the toddler should have known immediately that "no swimming" means "no wading"). Whereas, I think the Grand Floridian's signage is only really inadequate in hindsight.

I certainly don't hold either parent responsible. In the one case, the parent had no reason to believe that wading was a risky activity, and in the other... well, children are unpredictable and it only takes a moment for them to bolt into danger. I don't think anyone (much less the boy's mum!) expected the child to dive through the fence and over a cliff.

Inadequate fencing versus inadequate signage.

I'm not at all sure one case is more worthy of compensation than the other. Both families will need to heal, from very different traumas.

All I can say is, I have the deepest compassion for both families. And I'm very happy for the one, that her son survived.

I don't even see the two as comparable. Disney is installing a fence NOW not much higher than the one at the top of the gorilla enclosure. And the gorilla enclosure had a huge moat.

 

[nugov2]

Looks like, in addition to newer and more specific warning signs, a fence is going up around the Seven Seas Lagoon. Personally, I think that's a bit of overkill. And an eyesore. Ah, well.

In both of these cases you can easily argue that safety measures were inadequate.

This was the fence separating the child from the gorillas...

This was the sign warning people that Florida waters are infested with alligators...

Both, IMO, are inadequate. Though, I think Disney had FAR more cause to reasonably believe that there was no danger from alligators (considering that people used to swim in that location), than the zoo had to believe that their fence was in any way adequate (they've since erected a new fence: http://sandrarose.com/2016/06/cincinnati-zoo-erects-new-fence-around-gorilla-pit/).

The zoo's fence was obviously inadequate to the point where people were blaming the boy's mother for not having an iron grip on all four of her children, at the mere sight of that fence (similarly, I suppose, to folks who thought that the parents of the toddler should have known immediately that "no swimming" means "no wading"). Whereas, I think the Grand Floridian's signage is only really inadequate in hindsight.

I certainly don't hold either parent responsible. In the one case, the parent had no reason to believe that wading was a risky activity, and in the other... well, children are unpredictable and it only takes a moment for them to bolt into danger. I don't think anyone (much less the boy's mum!) expected the child to dive through the fence and over a cliff.

Inadequate fencing versus inadequate signage.

I'm not at all sure one case is more worthy of compensation than the other. Both families will need to heal, from very different traumas.

All I can say is, I have the deepest compassion for both families. And I'm very happy for the one, that her son survived.

I should have said that in neither case do I blame the parents. I just think the circumstances are different enough that the first case doesn't justify a lawsuit...unless it is just to pay medical. I feel that while the zoo needs to fix the fencing, even though it met requirements (something only works until it doesn't) they weren't promoting that area on the other side of the fence as a somewhere the kids could play. IMO Disney was, as they give buckets for water/sand/castle building and as I've stated only advertised no swimming, not no entry. I feel like there is a big difference in the warnings.

 

[asta]

Looks like, in addition to newer and more specific warning signs, a fence is going up around the Seven Seas Lagoon. Personally, I think that's a bit of overkill. And an eyesore. Ah, well.

I hope it is a good fence. I have seen videos of gators climbing fences. Please excuse the language.

 

[Clifton Tesh]

I hope it is a good fence. I have seen videos of gators climbing fences. Please excuse the language.

They climb my uncle's fence to get in his pool. He lives in southern Georgia and in 25 years he's had to call the gator wrangler 6 times to remove a gator from the pool. Now he's built a structure around it so it's an indoor pool.

 

[cabanafrau]

Don't lawsuits take a long time, and require a lot of effort on everyone's parts, including the plaintiffs? I don't see how this would give them the "time and space they need to regroup".

My mum was hit by a car, while crossing the road at a legal intersection. My mum needed some physical therapy to recover, and her insurance company sued the driver's insurance company. Which meant several years of my mum having to testify in court. I remember my mother being really shaken, when the driver's insurance company's lawyer would do things like insinuate that she was a lesbian (no, I don't know how that was supposed to be relevant... I suspect he was trying to suggest she was suicidal or something). Or suggest that she threw herself in front of the car. Calling into question her character and sanity and everything else.

In the end my mum won. But it was brutal.

I can't imagine how much worse it'd be for these parents. Just look at the people on these boards ready to question their culpability! In court it'd be a thousand times more vicious.

Maybe it's just because I'm Canadian, but I wouldn't sue unless the circumstances left me no other choice.

If this family retains legal representation it won't even be necessary to file a thing in court. Disney will enter into negotiations with their legal counsel and a confidential settlement will be agreed upon. No way Disney wants the bad publicity of anything like Broken hearted family of toddler v. The Walt Disney Co. to ever come anywhere near a courtroom.

Battles with insurance companies aren't anything like this, and yes, they are ugly.

 

[mom2rtk]

I hope it is a good fence. I have seen videos of gators climbing fences. Please excuse the language.

EEK!

But I think the fence is to keep the people out. Not to keep the gators in.

 

[Magpie]

I don't even see the two as comparable. Disney is installing a fence NOW not much higher than the one at the top of the gorilla enclosure. And the gorilla enclosure had a huge moat.

I think the moat was part of what convinced the child he could jump in. In hospital, he said, "I wanted to swim with the gorillas!"

Not every 4yo is going to see a moat as a barrier. Some will see it as a swimming pool.

 

[Magpie]

I should have said that in neither case do I blame the parents. I just think the circumstances are different enough that the first case doesn't justify a lawsuit...unless it is just to pay medical. I feel that while the zoo needs to fix the fencing, even though it met requirements (something only works until it doesn't) they weren't promoting that area on the other side of the fence as a somewhere the kids could play. IMO Disney was, as they give buckets for water/sand/castle building and as I've stated only advertised no swimming, not no entry. I feel like there is a big difference in the warnings.

I think Disney - and everyone else - honestly believed the beach was safe.

If there was anyone who didn't, they didn't speak up.

(And yes, you're right! Paying for medical is a huge driver behind lawsuits in the US. And a perfectly valid reason to sue, in my opinion, given the lack of other options.)

 

[cruisingtwins]

I hope it is a good fence. I have seen videos of gators climbing fences. Please excuse the language.

The fences are to keep people out of the water.

 

[mom2rtk]

I think the moat was part of what convinced the child he could jump in. In hospital, he said, "I wanted to swim with the gorillas!"

Not every 4yo is going to see a moat as a barrier. Some will see it as a swimming pool.

It clearly was not effective. But the zoo made an honest attempt, one that was probably in line with zoological standards when it was built. Disney did far less.

 

[Magpie]

It clearly was not effective. But the zoo made an honest attempt, one that was probably in line with zoological standards when it was built. Disney did far less.

Far as I can tell, Disney had no reason to think they needed to do anything. It's not like this has happened before, not even back when people regularly swam off of that beach.

Swimming stopped because the water was polluted, not because of any threat of gator attacks.

 

[cabanafrau]

I think Disney - and everyone else - honestly believed the beach was safe.

If there was anyone who didn't, they didn't speak up.

(And yes, you're right! Paying for medical is a huge driver behind lawsuits in the US.)

Truthfully I'm shocked about the lack of signage warning about the potential for alligators. I honestly think this incident reveals a bit of a disconnect in the company between the people on the front lines and those who make decisions. The resort has become more and more developed at the same time the alligator population appears to be growing and I think they may have been a bit complacent in their policies. It's known they're not terribly strong at enforcing a lot of their policies in the park about several things -- smoking, line cutting, etc. I suspect they have looked the other way about some gator feeding incidents as well. I'm certain that will have changed immediately because they realize they risk lawsuits and a real firestorm if they don't step down hard on any incidents of feeding promptly. I think the government wildlife control will be overseeing more of exactly what Disney is doing as well.

 

[bcla]

It was 15 years ago. Not too long ago, but not a short time either. NC still had them listed as a threatened species in 2014. I'm not sure about now. I pretty much live at the zoo and make sure I visit them each time I go. Alligators are one of the main reasons I got into herpetology. They really fascinate me.

ETA: Still threatened in NC.
http://www.ncwildlife.org/Conserving/Species.aspx#5528112-reptiles

I knew they had recovered quite well in Florida and Louisiana. I guess NC is at the edge of their natural range and perhaps has different conditions.

 

[mom2rtk]

Far as I can tell, Disney had no reason to think they needed to do anything. It's not like this has happened before, not even back when people regularly swam off of that beach.

Swimming stopped because the water was polluted, not because of any threat of gator attacks.

I think Disney ignored a lot of reports of gators close to people around their resorts.

 

[usnuzuloose]

I just saw the news and saw them putting up the fences, couldn't see how good the fences are they did not get a close up shot.

 

[Julie's Haircut]

It's the trifecta of blame, packaged in the juciest manner possible, constructed entirely of rumour and hearsay...

1. Wealthy, spoiled idiots renting high end bungalows and feeding gators. It's always fun to hate rich people!

2. An evil mega-corporation whose only concern is profit, maliciously looking the other way, in order to cater to the aforementioned Wealthy, deliberately putting the lives of innocent children at risk.

3. A horrifying near-miss story, complete with the implication that Disney staff baldly said, "Those are resident pets, and we’ve known about them for years. And they’re harmless, they’re not going to attack anybody."

The only thing making this less than perfection, as far as stirring maximum outrage, is that the person recounting the "A gator almost ate my five year old!" story is himself a lawyer and his family stayed at the Coronado Springs. It would have been far better if he'd been a middle class, blue-collar dad, staying at one of the All Stars. But you can't have everything.

Sadly, despite having been founded by Alexander Hamilton, the New York Post under Rupert Murdoch has slipped to "least credible" media outlet, behind even FOX. "Among the most recognized media outlets, only THE POST earns a higher negative than positive rating on the credibility scale." http://appserv.pace.edu/emplibrary/pace_poll_061604.pdf

Though, I still do think it's better than the Daily Mail (a very, very low standard).

Yeah, the NY Post isn't very credible, but they do excel at sensationalistic headlines (Headless Body In Topless Bar).

But today's NY Daily News isn't far behind.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nydn-front-pages-2016-gallery-1.2482879?pmSlide=1.2677354

It seems like everybody who's even seen an alligator on Disney premises is clamoring to get in on the act.

 

[JimMIA]

Re: the "fence," Sammie posted pix over on the DIS DVC Mousecellaneous Board. Here's a link: http://www.disboards.com/threads/new-fences-and-signs-going-in-at-beaches.3519681/

It's not a fence; it's a rope barrier designed to keep people from going into the water.