Comments on: “Baby Mixup Does Not Support Claim for Emotional Distress”

By: Ron Miller

Ron Miller — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 13:57:50 +0000

I love the lawyers reaction which is basically there is no real damages in the case, we lost on appeal, and if we had recovered we probably would not have gotten paid anyway. Other than that, the case was great.

By: William Nuesslein

William Nuesslein — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 10:33:26 +0000

There used to be the calling of wet nurse. Lady Macbeth mentions it in the play “Macbeth”. Until very recently in history there was no viable alternative to mother’s milk, and the mortality rate at foundling hospitals used to be around 99%. Activists actually protested companies that make the “baby formula” that provides life to babies and freedom to their mothers to improve the lives of their families. Activists drive me nuts.

As a young woman my wife freely provided suckling for needy children in her neighborhood in Bangkok. Her compassion is heart warming to me.

The suit in the subject case made me angry. The judge made the right ruling, although literal floggings of the woman and her lawyer is called for.

By: gasman

gasman — Thu, 22 Sep 2011 19:56:46 +0000

Mom got shut down appropriately in light of her vast over-reach claiming ‘extreme emotional pain’ when most reasonable folks would have been merely mildly piqued over events.
Normal folks get over something like this and have a dinner party and birthday party story for the next few decades.
The overwrought will tell their stories ad nausea to whomever will listen, but they will soon find they have few friends who don’t tune out their shrill hysterical retellings of the horror….