Hudson survivors may Sue US Airways
Paxing All Over The World
I am tempted to say that one reasons is that the folks see this as income during the recession - grab it whilst it's there but actually what I want to say is ...
Perhaps it is like when a parent inadvertently lets a child run into danger?
They pull the child back from the road/danger and scold them loudly. Actually, they are scolding themselves for the fright they had that they allowed the child into danger. They cannot sue the child or themselves but they can sue the airline.
If there was a cooling off period of 364 days, so that could asses what injury (mental and physical) they have and if they really ARE pleased to be alive ... perhaps fewer people would sue?
Perhaps it is like when a parent inadvertently lets a child run into danger?
They pull the child back from the road/danger and scold them loudly. Actually, they are scolding themselves for the fright they had that they allowed the child into danger. They cannot sue the child or themselves but they can sue the airline.
If there was a cooling off period of 364 days, so that could asses what injury (mental and physical) they have and if they really ARE pleased to be alive ... perhaps fewer people would sue?
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: US
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its not like anyone died, there was no smoke or fire or anything that could leave a lasting imprint on someone. Sure it would be stressful, for about 10mins (the flight would have been only 3 or 4 mins long) but is that enough to cause long term damage? If so, eat a bag of cement and harden up.
People almost died. Some will have very long lasting effects. Some won't. It isn't their fault if they do.
The fact that the event was over relatively quickly doesn't change the fact that they suffered from trauma. Some did not suffer much. Some suffered greatly.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: dubai
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is why I detest the US in some ways and the lawyers, for taking the case on.
While they're at it, why not Sue the crew for helping to save their lives? Why not sue the port authority, or whoever that oversees the Hudson for letting the birds fly in the first place? Why not sue the engine manufactures because the engines stopped turning? Why not.....
Reminds me of the judge in the US that tried to sue the cleaner for screwing up with the cleaning and pressing of his trousers.
While they're at it, why not Sue the crew for helping to save their lives? Why not sue the port authority, or whoever that oversees the Hudson for letting the birds fly in the first place? Why not sue the engine manufactures because the engines stopped turning? Why not.....
Reminds me of the judge in the US that tried to sue the cleaner for screwing up with the cleaning and pressing of his trousers.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Equally, you've not earned the right to worry about their PSTD issues until you realise just what happened- the flight crew pulled off something just about unprecdented in the annals of flying history. Landing a pod-slung jetliner in a river? A miracle, IMO.
They can still suffer terrible after effects, whilst understanding that the crew did a great job under the circumstances.
Once again, I am restricting my comments to these few words from the OP and am not expressing an opinion on the rights or wrongs of any litigation.
Last edited by Final 3 Greens; 27th Feb 2009 at 12:17.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: US
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once again, I am restricting my comments to these few words from the OP and am not expressing an opinion on the rights or wrongs of any litigation.
What disturbs me in this thread is that many people who have no understanding of PTSD make comments downplaying its impact. The fact that an incident is over in just minutes does not necessarily mean that someone won't suffer from PTSD.
People can suffer life-changing effects from PTSD.
Ungrateful bastards
Only in America, my friend. The only people who will make 'real' money from this is the lawyers. The passengers owe their lives to Sully and his crew, had it not been for their skill and courage, it would have been their relatives who were doing the suing.....no rhyme intended.
Unless you have suffered a life threatening incident, you don't really have any idea about the impact of PTSD.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Devon, England
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How right you are Evanelpus, so lets try to get right back to the original cause!
I don't know whether it was a Canada Goose or whatever that wiped out the aircraft engines, nor do I know how much sway animal rights activists enjoy in the US. But I can think of many countries where the god-dam birds are protected so lets sue the animal right groups, they can campaign with impunity currently and need to be made responsible for their unhelpful views and actions.
I don't know whether it was a Canada Goose or whatever that wiped out the aircraft engines, nor do I know how much sway animal rights activists enjoy in the US. But I can think of many countries where the god-dam birds are protected so lets sue the animal right groups, they can campaign with impunity currently and need to be made responsible for their unhelpful views and actions.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: US
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capt. Sullenberger has admitted to being greatly troubled by PTSD as a result of this incident. More than a few passengers are undoubtedly suffering from PTSD as well. Macho internet chest-thumping won't change that. Being grateful to the skillful crew won't solve their PTSD.
You can argue about whether or not the lawsuit is justified, but PTSD is no joke.
You can argue about whether or not the lawsuit is justified, but PTSD is no joke.
You can argue about whether or not the lawsuit is justified, but PTSD is no joke.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Evanplus
Like OFBSLF, I read your post #28 as downplaying PSTD.
If you didn't mean that, then fine.
Neither OFBSLF nor me are interested in talking about whether the US legal process is tha right approach, we are more concerned about those people who are really suffering, because of our prior experiences.
One other poster did say word to the effect that you won't carry ongoing ill effects from a 3-4 minute experience, but sadly this is plain wrong.
Like OFBSLF, I read your post #28 as downplaying PSTD.
If you didn't mean that, then fine.
Neither OFBSLF nor me are interested in talking about whether the US legal process is tha right approach, we are more concerned about those people who are really suffering, because of our prior experiences.
One other poster did say word to the effect that you won't carry ongoing ill effects from a 3-4 minute experience, but sadly this is plain wrong.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: US
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think anyone here has treated PTSD as a joke.
Its not like anyone died, there was no smoke or fire or anything that could leave a lasting imprint on someone. Sure it would be stressful, for about 10mins (the flight would have been only 3 or 4 mins long) but is that enough to cause long term damage? If so, eat a bag of cement and harden up.
I'm terribly vexed after reading this thread. Who can I sue?
Ungrateful bastards
Thread Starter
ungrateful...
if you were out walking, and lightning struck a nearby tree, and you were traumatised, you'd sue the weather beaurea for not predicting lightning? or maybe the person who planted the tree?? what a load of crap...
the event was caused by nature and not by any human negligence or malice.. it's a part of life, and they chose to fly in the first place..
before we know it, airlines will be including disclaimers in their in flight safety breifing.....
if they are suffering from PTSD, they should take the $5000 cheque US airways have provided and spend it on councelling...
if you were out walking, and lightning struck a nearby tree, and you were traumatised, you'd sue the weather beaurea for not predicting lightning? or maybe the person who planted the tree?? what a load of crap...
the event was caused by nature and not by any human negligence or malice.. it's a part of life, and they chose to fly in the first place..
before we know it, airlines will be including disclaimers in their in flight safety breifing.....
if they are suffering from PTSD, they should take the $5000 cheque US airways have provided and spend it on councelling...
Last edited by aviator's_anonymous; 27th Feb 2009 at 22:15.
...the thin end thereof
Join Date: Jun 1998
Location: London
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just because some of the passengers may sue does not mean that they will win.
They'd not win a case in negligence against the airline in England (on the facts as they appear at the moment), and they'd have a job doing so in America which has a reputation, unjust to some extent, for being over-litigious.
A double bird-strike, if that was the cause, would clearly fall into the category of a so called 'Act of God'. In order for the claimants to be successful, they will have to show that US Airlines breached their duty of care to the passengers in some way. On the present facts it does not look as if there is any evidence that they did; and in respect of the flight crew the evidence would suggest that Sully not only came up to the standard of care to be expected of an airline pilot, but surpassed it by some distance.
They'd not win a case in negligence against the airline in England (on the facts as they appear at the moment), and they'd have a job doing so in America which has a reputation, unjust to some extent, for being over-litigious.
A double bird-strike, if that was the cause, would clearly fall into the category of a so called 'Act of God'. In order for the claimants to be successful, they will have to show that US Airlines breached their duty of care to the passengers in some way. On the present facts it does not look as if there is any evidence that they did; and in respect of the flight crew the evidence would suggest that Sully not only came up to the standard of care to be expected of an airline pilot, but surpassed it by some distance.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why are people just guessing they are suffering from PTSD?
Have they approached the Lawyers or the Lawyers them?
I suffered PTSD many years ago in the forces (It wasn't called that then...). All the money in the world would not have cured me any quicker or made the flashbacks disappear. Only time will do that.
I suppose on the subject of suing, it will depend on your nature wether you are for it or against. Personally I could not bring myself to sue for an accident that was the fault no one but some Geese.
Have they approached the Lawyers or the Lawyers them?
I suffered PTSD many years ago in the forces (It wasn't called that then...). All the money in the world would not have cured me any quicker or made the flashbacks disappear. Only time will do that.
I suppose on the subject of suing, it will depend on your nature wether you are for it or against. Personally I could not bring myself to sue for an accident that was the fault no one but some Geese.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: US
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As usual, lots of folks are unable to separate two orthogonal issues:
1) that they are suffering PTSD and that it may be very severe for some,
versus
2) whether or not the legal action is justified.
Final 3 Greens and I have both been supporting 1), but have not taken a side, pro or con, with 2). Yet everyone criticizes us over 2).
1) that they are suffering PTSD and that it may be very severe for some,
versus
2) whether or not the legal action is justified.
Final 3 Greens and I have both been supporting 1), but have not taken a side, pro or con, with 2). Yet everyone criticizes us over 2).
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Leeds
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How can they sue the airline? It was not pilot error, nor did they have any powers to stop the accident from happening. Blame the RSPB for the birds having got in the way in the first place if people are going to be so critical.
Yes, they should be happy to be alive.
Yes, they should be happy to be alive.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Yes, they should be happy to be alive.
If you have severe PTSD, you may cognitively realise that you are lucky to be alive, but suffer from severe depression and literally never be the same again. 'Happy' will not be a meaningful word in your universe.
call 100 (who has my sympathy and best wishes) says that his PTSD took a long time to fade; for some it never does and for others (like me) it never really happens ..... I went back to work on the Monday after an incident on the Sunday and I am happy to be alive, never had a flasback, nightmare etc... I'm not a hardened heroic type, just didn't get affected.
If you take a practical view, then if the person cannot live a normal life for some time, e.g. they cannot hold down a job or travel if their job requires it, then how do they deal with this? It's not just the cost of the treatment.
Putting that to one side, I am not expressing an opinion on the rights or wrongs of any legal action, just empathising for those who are affected by their experiences.
I just read this article, it is in a totally different context, but is tough stuff.
Iraq hero goes on warpath - Home News, UK - The Independent
Last edited by Final 3 Greens; 28th Feb 2009 at 05:47. Reason: Added link to news story
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We, as you will all know, have had an incident in Europe too, where an aircraft 'crashed' onto the runway post birdstrike. Has that lead to legal action? Just interested to know if FR/CIA et all with possible accountability are in the same position of possible litigation.