would you want this for a mother?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4507090.stm
atb
steve
Oh what a lovely society we live in.
money grabbing b1tch
Seems she's blaming the hospital for her having a baby.
"I have got a child now that I wasn't planning to have and I believe the hospital should take some responsibility for that,"
Dont they teach the birds and the bees up in Perth?
i was thinking more along the lines of having a mother that so didnt want you to exist that its worth 250k for the 'inconvenience' of
bringing you up.
atb
steve
It would seem to me that if this young female, (I wouldn't call her a lady), did not want the child, which she most surely didn't, why didn't she have it adopted. SIMPLE realy, she could see that there was some money to be had by keeping the babe. How commercial can you get!
Cute looking ankle biter, seems the mothers still on the ughly pills though
Shug.
Surely the father is paying his fair share under the CSA rules (ROFL)
No mediacl procedure is succesful in 100% of cases and they never will be. You should not be able to sue a medical practice just because the result
of the procedure was not what you expected. If there was neglegence or incompetance involved or there was a culpabale disregard for the patient then
that is another matter but if only 99% of properly completed procedures are succesfull, for example, then the other 1% should not be alowed to sue.
[Edited on 8-12-2005 by smart51]
definately a bit of 4 x 2 round the back of her head and put the kid with some people who would repect it
what a cow!
What the F$$K!!!!
This is so wrong on that many different levels i have lost count. If she wins i think i will sue the British legal system under the trade discriptions
act and i also bet she gets legal aid.
Since when does having a 4 year old stop you working especially if she has two young grand parents to look after her as well as her thieving
scrounging bitch of a mother.
If she is saying she wants money for raising her own daughter giver her to someone who will do it for free!!!
Or maybe she loves the kid dearly but is so skint she can't bring it up properly, hence the living with grandparents etc. Maybe with the 250K she
may be able to give it a better life.
You know me, I don't like to follow the concensus of opinion! 
Cheers,
James
quote:
Originally posted by James
Maybe with the 250K she may be able to give it a better life.
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
quote:
Originally posted by James
Maybe with the 250K she may be able to give it a better life.
So give us all a quarter of a million when we have kids.
Still at least the kid won't end up with any long term physcological problems.....
That makes me feel like one of the luckiest people alive, but thats because my parents, both of them, have worked hard all their lives for me to be able to do what i do, and go to the school i go to. Maybe some more people should learn that a bit of hard work will pay off, rather than scrounging money off the government and living as if it isnt their fault. Their are plenty of laws in place that mean she can get a job and she cant be descriminated against, so really she has no reason not to go out their and get a decent job, and work her way up the ladder.
Nothing new for Perth a few years back a Lady sued a guy for having an epilectic fit in front of her. She told the court it was very disturbing.
thats just sick
quote:
Originally posted by steve_gus
i was thinking more along the lines of having a mother that so didnt want you to exist that its worth 250k for the 'inconvenience' of bringing you up.
Don't usually post but this is just wrong, like someone else said, on SO many levels.
I'd like to say much more but I'm sure you're thinking it anyway.
Yup!
In fact I am going to say it!!!
What the Fcuck!!!!! Stupid ignorant bitch, stupid stuck up frikkin cow.
How many couples in the world want children and cannot have them??????????????????????????????????
That is just disgusting
what the freak is the world coming to???? Sorry I am lost for words on this now
that was just about my reaction too.
not quite as bad, but there was also a case recently in cambridgeshire where 200k of public money ws spent on legal aid cos a woman comlained that a
school wouldnt let her double buggy with her disabled son in the building.
human rights and discrimination. the rule was no pushchairs for anyone on safety grounds.
she lost, and we got the 200k bill.
atb
steve
Just to really start an arguement....
I tend to agree with the statement that she is something of a money grabber....
HOWEVER I can't see anywhere in the article (admittedly I've only skimmed it as am at work) where it gives details of her reasons for
wanting an abortion in the first place.
If (for instance) she had been raped and that's why she had the abortion I would have to say that it can't have been easy for her to then
find out she was pregnant.
Basically all I'm saying is that in something like this I'd want to know ALL the details before dealing out judgement.
Even if she was raped, which would have been indescribably horrible, Is it really fair to take it out on the NHS (= taxpayers)?
I wasnt going to get involved in this, but the last few comments have wound me up, so here goes-
we dont know the circumstances of this. The girl could have been raped, she may have learning difficulites, or some mental problems. She may have a
physical problem whihc risked her life during pregnancy.
These facts would/should normally not be released to the press.
In any of these cases, then this girl deserves the money, without any discussions.
If one of your kids was raped and tried to have an abortion, would you be happy if the abortion failed? would you seek some compensation?
likewise, would you want details of your daughters rape or disability in all the papers?