Why was the Chinese girl who was run over ignored? Here's why....

[IndyPragmatist]

After falling in a downtown street and lying on the cold pavement, face down, for half an hour, during which no passers-by moved to help him, an 83-year-old man died. Hearing this story, what would you call this society? Cold-hearted?

In fact, the pedestrians in the southern China city of Fuzhou wanted to help when they found the old man lying on the ground last Wednesday. Two women tried to help the old man up. But one of the onlookers said: "Better not touch him. It will be hard for you to put it clearly later on."

The two women hesitated and finally stood up. Using their cell phone, they called the police and first-aid center. But by the time the ambulance arrived, the old man had died.

The case is not exceptional. A similar tragedy happened just 13 days earlier, in Shenzhen, Guangdong province. A 78-year-old man was found on the rain-soaked ground, face down in a residential compound, none of the onlookers took any action except to call the police. Despite the efforts of first-aid personnel to save his life, the man died. Had anybody turned him over and lifted his head up, the old man wouldn't have died. When questioned by the man's son, one of the community's guards said: "We dared not touch the old man because we would not be able to put it clearly should anything untoward occur."

The phrase "hard to put it clearly" may sound odd to foreigners, but everybody in China nowadays knows its meaning. When you try to help someone who falls to the ground injured or in coma, that person may allege that you caused the fall. You will then find it difficult to clear yourself of suspicion if the case is taken to court.

There was a precedent for this. On Nov 20, 2006, an old woman fell to the ground and broke her leg after jostling at a bus stop in Nanjing, an eastern China city. A young man, Peng Yu, helped her up and escorted her to hospital. Later the woman and her family dragged the man to court, which ruled that the young man should pay 40 percent of the medical costs. The court said the decision was reached by reasoning. The verdict said that "according to common sense", it was highly possible that the defendant had bumped into the old woman, given that he was the first person to get off the bus when the old woman was pushed down in front of the bus door and, "according to what one would normally do in this case", Peng would have left soon after sending the woman to the hospital instead of staying there for the surgical check. "His behavior obviously went against common sense."

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2011-01/05/content_11794724.htm

[Poll_Blind]

1. Something about that article seems a little fishy. Maybe it's just me.

I can't put my finger on it quite but it almost seems like a shot. Hrm, morning coffee hasn't kicked in yet- I mean "shot" like they use the term in Glengarry Glenross. Not like a a scam but more like a POV which is intentionally leaving something out.

PB

[HereSince1628]

3. POssibly because of the three uses of "put it clearly "

which is a bit unusual wording in American English.

When different people tell stories that are too similar we become suspicious. The phrase 'put it clearly' seems unusual to our ear for it to be repeated 3 times. But it could be a machine-like translation for a word in Chineses.

[SixthSense]

5. In the US the phrase is "cover your ass"

The equivalent situation would be not getting involved because you don't want to be sued by some scumbag lawyer who sees $$ and doesn't give a shit that you were trying to do the right thing.

[Bake]

12. "Some scumbag lawyer"

So the next time the cops beat you without case, call an accountant to protect your civil rights.

Scumbag lawyer, my ass!

Bake, Esq.

[Gormy Cuss]

6. The article seems to be making a case for Good Samaritan laws in China

See the final paragraphs.

In that context it makes sense to me but I have no idea if the Chinese do nothing routinely for fear of being made responsible. It seems like BS but we have states with Good Samaritan laws enacted to protect bystanders from lawsuits in similar situations.

[seabeyond]

2. not buying it. nt

[IndyPragmatist]

4. I buy it

There had to be some reason why people walked by. Yeah, some people are just evil and would ignore the girl, but most people are not. I believe that those people that walked by would not have helped if it weren't for something holding them back. I think the fear of being blamed for the accident or being put on the hook for the medical bills was the factor here.

The odds of that many people walking by being so self-centered to not help are far too small for me to believe there wasn't more to it.

[Safetykitten]

9. Neither am I.

[Tempest]

7. The same thing happens in the U.S.

Some states have passed good samaritan laws to protect against a victim suing his rescuer.

[distilledvinegar]

8. reason for samaritans to fear - not just in China

Please see this 2008 article from the LA Times:
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/dec/19/local/me-good-samaritan19

From the piece:

The California Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a young woman who pulled a co-worker from a crashed vehicle isn't immune from civil liability because the care she rendered wasn't medical.

The divided high court appeared to signal that rescue efforts are the responsibility of trained professionals. It was also thought to be the first ruling by the court that someone who intervened in an accident in good faith could be sued...

...In 1980, the Legislature enacted the Health and Safety Code, which provides that "no person who in good faith, and not for compensation, renders emergency care at the scene of an emergency shall be liable for any civil damages resulting from any act or omission."

Although that passage does not use the word "medical" in describing the protected emergency care, it was included in the section of the code that deals with emergency medical services. By placing it there, lawmakers intended to shield "only those persons who in good faith render emergency medical care at the scene of a medical emergency," Justice Carlos R. Moreno wrote for the majority.

The CA legislature did amend the Health and Safety Code the next year (2009) to cover both medical and non-medical care, but the way the statute was originally written allowed the court's unfortunate 2008 opinion.

This story may feel "wrong," but we have similar problems here as well.

[Catherine Vincent]

10. It's still no excuse for leaving a 2 year old to get hit by 2 vehicles

:(

[subterranean]

11. At least someone called the police about the old men.

In the case of the two-year old girl, the passers-by apparently didn't even bother to do that.

[renate]

13. I trust the BBC, and they're suggesting that this might be the reason

Granted, they're basing their story on the China Daily one, but I don't think the BBC would be cavalier about doing so if China Daily weren't a trusted source.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-15331773

[Courtesy Flush]

14. The child's video tells a different story.

Regardless of people's conditioning to avoid lawsuits, it seemed that the bystanders in the video were completely unmoved, and callous about her injuries. Sure, pass her up if your judicial system would punish you. But to show no surprize, no shock, and barely turn to look at a small child who had been run over on the street? That's another thing altogether

[Mimosa]

16. ^ Exactly ^ n/t

[stuntcat]

20. yes, The truck hit her the 2nd time knowing she was there. Another stopped, then ran over her.

.

[JI7]

15. i have heard this excuse and i think it's CRAP , the fucker who ran her over first did it on purpose

don't tell me he didn't see her.and then the fucker decides to finish the job by slowing torturing her to death. and the other fucker later on who ran her over again.

and i still ask whether this would have happened if it was a boy.

and someone DID try to help this child. she was an old poor woman .

and how about human instict ? there is a difference between adults and a little child,e specially one so young as not not even have the mental ability to know what is going on.

the fucker who ran her over blamed her.

she was just a worthless female to them. even if i see a dead aminal i wouldn't run over it.

[JI7]

17. The Lady who did try to help and find her parents was told to shut up and leave it alone

by others. how fucked up it that ?

[postatomic]

18. Then how would "they put it clearly"

... that no one caused the death of the 78 year old man laying face down in the rain? Using the "reasoning" of the "court decision" you would also have "reasoning" to believe that the women who called on their cell phone caused the injuries and death of the 83 year old man. Yes?

Excuses are never in short supply when it comes to attempting to explain away the fact that the human race is horrible and ugly.

What were the excuses for this one? I can't remember. :eyes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjrqkT13dGo

[JI7]

19. what does being at the top of the world matter if this is the Social Norm , there are people who

give their lives to save others including those they don't even know.

to think people are thinking not to do anything because of possiblity of a 2 year old suing them ? WTF ? i don't belive that shit.

worse than Kitty GEnovese and some other comparisons people make where there was a dangerous person involved .

in this case it was just a bleeding child by herself.

[JoeyT]

21. Good samaritans get sued here

in states that don't have laws to protect them. If we ask for a show of hands, who'd leave a two year old in the street for fear of lawsuit, how many hands would we see?

I'd risk a lawsuit. So would you. So would anyone else here. I could *almost* see it with an adult, even though I'd risk a lawsuit for that too, but at least there would be a logic to it.