Gym sues mother of drowned boy (Page 2)

This is a major pet peeve of mine...There should be rules around allowing young kids to be in a pool if they are not accompanied by a responsible adult.  Almost every day I see young children in the pool with parents sleeping, reading, talking or sitting too far away from their children.  I was in the pool with my children within arms reach for many, many years even when the water was cold or I really didn't want to go in.  I took the time and effort to train them how to swim and also how to follow pool and safety rules.  My kids are 10 and 11 and this year when the pool opened, I reinforced the rules with them again.  They asked me to get in with them again and go over water safety.  They like to practice the drill on how to handle a situation where someone is panicking and grabs them in the water.  In my mind, the lifeguards are the secondary line of defense.  It is my job to make sure my kids are safe in the pool.

I think I'd be too worried to bring my kid to the pool

As an aside, Lifetime's not exactly known for an overly moral way of doing things.   They are a big corporation and I am sure have staff attorneys who had to counter sue.  That's America for you. 

I think that even if the women climbed over the fence, the probably have a legitimate claim against Lifetime.  That's just how it works.  Similarly, cannot a person be sued if a burglar slips and falls on their property?  Doesn't make it right, but the owners of the properties have some responsibility no matter how you got there.    I am sure they are pizzed and suing only because since the woman didn't sign the guest waver she didn't give up her rights in a case like this.

Here's my take of what may be going on.

Mom makes a mistake in judgement and was not paying attention when she should have been.  Lifeguard and gym also had some fault in the child's drowning.

Mom goes to lawyer seeing if she can get some sort of financial compensation for her funeral bills, time off from work, therapy, etc.

Laywer examines the gyms insurance policy, and determines that they possibly could sue for $25M.  It has nothing to do with the level of fault...simply a number based on how much they can afford.

Mom gets talked into suing for $25M by her laywers, not realizing that the lawyers are simply out to make more money for themselves, and don't care if they smear the mom's name in the eye of the public as a greedy/irresponsible mom.

The case will likely get settled for some amount less than $25M, but the mom will realize that no amount of money can replace a child, and even worse, she is now known by many people as a greedy person trying to abuse the system.  People are now jealous/envious/disgusted with her (ETA: as far as abusing the system...not losing a child), and while the money is nice...she realizes she could have easily settled for a reasonable amount outside of court and the public eye.