Do you think the radio station should be held responsible for the death of the woman who died?

Question

from water intoxacation?? this has been tried many times, BUT a physician or nurse was there to monater people.

and a DR or nurse should have been there..I feel they should be held responsible!

Answer 1

It's not true that the station didn't think of the possibility of death from water intoxication at the outset. In fact, the DJs specifically discussed it on the air, and talked about a well-publicized case of a person who had died from water intoxication. They joked about whether any of the contestants were dead yet, and when a nurse called to talk about the dangers, they said, "We know, but we made them sign waivers, so we're OK."

I haven't seen anything that says exactly what the waiver said, but I doubt it discussed water intoxication, and I doubt the woman really understood the dangers. On the other hand, the station clearly did--they're on tape discussing it.

This was grossly, grossly negligient. I hope the criminal charges stick, but the civil lawsuit definitely will!

Answer 2

Having a physician or nurse present is not an excuse to promote a dangerous practice. It indeed there was a physician or nurse present they should also be held responsible.

Yes. they should be held responsible. From what I read they did not take any of this seriously. They believed having people sign a release relieved them of all responsibility this is not true.

They used a very enticing prize. Something that is very much coveted and hard to come by to get people to do something they would not ordinarily do. The DJs expressed knowledge that they knew this was harmful and could cause death.

This is what hazing is. When some one is hazed they do things they would not ordinarily do to get something they want very much. Often it is acceptance into a group. The ones who have the power to grant or withhold the prize or acceptance brutally take advantage of the person, to get them to humiliate and often harm themselves.

Not only morally reprehensible but illegal.

Answer 3

This is another sad example of people being exploited by a stupid radio contest. The Radio Station should loose their FCC License for allowing such stupidity to take place. Yes, they should be held legally responsible for this woman's death.

Answer 4

No. They warned and made the contestants sign a waiver, so they should be liable. Not even the physician or nurse, because maybe the bad symptoms hit the lady after the contest.

Answer 5

It was a pretty dumb contest to begin with... But water intoxication is pretty rare, so I'm not too surprised the Station didn't think of the possibility at the outset. The whole situation is just very sad...-and very stupid. I guess my answer would be, "no". With all the negative publicity about that woman's death, a pretty grim lesson has been learned here. Litigation would fix nothing... -and would only visit the damage & hardship upon others...

Answer 6

It was a silly competitition.10 people have already been firedYes the radio station is answerable for holding a competition that was physically dangerous to health

Answer 7

They had no medical people in attendance. They were warned by several people that it was dangerous, but just laughed it off. They ignored the evidence that the people were becoming ill.

Whether or not a person signed a waiver, no one is going to either print or sign a waiver that says "I am aware that I may die."

Answer 8

Yes, they should be held responsible. Especially since they had been warned about the danger yet the decided to make jokes about it.

Answer 9

Absolutely!

Answer 10

I think that any radio or TV station must prepare and be conscientious,and foreseeing that are people who do not know its limits.