Originally Posted by
yobrosew
Yes, so correct about the older skin. I watched the video. I never had an opinion on the story as did not have a television at the time. Maybe it is because I do not have any judgment history on this that I see some things that scream out, to me at least, that McDonald's was the victim. 81 year old skin is paper-tissue thin. 81 year olds know they their muscles and limbs shake and are not as easy to control. 81 year olds know it is not gonna work putting a cup of anything between your legs to balance without getting some spilled over the top. At the beginning of the story it was mentioned the vehicle only had curved surfaces so the cup was put between the legs. Her reasoning for putting the coffee between the paper-thin skinned thighs was because the car was not made to accommodate drinks on the go. So, did the coffee burn because it was too hot or because there were only curved surfaces in the vehicle? Blaming the auto mfgr is about as silly as blaming McDonalds. Out of the seven hundred burns mentioned, how many were the result of removing the entire lid to put cream and sugar in, instead of just through the drink/sip opening? Were they burned because they treated a travel beverage as a table-top beverage? Most 81 year olds would be too shaky to pour cream through just the sip hole and many were/are in the habit of asking it be added before they get the drink or request a few ice cubes to be put in. This woman chose to compensate for her age by opening the entire lid and no, she was not driving, but was the car in motion all the same? The fact is she would not have gotten burned if she would have acted her age. She would not have gotten burned if she had kept the lid on; or asked for ice to be put in, etc.. If her skin burned that severely at 190 degrees, she still would have had substantial burning at 170-180 degrees because.......her skin was so fragile. Thank goodness the coffee was at the higher temperature or we would be getting our coffee at all restaurants and gas stations at the not-so-hot temp of 160 degrees! (Yes, it is sad she was so badly burned, but this video has me wondering how in the heck she was awarded anything.
A couple of things to note . . . I didn't get the impression anyone in this woman's family was blaming the car manufacturer for not having straight surfaces to place the coffee on. It was simply mentioned to point out the reason why she chose to put the cup between her knees to get the lid off. No finger pointing, just explaining.
Also, I don't think anyone would argue that it's a bad idea to put a hot cup of coffee between your knees (at ANY age), but the real point here was the
extreme temperature of the coffee which was found to be exceedingly and dangerously hot. The fact that her skin was thin and fragile does not take away from McDonald's responsibility to serve their products at temperatures that are not dangerous and can cause extreme harm to anyone, at any age.
Would it have burned her if it had been 10, 20, 30 degrees cooler? Sure. Would it have been third degree burns that required one week in the hospital and skin grafts? Probably not, but at any rate, that would be pure speculation. We can only go by what DID happen and what temperature the coffee ACTUALLY was. And they did have an expert state that liquids at 180 degrees (McDonald's at the time served their coffee between 180 and 190 degrees) would cause third degree burns in fifteen seconds. On anyone, at any age.
And lastly, what I found most interesting about this whole story, was that this woman tried to get a fair compensation from McDonald's by just asking for her medical bills to be paid by them. When they refused, she sought legal help to simply have her bill's paid. Again, twice, McDonald's refused. Had they just been fair and sensible that would have been that and this woman would not have made a dime, just been able to pay her medical bills. But they chose not to take any responsibility whatsoever and it cost them dearly.