by Barbaraanne Helberg

Created on: July 05, 2008

Personal Safety and Responsibility

A teenager gets decapitated by a roller coaster when he makes the decision to climb over two fences six feet high to retrieve his wind-blown hat. Reasonable personal safety and taking responsibility for one's self collided.

The boy's grieving family need someone other than their loved one to blame; someone they can sue for their loss. Are amusement park officials to blame for this boy's death? Is it a tragedy?

When will the human species ever learn that taking responsibility for actions is the cornerstone of a free society? It is the price paid to remain free.

Park officials are not to blame for this boy's death. The incident is not a tragedy. The boy was his own foolish victim. More to the point, the victim's action was irresponsible. He put life and limb in harm's way. Harm resulted.

His loss of life is regrettable, not tragic. Tragedy is happenstance, an accident caused by totally uncontrollable circumstances. Mudslides and hurricanes and human errors that result in death are tragedies.

The boy in this incident made a conscious decision. Hurricanes don't make decisions. Mudslides don't plan who they end up killing. Humans make errors, but they alone among living animals have the power to choose.

The park fences are there for preventive reasons. They are above and beyond the measurements of required safety parameters. A second fence is there, representing a reenforcement of the first warning. Six feet high, the fences were installed to keep thinking humans away from dangerous running machinery.

The boy, for the sake of a hat that had been blown off his poor thinking head, challenged the safety of his own life when he challenged the warning of the fences. What would his family plea? Temporary insanity?

How can the amusement park where this occurred be blamed, or held responsible, even sued by the boy's family for wrongful death, or lack of safety measures and warnings? As sad as the result of the boy's decision was, he made the decision of his own free will. All humans roaming the park that day had a choice as far as the facility's fences were concerned, just as they had choices about any conduct which they participated in throughout their day.

The choice of this unfortunate teen was his responsibility. He acted alone, and he acted in the wrong. The fences are not there to climb.

To say that it is reasonable to assume that some young person would climb those fences for whatever reason at some point in time, as one lawyer claimed, and therefore this "forseeable" death is the fault of the park's owners is utter nonsense; rubbish to the highest non-thinking degree.

Where do safety and personal responsibility collide, and where do they stand separate? Placing blame elsewhere should not be the focal point for the result of risk taking. The risk taker is squarely, clearly at fault for any poor outcome.

Taking responsibility for actions seems to be a commitment lost to the human condition.

If and when humans capture the idea to be responsible for their own keeping, they'll put the safety industry out of business.

Learn more about this author, Barbaraanne Helberg.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.