I haven't read all the thread but the father doesn't seem to be involved in all this so either he wasn't on the scene at the time this happened or bailed out meantime.
If the mother was prosecuted for driving without insurance (which she should have been IMO) would the judge have taken into account the fact the father wasn't around in deciding on her sentence?
ie: The judge thinks the kid needs someone to care for him 24/7, daddy isn't around, he/she decides not to give the mother a custodial sentence.
I don't begrudge that kid a penny of the compensation he got, he deserves all of it and more. His life is, for most intents and purposes, ruined. Remember, he still has to go through the teen years watching all his buddies finding partners, travelling the world, starting careers while he's trapped in that chair until he dies.
But I do begrudge his mother spending any part of it for anything other than his care.
I can't shake the feeling she'll have herself a few respite holidays maybe, or some retail therapy as a break from caring for this lad.
I know people normally shouldn't have to pay for the rest of their for momentary lapses in judgement, but when the consequences are as catastrophic as they are in this case, maybe they should.
I know she probably cries daily when she thinks about what she did but, looking at the condition of her son, I wonder if that's enough.
I want to know that her life is as hellish as his.
Its heartening to know (probably the wrong word) that any money over should he die will be recoverable.
As for spending the money, I'm sure shell end up with a decent home, and yes a good few holidays, ironically a decent car etc etc, anything that he will benefit from.
As for designer shopping trips I'm not so sure. The trustees I've had to deal with in requesting money have been very strictly managed with every single penny having to be accounted for and agreed prior to the spend.
It took me 6 weeks to get £ 25 for a tennis racquet for instance, that was on behalf of someone who had money in trust from a medical negligence claim.
So the drunk driver goes to prison, so they earn nothing.
After that, how long does the drunk driver pay all but minimum needs? Forever, in your scheme I assume. In this case, why would they bother working? I presume in your world they wouldnt get any unemployment assistance in that case, but try and answer the question as if you live in the real world...
You still havent answered my question, if one person hurts another due to negligence (not involving a car) what is it you think they will be charged with?
Sure in Liam's world, anyone who commits a crime would spend their life in indentured servitude and injured children would litter the side of the roads without medical care.
Sounds like his favourite bastion of democracy, Iran, in fact.
Go tell a someone confined to a wheelchair because a drunk driver knocked them down that they cant have any compensation, because a lawyer would get paid for bringing the proceedings, and see how that goes...
Where did I say anything about compensation for the victim you moron.