Family sues over near drowning

I remember taking the lifeguard training course when I was in college and people (including the instructors) telling me; that unless you either wan't to be sued or wan't to be part of a lawsuit, DO NOT under any circumstances take employment as a lifeguard.

So as the lawsuits continue who in the future will want to hold these jobs?

jenny, as a college graduate, you should be able to have a little better reading & comprehension skills. in the article, it states the lifeguard on duty notice a floundering child and took no action then went on break. upon learning of the child's absence and despite the last place he was seen was in the water, the first place the counselors searched was the bathroom [a fact the reporter conveniently left out of the article].

i am very familiar with this incident because i live in redding and considered sending my children to this camp when they got to the right age. i read the police report when it was published in the town newspaper, so i believe i am very well informed on the topic... the case has very strong merit and the people of redding should be relieved the amount of the suit is not greater.

Moose, I agree with you. I also live here in Redding and even though our taxes could go up as the result of a lawsuit, I support the parents in this.
If what we read and hear from people who were there is correct - and I recognize that we need to hear all sides of this before final judgement - then this sure sounds like negligence.

It's a terrible tragedy and one that I think could have been avoided.

The summer camps ought to make the children wear colored swim caps.

Red - non-swimmers
Yellow - intermediate swimmers
Green - advanced swimmers.

This will make it easier for the life guards to see which children can swim in the deep parts. If a child refuses to wear the colored swim caps he or she does not swim.

What do you think.

I think this tragedy could have been avoided, like most. Tragedy happen, accidents happen. The lifeguards on duty that day are all great people. Their was a domino effect on that certain day of wrong doings, not just lifeguards, not just counselors, everybody. A lawsuit was expected, and well I wish luck to everyone tangled inside the situation. Topstone is a safe park, the Lifeguards do a lot of training sessions Things happen, more than once I am sure you have made a mistake that could have been fatal. The guards did the right thing calling the buddy check.

Overall it really stinks for everyone in the situation, and the Marx family has a right to sue. I just hope that the Town stands behind their employees, although I think they all could keep their head above water either way.

I agree that the first lifeguard in this situation should have done something and reacted to thinking that someone was hurt in the water even if she wasn't sure. That is the reason why the lifeguards are there. But it is the responsibility of the camp counselors to keep track of their kids in the water and especially keep a watchful eye on the kids that are not strong swimmers. But the one person in this suit that should not be sued is Evan Hanzor, the one lifeguard who took action. The family should be thanking him for saving their child's life. He could have shrugged off the comment made by the other lifeguard, but made the right decision to do a buddy check and personally searched the water for him. The family should be happy and celebrating their son's life instead of pointing fingers and placing blame where it is not deserved.

This frivolous lawsuit is the reason why good people are too afraid to step in and help when another is in need because they are worried about getting sued. If Evan Hanzor had stopped to think two yeas later he would be asked to defend his courageous actions in a court of law, their child might not be alive today.

why do you call this frivolous?... the employees of this town showed endless amounts of negligence resulting in great harm to a child and huge medical bills!!!

The police report on this incident was published in the town newspaper... in the report the officer QUOTES the female lifeguard on duty saying she saw the child struggling in the water, but did nothing and then told the lifeguard coming on the next shift she saw a floundering child but could no longer see him... ah, seems pretty negligent in duty to me! then, despite the last place the NOW MISSING child was seen in the water, the guards & counselors first looked in the bathroom.... wow, that was terrible thinking there too... negligence again! the park was very crowded that day and yet NO LIFEGUARD was posted on the floating dock,,, a procedure [as i understand it] that is standard operating procedure.... the person in charge of staffing and managing the lifeguard staff, was on vacation as was his immediate boss... so running the park was left to a bunch of late teenagers.... is there anything else i need to spell out for you nay sayers????

if this was corporate america, all involved with this tragic accident would have been fired without a moments thought... and i am sorry, but to say "accidents happen" is just totally unacceptable when it comes to the life and welling being of our children...

the family has a suit that is long on merit and would be a slam dunk for a first year law student... the town should be thankful the amount sought is so "small" as i believe it could have been in the millions!

my heart has been broken thinking about this family having to deal with such pain and suffering... good luck in your lawsuit, i hope you win quickly!

First of all, I specifically said that the lawsuit against Evan Hanzor was frivolous and there was negligence on the part of the female lifeguard. However, if we are distributing blame in equal parts, what about the parents? Parks and Rec gives parents, who don't feel their kids are strong swimmers, the option to keep their kids on the beach or stay at Redding Elementary for the day. If these parents were truly concerned about their child's swimming ability or how the Park and Rec Staff or the lifeguards were equipped to watch their child, then they should have kept their child out of the water or out of the program all together.

Since the accident the town has taken steps to prevent this unfortunate accident from happening again. Including a more strict dock test, wrist bands and buddy checks more often.

Being a life long resident of Redding and having frequented Topstone for countless summers, I have never witnessed lifeguards posted on the docks except for swim tests.

What it comes down to is there is an inherent risk when you mix water and children. You can have as many lifeguards on duty and all the children wearing life jackets and accidents will still happen.

here are your comments..

"But the one person in this suit that should not be sued is Evan Hanzor, the one lifeguard who took action."

then 5 lines later...

"This frivolous lawsuit is the reason why good people are too afraid to step in and help when another is in need because they are worried about getting sued."

so in fact you cant even remember what you wrote, or even were incapable of referring to what you wrote for in the last paragraph you are claiming the entire suit is frivolous.

by the mere fact the town revised its procedures AFTER the accident is an implied admission the procedures in place when the accident happened were flawed.

the paper failed to mention who was the de facto person in charge at the park in light of blick and his boss being on vacation when the child nearly drowned. if the head lifeguard that day was Hanczor, he unfortunately is on the hook as it was "management's" fault for allowing this accident to occur.

yes the child was designated a non swimmer and had been properly notated that day, but yet he was permitted to do something he was NOT supposed to do. there were [only] 4 guards on duty and how many counselors that day that SHOULD HAVE noticed this.

let us not lose sight of the fact the person injured is an 8 year old, so anyone with children would understand the judgment of such a young person is not yet developed.

yes it was the parents' prerogative to chose whether or not their children [if you recall, chandler is a twin] could remain at RES or go to the park... however, the option was provided to them to make an informed decision to allow the twins to go to the park with the understanding they would be properly supervised and guarded. the parents, therefore, believed chandler would be safe per the assurances, implied or stated otherwise, from the organizers of the camp. had the town strictly prohibited non swimmers from going to the park and it occurred, than of course the parents would be viewed as the negligent parties.

since there are 14 people named in the suit, i will concede the attorney representing the family may be over doing it a bit. however, by the relatively "small" amount mentioned in the suit, it would appear the family is looking to cover out of pocket medical expenses not covered by insurance without looking for pain & suffering compensation. the town should be relieved the amount is not significantly larger.

Dear "Redding Resident" As far as this being a "frivolous" lawsuit......think again. This child will need ongoing care now and for the rest of his life (when parents are no longer alive). Do you have any idea what this costs? Do you even know this child? I DO! I knew him before his near drowning and I know him now and guess what? No money in the world could ever make up for the negligence this child suffered. How dare you call this suit "frivolous"! Put yourself in the parents' shoes (that is, if you even have any children). You send your child to summer camp thinking that he/she will be closely monitored and naturally think he/she will be safe considering the information you have provided to the camp director, i.e.; swimmer, non-swimmer. You then receive a phone call informing you that you child suffered a "near drowning" and you are informed that he/she is being taken to the local hospital.......and then air lifted to another hospital with a critical care unit. As you try and process this information(while you are driving to the FIRST hospital, tell me......what are you feeling? Despair, hope, optimism, pessicism.........I would think ALL of these. Not to mention, your heart is probably in your throat and you are reciting every prayer you have ever known. Chandler was a bright, athletic, and exceptional child who would have gone far in this world. Unless you you have known this child first hand, please reserve you comments in regards to this suit. No amount could ever make up for the hardship this family has suffered.........numerous PT/OT hospital appointments, adaptations in his school curriculums, relearning what he has lost, etc. If I were the judge sitting on the bench for this lawsuit........I would rule in the MILLIONS. Do me a favor.........spend a day in the life of the Marx family and then, maybe, you would have a right to voice your opinions.

Concerned wrote:

Dear "Redding Resident" As far as this being a "frivolous" lawsuit......think again. This child will need ongoing care now and for the rest of his life (when parents are no longer alive). Do you have any idea what this costs? Do you even know this child? I DO! I knew him before his near drowning and I know him now and guess what? No money in the world could ever make up for the negligence this child suffered. How dare you call this suit "frivolous"! Put yourself in the parents' shoes (that is, if you even have any children). You send your child to summer camp thinking that he/she will be closely monitored and naturally think he/she will be safe considering the information you have provided to the camp director, i.e.; swimmer, non-swimmer. You then receive a phone call informing you that you child suffered a "near drowning" and you are informed that he/she is being taken to the local hospital.......and then air lifted to another hospital with a critical care unit. As you try and process this information(while you are driving to the FIRST hospital, tell me......what are you feeling? Despair, hope, optimism, pessicism.........I would think ALL of these. Not to mention, your heart is probably in your throat and you are reciting every prayer you have ever known. Chandler was a bright, athletic, and exceptional child who would have gone far in this world. Unless you you have known this child first hand, please reserve you comments in regards to this suit. No amount could ever make up for the hardship this family has suffered.........numerous PT/OT hospital appointments, adaptations in his school curriculums, relearning what he has lost, etc. If I were the judge sitting on the bench for this lawsuit........I would rule in the MILLIONS. Do me a favor.........spend a day in the life of the Marx family and then, maybe, you would have a right to voice your opinions.

well said... i am 110% in your camp! i am astounded there are people in this world who would assign blame to either the parents or the 8 yr old child or call this a frivolous lawsuit... shame on them!

I dont know the family, but wish them Godspeed in this lawsuit.