I empathize with this guy. Nobody should have a body part severed by a convenience mechanism that should have protective measures built into it, but “now relies on his wife to assist him with going to the bathroom, showering, brushing his teeth, getting dressed and buttoning his shirt. He has great difficulties holding a pen, feeding himself, tying his own shoes, using tools and assisting around the house with chores such as laundry and washing dishes.”?
I have an uncle who ties fishing flies with two fingers and three nubs on one hand. (and weirdly, he can pinch the hell out of you with the nubs…),so I don’t buy the “oh he’s lost all independence” statement from the lawyer. I get that that’s necessary to whip up a jury or the media, but it’d be nice to see legal things argued from a point of reasonableness and honesty for once.
But I guess “It really hurt, and now he’s missing part of a thumb, which is a pain in the ass. I mean he’ll get by but it’s going to suck for a while, and c’mon he’s literally missing a part of his body due to the errors of this company” isn’t as gripping a narrative.
