GenericID wrote:
You seem to have me muddled up with someone who is blaming the DJs for the nurse's death.
Like I said, there really isn't anything to discuss. The DJ's were not in any way to blame for this apparent tragedy. Hard to believe that there are those whose muddled thought leads them to believe otherwise.
The DJ's were not in any way to blame for this apparent tragedy.
It's not an "apparent" tragedy - it's a tragedy pure and simple.
While I don't hold the DJs responsible for what I consider to be an overreaction by the nurse (while at no time judging her decision to be any less valid simply because I don't share her values), I do think they stepped over the line of how the media should behave, and they should be sacked and barred from working in the industry in future.
At the end of the day, those DJs falsely obtained medical information about a patient in a hospital, and then broadcast that information to the world. This is a crime, and it is wrong (if a doctor had sold, or even given, patient information to the press he/she would be struck off and probably prosecuted).
We give the media special powers, including freedom from prosecution for several crimes which you or I would be locked up for, and I consider the behavior of those DJs to be an abuse of those powers.
That's the discussion that needs to be had.
Crickets are chirping wrote:
No, it doesn't make her a nut-job but it sure makes you classless for implying it. What do you know about her? That's what I thought.
Committing suicide over a prank makes one a nut-job.
This is a lesson in personal responsibility. The 2 DJs, and their employer, chose to carry out an action, knowing full well that they would be causing distress to another person. Did they know in advance what the result of that induced stress would be ? Of course not. But did they know that there would be stress and distress as a result of their deliberate and premeditated actions ? Absolutely. At any time they could have chosen to end it. They didn't. They chose to continue. The nurse may well have ended up making the same tragic decision, some time in the future. We will never know. What we do know is that the premeditated actions of those 2 DJs were a major contributing factor for the nurse to make her decision on the day that she did. For that reason, as human beings capable of saying ENOUGH, they need to be held accountable.
"Harmless Pranks" are like bullying or sexual harassment. The effects of the action are determined by the receiver, and not by the deliverer.
KiwiG wrote:
This is a lesson in personal responsibility.
Agreed. A mother of two should conduct herself in a more responsible manner.
KiwiG wrote:
The effects of the action are determined by the receiver, and not by the deliverer.
I don't know if that can work with everyone because some receivers won't ever hand out punishment. I'm a strong believer in self-correction - that the most effective punishment comes from the deliverer, not the receiver. For example, (it is amazing how well this works) but when I watch kids and they make a mistake, they get to decide what their punishment is. Suprisingly, the punishment they choose is always harsher than what I would have given them. It may sound like it wouldn't be effective, but it always is because giving them the opportunity to play a large role in their growth makes them feel in control of their life and who they want to become. Then it is really rewarding to hear about them self-correcting without you around.
Committing suicide over a prank makes one a nut-job.
I'm interested by what you define as a prank. Apparently, obtaining the privileged medical records of a mother and her unborn child by deception and fraud is "a prank" to you?
How does someone of your limited mental capacities define rape - perhaps that's just "a bit of a misunderstanding" to you?
Would you think it was just "a prank" if the hospital had taken a hard line about one of its nurses revealing patient information and sacked her (which they could easily have done)?
I recognize the fact that you are a moron - you don't have to keep on proving it with every post.
GenericID wrote:
Would you think it was just "a prank" if the hospital had taken a hard line about one of its nurses revealing patient information and sacked her (which they could easily have done)?
I recognize the fact that you are a moron - you don't have to keep on proving it with every post.
A nurse who gives out confidential patient information to unauthorized recipients should be fired, if not put in jail. I'll also point out the woman who killed herself didn't do that, which is why she was not in any trouble to begin with. I still don't see how a mother of two committing suicide was warranted or why the DJs' are at fault in anyway.
A nurse who gives out confidential patient information to unauthorized recipients should be fired, if not put in jail.
Then you agree that the DJs should be fired, if not put in jail. Thank you for that.
After all, if disclosing confidential patient information is a crime, then obtaining confidential patient information by fraud and deception, and using that information for personal gain must be a crime also.
why the DJs' are at fault in anyway
You've just told us why they are at fault, and admitted you think they should be in jail, so you've answered your own question.
I still don't see how a mother of two committing suicide was warranted
You don't have to, the only thing that mattered is that she felt it was warranted.
I think it's telling that they consulted lawyers before pulling the prank. If you have to consult lawyers to make sure you're not going to get sued before pulling a pranks, it's probably not worth it.
At the same time, the nurse's suicide seems like an overreaction. She must have been unstable to begin with.
But it's a good reminder that we go through life not knowing the stories of everyone we interact with. In this case, this incident was enough to send one person irrecoverably over the edge.
While the DJs could not have foreseen her actions, it doesn't mean that they are not responsible for her death. If they had not called, she would still be alive right now. If that is not "responsibility," what is?
A different question, and what a lot of you are calling "responsibility," is whether they should/could have refrained from the prank because the person who picked up the phone might commit suicide upon realizing she'd been pranked. Of course not. They couldn't know that.
They should/could have refrained from the prank just because a) it's not funny in the first place and b) if you're questioning the legality of something that's supposed to be a lighthearted, fun deal, IT'S PROBABLY NOT LIGHTHEARTED AND FUN!
Exactly. It's the Not Knowing aspect that should have made them stop and think. They knew there would be distress, that's a given. They didn't know the amount or scale of the distress (although fooling a person into revealing confidential information by pretending to be a Head Of State was only ever going to lead to major distress) and yet they chose to continue despite being unable to quantify the effects of their actions. The one thing that was certain was that it could only have had a negative effect. At what point did we decide that we no longer had a duty of care towards others ?.
There are tons of pranks done on the radio and TV every year. No one kills themself over it except this idiot nurse. Maybe the British media was hounding her, but it is in no way the radio people's fault.
I honestly don't think the djs are responsible for the suicide aspect, if there actually was a real threat of suicide. I bet the family knows enough about what was going on in her life to strongly believe the djs were not at fault on that account because she had probably shown repeated signs of psychological instability and they didn't know what was going on, what to believe or how to help. They probably don't blame or harbor any ill feelings toward anyone because they know she would have crashed whether or not the djs were ever in the picture. Now, did they make it worse?yes. Were they the cause? highly unlikely.
As a UK citizen I completely hold the DJs responsible for this. This was a not a prank, a prank is farting in a crowded elevator or changing someone's desktop background for a few minutes, not something on the scale of obtaining information related to the royal family by deception.
Although they could never forsee the consequences they surely knew the risks would be putting someone's career and livelihood at risk, making someone a laughung stock in the british press - surely had they considered these as risks and should not have proceeded with such behaviour. The 2 DJs have two carry the responsibility of this women's death with them for the rest of their life and I have little sympathy given their ill-considered actions.
Another piece of information that I think is important is that she was an immigrant who was probably very committed to living her life well in England. Like others have noted, there's an allegiance to the royalty in England that we can't quite imagine here in America.
I also guess she didn't pick up on the accent that the DJs thought would give them away because English is her second language.
My guess is immigrants feel that allegiance to the crown even more forcefully than your average English guy, and that she would have taken this prank harder than your average English guy.
Of course, the leap to suicide can only be taken my somebody who is already seriously mentally ill.
To those who think the DJs are not in the least culpable for this, I agree that if the nurse was driven to suicide over this prank she was probably a ticking time bomb. At the same time, where there is life, there is hope. There was hope that she could have overcome her demons.
While I don't think the DJs should be punished or anything, it is an undeniable fact that as a result of their actions, that life and that hope was extinguished. They couldn't have known this was going to happen, but it did.
I'm throwing rocks out a window for fun. Just to try to hit a particular spot on a nearby tree. One time, a bird flies by and I accidentally nail the bird. Could I have reasonably foreseen this? No, of course not! But do I still bear some responsibility? Of course!
I agree with you. I don't think her change in location was connected at all to it, if anything it probably helped whatever was going on with her and she knew that. It makes you wonder if she knew it was a prank, if there really was a genuine leap to suicide. Did she write anything that actually said the words that she wanted to kill herself? because she could be one of those women who are dramatic sometimes when they get upset and then everything got out of control.
Oh my goosness! The poor birdie got taken out. and I'm not sure why I'm smiling after I watched bird demolition, but I am :D okay, gotta sleep so I will be able to do all the work I was supposed to get done yesterday.
Wow. Really? What if someone said "hello" to her and then she committed suicide? Would that be a bad reason? If so, then are you making a judgement? What line then do you draw that says, ok, now it's ok? Just because someone decides they are going to commit suicide does not mean it was for a good reason. Sorry, but I will judge that...suicide over embarrassment is ridiculous. I'm sorry she got punked like that, and those DJs were punks, but her reaction to it was WAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too much.And, since when is it bad to judge things? YOU do it. If someone steals your stuff, do you judge them? Of course you do. Not everyone's values are to be respected. Some value beating their children.
GenericID wrote:
As I said, I'm not a fan of pranks, but the prank they pulled did not warrant a suicide.So now you get to decide what everyone does with their lives? If the nurse felt that her embarrassment over the prank which had been pulled on her warranted her taking her own life, then that is her decision, not yours.
Was she not free to do what she wanted with her life? I think you expect to be able to decide your own fate (insofar as any of us can), why not her?
(My point here Flagpole, in case you didn't get it, is that we all place different values on things - this was her expression of her values, and just because you don't share those values doesn't make her choice less valid.)
UK Broadshoulder wrote:
As a UK citizen I completely hold the DJs responsible for this. This was a not a prank, a prank is farting in a crowded elevator or changing someone's desktop background for a few minutes, not something on the scale of obtaining information related to the royal family by deception.
"Royal" family? Are you for real? Do you actually still believe that these people are special by some sort of birthright? Seriously? Um, welcome to the 21st century. Well, perhaps that would be too much of a shock. Perhaps it would be better if you tried to catch up to say, the 19th century.
"Royal" family. LOL.