• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should parents have legal standing and the ability to sue for damages...

Should parents have the ability to sue in the event of an adult child's death?

  • Total voters
    24
radcen

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,576
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Should parents have legal standing and the ability to sue for damages in the event of a wrongful death of an **adult** child? Key word: "adult", age 18+

I say 'no'. An adult is, or should be considered, a separate entity... emotionally, legally, and otherwise... and should be treated as such. The ties have been broken, and there is no longer a direct connection.

Lone exception: If the parents end up raising the adult child's children, then the parents could sue for the costs of raising said children, but no other damages, emotional, punitive, or otherwise.

Please note that this question is not asking what the current legalities are, but rather what the legalities should be. You can state that you favor the current legalities and that's fine, but simply spouting what the current legalities are will not address the question.
 
radcen said:
Should parents have legal standing and the ability to sue for damages in the event of a wrongful death of an **adult** child? Key word: "adult", age 18+

I say 'no'. An adult is, or should be considered, a separate entity... emotionally, legally, and otherwise... and should be treated as such. The ties have been broken, and there is no longer a direct connection.

Lone exception: If the parents end up raising the adult child's children, then the parents could sue for the costs of raising said children, but no other damages, emotional, punitive, or otherwise.

Please note that this question is not asking what the current legalities are, but rather what the legalities should be. You can state that you favor the current legalities and that's fine, but simply spouting what the current legalities are will not address the question.
Click to expand...

The next legal kin should have legal right to sue in a wrongful death suit whether that be the parents, a sibling, etc.
 
TheNextEra said:
The next legal kin should have legal right to sue in a wrongful death suit whether that be the parents, a sibling, etc.
Click to expand...

I would agree with this. There may be medical bills, student loans, or what not and if it is a wrongful death the next of kin would need the power to do what needs to be done.
 
americanwoman said:
I would agree with this. There may be medical bills, student loans, or what not and if it is a wrongful death the next of kin would need the power to do what needs to be done.
Click to expand...
The next of kin would not be liable for bills and unpaid loans. The estate would, but not any relatives. Unless they co-signed, but that's another matter as they consciously agreed to pay in the event the primary borrower could not. Contrary to popular belief, estate money is NOT the property of any heirs unless and until all estate obligations are paid (or forgiven) first.

If there is no money in the estate, the bills die with the borrower.
 
If the "adult" is still living at home, in school, contributing to the home, taking care of mom and dad. Then yes.
 
CRUE CAB said:
If the "adult" is still living at home, in school, contributing to the home, taking care of mom and dad. Then yes.
Click to expand...
How about if still living in their parent's home and/or going to school, and NOT contributing or taking care of mom and dad?
 
If the adult child has his own family (spouse, kids) then obviously not as suit money should go to them.
If the parents took care of the adult child (handicapped, special needs, etc.) then yes.
If the parents were the only survivors of the dead adult child, then yes.
 
tres borrachos said:
If the adult child has his own family (spouse, kids) then obviously not as suit money should go to them.
If the parents took care of the adult child (handicapped, special needs, etc.) then yes.
If the parents were the only survivors of the dead adult child, then yes.
Click to expand...
I have to ask: Why?
 
Is there some specific case in which this question has come up? It's hard to say what the legal rule should be in the absence of facts.
 
radcen said:
Why would 'next of kin' qualify? Next of kin could be a cousin, as far as that goes.
Click to expand...

Wait - qualify for what?

Of course next of kin could be a cousin if that's all you have left in the world.

Are you going someplace here?
 
radcen said:
The next of kin would not be liable for bills and unpaid loans. The estate would, but not any relatives. Unless they co-signed, but that's another matter as they consciously agreed to pay in the event the primary borrower could not. Contrary to popular belief, estate money is NOT the property of any heirs unless and until all estate obligations are paid (or forgiven) first.

If there is no money in the estate, the bills die with the borrower.
Click to expand...

If next of kin are distributees they would see their share of the estate is potentially impacted, though on the other hand the estate should probably be the one bringing the suit.

I don't know what the law is as far as who has standing in a wrongful death suit but I think it sensible that it be restricted to next of kin. If that's the parents so be it.
 
radcen said:
Why would 'next of kin' qualify? Next of kin could be a cousin, as far as that goes.
Click to expand...

If there's a civil wrong then the wrong doer needs to be held accountable. If not next of kin then who?
 
tres borrachos said:
Wait - qualify for what?

Of course next of kin could be a cousin if that's all you have left in the world.

Are you going someplace here?
Click to expand...
Most people would agree that a cousin would/should not have legal standing to sue for the wrongful death of an unmarried 35 yr old adult even if they are the next of kin. If so, why should parents be different? Is the 35 yr old adult not a separate entity unto them self?


Gaius46 said:
If there's a civil wrong then the wrong doer needs to be held accountable. If not next of kin then who?
Click to expand...
Why does it have to be anybody? If a law was broken then the wrong doer would/should be held accountable criminally. Civil wrong doings are far more nebulous.
 
radcen said:
Should parents have legal standing and the ability to sue for damages in the event of a wrongful death of an **adult** child? Key word: "adult", age 18+

I say 'no'. An adult is, or should be considered, a separate entity... emotionally, legally, and otherwise... and should be treated as such. The ties have been broken, and there is no longer a direct connection.

Lone exception: If the parents end up raising the adult child's children, then the parents could sue for the costs of raising said children, but no other damages, emotional, punitive, or otherwise.

Please note that this question is not asking what the current legalities are, but rather what the legalities should be. You can state that you favor the current legalities and that's fine, but simply spouting what the current legalities are will not address the question.
Click to expand...

Families sue for wrongful death all the time. If a peson is not married, someone has to represent him of her, so I say yes.
 
jet57 said:
Families sue for wrongful death all the time. If a peson is not married, someone has to represent him of her, so I say yes.
Click to expand...
Suing presumes there was a tangible loss. If the adult child was independent, and didn't leave kids to be cared for, what is the tangible loss?
 
radcen said:
Most people would agree that a cousin would/should not have legal standing to sue for the wrongful death of an unmarried 35 yr old adult even if they are the next of kin. If so, why should parents be different? Is the 35 yr old adult not a separate entity unto them self?



Why does it have to be anybody? If a law was broken then the wrong doer would/should be held accountable criminally. Civil wrong doings are far more nebulous.
Click to expand...

Because not all wrongs are covered by criminal law. The makers of a defective product that kills someone may not have any criminal liability so throwing them in jail just isn't going to happen. However they may have civil liability.

I don't think tort law is any more nebulous than criminal law - it's actually probably the opposite - though I'd love to hear the opinion of lawyer or two on that. The standard of proof is lower for civil wrongs......
 
CRUE CAB said:
The state can pick up the charges and file.
Click to expand...


Why would the state file a civil case on behalf of a dead guy? If anything the state has even less standing than next of kin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom