Quote (Goomshill @ Jul 8 2025 11:30pm)

You "can't put a price tag" on pretty much anything the civil courts are putting a price tag on. Peace of mind, a relationship, pregnancy, sex. The judge in the case even specifically cited the normal costs of a surrogate mother as a reference to put a dollar value onto the burden of a woman carrying a 'wrongful conception'. The entire point of the court case is to determine the value of these non-goods, non-services, so that they can sue over them. The jury determined what the value of sex was, what the cost of pregnancy was, how many dollars your emotions are worth. They even had precedents on risk and exposure for waiving values, such as the inherent emotional jeopardy associated with being in a personal relationship negating the monetary value of someone else compromising it. All those values translated to a fungible currency tradeable for concrete.

They were required to also determine the value of a human life and the benefit it will bring to a family. They absolutely do get to deduct the 'value of the concrete', that was right in the jury instructions and judge on appeal. It was up to them to determine whether that concrete dumped in their yard that they got to keep and benefit from, had inherent value or not. To a jury, is a human life just a burden and will bring only the costs associated with disposing of the unwanted little brat? A worthless little unwanted concrete blob dragging you down, with no redeeming merit, with no reason to be alive, and nothing but the grace of legal codes forbidding a post-birth abortion to force them to maintain such a toxic asset. Well, that's the view of the jury, at least. A life is worth $0

Quote (Plaguefear @ Jul 8 2025 08:13pm)

In the fact that neither are something that should be payed for when you didn't ask for them (or specifically paid for a service to prevent them existing) they are identical.

Quote (Budgeting @ Jul 9 2025 10:46am)

no its not identical at all. equating a baby to concrete is just stupid lol. human life is probably one of the greatest marvels of the universe. our brains alone are super computers.

Quote (Plaguefear @ Jul 8 2025 07:15pm)

Again, THEY DIDN'T WANT IT so it has NO VALUE TO THE FAMILY.

If you drop a bomb on my roof you can't charge me for the bomb.

Quote (Goomshill @ Jul 8 2025 06:39pm)

Again, the jury instructions specifically excluded that argument and required the jury to determine the value that is brought by having a child in the family, unwanted or not. Not sure how you fail to understand this after it is said multiple times in a row. The jury was required to determine the value of your 'concrete' 'bomb' and quantify the dollar value of how much a child would enrich the lives of their parents. This is standard for a civil damages claim, unwanted or not the values must be offset.

The jury had to deliberate on the dollar value of a human life. How much benefit a child brings over an entire lifetime, the future support they will provide, their emotional and financial value. All the ineffable qualities of the human condition boiled down in a court to a single number, because thats what the jury was doing with every other consideration of emotional burdens and value of relationships in this case.

And they judged this child to be a worthless piece of shit

Quote (Goomshill @ Jul 8 2025 08:39pm)

Again, the jury instructions specifically excluded that argument and required the jury to determine the value that is brought by having a child in the family, unwanted or not. Not sure how you fail to understand this after it is said multiple times in a row. The jury was required to determine the value of your 'concrete' 'bomb' and quantify the dollar value of how much a child would enrich the lives of their parents. This is standard for a civil damages claim, unwanted or not the values must be offset.

The jury had to deliberate on the dollar value of a human life. How much benefit a child brings over an entire lifetime, the future support they will provide, their emotional and financial value. All the ineffable qualities of the human condition boiled down in a court to a single number, because thats what the jury was doing with every other consideration of emotional burdens and value of relationships in this case.

And they judged this child to be a worthless piece of shit

Quote (Goomshill @ Jul 9 2025 11:39am)

Again, the jury instructions specifically excluded that argument and required the jury to determine the value that is brought by having a child in the family, unwanted or not. Not sure how you fail to understand this after it is said multiple times in a row. The jury was required to determine the value of your 'concrete' 'bomb' and quantify the dollar value of how much a child would enrich the lives of their parents. This is standard for a civil damages claim, unwanted or not the values must be offset.

The jury had to deliberate on the dollar value of a human life. How much benefit a child brings over an entire lifetime, the future support they will provide, their emotional and financial value. All the ineffable qualities of the human condition boiled down in a court to a single number, because thats what the jury was doing with every other consideration of emotional burdens and value of relationships in this case.

And they judged this child to be a worthless piece of shit

Quote (Plaguefear @ Jul 8 2025 09:50pm)

They decided zero because ITS UNWANTED, what part is your brain not grasping?

Quote

The Szlachtowskis say Minnesota Urology should be on the hook for a slew of damages related to the birth, including physical pain, emotional distress, lost economic opportunities and the cost of raising the child.

The case will ask jurors to weigh some of those damages against whatever they determine is the monetary value parents derive throughout their life from the joy of raising a child.