" McFact No. 1: For years, McDonald's had known they had a problem with the way they make their coffee - that their coffee was served much hotter (at least 20 degrees more so) than at other restaurants.
This fallacy is known as
ad populum. It amounts to saying that what most do isn't always right. My teachers used to say, "If all the others jumped off a cliff would you?" Whether or not serving coffee at 185 degrees F is negligent or not, needs to be established independently of what the other restaurants are doing.
McFact No. 2: McDonald's knew its coffee sometimes caused serious injuries - more than 700 incidents of scalding coffee burns in the past decade have been settled by the Corporation - and yet they never so much as consulted a burn expert regarding the issue.
Coffee causes injuries. So do hammers, saws, knives and ladders. But if the user is the one at fault, then they get the responsibility. This woman spilled the coffee on herself off the premises of the store. That's her fault. Of course they wouldn't consult a burn expert, it's not relevant.
McFact No. 3: The woman involved in this infamous case suffered very serious injuries - third degree burns on her groin, thighs and buttocks that required skin grafts and a seven-day hospital stay.
McDonald's is not responsible for her excessively frail condition. I've spilled hotter coffee on myself with no problems, (I have said "ouch"). It's more sensible that this woman, or her caretaker, not mess with coffee given her unusual frailties, than McDonald's (or anyone else) alter what they do on the speculation that maybe, just maybe this or that could happen. Let's not use hindsight.
McFact No. 4: The woman, an 81-year old former department store clerk who had never before filed suit against anyone, said she wouldn't have brought the lawsuit against McDonald's had the Corporation not dismissed her request for compensation for medical bills.
Of course, she spilled the coffee on herself, coffee that given her unbelievably frail condition, she shouldn't even have gotten in the first place. People always want to blame someone else.
McFact No. 5: A McDonald's quality assurance manager testified in the case that the Corporation was aware of the risk of serving dangerously hot coffee and had no plans to either turn down the heat or to post warning about the possibility of severe burns, even though most customers wouldn't think it was possible.
Anything is dangerous in some way, (why are butter knives still allowed?). I've heard that thousands complained about the coffee being too hot. How many complained that it wasn't hot enough? I doubt if that was no one. For a mom and pop business that would be alot, but given their size I don't think this # of complaints would stick out very much.
McFact No. 6: After careful deliberation, the jury found McDonald's was liable because the facts were overwhelmingly against the company. When it came to the punitive damages, the jury found that McDonald's had engaged in willful, reckless, malicious, or wanton conduct, and rendered a punitive damage award of 2.7 million dollars. (The equivalent of just two days of coffee sales, McDonalds Corporation generates revenues in excess of 1.3 million dollars daily from the sale of its coffee, selling 1 billion cups each year.)
I think you give it away in that last sentence. "Give her the money, so what if it's not really McDonald's fault, that not much to them and this woman has need of it." The problem I have with it, isn't that I feel sorry for McDonald's, but the precedent it sets in depriving me of hot coffee. And I like it hot, not lukewarm. And the other policies that get set following this, my freedom will be limited because people fear the lawsuits that come from the few who hurt themselves, then don't take responsibility, a dumb jury gives them an award, and it hurts the rest of us. I've run into this since I was a kid and "cracker balls" got banned because some dumb kids ate them. Then some cool playground equipment was taken away because some loser got hurt. These losers get hurt, and something I want to do gets banned. Someday, in the name of safety, it will be impossible to have any fun, anywhere.
McFact No. 7: On appeal, a judge lowered the award to $480,000, a fact not widely publicized in the media.
I know that and so what? $480,000 is still $480,000 too much. And the ruling still has the chill effects I discussed above. (It did, because shortly after this, when I'd get a coffee refill at Wendy's they'd put a lid on it. I'd tell them, "Don't bother". But they'd say that they have to, so these decisions really do impact things all over.
McFact No. 8: A report in Liability Week, September 29, 1997, indicated that Kathleen Gilliam, 73, suffered first degree burns when a cup of coffee spilled onto her lap. Reports also indicate that McDonald's consistently keeps its coffee at 185 degrees, still approximately 20 degrees hotter than at other restaurants. Third degree burns occur at this temperature in just two to seven seconds, requiring skin grafting, debridement and whirlpool treatments that cost tens of thousands of dollars and result in permanent disfigurement, extreme pain and disability to the victims for many months, and in some cases, years."
My goodness, then why don't we ban people from preparing it at home? I've heard some government workers say that they want to get the right to inspect our homes for safety. It's for our own good, mind you. (I'm from the government, and I'm here to help). I don't want this help. If I mess up, I'll blame myself. I promise.
To sum up. I see how some people feel about this. They think that some lady got some mild discomfort from from spilling coffee, and that once you show how bad her burns were, we'll all go, "Oh my! I...I...had no idea." Freak outcomes happen. I think most of the people who thought this verdict was ridiculous understood the principles I've outlined, and their minds won't be changed by hearing about her burns. My problem isn't with "poor McDonald's", it's the way the rules get changed for ALL of us just to look out for these people.