I know, this is Actually Infuriating, but … Also she didn’t just leave the now-dead kid in the car, she left two in there to die, but one survived. My guess: with brain damage. “Always Beautiful Medical Spa” FFS. Duck lips were totally worth it.
A baby died after his mother left him and his 2-year-old sibling inside a car while she was getting lip filler at a Bakersfield medical spa on a 101-degree day, authorities said.
It is estimated that Hernandez’s children were in the vehicle without air-conditioning for 90 minutes, wrote Det. Kyle McNabb, noting that the internal temperature of a car can rise to a blistering 143 degrees in just one hour of 100-degree weather.
Hernandez told police she found her baby foaming at the mouth and having an apparent seizure after emerging from her procedure at Always Beautiful Medical Spa, according to the police report. She frantically dialed 911, and both her children were transported to a hospital for treatment.
By the time her 1-year-old arrived at Adventist Health hospital, he wasn’t breathing, had no pulse, his lips were blue, and he had an internal body temperature of 107.2 degrees
she should have read her cars manual, and if thr manual didn’t cover the cars anti-features Toyota should be punished
Gonna assume that’s a joke??
The kids died because the engine auto shut off, so it’s actually an interesting question as to whether the manufacturer bears responsibility for having implemented a ‘feature’ dangerously.
Leaving a baby in a car for 90 minutes is neglect and dangerous no matter what features that car had.
I agree. But that doesn’t really address the issue under discussion
It does though. Leaving the baby in the car is the issue. The car manufacturer can’t be responsible for someone being a horrible parent, no matter if their manual said not to leave a baby in the car or not. It’s common sense not to do that.
Tragedy is not usually due to a single cause. Multiple failures have to happen for a tragedy to occur. In this case, the mum left them unattended, and the manufacturer implemented a feature in a dangerous way. It should have been obvious in the design phase that this was a risk, to pets if nothing else. The solution is also well known, there have been groups lobbying to make occupant sensors standard for literally decades. That they implemented one without the other is arguably corporate negligence for nothing more than extremely minor cost savings.
car manufacturers should inform the users about features that are potentially unintuitive and different from previous cars (let’s say all features that weren’t commonplace 2-3 decades ago)