# Child damages artwork, parents get bill for $132K **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [June 16, 2018, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187 "2018-06-16T02:24:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Corry\_El](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecae2f/32.png) [@Corry\_El](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Corry_El)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2018, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/21 "2018-06-16T18:50:58Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > Looking at the video, clearly the museums fault and they are lucky that the kid did not get harmed by their negligence, multiple kids are on that statue before this one goes there and basically does the same thing all other kids are doing. > > I feel the opposite, the museum should be closed for safety reasons, not reopend till the staff is trained to either safeguard the works or secure them, and sued as they obviously have a pattern of letting children touch/hug this sculpture but had it so unsecured that it could be tipped over by a child. Having one parent in the mix telling their child not to do it (assumed) does not change the rest of the video, actually reinforces taht the museum is not doing that, and when one kid sees it others want to follow (this goes for adults also). > > I find it distressful that kids were such exposed to this and am quite angry with the museum that they would allow this to happen. I agree showing other kids touching it (maybe there’s lots of footage of that) and no action by the museum to stop it suggests an ‘attractive nuisance’ issue. [eta sorry to be repetitive on that, simultaneous posts] Parents aren’t blameless either if their kids run around the neighborhood, fall into somebody’s _too easy to access_ pool and drown. But the pool owner or their insurance is going to pay out in that a case like that generally if it is judged too easy to access. Saying the ‘parents should have supervised’ does not confer blanket immunity from liability involving curious kids getting hurt by stuff. So it logically would not either in case of trying to claim compensation from the parents where the kid happened not to get hurt (no way would anyone with PR sense at the ins co try to make the parents pay if the kid had been seriously hurt, as seems could easily have happened, which wouldn’t really change who was at fault). You’ve come closest it seems to implying it’s all or almost all the museum/municipality’s fault. I’m mainly with the posts saying there’s fault to go around. But just as a practical matter if I were the parents I’d get a lawyer and explore a countersuit. Not that I’d think I wasn’t at fault, but everyone has a right to defend their finances. And these people have some case I think that their fault shouldn’t be measured at absolute full (and probably then some) list price of the sculpture. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2018, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/22 "2018-06-16T19:26:19Z")
> [@Ignotus](#): > > Am I the only one who gets the impression that the kid was mostly interested in… ahem… certain parts of the female anatomy of that sculpture? Yes, he kept grabbing the breasts. A very affectionate boy indeed. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2018, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/23 "2018-06-16T19:40:53Z")
I don’t think an attractive nuisance is “everyone has to lock up everything that children may want to touch,” because that’s literally everything on earth. Libraries would not be allowed to have shelves, for example, because kids loooove climbing shelves. Sure, people have a responsibility to secure swimming pools and so forth that kids who are wandering around a neighborhood may be attracted to, and tragedy may result. But this was not a case of having a statute in an area where kids who you’d expect to unsupervised could wander into. If you’re in a community center, it’s reasonable to believe that kids are there for a reason, and the duty to supervise children to prevent unfortunate accidents (IMHO) comes along with that. Seems like the statute was displayed in a way you’d expect most statutes in a facility like that to be displayed. I can’t reach the conclusion that the facility was negligent by displaying art in the way that pretty much everyone expects. ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2018, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/24 "2018-06-16T20:42:06Z")
> [@Jacquernagy](#): > > If you’re going to call a place “Tomahawk Ridge Community Center” you need to have less fragile art installations. You need to have big-ass wood carvings and sculptures with lots of leather and steel and shit. There’s no place for flimsy, froofy glass frippery and other such trifling nonsense at a place whose name contains the word “Tomahawk.” The child should be forced to rip the heart out of a buffalo with his bare hands. That was very rude of you. Tomahawk Community Center is close by. It is named that because that was the name of the former school which was taken over to become a community center. I live in Overland Park and this is the first I have heard of this. I will see what I can find out? ---
**Author:** ![sitchensis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sitchensis/32/4892_2.png) [@sitchensis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sitchensis)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2018, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/25 "2018-06-16T20:46:35Z")
If the kid worked there he’d have an L&I claim and the workplace would be at fault. ---
**Author:** ![aceplace57](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aceplace57/32/3500_2.png) [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2018, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/26 "2018-06-16T20:58:09Z")
Statues in parks get climbed on. They are properly secured because there are idiots out there. The community center should have realized kids would be grabbing at this thing. They are at fault here. ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2018, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/27 "2018-06-16T21:22:06Z")
If I’m associated with an insurance company and a city comes to me saying “Hey, we’d like a policy so that when a 5-year-old kid visits a place where kids are welcome and for a couple of minutes gets slightly out of control, you pony up $132k for the damages” my response would be to quote a _very_ stiff annual premium. ---
**Author:** ![aceplace57](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aceplace57/32/3500_2.png) [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2018, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/28 "2018-06-16T21:41:43Z")
I have to question the value of that piece. Local artists can churn out something like that pretty fast. That design goes back to the Greeks and been copied forever. I might accept 25k for a custom piece. But, a 132k item in a community center and totally unprotected? Who does that? ---
**Author:** ![Joey\_P](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@Joey\_P](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joey_P)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2018, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/29 "2018-06-16T21:54:45Z")
> [@aceplace57](#): > > I have to question the value of that piece. > > Local artists can churn out something like that pretty fast. That design goes back to the Greeks and been copied forever. > > I might accept 25k for a custom piece. > > But, a 132k item in a community center and totally unprotected? Who does that? The ‘value’ is just what the artist is asking for it. I’m sure the insurance people will have it appraised and take into consideration any current offers on it as well as what the artist’s other pieces have sold for. I mean, I can ‘value’ my car for $130,000 but when it gets smashed up, the insurance company is probably only going to give me 10k for it. > [@Xema](#): > > If I’m associated with an insurance company and a city comes to me saying “Hey, we’d like a policy so that when a 5-year-old kid visits a place where kids are welcome and for a couple of minutes gets slightly out of control, you pony up $132k for the damages” my response would be to quote a _very_ stiff annual premium. I thought the actuarial tables/underwriters figure all that out. I don’t know that there’s a whole lot of discretion on the part of the agent/broker to adjust premiums. I assume the policy spells out very clearly what is and isn’t covered. Since they’re attempting to collect from the family, they likely paid out on the claim. ---
**Author:** ![Aspidistra](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspidistra/32/3894_2.png) [@Aspidistra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspidistra)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2018, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/30 "2018-06-16T23:34:39Z")
_That’s_ an “unsupervised” child? Pull the other one. The family’s in the room down the corridor (you can see in the video, about 30s, as they’re coming in, they enter past the statue, the kid wants to climb on the plinth, and his dad tells him no) Then at about 43s the video cuts to the end when, as the mother says in the article, they’re getting ready to leave and the two kids get out in front of the parents on the way back out. Which is completely normal kids-leaving-places-with-their-family behaviour - if I saw a couple of parents say to their young schoolkids “yes, we’re just gathering our stuff, you can go wait by the car, we’ll be out in five” I wouldn’t bat an eyelid in a well-trafficked open area like that. It’s literally 20 seconds between when the kid leaves the room and disaster. If the standard of ‘supervised’ is ‘must have continuous eye contact on all your children whenever you leave the house’ then this is a standard that has been achieved by no parents in the history of ever. “Don’t leave artwork so poorly secured that a five year old can knock it down in less than five seconds” seems like a much more achievable standard to hold someone to. ---
**Author:** ![UCBearcats](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/77aa72/32.png) [@UCBearcats](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UCBearcats)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2018, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/31 "2018-06-16T23:42:04Z")
People who can’t supervise their children shouldn’t have them. ---
**Author:** ![jtur88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e9c0ed/32.png) [@jtur88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jtur88)\ **Post date:** [June 16, 2018, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/32 "2018-06-16T23:55:29Z")
In my view, I don’t think there is a strong case for payment. The owner of the artwork has been compensated, and it is the insurance company that has accepted the risk. This is exactly the risk exposure that the insurer undertakes to indemnify, and the family is under no obligation to pay the bill. I would assume that insurers routinely try to recover their payouts like this, but I doubt if they have much success. Insurers collect generous premiums against accidental losses, and then find it easy to argue that there is no such thing as an accident, human fault can always be found. ---
**Author:** ![Two\_Many\_Cats](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8dc957/32.png) [@Two\_Many\_Cats](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Two_Many_Cats)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2018, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/33 "2018-06-17T00:00:54Z")
If we accept whatever the artist says it’s worth, what’s to stop the artist from gouging? If the artist had said two million, that means it’s worth two million, no questions asked? Kids do need to learn that the world is not their playground though. ---
**Author:** ![jtur88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e9c0ed/32.png) [@jtur88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jtur88)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2018, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/34 "2018-06-17T00:10:36Z")
> [@Two\_Many\_Cats](#): > > If we accept whatever the artist says it’s worth, what’s to stop the artist from gouging? > > If the artist had said two million, that means it’s worth two million, no questions asked? > > Kids do need to learn that the world is not their playground though. I assume the insurers of art works and the like have knowledgeable investigators who can determine value, based normally on the last price the work sold for, or a realistic asking price for an item offered for sale, or an appraisal from an auction house. Probably also, in advance of the insurance agreement, an itemized list of the inventory and a declared value of each piece. Kids DO learn that, but are still a part of the natural environment before they do. If a small child can tip over a display, it was not displayed securely enough, and that is the fault of neither the child nor the parents. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2018, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/35 "2018-06-17T00:15:24Z")
I opened this thread all ready to pile onto the parents who let their kids run wild in an art gallery and harm valuable works. Instead, I find this bullshit. A fragile sculpture in a public room in a _community center_, with minimal protection, yet supposedly valued at $132K, but nobody bothered to protect it as if it were particularly valuable. And this wasn’t a damn [china shop](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYoxNh4D1J8), where a parent would be on notice that s/he would have to keep an eagle eye on the kid every second, or better yet, keep the kid out of there altogether. (I don’t know about _your_ community center, but in ours, kids run about a good bit.) So I’m on the parents’ side here. A community center is the sort of place where you shouldn’t need to keep an eye on your kid every damn second, and it clearly didn’t take more than a few seconds for a preschooler to break the statue. AFAIAC, it’s between the artist, the community center, and the center’s insurance company. The parents should have every right to tell them to piss up a rope. ---
**Author:** ![Tzigone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Tzigone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tzigone)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2018, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/36 "2018-06-17T00:23:51Z")
I’m a lot less generous to the parents than a lot of people. If your kids breaks something that belongs to someone else, that is a problem, and you should at least be apologetic about and attempt to compensate the other party (at or lease feel bad about not being able to do so). And the bullshit “he was probably trying to hug it because he’s sweet” _really_ irritated me, because he was doing no such thing. He was a kid climbing and playing on something he shouldn’t have been. Normal behavior for a kid, not abominable, but not the crap mom was saying, either. ---
**Author:** ![Urbanredneck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ea5d25/32.png) [@Urbanredneck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Urbanredneck)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2018, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/37 "2018-06-17T00:25:10Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > I opened this thread all ready to pile onto the parents who let their kids run wild in an art gallery and harm valuable works. > > Instead, I find this bullshit. A fragile sculpture in a public room in a _community center_, with minimal protection, yet supposedly valued at $132K, but nobody bothered to protect it as if it were particularly valuable. And this wasn’t a damn [china shop](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYoxNh4D1J8), where a parent would be on notice that s/he would have to keep an eagle eye on the kid every second, or better yet, keep the kid out of there altogether. (I don’t know about _your_ community center, but in ours, kids run about a good bit.) > > So I’m on the parents’ side here. A community center is the sort of place where you shouldn’t need to keep an eye on your kid every damn second, and it clearly didn’t take more than a few seconds for a preschooler to break the statue. AFAIAC, it’s between the artist, the community center, and the center’s insurance company. The parents should have every right to tell them to piss up a rope. I have looked into this more. First, [Tomahawk Ridge is a COMMUNITY CENTER](https://www.opkansas.org/things-to-see-and-do/community-centers/tomahawk-ridge-community-center/). Right next to a public pool and features a gym, childcare area, and fitness center. It is used for all kinds of community events like day camps for kids and birthday parties. It is NOT, NOT a art museum! Basically someone donated this piece to the community center to be placed in a room that features artwork but has no real security. A kid got away from his parents and ran up and broke it. From what I can tell it was basically just a foyer. You know what? Someone could have easily just walked in and stole it! Hey its worth $132,000 isnt it? So I think the insurance company is out of luck on this one. ---
**Author:** ![filmore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7993a0/32.png) [@filmore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/filmore)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2018, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/38 "2018-06-17T00:46:45Z")
The parents should sue the community center saying their child has been traumatized because the statue fell on him. Because he’s so young, this trauma will certainly greatly affect his entire lifetime earning potential. It’s probably the same insurance company who has the liability policy, so it should streamline things. Once the parents win their multi-million dollar settlement, they’ll can just tell the insurance company to deduct the $132k and send them the rest. ---
**Author:** ![Merneith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/57b2e6/32.png) [@Merneith](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merneith)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2018, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/39 "2018-06-17T01:17:04Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > If a small child can tip over a display, it was not displayed securely enough, and that is the fault of neither the child nor the parents. If the kid had just bumped into the display, you might have a point. But this kid tried to climb the exhibit. It’s unreasonable to expect that every object in a community center would be stabilized for use as a jungle gym. The dad should have reamed the kid out the first time he caught him monkeying with the sculpture. Instead, the parents moseyed on down and let the kids out of their line of sight. If you can’t see your kids - then they aren’t being supervised. I’m glad the child wasn’t hurt but - he broke it. His parents now get to buy it. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2018, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187/40 "2018-06-17T01:29:21Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > In my view, I don’t think there is a strong case for payment. The owner of the artwork has been compensated, and it is the insurance company that has accepted the risk. This is exactly the risk exposure that the insurer undertakes to indemnify, and the family is under no obligation to pay the bill. > > I would assume that insurers routinely try to recover their payouts like this, but I doubt if they have much success. Insurers collect generous premiums against accidental losses, and then find it easy to argue that there is no such thing as an accident, human fault can always be found. Insurance companies prevail in subrogation suits every day. There are attorneys that do nothing but subrogation lawsuits. Here is one: > **[Confessions of an Insurance Subrogation Attorney](https://www.propertycasualty360.com/2013/11/22/confessions-of-an-insurance-subrogation-attorney/?slreturn=20240519163035)** > > It's time to explain what my 33-year career in the subrogation industry is all about. Often truth is stranger than fiction. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/child-damages-artwork-parents-get-bill-for-132k/816187.md?page=3)