93 yo Freezes to Death in House when Power Shut Off!

Despite the subzero temperatures, the power company decided to cut off the power to a 93 year old WW2 vet. The result? The guy was found frozen to death in his own home a few days later. Ironically, the electric bill was found on his counter with a bunch of money clipped to it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

City succeeds where Nazis failed.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

LOL. Good one. Who knew the poor guy would survive WW2 and be killed by the power company.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=90129

 

What's different this time?

What's the alternative? Make an exception because he's old? Because he served in World War II?

Don't get me wrong; I think the situation is abhorrent. And it's symptomatic of our American values that place money above everything else.

What I don't get, though, is what makes this different. Ironically, the bill was found on his counter with the money? He should have sent it in. At least, that's what we would normally hear from those whose political affiliations make a big issue out of "personal accountability". By that doctrine, nobody is to blame for Schur's death but Schur himself.

So what's different this time? Really, I'm curious.

 

Yep, pretty much. People just feel sorry for old people because they are perceived as especially vulnerable.

 

Actually what the deal is this time, is that nobody told Shur thaththe device was being put on his house. Not to mention that most of the people in bay City wit the limiter do not actually know they have it installed. Nobody came to the house to tell him there was no notice mailed. In fact it is likely Shur died of hypothermia becuase the limiter was triggered. the lethargy that comes witb the first stages of hypothermia was his downfall as he did not even have the energy to call in that he had the money for the bill.

 

Well a number of places it is illegal to shut power off in the winter and there are programs to reduce the cost and help pay for the energy needs of at risk people.

 

But isn't a society judged on how they treat the vulnerable?

 

Personal accountability, Nuremberg-lite, and muddied assertions of fact

Well, obviously, we need more sources on this, because the topic article says that BCEL&P mailed a notice to the house "a few weeks ago". And that someone placed a shutoff notice on his door. Speaking from personal experience, that shutoff notice and the bills with "PAST DUE" stamped on the front of the envelope in big red letters is the only notice I've gotten.

And in that sense, we're still back to personal accountability.

This incident underscores systemic problems in our supply network, namely that the "right thing" is too often defined by the transfer of money from one party to another. Beyond that, if BCEL&P is telling different stories on different days, it suggests that they need to get their heads out of their asses and figure out what's going on. This is a second aspect of personal accountability.

Add to that the lack of regulation. I can't figure why the municipals are exempt from certain regulations the privates are subject to. That certainly needs to be changed.

But, as it is, while BCEL&P officials are certainly embarrassed and denigrated by this outcome, that seems to be about all they're going to suffer. Ex post facto laws are unconstitutional, especially when they prescribe punishment. So it's not like the Michigan legislature can pass a new law and then tack the power officials to the shed over this. So if it turns out BCEL&P followed its established protocols it will be tough to mount a successful lawsuit against them.

Nuremberg-lite (so-called because it doesn't involve mass exterminations) is recognized to a certain level in our society. The rules are set up so that people can take certain risks, and when they get bit in the ass, they can excuse themselves by saying, "This is the established policy", essentially claiming that they were only following orders.

Like my local utility provider. They charge poor people an estimated two months' consumption before they'll even hook up the power. Their explanation is that if they don't, they would have to raise rates. There must be a whole lot of people that fall below their threshold, though, because otherwise the rate increase to offset bills in default would be pretty small. And, as they don't apply that "deposit" to past-due bills, it seems that their whole purpose is for the Utility Directors to protect their elected positions against the wrath of rich people whose accountants might notice a couple extra dollars a month.

It's wrong. It's bullshit. It's what my mother's generation would call trying to get blood from a stone. But it's policy, and the people whose job it is to collect extra money from the people least able to pay it are just following orders.

So much for personal accountability.

 

The difference here is that you shouldn't allow someone to die for not paying a bill. It's analogous to not denying emergency care regardless of ability to pay. No one's power should be shut off in the winter when loss of such power could cause someone to die. Wait until spring, if they haven't settled up or arranged payment by then, cut them off. At that point, the loss of power would simply be annoying rather than deadly.

I might also add that it would be nice if someone would personally contact the customer, even if only by phone, before shutting off power. Like you, I have received final notices before when I know I never received any other notice.

 

Yeah, I completely agree, what a terrible thing to happen to someone.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

They used to have a rule up here (Upstate New York) that they couldn't shut the heat off during the winter. They should get back to that, because there's no telling why this man didn't pay his bill. He's 93, he might have been half-senile as it was. OR totally senile. Or maybe he just fucking forgot. Doesn't matter what the reason is. The companies could survive for a few months without shutting off the delinquents.

 

relatively speaking it is actually a pleasant way to go. perhaps being 93 he knew his number was up.

 

Freezing to death is pleasant? Give me a break.

 

i believe so because the body just slows down.

 

Aside from the incredible pain...yeah, I'm sure it's a little bit of alright.

 

it isnt painful though.

 

oh the pain helps pass the time while you are waiting to die.

 

it is like going to sleep.