Saint in Paradise Posted 29 November, 2009 Share Posted 29 November, 2009 between saving your wife or your son and you could only save one who would you choose ? A very sad and nasty situation, I am so glad I will never have to choose and what this poor chap is going through I cannot imagine :( A man had to make the terrible choice of rescuing his wife or teenage son when their car plunged into a river at the weekend. Stacey Horton saved his wife, Vanessa, and their 13-year-old son Silva drowned in the Whanganui River. Mid-Central police communications manager Kim Perks said today it was a very tough call for Mr Horton. "I would certainly not have wanted to be in his shoes." Mrs Horton, 35, was driving Silva, his best friend, Robert Palmer, 14, and the family dog when her Mazda MPV stationwagon went off Somme Parade in Wanganui and plunged down a steep 10-metre bank into the water on Saturday. Mr Horton said he arrived at the crash scene, less than two minutes after the accident happened to hear his wife http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/mp/6529385/man-had-to-choose-save-wife-or-son/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiltshire Saint Posted 29 November, 2009 Share Posted 29 November, 2009 Tricky one indeed and I, like you Saint in Paradise, wouldn't want to make that decision. However, having looked at the facts, it turns out that the wife is 35 years old. That makes her young enough for another child. If the husband had saved the boy you would have had two people who would have been scarred for the rest of their lives. A man who wouldn't be able to love another woman and would probably end up resenting the son, as tends to be the case in these situations. The boy would have had to live with the idea of him being the reason his mother is not alive. It would be awful. At least this way, they can forget about the boy by having another child and move on. There's no picture of the wife, but I imagine she's a good looker, or this could have been an opportunity for a change for the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatch Posted 29 November, 2009 Share Posted 29 November, 2009 I'd save the child Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 29 November, 2009 Share Posted 29 November, 2009 Wiltshere, you really are a c*nt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiltshire Saint Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 Wiltshere, you really are a c*nt. I don't think that insults are called for. Saint in Paradise posed a difficult dilemma and we both agreed that it would be hard a decision to make, but he did ask a question, so I gave it some thought and gave my answer. If you would have chosen to save the boy (like Hatch) I wouldn't have gone round calling you names as I know what a difficult decision it would have been. I think you need to grow up a little bit and start living in the real world if you think you can insult people for making a decision that you deem wrong. I would say "I'd love to see what you'd do in that position" but I wouldn't wish that scenario on anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanovski Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 Tricky one indeed and I, like you Saint in Paradise, wouldn't want to make that decision. However, having looked at the facts, it turns out that the wife is 35 years old. That makes her young enough for another child. If the husband had saved the boy you would have had two people who would have been scarred for the rest of their lives. A man who wouldn't be able to love another woman and would probably end up resenting the son, as tends to be the case in these situations. The boy would have had to live with the idea of him being the reason his mother is not alive. It would be awful. At least this way, they can forget about the boy by having another child and move on. There's no picture of the wife, but I imagine she's a good looker, or this could have been an opportunity for a change for the better. I agree. although find some of it alittle insensitive. its obv a lose-lose and i feel sorry for the father. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 I don't think that insults are called for. Saint in Paradise posed a difficult dilemma and we both agreed that it would be hard a decision to make, but he did ask a question, so I gave it some thought and gave my answer. If you would have chosen to save the boy (like Hatch) I wouldn't have gone round calling you names as I know what a difficult decision it would have been. I think you need to grow up a little bit and start living in the real world if you think you can insult people for making a decision that you deem wrong. I would say "I'd love to see what you'd do in that position" but I wouldn't wish that scenario on anyone. "At least this way, they can forget about the boy by having another child and move on. There's no picture of the wife, but I imagine she's a good looker, or this could have been an opportunity for a change for the better." Sorry, but that is a c*ntish statement, plain and simple. Having lost a young family member in the past I can tell you that the last thing any of us would want to do is forget him. As for the insinuation that letting the wife die could be a good opportunity to "change for the better" - well, i'm not even going to bother explaining why that is a disgusting thing to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Landrew Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 An almost impossible decision. My reasoning would probably depend on who I thought would have the best chance of surviving without help; who was nearest and therefore able to receive help quickest; and who was most in trouble. That could lead to many different variables. In the end, you just do what you can do. It's a deep, wide river is the Wanganui, and is slightly atypical of NZ rivers. I've canoed and swum it, in it's reaches above Wanganui [the town], and it is truely a beautiful river. But they can all drown you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Bates Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 Very easy decision for my dad, he would save me, his son. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atticus Finch of Maycomb Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 I would save neither at the risk of getting hurt/wet myself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dog Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 With a name like Stacey, I would of drowned myself years ago. How did the dog get on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 I can't swim well enough to save anyone so the decision would've been moot, fortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robsk II Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 How do you know he wasn't trying to save both? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70's Mike Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 The wife wouldn't forgive you for saving her and not the child. So that makes the decision, if there is any chance of thinking rationally at the time. agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpb Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 I suspect that my son has been reading this thread to see my contribution... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golden Balls Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 I'd save the closest one first and do the most I could to save the other next. It's happens in child birth quite a bit where the father has to pick between the unborn child and the mother when it goes wrong. In that case, I would save the mother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponty Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 I'd save the closest one first and do the most I could to save the other next. It's happens in child birth quite a bit where the father has to pick between the unborn child and the mother when it goes wrong. In that case, I would save the mother. Quite right, a newborn is not going to be able to cook for years. Seriously though, that would be a horrible, horrible decision to make but I would ultimately choose to save the mother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 Wiltshere, you really are a c*nt. I don't think that insults are called for. Saint in Paradise posed a difficult dilemma and we both agreed that it would be hard a decision to make, but he did ask a question, so I gave it some thought and gave my answer. If you would have chosen to save the boy (like Hatch) I wouldn't have gone round calling you names as I know what a difficult decision it would have been. I think you need to grow up a little bit and start living in the real world if you think you can insult people for making a decision that you deem wrong. I would say "I'd love to see what you'd do in that position" but I wouldn't wish that scenario on anyone. I think you're right Wiltshire. In fact you have now proven, beyond all doubt to me, that you are below insult. Not for your choice of who you would save as there is a fair reason in any choice. It's the mere fact that you could eradicate the memory of a child by the procreation of another child. Ask any parents who have lost a child and then have had another. Yes, the birth of the new child may strengthen their relationship but I reckon that child would never replace the lost child. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint francis Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 Does it say who was driving? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint francis Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 Also, bear in mind it is far easier to adopt a child than a mother. In fact I've never even heard of a mother adoption agency. Something he might have considered at the time, although I imagine he was probably feeling pretty rushed and stressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atticus Finch of Maycomb Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 I think you're right Wiltshire. In fact you have now proven, beyond all doubt to me, that you are below insult. Not for your choice of who you would save as there is a fair reason in any choice. It's the mere fact that you could eradicate the memory of a child by the procreation of another child. Ask any parents who have lost a child and then have had another. Yes, the birth of the new child may strengthen their relationship but I reckon that child would never replace the lost child. that is fair enough. ask a question such as 'would you save the wife or the boy' and anyone who says the wife is wrong. why even pose the question? what a moronic thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INFLUENCED.COM Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 Seriously though, that would be a horrible, horrible decision to make but I would ultimately choose to save the mother. I know its easy to answer a hypothetical question but for me the choice would be the child every time, I would still attempt both but the child would be my priority as they should be for every parent in any situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint_bert Posted 30 November, 2009 Share Posted 30 November, 2009 As much as I love my partner there is 100% no doubt in my mind i would save my son every time. And she, quite rightly would do the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 1 December, 2009 Share Posted 1 December, 2009 that is fair enough. ask a question such as 'would you save the wife or the boy' and anyone who says the wife is wrong. why even pose the question? what a moronic thread. It's what he said, not the answer he gave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dog Posted 1 December, 2009 Share Posted 1 December, 2009 I will ask again, how was the dog ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesaint sfc Posted 1 December, 2009 Share Posted 1 December, 2009 I wouldn't want to get wet. The child if I had a really long stick though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesaint sfc Posted 1 December, 2009 Share Posted 1 December, 2009 My colleague at work said he'd probably let them both drown. The mother ends up without a son and the son ends up without a mother. He said it seriously too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marsdinho Posted 1 December, 2009 Share Posted 1 December, 2009 Easy one for me. Save the wife........as I dont have a son. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slickmick Posted 1 December, 2009 Share Posted 1 December, 2009 If the roles were reversed, who would you want your wife to save ? Your son or yourself ? That should help with the answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dog Posted 1 December, 2009 Share Posted 1 December, 2009 If the roles were reversed, who would you want your wife to save ? Your son or yourself ? That should help with the answer. My son by a mile you selfish person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slickmick Posted 1 December, 2009 Share Posted 1 December, 2009 My son by a mile you selfish person. Shame you jumped to one conclusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deppo Posted 1 December, 2009 Share Posted 1 December, 2009 Easy one for me. Save the wife........as I dont have a son. I'm surprised you have a wife... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorpe-le-Saint Posted 1 December, 2009 Share Posted 1 December, 2009 Surely you would sacrifice yourself to save them both? It's a terrible situation, and obviously I'm not judging the poor bloke, but I'd like to think that is what I would do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatch Posted 1 December, 2009 Share Posted 1 December, 2009 The wife is more likely to be insured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 1 December, 2009 Share Posted 1 December, 2009 Frankly if it was me I would save whoever I could get to first. The true definition of a no-win scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tpbury Posted 1 December, 2009 Share Posted 1 December, 2009 Defiitely save the son, given the rationallity and capability to make the decision. If I knew I had to die to save them both, then I'd do that. If it was the wife alone, then I'd probably have a Hamlet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 1 December, 2009 Share Posted 1 December, 2009 I agree. although find some of it alittle insensitive. its obv a lose-lose and i feel sorry for the father. All you should be worrying about Deanovski if your cyber "girlfriend" getting her backdoor pounded by her mysterious american pals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marsdinho Posted 4 December, 2009 Share Posted 4 December, 2009 I'm surprised you have a wife... Me too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNSUN Posted 4 December, 2009 Share Posted 4 December, 2009 If my parents had to make the decision, I'd be a gonner as I'm the bastard child from hell. I don't have children, so I'd save my missus. :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now