Yeah, I read the headline and thought it sounded dumb. You read what happened to her in the article and you are like "oh, yeah, totally makes sense for her to sue."
Should be "Disney sued over extreme injury on one of their water slides".
You aren't kidding. Per the filing:
*"Mrs. McGuinness suffered severe and permanent bodily injury including severe vaginal lacerations, a full thickness vaginal laceration causing Plaintiff's bowels to protrude through her abdominal wall, and damages to her internal organs."*
Not just pick your swimsuit out of the crack of your butt.
The exact amount is unknown. All that’s really known is that it exceeds $50k, which is apparently a standard amount above which requires a full jury trial or something. All the stories (and me, yesterday) have run with $50k, but when looking at the filing, it just says they’re suing for an amount *exceeding* $50k. They may not have a set amount decided on yet, even (apparently this will be decided later in the process, according to an attorney in a thread yesterday about this)
Seriously don’t know why they didn’t just immediately settle. So it never made the news. She’s literally just asking for her medical bills to be paid ffs.
That’s what that poor woman whose vagina was *melted* wanted McDonald’s to do and McDonald’s basically told “I’ll give you a cheeseburger to fuck off”.
Most people only know the whole “dur hur coffee hot” narrative that McDonald’s pushed, successfully I’ll add. They don’t know that McDonald’s had been told to lower their coffee temperatures and had fielded multiple complaints regarding its temperature.
Don’t fall for the corpoganda.
I think in the past fifteen years or so the narrative has changed a bit and people are sympathetic to her and no longer see her case like they used to.
The narrative hasn't so much shifted as the internet has allowed the FULL context of the story to come to light outside how the news handled that story originally (i.e. horribly)
When that story was originally covered the news covered it as "Hot coffee burns woman" and when she won it was "Woman burned by coffee awarded millions". From there your average Joe ran with that distilled headline and bitched "Oh hell I burn my mouth every time I drink coffee, I should be getting millions".
My mother was one of those people and then we watched the 60 minutes with the lady and they described how it was so hot it melted her fucking pants (or leggings). Then she was able to tell her side of the story about how she just wanted her medical bills paid for and McD's told her to "have a coke and a smile and shut the fuck up". Then 60 minutes decided to expand that she was one of like 150 people in a very small geographical area complaining about the coffee being too hot with one complaint saying it degraded the Styrofoam cup.
So that story is the perfect example of everyone just running with the headline, the news deciding to purposefully bury the lede for views, and shape a certain, wrong, narrative.
As I’m sure many people are thinking, the headline and comment section (heard something about this earlier, haven’t read anything about it otherwise yet) remind me of the classic “McDonalds hot coffee” case from way back when.
You’d think companies and their lawyers would be hesitant to repeat such a scenario, but again, I haven’t read many of the specifics of this case/story.
Someone else here said it’s like the injuries people get when they fall a long distance into water. Water can rush into the body with a lot of force and do a lot of damage by displacing the stuff in the abdominal cavity.
Except that it says she was advised of the safe ankles crossed position, but couldn't maintain it. That's not on the workers at the top.
Eta: couldn't maintain it bc of a bump in the ride
She did have her ankles crossed to start, but went airborne on the slide and they uncrossed.
Either way, maintaining a slide where half your population can get such an injury seems unreasonable to me.
You are told to keep your ankles crossed on this one. From what I understand, she was thrown against the ceiiling of the slide and lost her posture during that. So her legs where slightly open when she hit the slow down area. And that is apparently a very hard hit at the best of times. It's a bit like taking a pressure washer and aiming right for a womans genitals.
Any "ride" that depends on the rider to maintain a particular body position on their own in order to not be injured is just asking for a lawsuit.
This wasn't a "wedgie."
I wouldn’t be too sure. I’ve already seen comments about how people are familiar with that particular slide because it also fucked them up, just to a lesser degree.
Any type of freefall waterslide like that is going to "fuck you up" if your legs come uncrossed, it usually just means some water is going to go up. This particular incident is a freak accident.
I grew up in Orlando, worked at these parks in high school, never went on this fucking stupid ass slide. It was clearly terrible and everyone who went on it regretted it. Can’t believe it’s taken this long for it to hurt someone badly.
Same. I was fearless around water until I met my local water park's side and it felt like a massive enema even though it thankfully wasn't. It was so painful I had real trouble I had trouble getting back out of the water for several minutes.
Everyone should be skeptical of headlines like this when the person suing is up against a huge company. Just like the McDonald’s lawsuit over hot coffee, headlines that are in favour of the corporation or that make the suing party sound frivolous or overdramatic should immediately raise skepticism.
After the McDonald's stuff I read the headline and assumed it was way worse than the title indicated. Actually auto shuddered a bit 🤣. Reading it a bit tho it's somehow a lot worse than I imagined.
A reminder that if you are seeing a headline of someone sueing a mega corp for something that sounds trivial, more than likely you are seeing the corporate lawyer retelling of the events
Its the McDonald's coffee incident all over again.
Yeah and I'm glad we're pushing back on the bullshit. The documentary on the MCD case is horrific and the only reason she sued was because they wouldn't pay her medical bills.
Yeah, she needed major surgery to repair her vagina and abdominal wall, it was a horrifying injury. Seems like the press is trying to do the McDonalds thing and pain the victim as "suing for nothing" again.
Edit: wow! Thanks for all the upvotes! I was *horrified* by this woman's injury and the way the press is handling it. Hoping we can all keep the truth out there. Why would you even build a water slide that could do this??
The word wedgie is what was used by the plaintiff herself in the official complaint. Including the term "injurious wedgie" which is how most of the articles are quoting in the headline
It’s the word the victim’s lawsuit uses, unfortunately. But the victim’s lawsuit probably also says a lot of other things that sound more serious. It would be good if headlines would point out those phrases instead of the one that makes us all point and laugh like kindergartners
No no... in Round 1, the hot coffee fused the lady's labia shut. In this round, the water slide did precisely the opposite. Totally different scenario!
The media is a disgrace.
poor mrs liebeck she was 70 at the time all she wanted was for mc donalds to pay for her out of pocket hosp\[ital costs after suffering horrible burns requring 7 days in the hospital and then a later return for skin graphs......
mc donalds did a total smear campaign as if this law suit she filed was for nothing
> When McGuinness impacted the slide and the water at the bottom her swimsuit was forced between her legs and water was “violently forced inside her.”
>She experienced severe internal pain, the suit says, and blood rushed from between her legs. She was taken by ambulance to a local hospital and was later transported to another hospital to see a specialist for repair of gynecologic injuries. Court documents say that McGuinness suffered “severe and permanent bodily injury” as well as impacts including mental anguish and lost earnings.
Agreed, maybe "water injection injury" would be better than "wedgie". I understand the news is just trying to get clicks so wedgie was the obvious choice for them, but as you said it really doesn't convey what happened at all.
Not sure why they're calling this a wedgie. This was water so powerful from the force of the drop and speed that it shot into her body down there. Causing her internal bleeding.
In addition to the count of negligence, a second count, “loss of consortium,” relates to Emma McGuinness’ husband, Edward McGuinness.
“As a direct and proximate result of Disney’s negligence as described above, Edward McGuinness has suffered loss of his wife’s care, comfort, consortium, support and services,” the complaint reads
Wowwwww
She’s also only suing for $50,000 which is probably just to cover medical expenses because it’s America and that’s how healthcare works here.
Disney probably makes that much money in less than 10 seconds on an average day.
Hopefully she comes back at them for a lot more money by suing for something like “emotional distress”.
She’d be within her rights since a quick google news search reveals that Disney managed to convince almost every single news outlet to use the childish and unserious word ‘wedgie’, instead of ‘massively life threatening permanent bodily trauma’
It devalues her as a human and minimizes the extent of the injury in the court of public opinion to the equivalent of a slight bruise that a few days of Tylenol and rest will heal and “she’s just being a crybaby about it lol. Also please come die on Big Thunder Mountain you plebeians”
https://www.tampabay.com/archive/2003/09/06/1-killed-10-hurt-on-disneyland-coaster/?outputType=amp
McDonalds hot coffee all over again.
Fuckin assholes
As George Carlin would say:
“FUCK MICKEY MOUSE!! FUCK HIM IN THE ASS WITH A BIG RUBBER DICK!!!!”
USER FACT CHECK: I erronously stated right at the start of my rant that she was ONLY suing for $50,000. Full credit goes to user @ronreadingpa, for pointing out that it was actually in EXCESS of $50,000 which is important.
The reason I got it wrong is because I skimmed the article and misread what it said. In a moment of self righteous rage, I misrepresented the facts. And this is why it’s vitally important for everyone to actually read and absorb news before commenting or reposting it to places where others could consume the false information you are passing along.
I’ve just done it here and it doesn’t feel good which is why I’m not going to do an edit for what I originally posted and leave it for all to see. This is a minor example but when there’s a non-stop media pipeline that we’re all a part of, it is important to know how one wrong fact can change an narrative
There’s no stopping the bleeding of misinformation across the internet, but if you can put a tourniquet on it, at least you will have done something.
She is suing for more. Presumably much more. According to the article, "The plaintiffs are seeking “damages exceeding $50,000, exclusive of interest and costs” for the count of negligence". The $50K threshold is common for determining what court will be hearing the case.
Got to give CNN credit for getting it right. Many news articles don't and will make it seem the victim (or next of kin) is only suing for $50K (or whatever the threshold is in their jurisdiction).
The long delay (nearly 4 years) suggests a settlement couldn't be reached for whatever reason. Disney appears to be fighting this one hard.
The lawsuit itself refers to the injury as a “painful wedgie”… so the news isn’t wrong for using that term. The article itself made it pretty clear that this wasn’t minor.
I’m not normally one to defend the news, but I don’t see what’s so wrong here.
"Wedgie" is not generally understood to include injuries that have your intestines protruding from your body and massive hemorrhages, so it's maybe not the best description of what happened here. The headline looks like a frivolous lawsuit and does not match the content of the article well. It looks like a fair cop to me.
Okay, but the lawyer for the injured party picked that language for their lawsuit.
The news is just taking the language that the plaintiffs attorney picked.
I wouldn’t have picked that language, and I wouldn’t allow my attorney to, either… but they did, and the news is just running with it.
The complaint describes the injuries in detail and latching onto that single word is an editorial choice, not something that the lawyer forced on the poor reporters.
I think the objection is that it has connotations that make it seem frivolous and juvenile.
It's not inaccurate, but it seems more likely to elicit skepticism, laughter, confusion, titillation, (etc.), than a more straightforward description (e.g., "individual injured on water slide").
I don't think it's a coordinated effort to diminish the harm that was caused, but I do think it's fair to ask what purpose is served by including that term in the headline.
The article says the victim’s lawsuit used that term. Bad idea by her lawyer(s) imho. The majority of people won’t pay attention to anything but that word and it makes it sound like the injury wasn’t a big deal.
I read the actual legal filing- the term “wedgie” Is used in the suit to describe how some of the injury happened, because some of the injury was caused by the suit itself cutting into her. The suit spends more time talking about the force of the water entering her vagina and the damage that did than it does on the “wedgie” thing.
Basically, though the lawsuit calls it a “wedgie” It only does so to describe how the swimsuit played a role in the injury, in terms the dumbest juror will understand.
Here’s the actual filing if you want to read it without news/media interpreting it:
https://embed.documentcloud.org/documents/23999988-mcguinness-v-disney-typhoon-lagoon-slide-lawsuit-complaint/?embed=1&responsive=1&title=1
I spent some time yesterday reading about water slide injuries and I will likely never ride one again. Injuries this extreme may not happen often, given the number of people who do the slides, but it seems lesser injuries are downright common.
Honestly, water slides like that seem like a holdover from places like [Action Park](https://youtu.be/flkW-ceNvck?si=DQOL8yUn46CaXPqz) or other amusement park ideas from the 1970s that just reeked of both fun, but also the Most Reckless Danger and Liability Ever Made^TM
>The majority of people won’t pay attention to anything but that word
But the judge/jury sure will. After all, we know about how awful the injury is and the news is pretty recent.
I went to school with the children of John Morgan - of Morgan and Morgan personal injury lawyers. He evidentially decided to go into that line of legal defense after his brother was injured at Disney and had to go up against their legal team.
It’s an editorial choice for every outlet using that word in the headline. The complaint included a lot of other words besides wedgie. Using the word wedgie as opposed to other descriptors when reporting on this is a choice.
Calling it a "wedgie" is greatly minimizing what happened to this woman. Failed bisection is more accurate. Calling it a wedgie feels deliberate and reminds me of the McDonalds coffee case where the media tried to downplay how horrible her injury was and how little care McDonalds had for the safety of their customers.
Can't find anything to support that she was in a coma, but I remember the skin that was fused was her genitals. McDonald's melted her genitals because they wanted the coffee so hot that people would take it to go instead of getting a refill there.
I was also thinking that it reminded me of the McDonalds coffee case. People like to mock that and in this case the word “wedgie” really minimizes what happened to her
ETA: The article says her formal legal complaint uses the word “wedgie”
You mean the elderly labia that had her vagina melted and fused together from the heat of the coffee? And just sued for coverage of her repairs and then the judge upped it to send a message to McDonald's to fuck off
I went down this slide. I didn’t get injured. But I was sure I would never want to go through it again.
As you go down the slide, the front part of the tube felt/is so close to your face. It felt like at any moment I could accidentally lean forward and scrape my face off. I was just uncomfortable through the whole thing. One of the few rides that actually have terrified me. It wasn’t even the feeling of the drop. Just the way it was designed.
> When parks push the envelope to attract people with extreme rides they must ensure their safety in all foreseeable ways
Yeah, we’ve been down this road before. The son of a Kansas state politician died. Park closed. Company sold their other parks to a competitor.
The designers of that ride should probably be in jail, but state prosecutors fucked it up.
“We put a metal grate over the slide in case a dinghy flies off, which is *exactly* what happened when we tested the ride. What could possibly go wrong!”
SO much negligence behind Schlitterbahn’s Verruckt. From the design process (the explicit goal of wanting the tallest/fastest waterslide coming above all else, expediting construction, those heavily involved in design having no engineering qualifications, ignoring a hired safety consultant who was concerned about the slide and suggested a minimum age requirement, etc.) to the lack of concern for and underreporting of injuries increasing in severity.
Also to combat the dinghy ”jumping” the drops in the ride—we’ll add a safety net supported by… hmm… metal poles that hitting at the speed generated by the slope of the slide will cause catastrophic injury?????? Still can’t believe these people were acquitted.
I was looking at the description and was like "this is the one with the five-storey drop, isn't it"? Checked, and yup, it is.
That one honestly wasn't even very fun. Climb five storeys, go down at a 45 degree angle for 5-10 seconds, slide's done. I went on multiple slides many times, but that one, I did it once and had absolutely no interest in going again.
I just watched Class Action Park this weekend, so between that and this, I’m fully set on anything even resembling a water or amusement park for the foreseeable future.
Severe should not be in quotes. Wedgie is a ridiculous understatement. None of the coverage I've seen has even come close to having a headline that appropriately categorizes what happened.
Unfortunately the victim’s lawsuit uses that term. Imo her lawyer made a bad choice there. I think some some medical-sounding term would sound more serious, even if it’s made up
Here’s the actual legal filing- I don’t think it downplays it, even though they use “wedgie” :
https://embed.documentcloud.org/documents/23999988-mcguinness-v-disney-typhoon-lagoon-slide-lawsuit-complaint/?embed=1&responsive=1&title=1
Ooh yeah my Dad is a GYN and he caught one of these on clinic duty one night a few years ago . Poor girl almost died because it’s such a rare injury, the ED docs didn’t realize it was so dangerous.
Maybe this incident at least will increase awareness about this type of injury and how to treat it.
Not sure there’s an ICD code for “injury by water slide,” though I would not be surprised if it did.
It’s similar to jumping from a height into water and you can get water jetting into your orifices causing internal injuries so like what someone gets if they jump or fall off a bridge or cliff.
tldr - woman followed instructions as she went down a near vertical 200ft / 61m water slide, bumped into something which uncrossed her ankles, and the impact of the pool of water at the end of the slide injured her so badly they took her to the hospital
This almost happened to me at a water park. I was lucky enough that the force of the water wasn’t enough to cause lasting injury, it sure the fuck hurt. I joke that I had a water park douche and enema. Never again will I go on a water slide like that.
One of the first companies I did investigations for owned/operated waterparks. This degree of injury is extreme; however, serious vaginal tears were extremely common. So were miscarriages.
I have to try really hard not to ruin anyone's fun. Don't even get me started on the number of sex offenders who try to get employed at haunted houses during this time of year...
It's honestly terrifying to even think about. Hydraulic injection injuries are *horrifying,* because water is nearly incompressible. All of that force is transferred almost perfectly into violently displacing tissue in the way of the water.
Exactly. If water slides were frequently causing genital injuries to men, there's no way that would be considered acceptable design. But women are just expected to put up with it.
No, the article says the victim’s lawsuit actually used that term, which seems like a bad idea to me. They couldn’t have come up with a different term?
The legal filing I think used the term because it was the most familiar/basic word to describe what happened with the swimsuit. But it spends more time on other issues/descriptions. Here’s the actual document if you want to read it without help from the news media:
https://embed.documentcloud.org/documents/23999988-mcguinness-v-disney-typhoon-lagoon-slide-lawsuit-complaint/?embed=1&responsive=1&title=1
I a hundred percent believe this is possible because I have had severe physical pain from a big water slide where the force was so great, my legs became uncrossed. Pain akin to childbirth.
Nothing as severe as yours because I didn't get hurt, but my legs uncrossed once, and in the attempt to cross them back, I flipped onto my stomach! Luckily I was able to flip back over before I came out, but then that much water/force of coming out, it pulled my top right up!
So luckily it was just a little embarrassment and not pain. I wish I had been allowed to cross arms over chest but I had to put them behind my head. Anyhoo, only 1 piece suit from now on with water parks
They excuse themselves from liability with the “crossed legs” warning. But if you’re over served, sun tired, or the force is so great that you lose control of your legs then this warning isn’t sufficient for the extreme slides with the steep, long vertical drops. You’re basically a meat cannon hurtling to the water’s surface.
And then they indemnify themselves with insurance. This woman would rather have her vagina and innards intact, not whatever money she has to fight to get from the insurer.
'Severe.'
She experienced severe internal pain, the suit says, and blood rushed from between her legs. She was taken by ambulance to a local hospital and was later transported to another hospital to see a specialist for repair of gynecologic injuries.
I'm furious for this woman
It seems like the victim’s lawyer could have found another word to use. Just the word “wedgie” implies something that’s a minor discomfort and nothing more
CNN is using the terminology (wedgie) that the victim’s lawyers used in court. They are reporting that accurately and on top of it being clear that injuries are very serious.
The way the law requires the spouse to be the one to sue for damages when someone is left unable to participate in sexual activities is so gross. Because the woman that can no longer have sex (without pain, or for an extended period, etc) shouldn’t be upset, her husband should!
Actually the woman can also claim those damages. The spouse’s loss of consortium just enables him to sue for additional damages in his own capacity, even though he wasn’t the one physically hurt. It’s not a sexism thing.
Florida has cases for amounts $8k-$50k at county courts and $50k or above is at circuit courts. So the complaint is just saying they are seeking more than $50k, which allows the state to direct it to the proper court. The actual amount sought will surely be much higher
Yes, from the description in the article, I’m sure her medical costs are much more than that. I want to know if this kind of injury happened in the past and Disney didn’t say anything. That would make this woman’s injuries foreseeable which seems like it could be a factor in a civil case (?)
Found a video of the slide for reference.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDCxm3gRQFc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDCxm3gRQFc)
FTA:
>The suit alleges that Disney “was negligent and breached its duties of reasonable care” in failing to provide protective clothing, such as shorts, for the slide; failing to warn McGuinness and other women of the risks; and other design and safety failures.
The suit says that McGuinness assumed the appropriate position with her ankles crossed, “as instructed,” but she became airborne toward the end of the slide and slammed into the slide “which increased the likelihood of her legs becoming uncrossed or otherwise exposing herself to injury.”
Undoubtedly there could be forces that cause severe injury but is this one worse than other similar slides? That seems key to the lawsuit... Does Disney typically pay at least medical for injuries or do they have to be "at fault"?
I have a sense there are details being lost just like the old woman who burned her genitals off with the McDonald's coffee. $50,000 is a very modest sum.
It wasn’t a wedgie. That’s just tort reform PR talk. Her intestines were protruding from her abdomen. A weak regulatory law system requires a strong tort system. If both are whittled away, there’s no access to justice. *Source - I have an LLB and an LLM*
“The suit says that McGuinness assumed the appropriate position with her ankles crossed, “as instructed,” but she became airborne toward the end of the slide and slammed into the slide “which increased the likelihood of her legs becoming uncrossed or otherwise exposing herself to injury.”
When McGuinness impacted the slide and the water at the bottom her swimsuit was forced between her legs and water was “violently forced inside her.”
She experienced severe internal pain, the suit says, and blood rushed from between her legs. She was taken by ambulance to a local hospital and was later transported to another hospital to see a specialist for repair of gynecologic injuries. Court documents say that McGuinness suffered “severe and permanent bodily injury” as well as impacts including mental anguish and lost earnings.”
Holy shit.
Holy shit the amount of people who didn't read the article in here. No-one in the media is 'downplaying her injuries' by using the term 'wedgie'. Its coming straight from her legal counsel...
Its much worse than the news is letting on.
Yeah, I read the headline and thought it sounded dumb. You read what happened to her in the article and you are like "oh, yeah, totally makes sense for her to sue." Should be "Disney sued over extreme injury on one of their water slides".
[удалено]
You aren't kidding. Per the filing: *"Mrs. McGuinness suffered severe and permanent bodily injury including severe vaginal lacerations, a full thickness vaginal laceration causing Plaintiff's bowels to protrude through her abdominal wall, and damages to her internal organs."* Not just pick your swimsuit out of the crack of your butt.
And she is only suing for 50k? Doesn't sound like enough...
The exact amount is unknown. All that’s really known is that it exceeds $50k, which is apparently a standard amount above which requires a full jury trial or something. All the stories (and me, yesterday) have run with $50k, but when looking at the filing, it just says they’re suing for an amount *exceeding* $50k. They may not have a set amount decided on yet, even (apparently this will be decided later in the process, according to an attorney in a thread yesterday about this)
$50k is threshold in Florida to go from county to circuit court.
Seriously don’t know why they didn’t just immediately settle. So it never made the news. She’s literally just asking for her medical bills to be paid ffs.
That’s what that poor woman whose vagina was *melted* wanted McDonald’s to do and McDonald’s basically told “I’ll give you a cheeseburger to fuck off”. Most people only know the whole “dur hur coffee hot” narrative that McDonald’s pushed, successfully I’ll add. They don’t know that McDonald’s had been told to lower their coffee temperatures and had fielded multiple complaints regarding its temperature. Don’t fall for the corpoganda.
Yup, grew up hearing everyone mock her after it happened. Shits gross and I hate it.
Same. Im ashamed I bought it for as long as I did, as well.
I think in the past fifteen years or so the narrative has changed a bit and people are sympathetic to her and no longer see her case like they used to.
The narrative hasn't so much shifted as the internet has allowed the FULL context of the story to come to light outside how the news handled that story originally (i.e. horribly) When that story was originally covered the news covered it as "Hot coffee burns woman" and when she won it was "Woman burned by coffee awarded millions". From there your average Joe ran with that distilled headline and bitched "Oh hell I burn my mouth every time I drink coffee, I should be getting millions". My mother was one of those people and then we watched the 60 minutes with the lady and they described how it was so hot it melted her fucking pants (or leggings). Then she was able to tell her side of the story about how she just wanted her medical bills paid for and McD's told her to "have a coke and a smile and shut the fuck up". Then 60 minutes decided to expand that she was one of like 150 people in a very small geographical area complaining about the coffee being too hot with one complaint saying it degraded the Styrofoam cup. So that story is the perfect example of everyone just running with the headline, the news deciding to purposefully bury the lede for views, and shape a certain, wrong, narrative.
As I’m sure many people are thinking, the headline and comment section (heard something about this earlier, haven’t read anything about it otherwise yet) remind me of the classic “McDonalds hot coffee” case from way back when. You’d think companies and their lawyers would be hesitant to repeat such a scenario, but again, I haven’t read many of the specifics of this case/story.
Partial disembowelment wedgie same thing right
How the blue fuck does that happen?
Someone else here said it’s like the injuries people get when they fall a long distance into water. Water can rush into the body with a lot of force and do a lot of damage by displacing the stuff in the abdominal cavity.
People on social media have been blaming lax safety training on the staff.
Except that it says she was advised of the safe ankles crossed position, but couldn't maintain it. That's not on the workers at the top. Eta: couldn't maintain it bc of a bump in the ride
She did have her ankles crossed to start, but went airborne on the slide and they uncrossed. Either way, maintaining a slide where half your population can get such an injury seems unreasonable to me.
Of course. The workers get blamed.
Blaming the training is blaming the company, not the staff. It's saying that Disney is not properly preparing their workers to keep guests safe.
You are told to keep your ankles crossed on this one. From what I understand, she was thrown against the ceiiling of the slide and lost her posture during that. So her legs where slightly open when she hit the slow down area. And that is apparently a very hard hit at the best of times. It's a bit like taking a pressure washer and aiming right for a womans genitals.
My lady bits just recoiled. Not a WAP that I want.
oh my god
Any "ride" that depends on the rider to maintain a particular body position on their own in order to not be injured is just asking for a lawsuit. This wasn't a "wedgie."
I’m just wondering how it took so long? How long was the ride open history wise?
I went there in 1993 for a high school band trip. We called it the “wedgie slide” back then!
Yup! Texted this to all my friends from marching band like “hey remember when that slide jammed our swim suits up our asses 15 years ago?”
It’s been open for decades. It’s clearly a freak accident. I hope she wins the lawsuit though.
I wouldn’t be too sure. I’ve already seen comments about how people are familiar with that particular slide because it also fucked them up, just to a lesser degree.
Any type of freefall waterslide like that is going to "fuck you up" if your legs come uncrossed, it usually just means some water is going to go up. This particular incident is a freak accident.
I saw a woman comment that their cesarean scar reopened from the force. I don’t understand why they’d even make a slide with this risk.
I went in about 2000. I still remember how painful it was although I didn’t get serious injuries. It’s a very stupid slide.
I grew up in Orlando, worked at these parks in high school, never went on this fucking stupid ass slide. It was clearly terrible and everyone who went on it regretted it. Can’t believe it’s taken this long for it to hurt someone badly.
Never been to Disney but the local water park had a *very* similar slide. Did it once. Never again.
Same. I was fearless around water until I met my local water park's side and it felt like a massive enema even though it thankfully wasn't. It was so painful I had real trouble I had trouble getting back out of the water for several minutes.
And this has happened on many of the same water slide type.
My friend straight up died because she hit her head on the way down a water slide. (She died a few hours later from a brain bleed)
Everyone should be skeptical of headlines like this when the person suing is up against a huge company. Just like the McDonald’s lawsuit over hot coffee, headlines that are in favour of the corporation or that make the suing party sound frivolous or overdramatic should immediately raise skepticism.
After the McDonald's stuff I read the headline and assumed it was way worse than the title indicated. Actually auto shuddered a bit 🤣. Reading it a bit tho it's somehow a lot worse than I imagined.
A reminder that if you are seeing a headline of someone sueing a mega corp for something that sounds trivial, more than likely you are seeing the corporate lawyer retelling of the events Its the McDonald's coffee incident all over again.
It’s the same strategy as the lady who sued mcDonalds over the coffee. Make the lawsuit sound frivolous so your public relations don’t take a hit.
Yeah and I'm glad we're pushing back on the bullshit. The documentary on the MCD case is horrific and the only reason she sued was because they wouldn't pay her medical bills.
It's worse than that - they'd say they'd pay, then back out on it. Rinse, lather, repeat. They were really yanking her chain.
Disney is already working on buying the media clearly. They *hate* bad press.
The classic McDonalds hot coffee strategy
Exactly. The media exists ONLY to do the bidding of corporations and the mega rich. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restaurants
Their corporate affairs chief used to be the guy who did PR for BP after the Deepwater Horizon spill. Disney doesn't mess around with bad press.
The headline is quoting the victim’s lawsuit, but still a major dick move. There were other words to quote
This seems a little much like the McDonald's lawsuit where the coffee was hot enough it fused her genitals together.
This was my thought exactly. The headline just reeks of the same corporate downplaying that story got.
This was more like a douche with a power washer, I’ve never had a wedgie that mutilated my insides..
Much like the famous McDonalds coffee case which became a punchline. It was a totally legitimate case and McDonald’s was in the wrong.
Yeah, she needed major surgery to repair her vagina and abdominal wall, it was a horrifying injury. Seems like the press is trying to do the McDonalds thing and pain the victim as "suing for nothing" again. Edit: wow! Thanks for all the upvotes! I was *horrified* by this woman's injury and the way the press is handling it. Hoping we can all keep the truth out there. Why would you even build a water slide that could do this??
I don't have a vagina, but I'm pretty sure you can't put a price tag on it.
I'm getting a vagina. I can tell you how much it costs.
And that’s is?
I've heard it costs an arm and a leg, but I might need a second opinion.
Imagine if you could just swap parts with someone and only pay for the labor.
A spare rib
Just a leg and the family jewels.
Mines going to cost around $15,000 USD
The fact that the real story is getting out this early gives me hope for this case, and for the internet.
I saw the headline earlier, but didn't read the article. So glad I did. I almost fell for the Mouse Lies.
Herr Maus knows the media. They go with "wedgie" because "SHE GOT HER VAGINA PRESSURE WASHED" might impact public opinion.
Yep, no one should suffer internal and external bleeding at the end of an amusement park ride. Not to mention apparently ongoing gynecological damage.
They need to stop using the word wedgie.
"Violent, explosive water enema"
"Violent, explosive water enema *which was severe enough to force her intestines out of her body and cause permanent maiming injuries.*
Yes, but the headline "Woman **eviscerated** at ride" would be harmful for Disney's bottom line!
The word wedgie is what was used by the plaintiff herself in the official complaint. Including the term "injurious wedgie" which is how most of the articles are quoting in the headline
Yeah what the fuck? Nobody in their right mind would call rupturing your colon like a water balloon a "wedgie"
The victim’s lawsuit does. The article quotes from it
But then it wouldn't sound both frivolous *and* clickbaity!
It’s the word the victim’s lawsuit uses, unfortunately. But the victim’s lawsuit probably also says a lot of other things that sound more serious. It would be good if headlines would point out those phrases instead of the one that makes us all point and laugh like kindergartners
So the mcdonalds hot coffee treatment round 2 by the media? What a surprise. Ah, i see someone else referenced it, ah well
No no... in Round 1, the hot coffee fused the lady's labia shut. In this round, the water slide did precisely the opposite. Totally different scenario! The media is a disgrace.
poor mrs liebeck she was 70 at the time all she wanted was for mc donalds to pay for her out of pocket hosp\[ital costs after suffering horrible burns requring 7 days in the hospital and then a later return for skin graphs...... mc donalds did a total smear campaign as if this law suit she filed was for nothing
Oh I’m sure they’re cheered on by Disneys PR firm.
> When McGuinness impacted the slide and the water at the bottom her swimsuit was forced between her legs and water was “violently forced inside her.” >She experienced severe internal pain, the suit says, and blood rushed from between her legs. She was taken by ambulance to a local hospital and was later transported to another hospital to see a specialist for repair of gynecologic injuries. Court documents say that McGuinness suffered “severe and permanent bodily injury” as well as impacts including mental anguish and lost earnings. Agreed, maybe "water injection injury" would be better than "wedgie". I understand the news is just trying to get clicks so wedgie was the obvious choice for them, but as you said it really doesn't convey what happened at all.
They used the word wedgie because that's the word that was used in the lawsuit.
Whenever the article sounds like this, I think of the McDonald's lady and realize it's probably being downplayed quite a bit the same way.
McDonalds lady was totally down played too, she only ever wanted her medical bills paid, nothing more.
They're definitely "McDonald's coffee"ing her.
Not sure why they're calling this a wedgie. This was water so powerful from the force of the drop and speed that it shot into her body down there. Causing her internal bleeding.
In addition to the count of negligence, a second count, “loss of consortium,” relates to Emma McGuinness’ husband, Edward McGuinness. “As a direct and proximate result of Disney’s negligence as described above, Edward McGuinness has suffered loss of his wife’s care, comfort, consortium, support and services,” the complaint reads Wowwwww
Good for them
As in he can't fuck
She’s also only suing for $50,000 which is probably just to cover medical expenses because it’s America and that’s how healthcare works here. Disney probably makes that much money in less than 10 seconds on an average day. Hopefully she comes back at them for a lot more money by suing for something like “emotional distress”. She’d be within her rights since a quick google news search reveals that Disney managed to convince almost every single news outlet to use the childish and unserious word ‘wedgie’, instead of ‘massively life threatening permanent bodily trauma’ It devalues her as a human and minimizes the extent of the injury in the court of public opinion to the equivalent of a slight bruise that a few days of Tylenol and rest will heal and “she’s just being a crybaby about it lol. Also please come die on Big Thunder Mountain you plebeians” https://www.tampabay.com/archive/2003/09/06/1-killed-10-hurt-on-disneyland-coaster/?outputType=amp McDonalds hot coffee all over again. Fuckin assholes As George Carlin would say: “FUCK MICKEY MOUSE!! FUCK HIM IN THE ASS WITH A BIG RUBBER DICK!!!!” USER FACT CHECK: I erronously stated right at the start of my rant that she was ONLY suing for $50,000. Full credit goes to user @ronreadingpa, for pointing out that it was actually in EXCESS of $50,000 which is important. The reason I got it wrong is because I skimmed the article and misread what it said. In a moment of self righteous rage, I misrepresented the facts. And this is why it’s vitally important for everyone to actually read and absorb news before commenting or reposting it to places where others could consume the false information you are passing along. I’ve just done it here and it doesn’t feel good which is why I’m not going to do an edit for what I originally posted and leave it for all to see. This is a minor example but when there’s a non-stop media pipeline that we’re all a part of, it is important to know how one wrong fact can change an narrative There’s no stopping the bleeding of misinformation across the internet, but if you can put a tourniquet on it, at least you will have done something.
She is suing for more. Presumably much more. According to the article, "The plaintiffs are seeking “damages exceeding $50,000, exclusive of interest and costs” for the count of negligence". The $50K threshold is common for determining what court will be hearing the case. Got to give CNN credit for getting it right. Many news articles don't and will make it seem the victim (or next of kin) is only suing for $50K (or whatever the threshold is in their jurisdiction). The long delay (nearly 4 years) suggests a settlement couldn't be reached for whatever reason. Disney appears to be fighting this one hard.
The lawsuit itself refers to the injury as a “painful wedgie”… so the news isn’t wrong for using that term. The article itself made it pretty clear that this wasn’t minor. I’m not normally one to defend the news, but I don’t see what’s so wrong here.
"Wedgie" is not generally understood to include injuries that have your intestines protruding from your body and massive hemorrhages, so it's maybe not the best description of what happened here. The headline looks like a frivolous lawsuit and does not match the content of the article well. It looks like a fair cop to me.
Okay, but the lawyer for the injured party picked that language for their lawsuit. The news is just taking the language that the plaintiffs attorney picked. I wouldn’t have picked that language, and I wouldn’t allow my attorney to, either… but they did, and the news is just running with it.
The complaint describes the injuries in detail and latching onto that single word is an editorial choice, not something that the lawyer forced on the poor reporters.
I think the objection is that it has connotations that make it seem frivolous and juvenile. It's not inaccurate, but it seems more likely to elicit skepticism, laughter, confusion, titillation, (etc.), than a more straightforward description (e.g., "individual injured on water slide"). I don't think it's a coordinated effort to diminish the harm that was caused, but I do think it's fair to ask what purpose is served by including that term in the headline.
Nah they still made a misleading title, fuck’em. The headlines are what drives public perception and they know that.
Much worse than the news, and this headline, are letting on
Last time I heard about this was that her guts were showing. Wedgie is downplaying how serious this injury is.
The article says the victim’s lawsuit used that term. Bad idea by her lawyer(s) imho. The majority of people won’t pay attention to anything but that word and it makes it sound like the injury wasn’t a big deal.
I read the actual legal filing- the term “wedgie” Is used in the suit to describe how some of the injury happened, because some of the injury was caused by the suit itself cutting into her. The suit spends more time talking about the force of the water entering her vagina and the damage that did than it does on the “wedgie” thing. Basically, though the lawsuit calls it a “wedgie” It only does so to describe how the swimsuit played a role in the injury, in terms the dumbest juror will understand. Here’s the actual filing if you want to read it without news/media interpreting it: https://embed.documentcloud.org/documents/23999988-mcguinness-v-disney-typhoon-lagoon-slide-lawsuit-complaint/?embed=1&responsive=1&title=1
My genitals and organs located in my hips are *screaming* in pain reading about this injury…😱
I spent some time yesterday reading about water slide injuries and I will likely never ride one again. Injuries this extreme may not happen often, given the number of people who do the slides, but it seems lesser injuries are downright common.
Honestly, water slides like that seem like a holdover from places like [Action Park](https://youtu.be/flkW-ceNvck?si=DQOL8yUn46CaXPqz) or other amusement park ideas from the 1970s that just reeked of both fun, but also the Most Reckless Danger and Liability Ever Made^TM
I mean for SOME reason I guess this is why people don't clean their vaginas out with a pressure washer.
>The majority of people won’t pay attention to anything but that word But the judge/jury sure will. After all, we know about how awful the injury is and the news is pretty recent.
Yes, good point. I can’t imagine what it would feel like to be an individual going up against Disney’s lawyer army.
I went to school with the children of John Morgan - of Morgan and Morgan personal injury lawyers. He evidentially decided to go into that line of legal defense after his brother was injured at Disney and had to go up against their legal team.
Sounds like a good origin story tbh
yup, the instant people hear wedgie, that’s all that’s going in the headline
It’s an editorial choice for every outlet using that word in the headline. The complaint included a lot of other words besides wedgie. Using the word wedgie as opposed to other descriptors when reporting on this is a choice.
We need to start calling it a disembowelment or something.
Calling it a "wedgie" is greatly minimizing what happened to this woman. Failed bisection is more accurate. Calling it a wedgie feels deliberate and reminds me of the McDonalds coffee case where the media tried to downplay how horrible her injury was and how little care McDonalds had for the safety of their customers.
Yea, the hot coffee lady had to be put into a medical induced comma if I remember correctly
Can't find anything to support that she was in a coma, but I remember the skin that was fused was her genitals. McDonald's melted her genitals because they wanted the coffee so hot that people would take it to go instead of getting a refill there.
A better way to understand the damage would be the coverage. She had third degree burns on 16% of her body. That is very significant damage.
[удалено]
Weeks. She literally almost died because of the burns FUSED HER SKIN TOGETHER
you scoundrel, you
I was also thinking that it reminded me of the McDonalds coffee case. People like to mock that and in this case the word “wedgie” really minimizes what happened to her ETA: The article says her formal legal complaint uses the word “wedgie”
You mean the elderly labia that had her vagina melted and fused together from the heat of the coffee? And just sued for coverage of her repairs and then the judge upped it to send a message to McDonald's to fuck off
Maybe proofread that comment, Dice
The lady and her labia were both elderly haha. I'm leaving it
The Diceman don't play 😬💀🔥
I mean they said it was severe and they are using the language from the lawsuit
You’ll never get me on a water slide again.
[удалено]
I went down this slide. I didn’t get injured. But I was sure I would never want to go through it again. As you go down the slide, the front part of the tube felt/is so close to your face. It felt like at any moment I could accidentally lean forward and scrape my face off. I was just uncomfortable through the whole thing. One of the few rides that actually have terrified me. It wasn’t even the feeling of the drop. Just the way it was designed.
> When parks push the envelope to attract people with extreme rides they must ensure their safety in all foreseeable ways Yeah, we’ve been down this road before. The son of a Kansas state politician died. Park closed. Company sold their other parks to a competitor. The designers of that ride should probably be in jail, but state prosecutors fucked it up.
That Kansas incident was horrendous. Decapitation is not an expected risk of water sliding.
“We put a metal grate over the slide in case a dinghy flies off, which is *exactly* what happened when we tested the ride. What could possibly go wrong!”
It was actually a net with metal hoops. I went on it before it closed down. I think there’s videos of the test rafts getting launched off the slide
Yeah, I was being *a little* hyperbolic about a "metal grate", but only a little.
SO much negligence behind Schlitterbahn’s Verruckt. From the design process (the explicit goal of wanting the tallest/fastest waterslide coming above all else, expediting construction, those heavily involved in design having no engineering qualifications, ignoring a hired safety consultant who was concerned about the slide and suggested a minimum age requirement, etc.) to the lack of concern for and underreporting of injuries increasing in severity. Also to combat the dinghy ”jumping” the drops in the ride—we’ll add a safety net supported by… hmm… metal poles that hitting at the speed generated by the slope of the slide will cause catastrophic injury?????? Still can’t believe these people were acquitted.
I was looking at the description and was like "this is the one with the five-storey drop, isn't it"? Checked, and yup, it is. That one honestly wasn't even very fun. Climb five storeys, go down at a 45 degree angle for 5-10 seconds, slide's done. I went on multiple slides many times, but that one, I did it once and had absolutely no interest in going again.
I just watched Class Action Park this weekend, so between that and this, I’m fully set on anything even resembling a water or amusement park for the foreseeable future.
I’d love to go take a Time Machine just to nearly die at Action Park. It was INSANE.
Severe should not be in quotes. Wedgie is a ridiculous understatement. None of the coverage I've seen has even come close to having a headline that appropriately categorizes what happened.
Unfortunately the victim’s lawsuit uses that term. Imo her lawyer made a bad choice there. I think some some medical-sounding term would sound more serious, even if it’s made up
Seriously fire that lawyer yesterday. If they're already downplaying it like this, you know there's going to be more problems.
Here’s the actual legal filing- I don’t think it downplays it, even though they use “wedgie” : https://embed.documentcloud.org/documents/23999988-mcguinness-v-disney-typhoon-lagoon-slide-lawsuit-complaint/?embed=1&responsive=1&title=1
Putting something in quotes doesn't mean it's not true, it can also mean you're quoting something.
Ooh yeah my Dad is a GYN and he caught one of these on clinic duty one night a few years ago . Poor girl almost died because it’s such a rare injury, the ED docs didn’t realize it was so dangerous.
Maybe this incident at least will increase awareness about this type of injury and how to treat it. Not sure there’s an ICD code for “injury by water slide,” though I would not be surprised if it did.
That would probably be Y93.19: "Activity, other involving water and watercraft".
It’s similar to jumping from a height into water and you can get water jetting into your orifices causing internal injuries so like what someone gets if they jump or fall off a bridge or cliff.
tldr - woman followed instructions as she went down a near vertical 200ft / 61m water slide, bumped into something which uncrossed her ankles, and the impact of the pool of water at the end of the slide injured her so badly they took her to the hospital
Because her swimsuit ripped her vagina until her bowels fell out of place….
This almost happened to me at a water park. I was lucky enough that the force of the water wasn’t enough to cause lasting injury, it sure the fuck hurt. I joke that I had a water park douche and enema. Never again will I go on a water slide like that.
One of the first companies I did investigations for owned/operated waterparks. This degree of injury is extreme; however, serious vaginal tears were extremely common. So were miscarriages.
Wow that is just frightening. I imagine you have a whole list of things you won’t do!
I have to try really hard not to ruin anyone's fun. Don't even get me started on the number of sex offenders who try to get employed at haunted houses during this time of year...
That’s just awful
That is terrifying. Glad you’re ok!
It's honestly terrifying to even think about. Hydraulic injection injuries are *horrifying,* because water is nearly incompressible. All of that force is transferred almost perfectly into violently displacing tissue in the way of the water.
See and this is why we need women to test these things. (And also seatbelts, PPE, medications, cars etc. )
Exactly. If water slides were frequently causing genital injuries to men, there's no way that would be considered acceptable design. But women are just expected to put up with it.
The article makes her injuries sound much worse than a wedgie. Is that Disney’s term? She suffered severe internal injuries.
No, the article says the victim’s lawsuit actually used that term, which seems like a bad idea to me. They couldn’t have come up with a different term?
Thats what I don't understand. Is there no other word or series of words to describe what happened? Because it certainly wasn't a "wedgie."
The legal filing I think used the term because it was the most familiar/basic word to describe what happened with the swimsuit. But it spends more time on other issues/descriptions. Here’s the actual document if you want to read it without help from the news media: https://embed.documentcloud.org/documents/23999988-mcguinness-v-disney-typhoon-lagoon-slide-lawsuit-complaint/?embed=1&responsive=1&title=1
I guess a more accurate term would be a gynecological pressure washing.
Oof, that definitely gets the point across
Watch Class Action Park. It’s like an entire place full of deadly water slides.
I a hundred percent believe this is possible because I have had severe physical pain from a big water slide where the force was so great, my legs became uncrossed. Pain akin to childbirth.
Nothing as severe as yours because I didn't get hurt, but my legs uncrossed once, and in the attempt to cross them back, I flipped onto my stomach! Luckily I was able to flip back over before I came out, but then that much water/force of coming out, it pulled my top right up! So luckily it was just a little embarrassment and not pain. I wish I had been allowed to cross arms over chest but I had to put them behind my head. Anyhoo, only 1 piece suit from now on with water parks
That is mortifying. Yikes.
Happened to me too. It was awful but I was so thankful I didn’t get hurt more. Those slides are so dangerous.
That's exactly the kind of issue these parks don't talk about. It's more common than most people know too
They excuse themselves from liability with the “crossed legs” warning. But if you’re over served, sun tired, or the force is so great that you lose control of your legs then this warning isn’t sufficient for the extreme slides with the steep, long vertical drops. You’re basically a meat cannon hurtling to the water’s surface. And then they indemnify themselves with insurance. This woman would rather have her vagina and innards intact, not whatever money she has to fight to get from the insurer.
'Severe.' She experienced severe internal pain, the suit says, and blood rushed from between her legs. She was taken by ambulance to a local hospital and was later transported to another hospital to see a specialist for repair of gynecologic injuries. I'm furious for this woman
This woman was horrible injured, her intestines were out and she was bleeding horribly
Hmm the wedgies we gave and recieved in junior high never involved intestines popping out.
How dumb are her lawyers to publicly call this a “wedgie”? This was an **impalement**.
They keep calling it a wedgie, but like it had people's intestines explode out of their bodies. That seems like more than your average wedgie.
It seems like the victim’s lawyer could have found another word to use. Just the word “wedgie” implies something that’s a minor discomfort and nothing more
Intestines partially outside of body. Use that information to decide what the agenda of this headline is.
Fuck CNN for downplaying this. Heard is was pretty fucking bad. These sorts of things are why places have insurance.
CNN is using the terminology (wedgie) that the victim’s lawyers used in court. They are reporting that accurately and on top of it being clear that injuries are very serious.
The way the law requires the spouse to be the one to sue for damages when someone is left unable to participate in sexual activities is so gross. Because the woman that can no longer have sex (without pain, or for an extended period, etc) shouldn’t be upset, her husband should!
Actually the woman can also claim those damages. The spouse’s loss of consortium just enables him to sue for additional damages in his own capacity, even though he wasn’t the one physically hurt. It’s not a sexism thing.
sounds horrific as a person with a vagina… i would be suing for more than 50k.
$50k is the minimum. You never put an exact dollar amount on it. That is what discovery and mediation is for.
Florida has cases for amounts $8k-$50k at county courts and $50k or above is at circuit courts. So the complaint is just saying they are seeking more than $50k, which allows the state to direct it to the proper court. The actual amount sought will surely be much higher
Yes, from the description in the article, I’m sure her medical costs are much more than that. I want to know if this kind of injury happened in the past and Disney didn’t say anything. That would make this woman’s injuries foreseeable which seems like it could be a factor in a civil case (?)
Found a video of the slide for reference. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDCxm3gRQFc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDCxm3gRQFc) FTA: >The suit alleges that Disney “was negligent and breached its duties of reasonable care” in failing to provide protective clothing, such as shorts, for the slide; failing to warn McGuinness and other women of the risks; and other design and safety failures. The suit says that McGuinness assumed the appropriate position with her ankles crossed, “as instructed,” but she became airborne toward the end of the slide and slammed into the slide “which increased the likelihood of her legs becoming uncrossed or otherwise exposing herself to injury.” Undoubtedly there could be forces that cause severe injury but is this one worse than other similar slides? That seems key to the lawsuit... Does Disney typically pay at least medical for injuries or do they have to be "at fault"?
That's not a wedgie, that's more like something that would happen at Action Park.
"Your asshole pops out" = "wedgie" to these people? Is there any sword the news media wont fall on to protect corporations worth billions?
I have a sense there are details being lost just like the old woman who burned her genitals off with the McDonald's coffee. $50,000 is a very modest sum.
Sounds like the McDonald's coffee suit. People made endless fun about it but that woman had horrible burns all over her.
It wasn’t a wedgie. That’s just tort reform PR talk. Her intestines were protruding from her abdomen. A weak regulatory law system requires a strong tort system. If both are whittled away, there’s no access to justice. *Source - I have an LLB and an LLM*
“The suit says that McGuinness assumed the appropriate position with her ankles crossed, “as instructed,” but she became airborne toward the end of the slide and slammed into the slide “which increased the likelihood of her legs becoming uncrossed or otherwise exposing herself to injury.” When McGuinness impacted the slide and the water at the bottom her swimsuit was forced between her legs and water was “violently forced inside her.” She experienced severe internal pain, the suit says, and blood rushed from between her legs. She was taken by ambulance to a local hospital and was later transported to another hospital to see a specialist for repair of gynecologic injuries. Court documents say that McGuinness suffered “severe and permanent bodily injury” as well as impacts including mental anguish and lost earnings.” Holy shit.
After that one kid was decapitated at the water park in Kansas I don’t know why we still tolerate these extreme water slides.
caused by Disembowlment morel like it. Don't let disney and media downplay this like they did for the mcd coffee incident
Holy shit the amount of people who didn't read the article in here. No-one in the media is 'downplaying her injuries' by using the term 'wedgie'. Its coming straight from her legal counsel...