Here is the real reason http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2325502/Map-shows-wo...
If no-one helps you after a car crash in India, this is why
51–60 of 225 posts
Re: If no-one helps you after a car crash in India, this is why
#52> "[At the hospital", they wait for somebody to give them assurance that they will pay the bill."
How can such low levels of humanity be reached at a hospital?
Re: If no-one helps you after a car crash in India, this is why
#53tl;dr: "The foremost reason was intimidation by police," he says. "Oftentimes if you assist someone the police will assume you're helping that person out of guilt." Apart from the fear of being falsely implicated, people also worried about becoming trapped as a witness in a court case - legal proceedings can be notoriously protracted in India. And if they helped the victim get to hospital, they feared coming under pr…
While I haven't been to Japan, a documentary [1] on expats living in Japan had a part (if my memory serves me) where the same sentiment was expressed, ie, "don't involve yourself". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prNYOW0_kms PS - Even if my memory is from another source regarding Japan, the documentary showed me a lot I didn't know.
I've only watched the first 20 minutes of the documentary, but I'm impressed. It's probably one of the most accurate portrayals of what it's like to be a foreigner living long term in Japan that I've seen. Like always, documentary directors usually like to be controversial, so I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop ;-)
In terms of "don't involve yourself", I wouldn't say that's really true. The very few times I've seen anyone in trouble, people have rushed to come to their aid. I live in the countryside, though, so it might be different than the big city. Social duty is a big part of Japanese culture, though, so I can't really imagine people ignoring others in distress.
As a brief diversion, I recently went to Tokyo and was surprised by how many more homeless people there are now than there were roughly 10 years ago. People seem inured to that kind of distress (as they are in any big city, I guess), which is too bad.
Re: If no-one helps you after a car crash in India, this is why
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder how does that even work? If someone drops in an injured person and leaves, will the hospital just let the injured person die on the floor? If bystanders doing nothing raises headlines in India, I'd imagine hospitals doing that would be an even bigger scandal.
I can confirm this. Hospitals don't treat unless the injured person's relative(s) sign legal papers. The general rule of thumb in India is that one should always carry at least an ID proof (better yet an insurance policy) so that in case of an accident the hospital can contact the relative.
I double-confirm this, but with the exception of charity and government hospitals. There are several such hospitals in every major metropolitan city in India. Of course, the 'nearest' hospital may not be one such. The private hospitals operate on pure capitalism and patients who cannot pay are always delayed and then later declared as brought dead on arrival (DOA).
Re: If no-one helps you after a car crash in India, this is why
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
Statistics always presents a wrong picture when considered in isolation. Just for the sake of curiosity let us compare statistics of road accidents between USA and India. I'm taking the 2005 US road accident data as a reference: http://www.foxnews.com/story/2005/02/03/car-crashes-kill-400... So according to the statistics from the above article, approximately 40,000 die every year in USA with 100 people dying every d…
I suspect that you're making a bit of a mistake yourself in your calculations here if we want to get an understanding of if it's "more accidents" or "access to help when the accident happens" that is more important. The reason is that you're taking the population of the USA where over 80% have licenses to drive ( http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/pubs/hf/pl11028/ch... ) and comparing with a country where most…
No I'm not making a mistake. I know very well that my calculations are skewed. That is precisely the point I was trying to make: Taking a statistic in isolation presents a wrong picture (that is also the reason I said: 'So by looking at these calculations India "seems" to be a lot safer than the US'. Note the stress on "seems")
Hope this clarifies my intent :)
Re: If no-one helps you after a car crash in India, this is why
#56Here is the real reason http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2325502/Map-shows-wo...
how does racism explain why people in India won't help other Indians? I know Indian has a wide diversity of languages and religions but even at the very least I would expect people from the same group to help but that doesn't seem to be the case here.
Re: If no-one helps you after a car crash in India, this is why
#57> "[At the hospital", they wait for somebody to give them assurance that they will pay the bill." How can such low levels of humanity be reached at a hospital?
When first visiting the US many years ago I was warned always to carry with me proof of insurance, for otherwise a hospital might not treat me until I could provide some proof that I could pay.
I wonder if that was true, whether it's still true, and what the situation really was or is.
Re: If no-one helps you after a car crash in India, this is why
#58> Oftentimes if you assist someone the police will assume you're helping that person out of guilt.
That doesn't make the bystanders apathy any more tolerable. I'd like to think I would help someone in need even if I went to jail for it (you never know what you'd actually do unless you're in the situation, but still...)
Re: If no-one helps you after a car crash in India, this is why
#59> "[At the hospital", they wait for somebody to give them assurance that they will pay the bill." How can such low levels of humanity be reached at a hospital?
Well, if the person doesn't have money who is going to pay for the bills? Medicine costs money.
Re: If no-one helps you after a car crash in India, this is why
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you still do that if you had friends or family who had been bankrupted or jailed because they helped a crash victim? It's easy to say that you would help when it's a hypothetical situation. It's much harder to actually do it when the consequences are staring you in the face. Maybe you still would, but you can't really know how you'd react until you've actually been in that situation. Indians are not fundamental…
People are people. Societal norms vary. And yes, I would and have put myself in physical jeopardy assisting people in need. Edit: In the US we have 'Good Samaritan' laws for most of that. It is possible I could do more harm &/or be liable for my actions. Yet, I refuse to not do what I believe is 'right' out of fear. Yeah, my lifestyle & welfare has suffered(sic) for my principles in many facets of life, but principle…
Ok. Then would you still do that if the consequences were jail, separation from family, which also means putting family in a desperate situation of worry and runaround? Plus the rebuke that you would get from family too for putting them through so much trouble? Plus if you are the partial or whole breadwinner, which is often the case, putting family in financial calamity?
I support what you feel, and I too would put up an aggressive stance of helping the individual, but the cost is a lot higher than just my personal efforts. I put a lot more people through the misery.