Lunch Break: “Baby Jessica,” age 25, to inherit trust fund
To give us a break from the daily grind…
I heard this past weekend that Jessica McClure Morales (aka “Baby Jessica”) turned 25. That milestone was not surprising to me as I remember her dramatic rescue from the underground shaft.
However, what did surprise me was that reaching her milestone birthday now gives her access to a trust fund in the ballpark of $800,000-$1,000,000.
Jessica is now a stay-at-home mother of two, and her youngest is 18 months old — the same age she was when her accident drew the eyes of the world to her ordeal. She lives less than two miles from the site of the 1987 rescue.
According to her father, Jessica has no memory of being wedged in the pipe – or of the 15 operations that followed her ordeal. A scar from her hairline to the bridge of her nose is still visible where her head rubbed against the wall of the well. She also lost a toe to gangrene because one leg was pinned above her head in the underground shaft.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKfz3jFVLME[/youtube]
I have a few questions:
1. After her parents spent all that was necessary to restore Jessica to health, they set up a trust fund (which undoubtedly grew in size over the years with interest). There was also a TV deal which brought the family some money. Speaking only about the part of the trust fund which was excess donations received, is Jessica entitled to keep it?
2. If she is not entitled to keep it, what should Jessica do with it?
Here are my thoughts on the matter.
1. I’m glad the community rallied together to help Jessica if that’s what they felt in their heart, but I don’t believe it was their intention to make her financially set for life – provided, of course, she continues to invest or save wisely. Jessica and her husband will never have to worry about working for a house payment for 30 years, or struggle to put their kids through college, or struggle to secure medical necessities for their children, or pinch pennies for family trips like so many households do.
2. Did Jessica’s parents share any of the wealth with her rescuers, the engineers who got her out of that shaft? Would Jessica consider doing the right thing and giving all of it (or a substantial part) to a children’s charity such as St. Jude’s or Children’s Memorial Hospital.
3. Finally, I never heard about money pouring in for the Chilean miners or any other individual who may have been stuck in some similar situation. Was Jessica treated differently because she was a toddler wedged in a shaft all by herself? I think so. Does it merit keeping the excess donations received? I say no. Time will tell what Jessica does with the trust fund windfall.
Email LauraLoo with your Lunch Break suggestions.
[HT: Today People.msnbc]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I vaguely recall watching that on TV with my mom. I can’t watch it now without tearing up even though I know she is alright. As a mom that just tugs on your heart.
Honestly, I think she ought to donate that money to a good cause… St. Jude’s is excellent and is a charity I support as they don’t charge parents that can’t afford cancer treatment for their children.
But then again, in Jessica’s shoes… I probably would want to hold onto the money for the future of my family. Who can blame her if she does. An 800,000 dollar toe. Not bad!
#2 was a good question. It does seems strange to be rewarded with huge sums of cash for being a young victim, but not reward the rescuers who got her out alive. Donating the money is a good idea.
I imagine that Jessica has kind of counted on that money. Her family fell apart after the whole ordeal. I really don’t have a problem with her keeping it. She was kind of like a child star cash cow for her family. They did not seem to get much happiness from it . I hope Jessica can find happiness with her own children.
Don’t know enough about the situation to speculate (I certainly recall watching it on TV and weeping – but the only facts I know are that a kid fell down a well and was rescued), I don’t know how much time or money she donates to charity, I don’t know what her financial situation or that of her loved ones is, I don’t know if she has people in her family with conditions like health problems who might be depending on her for help, and don’t really care what she does with it.
I’m happy she’s fortunate enough to be a SAHM and I hope she has a long, happy life.
If the money was donated to Jessica without any conditions attached then it’s hers to do with as she chooses. Of course it would be nice of her to donate some or all of it to charities, but she is not obligated to do so, and I wouldn’t hold it against her if she didn’t.
This situation really makes you think about who you donate money to and why. Everyone’s hearts went out to the baby stuck in the well, but people didn’t think to open up their wallets for those who took risks and gave their time and energy to save her. Jessica’s windfall can certainly serve as a reminder that when your emotions lead you to giving money to someone, once the money leaves your hands you often don’t have any say in what it pays for!
I’m glad her parents were both decent enough not to blow her money and wise enough to make her wait until she’s 25 to access it. Imagine if she had that money at 18. It would have potentially ruined her life.
I think len’s comment speaks for me. I’d have fewer qualms about how Jessica spends her money than some homeless man on the street. And giving to just about anyone is still a good thing.
It’s her money and it’s none of our business. This whole post sounds like envy to me.
What Len said.
And who knew that she’d recover so well? For all donors knew, the money they gave might not even cover her family’s initial bills for her medical are. If it hadn’t been wisely invested, there might be little if anything left.
Now that we have a new, larger crisis in Japan, maybe we can learn from this and give extra thought to the families of the nuclear reactor employees who are risking their lives for strangers.
it’s hers. She has shown responsibility and focus. Her parents didn’t spend it all like drunken monkeys. I know children who suffered, who came into money at 18, and the parents persuaded and harassed them to spend it all in six months flat.
She is a quiet, stay at home mother, married, with children. Vaya con Dios.
I also agree with Len. :)
1987….? Whoa, where did the time go?
All of these questions are irrelevant. As has already been stated, when you donate money without conditions attached, you loose all ability to determine what should be done with it. In essence, the money was a donation, a gift to help Jessica recover from her ordeal. It was up to her parents, and now Jessica herself, what to do with it. I frankly think that this post is in extremely poor taste.
Oh, do you Enigma? Shame on us. If only we were defending the dismemberment of unborn human beings like you… then how classy we would be!
Sydney,
How exactly is anything that you said relevant to what I wrote in my post?
Jill,
Great post. In 1995 Robert O’Donnell, the paramedic who went into the dangerous rescue shaft (even though he was claustrophobic) and pulled Jessica out, committed suicide. The short-lived instant fame, combined with post-traumatic stress syndrome led to a prescription drug abuse that led O’Donnell into a death spiral he could not pull out of. He ended it with his mother’s shotgun.
Get the story here:
http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20105787,00.html
O’Donnell left behind two young sons. Perhaps Jessica could use a healthy chunk of that money to pay for O’Donnell’s sons’ educations, or mortgages. They lost their dad as a consequence of Jessica’s rescue. It would be beautiful if she could assist O’Donnell’s boys in getting a solid footing in their young adulthood.
Sorry guys, Enigma and Jacqueline are the only ones who have made any sensible comments.
Jill, why are you even considering/asking what Jessica ought to do with her money? I thought such considerations were the purview of Commies and Leftists. I do agree that the miners didn’t receive such largess. I would suggest that that may be because of the perception that they are adults who signed on for it. That does not justify not helping them…
Sydney, how in the world did you get from Enigma’s comment to his support for abortion? I mean, really?
Its completely relevant. Someone who advocates murdering unborn children has no right to chide others for “poor taste”. pulease.
Jacqueline – I assure you there is no envy on my part. In fact, I am the type of person who finds it hard to accept monetary gifts, excess of any kind.
My beloved Aunt Mary is always ready to assist me with expenses I may have (such as a recent home model) and I will have no part of it. I find so much personal satisfaction and inner strength when God gives me the ability to accomplish these things on my own. And I appreciate them more than if someone just handed them to me.
Gerry - I didn’t know about Robert O’Donnell’s tragedy. Your recommendation is EXACTLY what this post is about – helping others after someone has already been helped in monumental proportions.
Kevin, if you read here long enough you will see Enigma supports abortion.
Sydney and Kevin,
It’s true, I do support abortion rights. That still lends no relevance to this discussion. Can anyone say ‘ad hominem?’
Guess what Enigma… character matters. Just like I wouldn’t take marriage advice from Bill Clinton, I wouldn’t take advice from you on what is in poor taste. Not saying your opinion wasn’t valid, it was just super hypocritical coming from someone who espouses the cold-hearted opinions you do. When you stop supporting child murder then you can act utterly offended by posts in “poor taste”
Thanks Laura. :-)
Kevin,
I see your point, but I also see another, larger point. I recall this drama vividly. People donated money for a trust fund because there was much talk about possible future surgeries and psychiatric care that might be needed. BLESSEDLY this has not come to pass.
Yes Kevin, you are correct; the money is hers to do with as she will. The larger discussion is about whether one has an obligation to do good with money that was intended for doing good. Or does one do well for oneself in the absence of any need arising from the tragedy.
My larger point was that none of us foresaw that the hero who emerged with Jessica would end up in a death spiral. We’ve learned much about this area in 25 years. Many gave money in the hopes that their money would bring healing from this tragedy. Two boys have been growing up without a father, and with their own traumatic stress, knowing how dad ended it all. How has the trajectory of their lives been altered as a result? These young adults from two families are forever bound by blood and sacrifice. It would be a grace-filled moment if Jessica could use some of that money to ease their load.
Jessica didn’t just lose a single toe, she lost part of her right foot as well. I think it would be silly to pooh-pooh her injuries or the effect this has had on her life. I have scars on my own forehead due to a childhood accident of my own, and throughout my life people have gawked at the scars and called me names, just like they did to Jessica.
She had an innocent accident because she was a baby, not through a personal failing or irresponsibility. Her rescuers were grownups who knew the risks of what they were doing and did their jobs. The money was freely given in support of her ongoing well-being. I see no reason why it should not be used for its intended purpose.
And I’m sorry about the rescuer’s suicide, but honestly, that was an unpredictable consequence, and it’s quite possible something else would have triggered that effect if he had never had anything to do with Jessica.
Gerry – Amen! And as the Bible states, freely we have received, freely we need to give. :D
Sydney,
Since when is saying that something is in poor taste “act[ing] all utterly offended?”
Your post is also contradictory–while saying that I have a right to an opinion, you impugn it because of my supposed “bad” character. So, which is it? Do I have a right to have an opinion, and in turn have other people listen to and treat it respectfully, or does my supposed “bad character” render all such considerations either impossible or invalid?
FYI–Not all people who disagree with you are evil. It just makes it easier to paint them that way.
I was 6 years old and recall this situation like it was yesterday. Probably because the TV was holding a news vigil and wouldn’t play He-Man or My Little Ponies and I was forced to watch the whole thing unfold.
I agree that this post is in poor taste. People donated their money to her and she was blessed enough to have parents who were wise and prudent with it, which is why she has it today. It’s her decision what she does with it. We hope she will be generous and do good, but it’s not our business to ask ourselves if she is deserving and what she “should” do with her money. People donated to her of their own free will- nothing was coerced or fraudulently taken from anyone. It’s not our business.
And I’m sorry about the rescuer’s suicide, but honestly, that was an unpredictable consequence, and it’s quite possible something else would have triggered that effect if he had never had anything to do with Jessica.
I agree 100% Clarice.
Family and friends feel guilty enough the way it is when someone takes their own life, and yes some of them may have been abusive and are in some ways responsible.
In this case, there were many, many more decisions made on this man’s part that led to his suicide, none of which Jessica should be made to feel guilty or responsible for. I am shocked it was brought up.
I agree, Praxedes and Clarice.
I was taught growing up that it is in poor taste to discuss how others spend their money. It is none of our business.
I think we would all be better off if we concerned ourselves with what we are capable of doing with what we have, rather than concerning ourselves with what others should do with what they have. What if each of us on this blog would go out and buy a homeless person dinner or actually help someone in need rather than cry that someone else isn’t doing enough? I think then we could say that each of us tried to make this a better place. I don’t really care what you do with what you have, it doesn’t effect me or those around, but I am going to go and actually help someone today.
Have a nice day :)
Enigma, Jacqueline, Len, Praxedes and Kevin are few who have said it correctly. What the young lady does with her money is none of our business. Boys and girls, can we say “gossip” and “busybody”?
Sydney, I have been a pro-life activist for almost 20 years now, and I find your attitude towards Enigma, as expressed in your replies, to be condescending.
Bully for you Janet Baker. you just called us “boys and girls” I’m 30 years old hon. Who is being condescending, hmmmm?
Janet Baker and Jaqueline,
I appreciate the support. Although we may not agree on everything, I have never seen a reason to demonize my opponents. In my experience, a majority of people subscribe to various moral positions because they believe them to either be true or right, depending upon one’s own understanding. Although there are entirely self-serving people who preach certain positions (and when I say this, realize that this stripe of people is confined to no particular position, political affiliation, gender, religion, race, ect.) for for their own personal gain, such cases are, in my opinion, the minority rather than the majority. Reasonable, well-intentioned people can still disagree. It’s always nice to be reminded that there are other people out there who feel roughly the same way, regardless of what views they hold dear.
Sydney: I’m 30 years old hon. Who is being condescending, hmmmm?
You got a point, kid. : P