W000551

Sunday, November 25, 2001 10:44 PM
Comments regarding September 11th Victim Compensation Fund

I lost my brother,     , 36, on 11 September 2001. There was so much pain, and still is, during the 11th as I first listened on the radio, on my way home from work, as it was reported that the building that my brother worked in collapsed, and later, as I sat with my parents and watched in horror the events that unfolded on television. My brother has a wife and two children, that were less than three years old in September. They must be taken care of. However, my parents raised my brother, cared for him as a child, relished in his victories of later years, encouraged him through his defeats. As a sister, we shared, family vacations, cheering for each other during sporting events, encouraging each other towards success, double dating, and discussing everything from relationship of the moment, which skis were the coolest, how far we would run tonight, where to go out that evening and what time we would meet, and how to select a school for our children.

Because of all of this, although there is an expediency issue in dealing with multiple representatives of any family, I believe that it is important for the Department to consider the significance of the loss of a husband, wife, father, mother. However, the Department should not ignore the significance of the loss to a mother, father, brother, or, in my case, sister.

I understand that there must be a systematic manner in which to administer this fund. However, in choosing to deal with a single representative of a victim, it is evident that the Department has already foreseen the potential for conflict. This has been an emotional time for every survivor. Why not avoid further distress, keep all survivors involved in the process, not just a single family representative. Although this event has worked to make many families pull together, supporting each other. The potential of a single family representative may push many families apart.

As to drawing distinctions regarding the location of the death, I do not understand the significance. My brother was located on the     floor of wtc tower 2. He worked for     . Although I try not to imagine what happened to him following the impact of the United Airline flight, it is impossible for me not to try to imagine. It is probably better for there to be no distinction, preventing those survivors from further imagining the circumstances of death. And does it really matter, dead is dead. As to where the location of the death occurred, is that really important.

Collateral sources should have no direct impact on the amount of compensation received. My brother worked very hard in life. In his death, should his survivors be penalized. Do you think that people made contributions to his family, knowing that this may reduce the amount of compensation that his family may eventually receive.

I know that this document has been moved forward quickly in order to help the survivors of this terrible, tragic event. I hope that in continuing to move this process forward, the Department will continue to be diligent in your efforts. However, I also hope that the Department will be cognizant of the need to be sensitive to the families of the victims, limiting the amount of stress that they must continue to undergo throughout the duration of this process.

Thank you for your efforts.

Individual Comment

Previous Next Back to Comments by Date Back to Comments by Date
(Graphical Version) (Text Only Version)