If they die on the thirty-first day, is it right that the family no longer gets this $250,000 amount? Don't you think this should be considered or reviewed, and that maybe there should be some sort of medical requirement to tie the death, after 30 days, specifically to the injury? That can be done in personal injury litigation. Why would you cut somebody off, cut the family off, which has lost its bread winner, because it's the thirty-first day? It's not logical to me.
On May 6th, 2010. See this statement in context.