Of course The Relic is not wrong...mind you I dont think he is right either.In all of The Relic's examples a degree of negligence is clear.
Even if you have a simple run of the mill operation, the same as hundreds do every day, you have to sign a disclaimer.
You are pointed to the dangers that might happen, and all reasonable precautions are taken.But should there be a reaction to a certain drug or treatment that causes a massive reaction and you are put into grave danger,then it is the risk you take, unless it can be proven to be negligence.
I dont know but I would bet that the agreement signed by the participants in this tragedy covered every eventuality. And any claim would be based on if negligence could be found to be the cause of the problems.
Surely it would not be in the companies interests to be so cavalier in throwing caution to the winds hoping that they might win big time IF it works alright.
I personally believe the company is liable for the treatment the men recieve and any further help for the future resulting from their error in administering the drug, and perhaps a nominal sum.
No more than that.
__________________
I thought I knew more than this...before I started talking |