Assumption of Risk, After All
-
Avihay Dorfman
Abstract
Assumption of risk - the notion that one cannot complain about a harmful state to which one has willingly exposed oneself - figures prominently in our extra-legal lived experience. In spite of its deep roots in our common-sense morality, the tort doctrine of assumption of risk has long been discredited by many leading tort scholars, restatement reporters, courts, and legislatures. In recent years, however, growing concerns about junk food consumption, and about obesity more generally, have given rise to considerations that are traditionally associated with the principles underlying the doctrine of assumption of risk. Against this backdrop, I shall advance two claims: one negative and the other affirmative. The negative claim is that the major objections to the doctrine of assumption of risk are either misplaced or overblown. And affirmatively, I argue that this doctrine (properly reconstructed to reflect liberal-egalitarian intuitions) can provide an illuminating framework with which to address pressing social concerns such as the one associated with junk food’s harmful side-effects
© 2014 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Masthead
- Introduction
- The Uneasy Case of Multiple Injurers’ Liability
- Assumption of Risk, After All
- Lapses of Attention in Medical Malpractice and Road Accidents
- Tort-Agency Partnerships in an Age of Preemption
- The Tort Entitlement to Physical Security as the Distributive Basis for Environmental, Health, and Safety Regulations
- Reg Neg Redux: The Career of a Procedural Reform
- Internality Regulation Through Public Choice
- Modeling Partial Agency Autonomy in Public-Health Policymaking
- Reexamining the Pathways to Reduction in Tobacco-Related Disease
- Competitive Third-Party Regulation: How Private Certification Can Overcome Constraints That Frustrate Government Regulation
- Outcome-Based Regulatory Strategies for Promoting Greater Patient Safety
- Whither Whistleblowing? Bounty Regimes, Regulatory Context, and the Challenge of Optimal Design
- A Sampling-Based System of Civil Liability
- Operation Arbitration: Privatizing Medical Malpractice Claims
Articles in the same Issue
- Masthead
- Introduction
- The Uneasy Case of Multiple Injurers’ Liability
- Assumption of Risk, After All
- Lapses of Attention in Medical Malpractice and Road Accidents
- Tort-Agency Partnerships in an Age of Preemption
- The Tort Entitlement to Physical Security as the Distributive Basis for Environmental, Health, and Safety Regulations
- Reg Neg Redux: The Career of a Procedural Reform
- Internality Regulation Through Public Choice
- Modeling Partial Agency Autonomy in Public-Health Policymaking
- Reexamining the Pathways to Reduction in Tobacco-Related Disease
- Competitive Third-Party Regulation: How Private Certification Can Overcome Constraints That Frustrate Government Regulation
- Outcome-Based Regulatory Strategies for Promoting Greater Patient Safety
- Whither Whistleblowing? Bounty Regimes, Regulatory Context, and the Challenge of Optimal Design
- A Sampling-Based System of Civil Liability
- Operation Arbitration: Privatizing Medical Malpractice Claims
