The author will endeavour to show that this methodology can be used in the
context of medicinal products and causation , 219 in respect of refining statistical chances into personal chances . Bayes ' Theorem is a significant branch of
Author: Richard Goldberg
Publisher: Hart Publishing
This book provides a comparative account of the legal and scientific issues relating to proof of causation in alleged cases of drug-induced injury, principally in Europe and North America. It seeks to assess whether, by using probabilistic approaches, the courts may more accurately determine the cause of adverse reactions contentiously associated with drugs. In four case studies (DES, Bondoctin, vaccine damage and "Gulf War Syndrome"), the deficiencies of orthodox approaches to causation are revealed. A sustained argument is presented in favour of according greater weight to epidemological statistics, as refined by the application of the Bayes' Theorem. A valuable feature is the discussion of the role of expert witnesses, including an examination of how the author's proposals could be accommodated within the reformed civil process envisaged by the Woolf Report. The book also examines the economic implications of these proposals. It is a timely contribution to the resolution of the legal problems in this complex area of tort law.
Apparently , then , each injury in the exposed group has a chance of 3 / 4 of
being caused by exposure . Likewise , a relative risk of 3 corresponds to a chance of 2 / 3 , while a relative risk of 2 corresponds to a chance of 1 / 2 , which
may be the ...
For the purposes of the allocation of legal responsibility , “ [ i ] f a wrongful act or
omission results in an increased risk of injury ... As already indicated , it has been
suggested that the lost chance approach avoids problems of proof of causation .
issue of the - he controversial recoverability of damages for is loss of a chance in
clinical negligence cases was re-visited ... have been characterised by judicial
refusal or failure to grapple with the distinction between causation as an element
of primary ... Fairchild held a claimant would recover damages from a defendant if
all he could prove was that the defendant materially increased his risk of injury.
14 Although the term risk factor is applied loosely in the literature , modern usage
ascribes a strong causal role to a risk ... but because it brings a person into
contact with toxic materials , which are the risk factors , it does increase the chance of ...
Author: Brian A. Burt
Cram101 provides all of the highlights, notes, and practice tests to accompany most textbooks for all disciplines and levels.
Author: Michelle Denise Roth-ClinePublish On: 2006
Similar reduced - chance , increased - risk , and alternativecausation cases have
all raised legal questions about the connection that exists between various types
of probability statements and causation . These questions are part of an ...
und of the Probability cognized , able fact hat ( Otherwise no production has
occurred . ) This is the ... Chance is more than human ignorance of causality
which is " really ” absolute ; that idea was always a dogma , an intellectual
evidence expressing 51 % or higher probability of causation might be permitted
to elide with the standard of proof without ... Authority.141 It is the notion of
recovery for the loss of a chance or , expressed differently , recovery for
increased risk .
... duplicative causation , 172 duty to preserve plaintiff ' s small chance of life or
health , 177 - 82 duty to try analysis , 180 – 81 element of plaintiff ' s negligence
claim , 165 epidemiological evidence , 560 evidence of causation , increased risk
Author: Dan B. Dobbs
Publisher: West Academic
The Concise Version is newly streamlined for professors who teach a four-unit course or who want to cover fewer pages per day yet to retain complete coverage. The Concise Edition tracks the Standard Edition, but aims at cutting an additional 200 pages by trimming notes and cases and omitting some cases in favor of a short textual summary, or in one instance, substituting a shorter case. It also omits defamation, fraud, and other economic and dignitary torts, as well as some practice-oriented material. The result is a substantially shorter casebook that nevertheless provides the coverage most teachers want.
12 An analysis of the two - word phrase political risk indicates that the concept of
" political risk " consists of the union of two subconcepts : political causation or
attribution , and risk ( chance - - i . e . , degree of probability - - of injury , damage
Then there would be a 25 % chance ( that is , 2 / 3 X 30 % + 1 / 2 X 10 % ) of
accidents of ambiguous origin ; an 80 % probability of causation by the party in
such accidents ( for 20 % is the risk of an ambiguous accident truly caused by the
Author: Steven Shavell
Category: Liability (Law)
Situations in which there is uncertainty over the cause of harm are studied (e.g., was the lung cancer due to normal exposure to medical x-radiation, to smoking, to exposure to carcinogens discharged by a chemical plant?); and the effects on incentives to reduce risk of various ways of treating such uncertainty under the liability system are identified using a theoretical model of the occurrence of harm. The main points are these. Use of a threshold probabilit' of causation (e.g., 50%) as a criterion for determining liability may adversely affect behavior: parties might face a diminished burden of liability (if their probability of causation systematically fell below the threshold) and thus do too little to reduce risk; or they might face an extra burden (if their probability were systematically above the threshold), and thus do too much. Second, the best all or nothing criterion for determining liability (a criterion under which a party is fully liable if at all liable) is different in form from a threshold probability criterion. Third, liability in proportion to the probability of causation is superior to all other criteria and results in socially ideal behavior.These points are demonstrated and analyzed in two types of case: where the uncertainty involves a party versus natural or "background" factors; and where it involves which party among several was the author of harm. The importance of the points is shown to depend on the type of case, and as well on the form of liability (strict liability or the negligence rule).The interpretation of the analysis and important qualifications to it are discussed in a concluding section.
Finally , I argue that the probabilistic increased - risk concept of causation must
be rejected , because it lacks the attributive element that distinguishes causal
explanations from mere probability statements . This attributive element , which
Author: University of California, Davis. School of LawPublish On: 2002
Enhanced risk recovery , therefore , can be viewed as promoting the goals of
both deterrence and corrective justice . ... Richard W. Wright , Causation ,
Responsibility , Risk , Probability , Naked Statistics , and Proof : Pruning the
Bramble Bush ...
Author: University of California, Davis. School of Law
The loss of chance exception to the substantial probability causation requirement
has been recognized because : See also , Smith , “ Increased Risk of Harm : A
New Standard for Sufficiency of Evidence of Causation in Medical Malpractice ...
Summary : non - causal explanations Thus of the three non - causal explanations
, we can effectively exclude chance , but must proceed ... The time relationship is
not clear ; no data for risk by time since first use of estrogens are given . As it is ...
Author: J. Mark Elwood
Publisher: Oxford University Press, USA
This book shows that in most controversial questions in medicine the essential argument concerns whether the available evidence supports a particular cause-and-effect relationship. Making this evaluation, however, requires a degree of critical thinking that is not emphasized in medical education. In redressing this imbalance, the author demonstrates that by defining the postulated causal relationship, the possible causal and non-causal explanations can be considered in a logical and constructive manner. Elwood assumes no preliminary knowledge, but starts from a simple logical base to lead the reader through types of studies which are relevant, including the issue of selection in subjects, bias in observations, influences of other factors, and statistical analysis. This yields a question and answer approach that can be applied to a wide range of clinical and epidemiological issues.
1977 ) ( under D.C. law reduced chance of survival sufficient to put causation
before jury ) ; McBride v . United States , 462 F.2d 72 ... 1986 ) ( showing of
increased risk of harm shows proximate cause ) ; Roberson v . Counselman , 686
Because the Court adopted the “ increased risk of harm ” standard of causation ,
plaintiffs with a less than fifty percent ( 50 % ) chance of recovery , who have
suffered a decreased chance of recovery from illness or injury due to the
While courts have permitted proof of general causation with something less than
epidemiologic evidence , case reports ... 13 ( 2001 ) ; see also Richard W . Wright
, Causation , Responsibility , Risk , Probability , Naked Statistics , and Proof ...