Posted On: May 25, 2006, 1:34 pm CDT

Posted By: Hugh M. Robert

The problem is that the courts dont recognize it that way- the lost eyesight or earning potential cannot be measured because they are not currently earning. The reason is that it is too vague, the child could have been a rocket scientist or a janitor which have vastly different economic impacts. Therefore, the courts recognize these kinds of losses as non-economic damages. I think there are probably some kinds of economist that could formulate it that way but the courts do not. I agree no value could bring back the life, the ability to walk, or eyesight, however, if you ask those people if they would rather have a pile of money or their sight or ability to walk, they would choose the later. The only thing the civil justice system can do is try to provide them with something to compensate them for their losses, for either a life of darkness, paralysis, or even without a father/mother.