Abstract
Imagine a man who cannot speak, cannot walk, cannot feed himself, and cannot clean himself. He has no family to speak of, or if he does, the time and economic burden of his care will jeopardize their own survival. Our society has enacted laws to provide some level of support and care for this man and employs the resources of the state to pursue that goal. Tragically, the man dies in the state’s care due to unquestionable negligence. If his family had the resources to place him in a private facility, basic negligence law tells us the private facility may be answerable to his family for the wrongful death of their loved one. The facility breached its duty and is responsible for it. It can be fairly asked: Why do we allow the state to absolve itself of liability for falling below that same standard of care? Has the family forfeited all rights to hold anyone responsible for the negligent behavior that resulted in the death of their loved one simply because they have accepted the services for free? Should we, as the arbiters and watchdogs of our own government, not hold that government to the same standard of care as other market participants?
Recommended Citation
Adam Schexnayder,
A Nation of Kings: Judicial Overextension of Official Immunity and the Abdication of Responsibility for Our Most Vulnerable Citizens,
89 Mo. L. Rev.
(2025)
Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/mlr/vol89/iss4/11
