Assumption of risk, after all

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

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.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)293-327
Number of pages35
JournalTheoretical inquiries in law
Volume15
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Jul 2014

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Assumption of risk, after all'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this