3 ms·
This analysis of "what's the worst that could happen" is insufficient as the appropriate test is "what's the worst that could happen and how often could it happ
by AbrahamParangi 3y ago
This analysis of "what's the worst that could happen" is insufficient as the appropriate test is "what's the worst that could happen and how often could it happen"
Things that can go very wrong, but which in practice we may expect to be extremely rare are not necessarily large problems.
- toyg 3y agoThey are still problems. They can be somewhat neutered when they clearly go against the spirit of the law. Unfortunately, this is not the case here: since the spirit of the law is effectively to move decisive power from patient to doctor on grounds of personal and un-objective opinions, aberrations fit pretty nicely inside it. Notice how amendments to protect sexual orientation were rejected; that is very much a "worst case" (and statistically significant) that could have been easily avoided, bringing no ill-effects, additional ambiguity or implementation costs. Still, the legislator explicitly decided that case will fit in the law.