‘But they ‘killed’ my mother – and her life is only worth £8,000’!
This will be familiar to most clinical negligence and personal injury lawyers – albeit that in a negligence case there was no intention to kill. It was someone’s death by negligence.
Another client recently expressed her ‘embarrassment’ at such a low value being placed on her much loved late mother – who died in hospital after a very short time of pain and suffering, leaving no dependents (according to the criteria of the Fatal Accidents Act 1976). I, too, was embarrassed that – although I did my best for compensation on behalf of her late mother’s estate – it still felt woefully inadequate.
So, in the UK – what is the monetary value of human life? Legally, someone is valued according to:
- Their usefulness to any dependants in terms of either monetary contributions or services they provided. Possibly some compensation for the loss of love and affection those dependents suffered.
- The amount of pain, suffering and loss of amenity they suffered before they died.
- The cost of either cremating or burying their body.
But the fact of their death is accorded no monetary value. The worst outcome has happened for both the Deceased, their relatives (who have no claim under the FAA), friends, colleagues – but the fact of death is accorded no monetary value in and of itself.
NICE and other health economists often consider QALYs – ‘Quality Adjusted Life Years’ – which is the impact of a measure saving or improving one year of life – valued at around £20,000 – £30,000 / year (set to increase to £25,000 to £35,000 / year).
The UK government also has a measure of ‘Value of Prevented Fatality’ (‘VPF’). They stress, however, that it is not a price tag on a person, but that it’s an economic tool to compare the ‘costs of safety interventions with the monetised benefit of reducing the risk of death (£1.8m in 2016)’.
You might think that Kantian deontological arguments – that the value of a human life in itself is valued – might help this with idea. The argument, however, from a deontological viewpoint seems more to be that as a person’s life in itself has infinite moral worth, then it is best to avoid placing a monetary value on life. I agree that a person’s innate worth has unquantifiable value in and of itself.
Where, however, someone has lost their life as a result of clinical negligence or personal injury, then regardless of any loss of income or services to others and / or dependents, their life carried a moral worth and should be recognised as such. In clinical negligence / personal injury this would be monetary compensation. The Deceased’s value in terms of loss of love and affection also does not end with descendants until 18 (or otherwise dependent), living spouses / partners or eligible cohabitees. Adult children, friends, acquaintances, work colleagues with no financial or other dependency, still mourn the loss of their person for who they were regarding of any other usefulness or service given.
The loss of a human life, although unquantifiable, needs to be recognised in compensation given in and of itself.