TAW122
Emissary of the right to die.
- Aug 30, 2018
- 6,888
This title may be attention grabbing and broad, but my focus is related to life's problems, injustices, and how yet another example why CTB would have been preferable (again, I don't speak for everyone as each individual's circumstances is unique and to their own). Similar to another thread I wrote about "Why the criminal justice system (compared to the mental health system) is the lesser of two carceral systems", this thread is somewhat related (albeit different) to that topic.
A lot of the times, you oftenly hear about the news of wrongfully incarcerated prisoners ending up death row or even life in prison. Then once they are exonerated, they are given compensation (depending on the state or jurisdiction, some do and some don't). This is because even after many years, perhaps decades or so, the inmate is already either near their twilight years or lost all their youth and most of their adult life (when they had peak health and many other opportunities that many people almost take for granted), they only then had scraps left. To a lesser degree and not specifically exonerated inmates, but when it comes to people who are harmed in certain incidents, be it accidents (includes property, life, or limb, etc.) or any unfortunate event like being mistaken for someone who they aren't and even though they didn't lose years being incarcerated for something they didn't do, but suffered due to injuries or what not, there are certainly things that money will not replace. Sure, one could go as far to claim that most people who get the money just go quietly, but that's not the point and I'm not going to entertain the idea that people adapt or such (again, not everyone can or does, nor should!).
So in this article, I'm claiming that money alone doesn't solve everything and while it does allow one to afford copes and/or other luxuries in life, it certainly doesn't solve everything and sometimes one simply cannot recover such losses. Instead, the best society and the guilty party can do is award monetary damages. Then of course, if applicable, there may be talks of reforming the "broken" system or changing certain policies to prevent the likelihood of future victims falling into the system and receiving such injustices. That is commendable.
Why CTB would be considered a possible solution when existing remedies and money fail:
When money fails to resolve the grievances, the next best thing society as a whole can do is to at least give the person an out (or when it fails to, the person ends up taking matters into their own hands. I don't endorse nor condone illegal acts or anything harmful to others, especially of unwilling participants). By giving an out, I'm referring to gently allowing the person to be granted a peaceful, dignified exit. Then of course (not solely out of vengeance but justice and reparations) the other next best thing is for the guilty party (including all it's members) to incur a penalty, not just as a deterrence, but as a form of justice. For example, if crooked prosecutor, crooked judge caused a prisoner to lose about two or three decades of said prisoner's life and later it was discovered that said prisoner was innocent, those people and anyone involved must pay reparations. Most people think that money alone is enough, but sometimes it isn't. Money won't bring back time or bring back the lost years, money won't buy certain things (besides copes and whatever is in the present or remaining future of said person's life), and it certain won't solve the damage done.
Sure one could argue that said person is now free and should just enjoy whatever years (be it a few years, a few decades, or however long the person's lifespan remains), but regardless of time, age and weathering will still catch up and someone who is in their elderly or late middle age (late 50's or 60's or even older) won't be able to experience what they missed out in their 20's or 30's, or younger age. No amount of money will buy that experience or even replace those. Plus, this doesn't even include the nonrecoverable losses that will persist for as long as said victim remains in sentience. The duration is really a moot point because it doesn't matter whether the person has a few years, half a decade, many decades, because the fact is the person lost something that money cannot replace, or fix! Therefore, the other solution would either to be let the person go and before they argue about that's injustice for itself, I believe that if the State or any wrong party is unable or fails to rectify the situation, the best option would be just to let the person at least end their suffering after doing what they can (but still failing) to make the wronged party or individual whole. That is the least they can do because at least the wronged party or individual will not be held hostage to the failings of the system or party. Of course, pro-lifers and anti-choicers won't see this logic and those who support justice often cry but letting the wronged party go in peace (euthanasia or ending their suffering) would be letting the bad parties (the State that has done wrong, or the wrong parties) get away with it, but I disagree and digress.
So in conclusion, I hold the stance that there are instances where money does indeed fail to solve everything and not everything can be replaced or made whole. Therefore, it is overrated and short-sighted to claim that money solves everything, especially for those who have been aggrieved or wronged. It may/not apply to all situations, but there has to be more than that. Justice would be the wrong party ending up with repercussions, including the loss of enjoyment and/or sacrifices on their end. While it doesn't bring back the losses of the aggrieved, it will at least bring some form of 'catharsis' and justice to the wronged party. With regards to the concept of catharsis however, that is for another thread altogether.
A lot of the times, you oftenly hear about the news of wrongfully incarcerated prisoners ending up death row or even life in prison. Then once they are exonerated, they are given compensation (depending on the state or jurisdiction, some do and some don't). This is because even after many years, perhaps decades or so, the inmate is already either near their twilight years or lost all their youth and most of their adult life (when they had peak health and many other opportunities that many people almost take for granted), they only then had scraps left. To a lesser degree and not specifically exonerated inmates, but when it comes to people who are harmed in certain incidents, be it accidents (includes property, life, or limb, etc.) or any unfortunate event like being mistaken for someone who they aren't and even though they didn't lose years being incarcerated for something they didn't do, but suffered due to injuries or what not, there are certainly things that money will not replace. Sure, one could go as far to claim that most people who get the money just go quietly, but that's not the point and I'm not going to entertain the idea that people adapt or such (again, not everyone can or does, nor should!).
So in this article, I'm claiming that money alone doesn't solve everything and while it does allow one to afford copes and/or other luxuries in life, it certainly doesn't solve everything and sometimes one simply cannot recover such losses. Instead, the best society and the guilty party can do is award monetary damages. Then of course, if applicable, there may be talks of reforming the "broken" system or changing certain policies to prevent the likelihood of future victims falling into the system and receiving such injustices. That is commendable.
Why CTB would be considered a possible solution when existing remedies and money fail:
When money fails to resolve the grievances, the next best thing society as a whole can do is to at least give the person an out (or when it fails to, the person ends up taking matters into their own hands. I don't endorse nor condone illegal acts or anything harmful to others, especially of unwilling participants). By giving an out, I'm referring to gently allowing the person to be granted a peaceful, dignified exit. Then of course (not solely out of vengeance but justice and reparations) the other next best thing is for the guilty party (including all it's members) to incur a penalty, not just as a deterrence, but as a form of justice. For example, if crooked prosecutor, crooked judge caused a prisoner to lose about two or three decades of said prisoner's life and later it was discovered that said prisoner was innocent, those people and anyone involved must pay reparations. Most people think that money alone is enough, but sometimes it isn't. Money won't bring back time or bring back the lost years, money won't buy certain things (besides copes and whatever is in the present or remaining future of said person's life), and it certain won't solve the damage done.
Sure one could argue that said person is now free and should just enjoy whatever years (be it a few years, a few decades, or however long the person's lifespan remains), but regardless of time, age and weathering will still catch up and someone who is in their elderly or late middle age (late 50's or 60's or even older) won't be able to experience what they missed out in their 20's or 30's, or younger age. No amount of money will buy that experience or even replace those. Plus, this doesn't even include the nonrecoverable losses that will persist for as long as said victim remains in sentience. The duration is really a moot point because it doesn't matter whether the person has a few years, half a decade, many decades, because the fact is the person lost something that money cannot replace, or fix! Therefore, the other solution would either to be let the person go and before they argue about that's injustice for itself, I believe that if the State or any wrong party is unable or fails to rectify the situation, the best option would be just to let the person at least end their suffering after doing what they can (but still failing) to make the wronged party or individual whole. That is the least they can do because at least the wronged party or individual will not be held hostage to the failings of the system or party. Of course, pro-lifers and anti-choicers won't see this logic and those who support justice often cry but letting the wronged party go in peace (euthanasia or ending their suffering) would be letting the bad parties (the State that has done wrong, or the wrong parties) get away with it, but I disagree and digress.
So in conclusion, I hold the stance that there are instances where money does indeed fail to solve everything and not everything can be replaced or made whole. Therefore, it is overrated and short-sighted to claim that money solves everything, especially for those who have been aggrieved or wronged. It may/not apply to all situations, but there has to be more than that. Justice would be the wrong party ending up with repercussions, including the loss of enjoyment and/or sacrifices on their end. While it doesn't bring back the losses of the aggrieved, it will at least bring some form of 'catharsis' and justice to the wronged party. With regards to the concept of catharsis however, that is for another thread altogether.
