Searching for the guilty in every human situation has become an imperative for journalists.
In recent decades, the medical field has soared from an unacceptable state of the untouchable doctor to, even worse, a state of systematic criminality upon the occurrence of any incident.
For example, a team of doctors have even been incriminated for not being able to save a newborn that was missing half of its heart! We have gone from one extreme to the other, thus certainly generating a distorted view of reality.
This situation is now widespread in all sectors. Let’s think how we came to incriminate the great risk commission because of the underestimated risk of an earthquake. A magistrate put on trial a technician that didn’t think to evacuate the city facing the succession of shock.
Is it possible that we don’t realize that according to this principle, every city should be evacuated in response to every shock? It is a universally accepted fact that the first shock in 98% of cases is the strongest.
There was no way for him to behave differently from the way he was without causing constant chaos.
Let’s think about cases for negligent custody when a child or an elderly person has a serious or mortal incident: does anybody really believe that carelessness is the cause of every case? Or is it more correct to think of this as a reality of life and reflect upon the many times these fatalities could have happened to our children or parents instead of someone less fortunate.
I recently read with dismay a comment of the Corriere della Sera journalist that sang praises to the courage of a woman who has sued a hospital for the death of her mother who, at night went to turn off her neighbors light, stumbled and died instantly. According to the journalist, the woman, who had managed to convict the hospital to the result of very high compensation, was considered a champion of justice.
Who is able to control every movement of another person, a loved one, or a person entrusted to them?
For example, which teacher can protect their students from an accidental fall, or from a push by another child?
Who is able to prevent every misfortune? I believe that those (especially the journalist who has written the quoted article and even more the judge who issued the sentence) ready to condemn episodes just due to fatality, should, objectively reflect upon their own lives.
Certainly think well before saying that with these incidences there is an inevitable negligence.
Justice is to condemn those who neglect their duty, something quite different from the judge punishing every fatality.
Now, there are orders of the daily process for doctors involved in the death of a patient. I am convinced of this particular judge and journalist, even if I don’t know them personally, that they always blame others and never themselves. I invite you to look at yourself before you look at others.
Be wary of those who tear their clothes and get offended: most of the time, they have more skeletons in their closet than anyone else.