Why aren't professors and universities liable for the death of students?

[energyresearch]

A recent article in Chemistry World reminded me of an earlier blog post about the death of the student Sheri Shangji in a chemistry laboratory. The blog post describes that basically, if a student is killed in a university laboratory, neither the professor concerned nor the university are liable to any significance. Ignoring an example such as the

Comments

[libwitch]

Well, as this article makes more clear: http://cen.acs.org/articles/92/web/2014/06/Patrick-Harran-L-District-Attorney.html the professor was held liable - it was the charges against the University that was dropped. There is a great point of contention if what the punishment was against the professor was actually just, though.

There is a certain amount of logic in the charges being dropped against the University *if* (and I don't know the details) the University could prove that they had procedures in place that would have prevented the accident and they were not be followed. As the supervisory PI, the professor would have been responsible, at all times, for making sure any campus procedures were being followed in his own labs.

[varanus]

I was active in the union when this happened at UCLA. As you can see in the linked article, the charges against the University were dropped in a settlement, not because the charges were tried and found meritless. Had those cases gone to trial I have the feeling there might have been different outcomes. Which is why UC (and all universities) employs a flotilla of lawyers on retainer.

[i_strannik]

As a PhD student, I did most of my work alone and at night. I worked with electrical equipment, vacuum stuff, microscopes, you name it

[the_physicist]

I've worked in labs in a university that had all the procedures in place to stop people working through the night (and was meant to stop people from working on dangerous things out of 9-5 hours).

I've also worked in labs that where no one gave a shit about health and safety.

And eeeehhh... I'm now on the side of 'have the difficult annoying procedures in place'. When heath and safety isn't a big issue a lot more students and researchers are harmed. In the ideal case there would simply be more lab space so people wouldn't have to share so much -_-.

[i_strannik]

What do you mean by "other side"? H&S or a prof?

I walked both sides of the isle - student/prof... What I do now is look at the student. If I trust them not to do themselves harm, I will close my eyes on some of the regulations concerning working hours and such, and if I don't, I won't. Part of the trust comes from watching them not forget to put their safety glasses on (I've kicked people out of the lab for not having them on), not leaving unlabeled waste around, stuff like that.

But in a situation where a lot of equipment is shared, I can't enforce my policies all the way. The result is what I said in the other post.

I am for selective enforcement of the regulations. :)

[the_physicist]

i think you misread what i wrote. i said 'on the side of' not 'other side

[babyfood22]

Most important thing to take from the Sangji case, of course, is that negligent professors will get hit with a severe punishment of barely any community service.

[babyfood22]

Oh, and I have no idea about liability in EU law - but the stereotype that American labs are less safe, and have fewer safety rules, than European ones is true in my limited experience and from my friends' (not referring to my current lab).