And parents are held responsible if they give it to kids
Imo, only if it can be proven that the parent is being willfully negligent regarding the safety the child.
Also, if a product that claimed to be safe, but actually wasn’t, was purchased and given to the child, then this responsibility should fall on the producer only.
Oneser@lemm.ee 2 months ago
Insurance should cover everyone for everything and should remain affordable for all.
auzy@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Not if you’re drinking raw milk
svcg@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 months ago
I also think insurance shouldn’t cover cancer treatment for smokers. Or diabetes treatment for overweight people. Or broken bones for skiers. Or literally anything for anyone who has ever done anything bad for them. /s
auzy@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Why shouldn’t they be able to sue cigarette companies or companies releasing unsafe products?
Valmond@lemmy.world 2 months ago
What is it with this americans aversion for raw milk, it’s not like you’ll fall down dead if you drink it.
Do you also burn your salmon and cook your meat?
In france there are lots of cheese (no really?) and many are forbidden for import to the USA because of stuff like raw milk. Guess that’s why we have the watch coming by getting all the dead babies every tuesday.
Maybe I’m missing something, please do enlighten me!
threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
What if a child were given raw milk by their parents? Should a child be forced to pay for their parents’ decisions, potentially with their life?
auzy@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Look up. That’s why I said parents should be held responsible for serving it to kids