compensation after class

oh man, oh man what a class and now I have so many questions running through my head as Im unsure which to go after first. Well I guess I could try and go after the ones that Sheri asked: When is it ethically justified to set up a fund and if I would set one up? Should the source of victimization make a difference? What about the responsibility and where it lies? How do we decide in what cases? There was a lot of discretion given to Feinberg, would it have been better if a panel would've done it like 35W? Who and what guidelines should make the fund?

I don't even know if I have all of the answers for I think that these questions are almost too complex for me to know the answer unless based on an individual case. I think this case is one of the cases that has made me feel the strongest about deciding on individual cases. But to address the first question, I think that it is ethically justified for a fund to be set up when either the cause of the tragedy was based on government actions or when it is something that happened that was completely out of the persons control (eg hurricane katrina) and it rendered some of the victims much less well off. It is in those cases, the governments responsibility to its people to take care of the victims. However I am the kind of person who would feel guilty for someone facing something out of their control that is unfair. I have a strong sense of empathy and can't imagine how much any scenario could compensate but I do think that it is important to have apanel decide if their are going to be funds. I think that too much control was given to Feinberg and having panels generally would hopefully call for more rational solutions, and also add a sense of empathy.

Oh man, this is a tough case study.