VCF

This case study I feel like I'm almost an expert on, having gone thru a similar experience myself. However, I cant speak of experience with the magnitude of 9/11 where there are thousands of victims and surviving families.

First off, I think it is important to point out and remind ourselves who the VCF was initially established for: the airlines, the Port Authority and New York City, to protect these institutions and businesses from being sued and forced into bankruptcy. Feinberg has the experience and is good with making settlements and keeping tragedies like this out of the courtroom, where jurors would for sure would award everyone an amount that could never be paid.

Personally in this case, I myself think that I would have taken an Egalitarian approach and pay the victims families the same amount for their loss. I don't think it would be fair to stay that victim "A's" live is worth more than victim's' "B" and "C", etc. I also think that the people that have medical needs and issues that were involved in the 9/11 tragedy should have their medical needs taken care of, which in itself could be astronomically high. I'm not sure what is being considered for these victims but in my opinion, they should have medical needs paid for. The pain and suffering in this case, I have no clue what to consider here, and know that I am so glad that is Feinbergs job and not mine. It is guaranteed that whatever decision he makes, is not going to be enough and it is impossible to please everyone.

Now in the 35W case, I take the same stand as with the 9/11 tragedy, but still struggle what amount to pay to the victims that survived but have medical needs and issues. I think it seems to be unfair when you pay a million dollars to family "A", who lost their loved one's life and you pay five million dollars to victim "B", because they lived and have a ton of medical bills. (Please note, the dollar amounts I am using are completely made up in this example). But I think it is still unfair, because the people whose loved one has died, their life as they knew it before also changed and will never be the same.

Overall, in both of these cases I think that it is best to take the Egalitarian approach and pay everyone the same amount for people that lost their life and allowing variations, which in this case, medical needs.