Tuesday 12 July 2016

Bava Kamma 42: When An Ox Causes A Miscarriage

We have learned earlier that if a man injures a woman and causes her to miscarry, whether or not he intended to harm her or the fetus, he is liable to pay damages as the woman's husband sees fit.  The potential life that was lost might have been anyone, might have done anything - there is no way to determine the true value of that potential person.  But what if an ox causes a woman to miscarry?  Does it make a difference whether or not the ox intended to harm the woman?  Does it matter whether the ox was tam or mu'ad?  Is the ox's owner liable to pay for damages that might be incurred? 

The rabbis spend as much time on these damages as they do on the damages that are incurred when an ox kills a slave.  The rabbis discuss how these issues might be connected: the owner of the ox should pay damages of thirty sela to the slave's owner, even if that slave is worth only one sela.  Does this suggest that the 'owner' of the fetus - and we are speaking of the woman's husband if the woman herself has not been killed as well - should be paid for his potential loss, regardless of the worth of the fetus?

The rabbis also argue about who should inherit the damages owed to a woman if that woman has died.  Her husband?  Her children? What if they are still married?  What if they are divorced?  What if both of them have died?

Clearly the rabbis debate about the valuation of people - and potential people - as we still duo today.  In antiquity, normative understandings of value included one's sex, age, physical and mental ability, and so on. These are listed in other dapim.  But the fetus... that is an interesting one.  Generally speaking, a fetus and an infant under one month old hold no monetary value (according to the ancient Jewish understanding of monetizing life to assess damages, not just for slavery accounting).  But here we see that the husband might be paid money for the fetus alone - not for other damages.  Likely I'm missing a piece of the puzzle here.  And/or the puzzle is quite complicated.

No comments:

Post a Comment