A TALE OF TWO TRIALS

Approximately 20% of the workers in the nuclear industry will die of cancer, and that's the truth.

But it is not the whole truth: the same fraction holds for the entire American population. Since a defendant is innocent until proven guilty, this statistic alone (without a hundred additional points) should make it next to impossible for anyone to collect damages if he can show no more than that he was exposed to man-made radiation and contracted cancer.

The May 1984 issue of the Baltimore-Washington Chapter of the Health Physics Society brings an article by D.E. Jose and R.A. Henderson, attorneys of the Justice and Energy Depts., respectively, contrasting two such cases of workers in the nuclear industry.

Karen Silkwood received one fourth the permissible body burden of plutonium and died of an unrelated automobile accident shortly after her exposure; a jury awarded her heirs $10,000,000.

James Dennis received a whole-body dose of 2.265 rems (permissible by occupational standards) while helping to clean up the SL-1 reactor accident in 1962. (His exposure and absence of internal contamination were carefully measured at the time.) 16 years later he developed a rare malignancy and sued. The jury did not award him a penny.

The strategy of the plaintiffs was very similar in both cases, and both used the PAWs to impress the jury. The difference must evidently have been in the defense:

"The best explanation for the Silkwood verdict seems to be that the defense lawyers and experts did not educate the jury about ... health physics to overcome their emotional response to the plaintiffs case. In contrast the Dennis jury ... were able to overcome this emotional situation because they understood and trusted the scientific testimony presented by the defense."

And the authors conclude: "Standards of conduct for health physicists are now set by national and international bodies of fellow scientists and are based on the best scientific information available. If following these rules still results in multi-million dollar judgements, then these rules are meaningless... If more cases yield large judgements like Silkwood, there will be tremendous economic pressure on health physics professionals to abandon existing scientific standards and adopt irrational standards set by emotional juries."

Depressing?

Read on, for good tidings follow.

[More: The title of the article is "Silkwood and Dennis;" it is available to AtE readers for a SASE sent to Howard Hering, H & H Assocts., Box 7532, Silver Spring, MD 20007.]