Compensations for Lost Lives
Peter Singer compares the compensation paid by the U.S. and British governments to the Afghan families after the accidental killing of a family member with the compensation given to families of 9/11 victims and the amount paid by the National Health Service to extend the life of a British citizen. He finds finds that latter far outweigh the former, even taking into consideration the real value of the compensation for those to whom it is given. Singer concludes that the U.S. and British governments value American and British lives more than the lives of Afghans.
He may be right, but his comparison doesn’t really work. Even if we assume the valuation of life by America and Britain has a monetary correspondence, Singer isn’t comparing the same people making the same calculation of value. The people deciding how much to compensate the families of killed Afghans may not have the same budget total or authority as those making financial decisions regarding healthcare in Britain or the families of those murdered on September 11th.
Still, the fact remains that there is a big difference between the compensations, and Singer is right to call for “equal treatment” through an increase in the compensation given to the people of Afghanistan. They are owed nothing less, and truly a great deal more.
Comments are closed.
Singer’s perspective is interesting, but it seems that he did not take into account the fact that, in the case of Afghanistan, the U.S. military uses its Search and Rescue teams to medevac both Afghani civilians and enemy combatants. The cost of such missions suggests that the U.S. and British governments do place a significantly greater value on Afghani lives than Singer’s concludes.