A place to ask questions and add to probative and informative discussions associated with the various aspects of the field of fire investigation. -- FORUM RULES---BE CIVIL AND NO NAME CALLING, NO BELITTLING, NO BERATING, NO DENIGRATING others. Postings in violation of these rules can be removed or editted to remove the offending remarks at the discretion of the moderators and/or site administrator.
Re: One Question
Posted by:
Jim Mazerat (IP Logged)
Date: February 21, 2007 12:32PM
John
Sorry that cam out wrong. The first part about the courts putting emphases on the document is one thing and the other was my personal opinion. I know yours is different.
I must disagree with you that in the legal term “standard of care” is a mandatory requirement that a person in the profession must follow in order not to be negligent. If this is a fact then I would consider it mandatory. In this respect, I believe there s some support to my hypothesis that this term directly related to being mandatory. Considering that the National Fire Protection Association’s intention was to have this non-mandatory document seems to be opposite of the terms meaning under the law.
Again, this is my opinion about the standard of care’s relationship to being mandatory, and others can look at the same data and reach a completion opinion.