Whereas the Restatement of Torts and leading economic and justice-based approaches to explaining the standard of reasonable care advocate symmetric measurement of reasonable care across the defendant/plaintiff distinction, this article demonstrates that, in fact, the law applies this standard asymmetrically. Defendants are expected to discharge an objectively fixed amount of care, whereas plaintiffs are generally assessed using a subjective measurement of reasonable care. Normatively, I argue that an asymmetric assessment of care, because it combines an unfavorable assessment of defendant's negligence with a favorable assessment of plaintiff's negligence, means that the victim gets to fix the terms of the interaction. This argument resonates with the powerful egalitarian idea of accommodating, rather than overlooking, relevant differences; different treatment is necessary for the duty of reasonable care to give effect to the qualitative difference between the plaintiff's life and limb and the defendant's autonomy. Asymmetric assessment of due care, I argue, is the doctrinal metric by which the law determines what it is for the plaintiff and the defendant to relate as equals given that difference, or to relate as substantive equals.

中文翻译：

---

疏忽和通融

鉴于侵权行为重述以及解释合理照顾标准的主要基于经济和司法的方法提倡对被告/原告区分的合理照顾进行对称衡量，但本文表明，事实上，法律不对称地应用了这一标准。被告应履行客观固定数量的谨慎，而原告通常使用合理谨慎的主观衡量标准进行评估。从规范上讲，我认为对护理的不对称评估，因为它将对被告疏忽的不利评估与对原告疏忽的有利评估结合在一起，意味着受害者可以确定互动的条款。这一论点与适应而不是忽视相关差异的强大平等主义思想产生了共鸣。必要的为实现原告的生命和肢体与被告的自主权之间的质的差异而进行的合理注意义务。我认为，对适当注意的不对称评估是法律确定原告和被告在考虑到差异的情况下平等地联系或联系为实质性等于。