There is no way to have enough nuance for this to actually mean anything. If I drive my child in a small car instead of a massive truck, is this statistical negligence? Or driving at all, very likely the most dangerous thing people do daily. What about the trees outside my home and their hundred pound limbs — if one breaks it will almost certainly be fatal. But many people accept that death is inevitable and minimizing the chance of it isn’t worth doing. Society also speaks out both sides of its mouth — why does an infant refused a vaccine constitute murder but 11 days earlier in the womb its life had no value?

The world has a lot of things it needs to figure out with all this stuff. Blanket statements just aren’t very valuable IMO.

> If I drive my child in a small car instead of a massive truck, is this statistical negligence?

No, I'd say the responsibility there lies on the car company execs making F-250s ever-bigger to the point they have worse forward visibility than a M1 Abrams tank. https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/vehicles-with-higher-more-v...

> What about the trees outside my home and their hundred pound limbs — if one breaks it will almost certainly be fatal.

If you don't maintain your trees and they kill your neighbor or damage their house, you'll often be on the hook for it, yes. Insurance won't cover you if it was negligence.

> why does an infant refused a vaccine constitute murder but 11 days earlier in the womb its life had no value?

Virtually zero abortions happen 11 days before term. When they do, they're medical emergencies, not voluntary.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_abortion_by_gesta...