{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026875699888017916, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.340425531914893, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Personal Injury and Socail Policy: Institutional and Ideological Alternatives

In the four decades between the publication of the first and ninth editions of John Fleming's "The Law of Torts" his field has undergone enormous change. With respect to social policy toward personal injuries, tort law has come to play a more central role -with respect to product injuries, medical accidents, toxic spills and more. Yet, as Professor Fleming well appreciated, today's fault-and-lawsuit-based system suffers from many shortcomings -shortcomings that have generated a wide range of proposals, some enacted, to replace personal injury law in part or entirely. In this essay, I compare the judicially-administered negligence regime with three competing institutional and ideological alternatives, and speculate about the possible ousting of tort from its current prominence over the next four decades.