| Summary: | This investigation used a series of 60 in-depth semi-structured interviews with members of the public, discussing real-life work-related fatality cases, to uncover information about public attitudes, substantive legal preferences and knowledge, and processes of risk evaluation. Each interview lasted approximately 60 minutes and consists of dialogue-based discussion of a series of core questions relating to each case (seriousness, wrongfulness, appropriate response and suitability of legal outcome). The face-to-face interviews were transcribed for this cross-sectional (one-time) study. Although 60 interviews were conducted, consent forms for depositing were only obtained for 27 of the interviewees. This research project investigates public attitudes towards work-related fatality cases; incidents where deaths are caused as a result of corporate activity. In 2007 the government introduced a new 'corporate manslaughter' offence in order to address perceived high levels of public concern and insecurity that result from these cases, but public attitudes in this area have never been empirically tested in detail. This research project has generated information about public attitudes towards work-related fatality cases, and measures whether there is a public 'lack of confidence' in the law's ability to handle work-related fatality cases, and whether this translates into support for the new offence. A year-long series of interviews was conducted with a sample of the general public, which will centre on structured discussion of specific work-related fatality cases. The respondents will consider the seriousness of the incidents, as well as issues of responsibility and punishment that might follow on from it. The data that is gathered will inform understandings of the form that the law governing work-related fatality cases should take, as well as illustrating how these cases function as indicators of risk and feelings of insecurity among the general public.
|
|---|
