One day a twenty year old man was walking when he all of a sudden drops dead on the spot. The cause of death was later determined as a heart attack which is peculiar for a twenty year old man. Further investigation revealed that the man had a pace maker implanted in him. Even more strange then the circumstance of his death was the fact that six other individuals also died with pacemakers inserted within them. The question now is what led to their unfortunate deaths? Who can be held responsible and accountable for their actions or lack of actions? For this sort of phenomena to occur, there must be something that was left unsaid.
             The causal responsibility can be divided among several parties, first being the manufacturer of the pacemaker and the ones who work under them to sell them. After the Heymach v. Cardiac Pacemakers case was decided in 1999, pacemaker companies were forced to modify their products as stated in the ruling. The manufacture of the pacemaker explains how no other product goes through as much testing as pacemakers do and that since the modifications there has been no problems regarding their product. They are even quoted on saying that the incidents were, "unrelated" and "perhaps they were installed incorrectly".
             The second party who could have been causally responsible are those who performed and watched the installation of the pacemaker, it was found that the pacemakers were indeed installed correctly, however in the case of this young man it was a used pacemaker from someone who perished in an automobile accident the previous year. The doctor evaluating the installation believed that perhaps they were unrelated deaths and was just an act of god.
             The third party in which causal responsibility can be divided is the medical school supply office in which the pacemaker was purchased. After the supply office first denied selling the used pacemakers, the coroner of the body later d...