Despite the complexity of current legal doctrine, courts have only two general reasons for preventing recovery when a defendant's negligent behavior causes emotional harm to a plaintiff: (a) courts may decide that public policy counsels against recognizing an entire class of plaintiffs, irrespective of the theoretical merits of any individual plaintiff's claim; or (b) courts may hold that the defendant's negligence is not the proximate cause of the plaintiff's emotional harm. In other words, does that organization of the material make sense to you? How should emotional harms be recoverable in tort law, if at all?