Well this thread has grown malignant little legs of its own…
Surely the LAME's only responsibility is to perform the work requested of them (by the person responsible for the continued airworthiness of the aircraft) to the best of their ability, and for that standard to be competent at least. If it doesn't meet that standard, they are liable for the deficiencies arising and the potential consequences. No more and no less. Similar to my industry, patients are ultimately responsible for their own continued health, they choose whether or not to have a particular operation (there are no mandatory overhauls) and my responsibility is to perform it correctly. If I don't and they suffer impairment or adverse consequence as a result, who is liable? Me, as the person performing the work. Why would anyone lose any sleep over any of that - presumably we all strive to to a good job, and we all keep the insurance industry afloat by paying hefty premiums to insure ourselves. If the registered operator chooses not to follow a non-mandatory manufacturer's SB, the buck should stop with them, not the LAME. I do not believe that the law sees it otherwise. If I recommend that a patient has an operation (I can't mandate it), but they choose not to, they lose control of their car due to their weak arm / wonky eye / insert failed body part here and crash into a school bus full of children with haemophilia, who carries the blame?
I think this thread has reached its manufacturer's specified life limit.