Posted on 01/18/2017 9:44:00 AM PST by C19fan
It’s also a “I can sue because of how I think” bottomless legal pit.
I’m anti-abortion, but this is a very bad legal move, and would not survive past the Circuit Courts.
It is to be hoped that anyone doing ANYTHING which resulted in the intentional death of an innocent human being, would be exposed to the risk of lawsuit.
No. Dumb idea.
Empowering medical consumers to sue for suffering from harm from their medical providers, the risk of which was nor previously undisclosed before the procedures, seems to follow the pattern for other harms for which you can sue.
A friend of mine had his young son killed on a snowmobile.
The Snowmobile manufacture killed him?
No it was driving into a tree that killed him.
Unconstitutional in what way? Especially when the potential for harm wasn’t fully and fairly disclosed beforehand, doesn’t a person who suffers harm, deserve a chance to sue the party who harmed her and did not disclose the risk? Then let the jury decide.
Looks like strict liability to me.
Sadly you are probably right.
“good tactic”
Indeed. Make the abortionist think twice - especially since it is estimated that upwards of 2/3rds of abortion decisions are coerced.
Yeah right./s
hat if the snowmobile was built to kill children?
That’s what would make it fairly analogous to abortion. Especially since the abortionist does not tell you plainly that he is going to kill your child and that you may suffer psychological trauma from it.
Does this sound doubtful? OK, then let the jury decide.
You have provided the answer. She would ONLY have a case if the risks had not been spelled out to her prior to procedure.
At some point, a doctor has to believe the patient when they say ‘Yes, Doctor. I understand the risks, but want to proceed anyway.’ At some point, a signed consent should remain just that.
My remark is the law should not facilitate suing a doctor who provided the abortion, simply because a month or a decade later, the lady is having regrets that she ever allowed it to happen. There can be no iron clad guarantee to never have any regrets, doubts or second thoughts.
This is really informed consent. Before you have surgery a physician has to inform you of possible risks of the procedure and the patient has to signs off. If the physician doesn’t outline the risks he can be sued. It is a weapon against abortion. They use all the tools at their disposal so shouldn’t we?
The is one reason why the pro-abortion side strongly fights and tries to discredit any studies supporting a link between abortion and breast cancer.
Thanks for sharing that. I’m not a lawyer. Peace :)
Do you think a lawyer will smell a class action suit?
This is a BRILLIANT strategy!
Not only does it use feminist legal theory against their own special interest, it puts a knife to the throat of the “sue gun manufacturers” lobbyists!
Ordinarily I would agree, but not in this case.
Writing bad law is NOT the way to fix our country.
There is no easy way to fix the country. This puts a lot of economic pressure on people who need to be wiped out anyways. The "law" (really an extra-legal court ruling) which allowed them to engage in Abortions for money was done contrary to the will of the people, and at this point, any means of destroying this industry is a worthwhile effort.
I give you the Americans for Disability Act as an example.
Yes, that was a horrible law, but that doesn't mean a bad law can't serve a beneficial purpose, so long as it targets the right people.
This may not be good philosophy, but it is certainly good tactics when it comes to a war with the left. They've already set the standard of using bad law, we are fools if we do not pick up this weapon and use it against them.
If that is the standard we are following, (and I believe it is) then I don't see a downside to using this tactic.
If we cannot rely on morality to prevent these doctors from engaging in this abhorrent practice, then let us use fear and punishment to convince them to disengage from this business.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.