Posted on 01/10/2020 7:24:00 PM PST by Morgana
A Southern California couple who said they would have aborted the wife's fetus had doctors competently performed tests showing their daughter would be born with Down syndrome reached a settlement with two medical groups and three physicians, court papers obtained Friday show.
Lawyers for the couple filed papers with Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Victor Chavez on Thursday stating that the case was resolved just before trial was scheduled to begin. No terms were divulged. More Stories
The couple filed the wrongful birth/wrongful life case in June 2015 against Axminster Medical Group Inc., Westchester Advanced Imaging Medical Group Inc. and Drs. Glenn P. Wedeen, Christopher Meilleur and Mia J. Sanders Madati. The couple had sought about $80 million.
The mother received her obstetrical care from Axminster Medical and was seen by Sanders Madati and Meilleur, according to Axminster Medical Group's court papers.
Wedeen performed a second-semester ultrasound on the woman in June 2014 at Meilleur's request, according to court papers filed by attorneys for Wedeen and Westchester Advanced Imaging.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbclosangeles.com ...
There is a difference between genetic, inherited, and penetrance. If a person with downs were able to have a child and did so there would likely be abnormalities in their child. Ignorance of how genetics works is no reason to abandon correct terminology.
There are certain indications of Downs that can be seen on ultrasound. However they are not present in every child with Downs and can be seen in children who do not have Downs. It is far from 100%
With my last child I told my OB no testing it would not change what I did. He insisted saying it would change what he did —- that he would have a more extensive team in the delivery room if there was a chance of Downs or a neural tube defect. I told him he could do blood test but was not to tell me results, that I didn’t want to know.
Wikipedia is wrong in the terminology.
If someone with Downs had a child, the child would definitely have Downs. Not maybe.
“Genetic” happens NOT to be the correct terminology.
There is also a genetic Downs syndrome that is a minuscule percentage of all the Downs cases. The woman is usually tested for that if she intends to have more children and the Downs baby is her first baby. Then she has the choice of taking a chance on the next one.
Several questions arise. How old was the mother? Old enough that Downs was a high probability? Why was the ultrasound done? Had the parents and their doctor discussed Downs and/or other abnormalities ahead of time? Had the parents made it clear that they wanted to abort any less than perfect child, and were the doctors on board with this priority?
The default position for most physicians is presumably to manage a healthy pregnancy and normal childbirth. The default position is NOT to act as a eugenic gatekeeper, on a hair trigger to exterminate any child with abnormalities. It is not the doctor's "fault" if a child with Downs is conceived, or is allowed to survive. Downs ought not to be a death sentence, and doctors should not be expected to act as if it is.
If the doctor in this case was specifically asked to check for Downs and he missed an indicator, he might be liable. Otherwise, no. This may very well be a case where a jury saw parents with a problem and reached out arbitrarily to tap the nearest deep pocket. The problem is that this sort of thing shifts the calculation for caregivers. Do we want to establish the presumption that Downs Syndrome babies ought to be aborted and draft physicians into an obstetrical gestapo committed to automatic screening in order to ensure quick extermination?
No.
They used to use ultrasound but now chorionic villus sampling (CVS) is the improved method. It is much safer.
A woman would be foolish not to have it if she had a previous baby with Downs, because it is better to be educated about it and psychologically prepared for it, and perhaps adoption arrangements can be made ahead of time if she thinks she can’t raise the child. There are also many cases where a Downs baby is breech presentation, and that works out better in the delivery room if everyone knows about it ahead of time, so a woman is wiser to be tested nowadays even if she would never have an abortion.
not true that downs would have 100% penetrance. it is possible someone with downs could produce a normal gamete i have idea the incidence as i do not know if it has been studied. But you cannot change terms to suit yourself. Downs is a genetic disorder.
Today even CVS isn’t necessary. A full chromosomal work up can be done on a baby at 6-8 weeks gestation just by drawing the mothers blood. I would not have it done as again it wouldn’t change what I do but the test can be done with ease and no risk to the baby.
The testing method has become even less invasive I see, so that is a good thing.
The terminology should be correct, though. Calling it genetic confuses it with the true genetic variation, which is very, very rare. And it also misleads those who are considering marriage with someone who had or has a Downs kid in the family. They have no more chance of having a Downs kid than anybody else, unless it is the genetic kind.
Another big issue is protecting the girls and women from seduction and rape. Since they have lower IQ than normal, they are easy prey, and that is exactly what happened recently, when a Downs woman became pregnant and died on the abortion table. Raising a Downs child is a lifetime responsibility.
we will have to agree to disagree but Downs in all its variations is a genetic disorder. Genetic disorders are inherited in different ways and if someone’s potential spouse is put off by Downs in the family they can have genetic. counseling before marriage or having children.
Down syndrome is a genetic disorder caused when abnormal cell division results in an extra full or partial copy of chromosome 21. This extra genetic material causes the developmental changes and physical features of Down syndrome.Down syndrome varies in severity among individuals, causing lifelong intellectual disability and developmental delays. It's the most common genetic chromosomal disorder and cause of learning disabilities in children. It also commonly causes other medical abnormalities, including heart and gastrointestinal disorders.
I think it is better if they know it is not genetic. Can save a lot of unnecessary heartbreak.
Yes.
Hate to disagree with a 2A mama, but yes, they are wrong too.
Just great. So the baby is going to grow knowing her parents wanted to kill her in the womb.
It is genetic. You are wrong. I am done with this conversation.
If it’s genetic, then everything about aging is genetic in a sense: hearing loss, cataracts, wrinkly skin, osteoporosis, clogged arteries . . . If you count all these things—and aging ova—as genetic, then the term becomes completely meaningless.
Genetic means something carried by the genes from one generation to the next. There are many diseases that are genetic. You can be tested for them. They occur in some populations more than they do in others. Tourettes, spina bifida, hemophilia, sickle cell anemia, many others. Downs is not genetic, except in that extremely minute number of cases that I mentioned above.
Why are you so determined to make people believe it’s a genetic disease? Do you WANT discrimination against people who have a Downs child in their family?
And that is why those in my family don't get that test. They can't perform it until the baby is pretty far along. Can you imagine aborting a 2nd trimester baby that is about as big as your hand? We all just figured we'd take our chances. None of us could do that. It just gives you five months to worry and doesn't change anything.
Definition of genetic
The most crucial difference between the two terms is that a hereditary disease can be passed on from one generation to another. A genetic disease, on the other hand, may or may not be hereditary, but it is always a result of a change in an organism’s genome.
Why do hate using language and medical terms precisely?
By the way you are wrong about the inheritance of Downs as well. I looked it up. When a woman with Downs has a child there is a 30-50 percent chance her child will have Downs meaning once the mutation has arisen it is passed along some what like an autosomal dominant with incomplete penetrance. Now run along and bother someone who will buy what you are selling
Correction, we had ultrasounds, we declined the amnio test that was standard in my day.
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.