Posted on 11/09/2005 10:12:20 AM PST by davidosborne
Woman sues for 'wrongful life'
November 10, 2005
THE full bench of the High Court will today begin hearing a landmark test case involving a disabled woman who unsuccessfully sued her mother's doctor for wrongful life.
Alexia Harriton, now 24, was born deaf, blind and mentally disabled.
She claims her mother's doctor negligently failed to diagnose rubella infection early in the pregnancy and wrongly reassured her that her baby would not be affected.
Ms Harriton unsuccessfully tried to sue her mother's doctor, Paul Stephens, in the NSW Supreme Court three years ago for negligence.
But in April this year she won the right to take her test case to the High Court, with the hearing set down for this morning.
One of Ms Harriton's lawyers, Kathryn Booth, said the case raised complex legal and philosophical issues which had never been considered by Australia's highest court.
Ms Booth said she would seek leave to have damages awarded to her client, including her costs for medical treatment, special care and housing.
Passing it on...
So she's asserting that she should have been aborted? Those who are aborted have no such access to the legal system.
She seems to be quite legally competent for a woman of such significant disability. Kind of reminds me of the old "unfrozen caveman lawyer" sketch from SNL.
What if the court sides with her and decides to confiscate said life?
Well, I shouldn't have been born.. .but since I was... SHOW ME THE MONEY!!!
PING
Hate to sound callous but considering she is suing for "wrongful life" why isn't she demanding to die?
Government assisted suicide?
This is scary. Now imagine every young adult with severe disabilites suing for wrongful life. Now a parent with a Downs Syndrome child, who chooses NOT to abort, can be sued for not doing so.
Would a victory in a "wrongful life" case bring a verdict of death?
If she is mentally disabled, does she have status to sue ?
Or is some family member orchestrating this in order to make money out of this tragedy ?
probably just Money... and a HUGE precedent which would open the door to ANYONE born with a handicap to successfully sue their doctors for not killing them before they were born
She knows how to fix this herself...
She is not suing her mother.
Apparently she's not too mentally disabled if she has the wherewithal to sue for her "wrongful life."
Add list to my list of frivolous lawsuits.
How many doctors will advise women to get abortions, just to protect themselves from liability?
Sometimes you just want to smack people.
Or the parent that chooses not to abort can sue the doctor for not being more forceful in trying to convince the mother to abort?
She's 24 years old. The wrong was committed before her birth. But she didn't bring suit until 3 years ago? The statute of limitations should have run years ago. Why is this lawsuit being brought only now?
(possible answer - statutes of limitations vary. There may be an exception for minority or mental incapacity BUT there is also generally an exclusion for continuing mental incapacity with no hope of recovery. You can't just wait forever to sue.)
And if she is indeed mentally incompetent, her parents are bring this action as next friends or guardians.
BTTT!!!!!!
I'm sure 5 of our 4 sitting Justices will be following this case to see how they can use Australia Precedent in deciding future cases brought to the SCOTUS.
Any guess which 5?
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.