Posted on 11/14/2005 3:23:14 AM PST by bremenboy
THE High Court has been asked to decide whether severely disabled children can sue over medical negligence which resulted in their birth rather than abortion.
In a landmark hearing, two disabled children, one now a young woman and the other a three-year-old girl, are seeking the right to sue their mothers' doctors for wrongful life.
(Excerpt) Read more at theaustralian.news.com.au ...
|
Disabled suing over 'wrongful life'
One of the claims has been brought by Sydney woman Alexia Harriton, 24, who was born deaf, blind, physically and mentally disabled and not expected to live more than six months.
She now requires 24 hour a day care.
She claims Dr Paul Stephens was negligent in failing to diagnose rubella infection early in her mother's pregnancy and wrongly reassured the mother, Olga Harriton, that her unborn child would not be affected by rubella.
Ms Harriton's legal team said the law currently recognised claims by parents for the costs of raising a child born as a result of negligence but not the right of a child to sue after being born as a result of a doctor's negligence.
Counsel for Ms Harriton, Bret Walker, SC, told the High Court that Olga Harriton should have been told of the consequences for his client if the pregnancy went full term.
He said had the mother been made aware of the disabilities her baby would suffer, she would have aborted the pregnancy. "The only reason that the termination should have been brought to the attention of the woman, and the only reason she should have been counselled, was because of the gravity or awfulness for the prospect of my client," Mr Walker said to the court.
He argued Ms Harriton had a claim for compensation because her pain and suffering was the result of Dr Stephens' negligence.
Had there been no negligence on behalf of the doctor, Ms Harriton would not have been born, Mr Walker said.
"We say that the pain and suffering and the needs caused by the disability – nothing to do with being alive – but the disability, are matters that would not have happened but for the negligence," he said.
IVF baby Keeden Waller, now three years old, is also claiming wrongful life after inheriting the clotting disorder AT3 from her father, which was known to transmit to 50 per cent of embryos and was detectable in foetal testing.
The New South Wales Court of Appeal last year decided in a 2-1 judgment to reject the claim on behalf of two children but they won special leave earlier this year to appeal their case in the High Court.
Outside court, Ms Harriton's lawyer Kathryn Booth said her client was seeking to have the Court of Appeal judgment set aside and damages awarded to cover the costs of special care, medical expenses, housing and other expenses.
Mrs Harriton said she was seeking justice for her daughter and would not speculate on what compensation figure the family was seeking.
"We're here for Alexia, for justice and simply that's all it is," she said.
"We've got to look after her interests and the fact that she's been a fighter all her life.
"She's given us the strength and determination to keep going and we're her voice.
"She's got rights like all of us, whether she's disabled or not."
The hearing continues.
|
|
must
not
say
what
I
really
think
about
these
barstids.....
Hmmmmm...that's a tough one!
Let's see...
Deaf, blind, physically and mentally disabled...
3yrs old...
Who's suing?...
OK...
Don't want any OBs in Australia, do they?
Sounds like something from the mind of a lawyer.
totally out of control! Craziness...somebody make it SSSSSSTTTTTOOOOOPPPPP!!!!!
They are driving me nuts lol.
Is there no end?
Wrongful life?
Now I have heard EVERYTHING.
G-d help that three-year-old when she learns what her parents are doing.
The thing is: it is a wrongful lawsuit, because by it's very definition there is no such thing as a wrongful life.
So just ****ing well kill yourself then
"I have a better idea. If she is competent to sue the doctor, she is competent to tell the people giving her round-the-clock medical care to get lost and let nature take its course. Hell, she could tell one of them to leave a nice sharp knife or a cup of water and a bottle of sleeping pills within reach if she wants to expedite things and if she cannot manage that, well seeing as how her mother is so supportive...
…decide whether severely disabled children can sue over medical negligence which resulted in their birth rather than abortion.
I want to sue God because my parents werent rich.
Anhyone sho feels he or she has a "wrongful life" due to a botched or nonexistent abortion can solve the probelem cheaply and easily with a rope or a gun. No need for a law suit.
Exactly. If they win the case then just blow em away.
A "Wrongful Life" suit is only sensible if the plaintiff is immediately killed when he wins his suit.If the life is Wrongful, then it should be ended. The judge should, at the onset, ask if the plaintiff has made a good faith effort to settle his case by ending his Wrongful Life.
Yeah, right. My 3-year-old is claiming "wrongful life" because we won't give him Cheerios three meals a day.
Someone is using this baby to make some money ... unutterably vulgar.
You fail to take into account it's not the kid who'se suing--it's the family.
I understood that it's the family pushing the issue. Doesn't change the reaction. Maybe they should take responsibility for what they are claiming should have been done and kill her now. What's the difference between pulling the trigger now or paying a doctor to do it then?
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.