Posted on 03/22/2007 4:00:39 PM PDT by HarmlessLovableFuzzball
NEW YORK - A couple can proceed with a lawsuit against a fertility clinic they filed after the wife gave birth to a daughter whose skin they thought was too dark to be their child, a judge has ruled. ADVERTISEMENT
Thomas and Nancy Andrews, of Commack, N.Y., sued New York Medical Services for Reproductive Medicine, accusing the Manhattan clinic of medical malpractice and other offenses. They claim the Park Avenue clinic used another man's sperm to inseminate Nancy Andrews' eggs.
Three DNA tests — a home kit and two professional laboratory tests — confirmed that Thomas Andrews was not the baby's biological father, state Supreme Court Judge Sheila Abdus-Salaam quoted the couple as saying.
The couple says that they have been forced to raise a child who is "not even the same race, nationality, color ... as they are," the judge said in the ruling.
The lawsuit, which seeks unspecified damages, came to light Wednesday after the judge issued a decision that allows them to proceed with parts of the lawsuit while dismissing other parts.
The judge quoted the couple as saying that after their daughter, Jessica, was born Oct. 19, 2004, they knew something was wrong because of her physical appearance.
They say that "while we love Baby Jessica as our own, we are reminded of this terrible mistake each and every time we look at her; it is simply impossible to ignore," the judge's decision said.
The judge, in her ruling made public Wednesday, dismissed the claims against Dr. Martin Keltz, who had advised the procedure and had performed the embryo implantation.
She allowed the case to proceed against Dr. Reginald Puckett as owner of the clinic but threw out the case against him as an individual.
In trying to have the lawsuit against Puckett dismissed, his lawyer, Martin B. Adams, told the court that Puckett "did not examine, communicate with, care for or treat plaintiffs."
The judge found Carlo Acosta, the non-physician embryologist who processed the egg and sperm for creation of an embryo, also could be held liable.
The couple's lawyer, Howard J. Stern, did not immediately return a telephone call for comment.
woops.
In this case, the complaint is that the kid wasn't born with a coathanger for a nose. Forget it, Howard.
Lets hope the child was born to Birkhead.
LOL
Whoops, missed it by one letter in the alphabet. Are they all alike?
Although, they might want to do a DNA test on the gardener..
The couple says that they have been forced to raise a child who is "not even the same race, nationality, color ... as they are,"
They say that "while we love Baby Jessica as our own, we are reminded of this terrible mistake each and every time we look at her; it is simply impossible to ignore," the judge's decision said.
----
Poor child. Brought into the world by shallow people who look at her as a mistake.
It's still her baby.
I hope when the kid is old enough she can tell Mom and Dad what they can do with their bigotry.
Just gotta say that, had they used the 'old-fashioned' method of creating a child, there would be no chance for the 'wrong sperm' to have been involved.
While there are cases where in vitro is needed for a couple, these two at least sounded healthy.
They do have a case for malpractice in some way, but the horrible things they have said about their daughter in court will find their way to her ears one day. Calling her a mistake, etc. I would have preferred it if they said that there was carelessness in the laboratory and the clinic needs to pay for their negligence, even though it got them their beautiful daughter and they wouldn't have her any other way. THAT would have been the right way to go about this suit. My G-d. That poor baby.
Also, I would like to see a wasteful taxpayer-funded study of all parents named Stern who choose "Howard" for their child's name and how that's working out.
Would they have killed the child in the womb if they would have seen the color? Or attempted too? With an attitude like this I feel they would have. By the way, I don't feel it is wrong that they are suing. They have a legitimate gripe. But I would use that money in service of doing the right thing as God led me.
I am guessing if the parents had advance knowledge of the "monster" that was growing inside the mother, the baby would have been long aborted.
You should see 'Me, Myself & Irene' (Jim Carrey), you will get a good laugh.
I have very good quality control.
I have never used anyone's but my own.
You and a lot of other people here on FR seem to trust the MSM's depiction of this couple's feelings a lot more than I do.
How do you know that this couple does not feel exactly as you describe here? Because of AP's excerpts from a judge's legal ruling presenting his decision to side with the couple? What do you suppose AP wants you to feel about this case?
I know; that's what I don't get. It sounds like the mother gave birth and they used the father's sperm (unless I'm missing something here).
God's way is definitely better, but I do feel really bad for these people.
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.