(no subject)

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Couple sues hospital for ‘wrongful birth’ of daughter born with down syndrome they would have aborted

Ariel and Deborah Levy are suing Legacy Health, a local hospital, for three million dollars. The parents claim a health screening, the result of which was later proven to be incorrect, cost them the chance to abort their mentally-handicapped daughter. Kalanit, who is now four, was diagnosed with Down syndrome shortly after birth

So, it has come to this.

----
I think these people are horrible people, that they only wanted a perfect child and not their child. They should have adopted, since they wanted to be able to control how healthy their baby was. And it's horrible that they would have killed a child had they known the future. And yes, this is the kind of people to point to as an example of why allowing abortion-on-demand, for any reason, is bad.

P.S.
Alternate links for those worried about corrupting their computer with the stain of a conservative website:
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2012/03/portland_couple_sues_legacy_he.html
http://newsfeedresearcher.com/data/articles_m10_2/child-levy-syndrome.html

And it looks like they won their suit:
http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/parents-awarded-2-9m-wrongful-birth-lawsuit-daughter-born-syndrome-article-1.1037159?localLinksEnabled=false
http://www.imperfectparent.com/topics/2012/03/10/portland-couple-wins-wrongful-birth-lawsuit/

Comments

[curseangel.livejournal.com]

Abortion is not killing a child.

I think these are perfectly reasonable people. As much as it sucks, a lot of people simply do not have the resources or temperament to deal with a disabled child. The medical, physical and emotional costs can be too much. Honestly, I applaud the couple for knowing their own limits and being willing to take steps to ensure that they can adequately care for their child. It's unfortunate that the hospital thwarted those efforts.

I'm very glad that they won their lawsuit. :)

P.S. Abortion "on demand" (you make it sound like a special TV channel!) is an awesome idea. Love it!

[hourglasscreate.livejournal.com]

This.

[a-new-machine.livejournal.com]

When you have huge costs, you do whatever you can to recoup them. Here, these people were unexpectedly handed a disabled child, with all the issues that attend that. There was a case a while back about a woman who sued someone who had died in an accident, because his his flying body parts had injured her (http://www.newser.com/story/136459/dead-accident-victim-to-be-sued-over-flying-body-parts.html). That wasn't because she thought to herself, "Well I never! The sheer indignity that this.... this... man thought he could dismember himself in my direction! I will seek justice, forthwith!" The woman had serious medical bills to pay, totally not her own fault, and there was fault to find with the dead man. The lawyers did their job and investigated all possible avenues to get money. This suit was one of them. I'd imagine something similar could have happened in this case.

I'm not saying that they were definitely going to bring the baby to term anyway, but it's not outside the realm of reason for them to money-grab with a legal theory that didn't reflect their actual feelings. Note that this was one of five negligent acts that the jury found - there were apparently other issues with the care. “These are parents who love this little girl very, very much,” Miller said. “Their mission since the beginning was to provide for her and that’s what this is all about.” Of course, that's their attorney talking, but it could easily reflect fact.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

If that was all the suit was about, there wouldn't be an issue. But they explicitly said that they wanted to know so they could abort. That's the problem here. The money-grab is ordinary human mentality.

[udoswald.livejournal.com]

It is not the doctor's job to make the decision for them. Abortion is legal and they have every right to make that choice if they want. The doctor lied to them and therefore took that decision out of their hands. He violated ethics if not the law and he should certainly be sued. Sadly, many Republican controlled states are attempting to pass laws that say doctors can lie to you in order to prevent you from getting an abortion. Would you accept a Jehovah's Witness doctor lying to you about your loved one needing a blood transfusion as that loved one was dying on the operating table? A doctor's personal moral idiocy should have nothing to do with the medical care they provide to their patients.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

I'm not complaining about the suit, I'm calling out the horrible human beings behind it.

[hey-its-michael.livejournal.com]

And yes, this is the kind of people to point to as an example of why allowing abortion-on-demand, for any reason, is bad.


Well, if one is anti-choice, sure. For the rest of us, no, it is not any such reason.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Given that children with Down's Syndrome require intensive efforts to keep them alive and happy, efforts including government involvement.........

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

...then what? These people are really saints then? We should praise them for being willing to kill their own child because it has a birth defect?

[yes-justice.livejournal.com]

When faced with this situation, you know what you would do. Others differ.

I hope they use the money on the kid.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

I hope they use the money on the kid.

I definitely agree with that.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

If those are the only two options, yes, I'd rather people didn't abort.

[sealwhiskers.livejournal.com]

Have you any idea what it takes to take care of someone with Down's? (I do, as I've worked with kids who have the disability)
It's pointless to speculate what goes on in people's heads and hearts, the thing is, a wrongful diagnosis is wrong and it's not at all
unreasonable to want that money to give a kid with a *highly* challenging life some help that money can buy.

ETA: in Sweden and certain other countries you can't sue over something like this, but you get government help for the rest of the child's life.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

I'm not complaining about the suit or their desire for money.

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

Consider that it might have been unethical if they lied about any predicted physical or mental conditions to the parents, that is a dangerous position to take in the medical field in my opinion.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

I didn't notice anything about the doctors deliberately lying. But the lawsuit itself isn't the issue I'm writing about.

[omnot.livejournal.com]

I recently went through the tests to check whether the foetus I was carrying had chromosomal abnormalities, and if it had had Down's Syndrome, I would absolutely have terminated the pregnancy. So I guess that, by your standards, I am evil and loathesome.

The fact is that while I am in a situation to cope with a healthy baby, I am not in a position to cope with one with special needs. I am not alone in that, and I absolutely support both the right to end a pregnancy for any reason, and the right of those parents to sue for medical malpractice.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

if it had had Down's Syndrome, I would absolutely have terminated the pregnancy. So I guess that, by your standards, I am evil and loathesome.

Yes, that would make you horrible also. Evil and loathsome is outside the scope, so I can't say whether you're that too or not.

the right of those parents to sue for medical malpractice.

They can certainly sue for that, I'm not objecting to that.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

Good for them. My wife and I discussed this when we were going through IVF, and if our son had been a downs kid, we probably would have aborted as well. It would have been a crushingly difficult decision.

They were told things would be fine, so they chose not to abort. The hospital screwed up, and now they face the rest of their lives supporting this child as a perpetual teenager at best. They were right to sue, and the jury was right to find in their favor.

This doesn't make them terrible people. This makes them regular people facing incredible hardship.

And your response makes it clear that you're not a parent.

Read this, and think about your self.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kara-gebhart-uhl/mom-judgments_b_1319775.html

[chessdev.livejournal.com]

Agreed -- he couldnt be a parent and throw around the words and phrases he does
so easily.

It's easy to judge until you've been through it and he just doesnt come across
as having been through it

[thies.livejournal.com]

It's all down to economics, why pay for a downy - if you can afford insurance for that in post-obamacare 'murrica - if you can have a healthy child instead?

[telemann.livejournal.com]

Yeah, Obama care really starts kicking in next year I think.

[soliloquy76.livejournal.com]

A post about abortion: must be election season.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

I don't see the connection.

[yahvah.livejournal.com]

Genesis 2:19:
And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

The great thing about science is it gets us out of the dark ages of blindly adhering to God's will. A modern Rabbinic take on this passage could support that position. Aborting the known difficulties of a potential future is practically meaningless if you accept God is probably not going to judge people based on potential futures lost.

[awdrey-gore.livejournal.com]

A Biblical passage about a man naming animals God made and commentary about the judgement of God delivered in the form of a strange homily in a post about the relative morality of aborting babies with Down's may not be conveying a particularly coherent message.

I dare you to make less sense.

[oslo.livejournal.com]

I don't see why any woman, by choosing to become pregnant, must as a consequence of that decision carry to term and subsequently be responsible for any fetus/child that might result, regardless of whether the child turns out to be developmentally "normal" or otherwise.

I don't pretend that this is an easy moral question, but part of the point of being pro-choice is acknowledging that these intensely difficult questions are best addressed by the people who are closest and most directly implicated by the decision to abort - a woman, her health care provider, and to a lesser extent, the father and/or her partner. To say that these people are "horrible people" and a case-in-point on why "abortion-on-demand, for any reason, is bad," is, in itself, a case-in-point why we shouldn't allow people like you to be making these kinds of decisions, through the state, for them.

Anyway, I don't see what the big deal is. The couple made a medical decision to carry the fetus to term based on botched medical advice. Do they have no right to recover for the consequential economic losses their doctors' malpractice caused? Do you suppose that people like this are just out of luck, thereby protecting doctors from the consequences of their own negligence? As others have pointed out, objecting to this lawsuit would be a lot more defensible if it were the case that having a developmentally-disabled child in our society didn't turn out to be the financial nightmare that it can often turn out to be. But desperate people resort to desperate measures, as it turns out.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

I didn't say anything about the state forcing her to carry the baby to term, so you can take back your strawman. And your third paragraph is irrelevant as the lawsuit isn't the issue.

[auntiesiannan.livejournal.com]

With a surname like Levy, they are most likely a Jewish couple. Judaism holds that a fetus is not a separate entity from the woman until it takes its first independent breath.

By that logic, the WOMAN was misdiagnosed, and is still perfectly within her rights to sue. I'm glad this couple won. The costs for the lifelong care of a mentally challenged individual are astronomical.

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

Imagine the cost to a poor 3rd world parent of raising a female.

And some people are against gender based abortion. They just don't understand.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

I'm glad they won their suit.

[di-glossia.livejournal.com]

While it sounds horrible to abort a child for health reasons, is it really any better or worse than any other reason to abort? What quality of life does this child now have with parents who would rather have aborted her? Not a high one.

The thing is, if you've never dealt with someone with developmental challenges, you really can't say anything about what it's like. A Down's child almost certainly will never be able to live a completely independent life. Schooling will be difficult; finding a job will be difficult. Discrimination will be rampant. Down's also typically occurs with other disabilities. Many children are HOH, are partially blind, have heart or other internal organ issues, or are otherwise physically impaired. In my experience with Special Olympics, there are so many parents incapable of properly caring for their Down's children (and intellectual disabilities in general), that it would be better for the child to be adopted or not born at all.

As for controlling "how healthy their baby was", I see no problem with that. I have a hereditary disability, and, if it were at all possible, I would not have been at all against my parents having an abortion based upon prenatal screening. When the quality of someone's life is irreparably reduced, why is it so wrong to have an abortion?

[chessdev.livejournal.com]

Why? Because the guys who dont have children and have no concept of what you're
talking about say so...

[foolsguinea.livejournal.com]

"Perfect" is a loaded word. Maybe just not, "profoundly handicapped"? What if it had been the trisomy Rick Santorum's daughter has? Would that change your contempt?

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

Good point, I don't think the parents necessarily said they wanted a "perfect" child.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

Do you support their right to do this or does your moral outrage imply There Should Be a Law(tm)?

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

They do have the right.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

I don't really see how 2 random people and whether or not they're bad people is really relevant to politics.

[mylaptopisevil.livejournal.com]

BUT THIS IS WHAT LIBERALS WANT

[new-wave-witch.livejournal.com]

they only wanted a perfect child

Where in the articles does it say that?

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

Abortion talks always eventually boil down to:
A: You're a horrible person!
B: No, U!

[kardashev.livejournal.com]

It'a all fun and games until the Godwin card comes into play.

[major-dallas.livejournal.com]

Eugenics is never the right answer... at least, that's my opinon so based off that I would accept how my child for it is born.

[omnot.livejournal.com]

Euganics intends to purify the gene pool.

Down's Syndrome is for the vast, vast majority, not hereditary.

Therefore terminating Down's Syndrome pregnancies is not eugenics.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

Maybe they could just have a litter and eat the weak ones.

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

THIS! IS! SPARTAAA!