Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mikemover
Exactly.
If they are suing on the grounds that they "should never have been born", then shouldn't they be suing their mother?....
|
The allegation was that the doctors' negligence kept the mothers in the dark about their diseases. If those allegations are true, then how would the mothers know whether to have abortions?
Quote:
|
The doctors are not to blame. It was not their choice. They were simply doing their job.
|
How do you know that? There is nothing in the posted article to support your statement.
The court ruled that there was no claim, regardless of whether the doctors were negligent. This is what the court said in Ms. Harriton's case: "There is no practical possibility of a court (or jury) ever apprehending or evaluating, or receiving proof of, the actual loss or damage as claimed by the appellant. It cannot be determined in what sense Alexia Harriton's life with disabilities represents a loss, deprivation or detriment compared with non-existence."
The court made no finding either way about whether the doctors were negligent, so how do you know they were doing their jobs?
Quote:
...I also agree that it smells like exploitation by an opportunistic scumbag lawyer... If they are so severely mentally disabled, then where did they get the idea for this highly unusual lawsuit?
Mike
|
These two unfortunate people did not come up with the idea for anything. The lawsuits were brought on their behalf by parents or fiduciaries, which is why is it unfair to judge their motivations without knowing more information. A fiduciary is required by the law to have a single-minded focus on what's best for the person under their care. A fiduciary cannot worry that others might find the lawsuit to be offensive.
By the way, if those scumbag lawyers were working on a contingency, which would be customary in the US, then they made a grand total of zero dollars in return for a monumental amount of work.