Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dculkin
The doctors' care was not limited to delivery. They treated the mothers during their pregnancies. Here's a quote from the article:The lawsuits had nothing to do with what the doctors did during delivery. Who said otherwise? The only one who can make that decision is the mother, but she has the right to rely on the information she gets from her doctors.Fortunately, no legal system in the free world agrees with you on that one.It might be a losing argument, but it is not ludicrous. What I find more troubling than the arguments attempted by these plaintiffs is that the doctors escape liablity regardless of whether they provided proper care. Where's the justice in that?
It's a close call. IMHO.
|
Ridiculous.
The conditions endured by these plaintiffs, how ever unfortunate, were INHERITED, and had NOTHING to do with any action taken by the doctors, or a lack thereof.
Additionally, there is no way to prove that "being born" somehow constitutes a "loss", compared to "not being born". This is an impossible comparison to make.
Nor is there any way to prove what effect that different actions, diagnoses, advice, or whatever, on the part of the doctors may theoretically have had upon the decision of the parents. Any discussion of such a thing is pure speculation, nothing more. The mother can SAY that she would have made "decision X" instead of "decision Y" if she had been given different advice or information, but that proves nothing. She made the decision that she made, and she alone is liable for it.
It is quite clear-cut, and obviously the courts involved in the case agree with me.
Mike