Parents Sue Doctor For Not Recommending That They Abort Their Daughter

What a sick way to communicate to their daughter, “You’re not the ‘perfect’ child we wanted. We wish you were dead. We’re sorry we never got the chance to kill you.”

These people don’t deserve their child. They should give her to a couple who appreciates her just the way she is and doesn’t wish they’d had a chance to kill her before birth.

Rebecca Taylor writes at Life News:

A couple in Portland are suing Legacy Health because their child has Down Syndrome. This is another of these so-called wrongful birth lawsuits that are so very wrong. The wrongful birth suit is brought by the parents of a sick or disabled child against medical professionals that, the parents say, were negligent.

The wrongful birth lawsuit does not say that the medical practitioners caused the disease or disability, which would be a valid reason to sue. Instead the wrongful birth lawsuit claims the that doctor failed to inform the parents of the illness or disability of the child and that had they known, they would have aborted their child. In other words, the parents are saying we wish our child was dead. Because he or she is not, the someone has to pay.

The parents often use the excuse that they love their child; they are simply suing to acquire funds to care for their sick or disabled offspring. But to get those funds they have to insist that, had they known, they would have killed that very same child. The Oregon couple is suing for $7 million.

From ABCNews:

The parents of a four-year-old Oregon girl with Down syndrome are suing Legacy Health in Portland because they say doctors misdiagnosed their daughter as not having the condition during a prenatal screening.

As a result of doctors’ reassurances, according to KATU, the parents decided to continue the pregnancy. They are suing for $7 million, an amount they say will pay for the girl’s care for life.

Court documents were not immediately available, so it’s unclear what type of genetic testing the couple underwent. Genetic counselors say there are different types of screening options, including amniocentesis, chorionic villus sampling, and an ultrasound combined with blood testing.

There is much confusion over prenatal testing in general so it is not surprising that the details of exactly what testing was perform have been omitted. People often confuse a screening method called a triple or quad screen that simply looks at protein levels in a maternal blood sample and actual genetic testing of the fetus through amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling (CVS). While the quad screen is just that, a non-invasive screen that requires further testing, the genetic testing through amnio or CVS is much more accurate because it tests the DNA of the baby directly.

Regardless of the testing performed there is no guarantee ever that a child will be healthy. Which is precisely why a dozen or so states prohibit these wrongful birth lawsuits. The statutes that prevent these suits usually have language similar to the Idaho law that says:

“A cause of action shall not arise, and damages shall not be awarded, on behalf of any person, based on the claim that but for the act or omission of another, a person would not have been permitted to have been born alive but would have been aborted.”

The laws that prohibit wrongful life suits are there in part to protect doctors or other medical personnel from being coerced into recommending eugenic abortion as a way to avoid lawsuits. With the possibility of a wrongful life lawsuit hanging over their heads medical professionals are more likely to participate in a “seek-and-destroy” mission against any fetus with any kind of abnormality. That seek-and-destroy mission comprising unnecessary or unwanted testing is not healthy for the mother or her child.

Read more at Life News

Recently I blogged about a couple of “ethicists” who are arguing for acceptance of ‘after-birth abortions‘ since they believe newborns ’are not persons’.

If these “ethicists” had their way, parents like this would be legally allowed to murder her after she was born.  They treat human beings like commodities or accessories that you can just send back to the manufacturer if you’re not happy with the product.

Better dead than disabled? The insanity of that $4.5 million ‘wrongful birth’ case

Ethicists Argue For Acceptance Of ‘After-Birth Abortions‘ As Newborns ’Are Not Persons’

“Agony Aunt” Ironside says ‘any good mother’ would suffocate a disabled child

War Against The Weak

‘Imperfect’ kids teach life lessons

[adrotate group=”12″]

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!