Switch to
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| lifeskim:mentions | |
| pubmed:issue |
2
|
| pubmed:dateCreated |
1984-7-9
|
| pubmed:keyword |
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Abortion, Induced--legal aspects,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Abortion Law,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Americas,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Behavior,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/DECISION MAKING,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Demographic Factors,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Developed Countries,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Developing Countries,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Diseases,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/ETHICS,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Family Planning,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Fertility,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Fertility Control, Postconception,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Fertility Measurements,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/High Risk Women,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Influentials,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Jurisprudence--changes,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Legislation--changes,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Medical Liability,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Neonatal Diseases And Abnormalities,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/North America,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Northern America,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Population,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Population Dynamics,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Pregnancy, Unwanted--legal aspects,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Reproductive Behavior,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Research Report,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/Summary Report,
http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/keyword/United States
|
| pubmed:language |
eng
|
| pubmed:journal | |
| pubmed:citationSubset |
IM
|
| pubmed:status |
MEDLINE
|
| pubmed:issn |
0014-7354
|
| pubmed:author | |
| pubmed:issnType |
Print
|
| pubmed:volume |
16
|
| pubmed:owner |
NLM
|
| pubmed:authorsComplete |
Y
|
| pubmed:pagination |
64-9
|
| pubmed:dateRevised |
2004-11-17
|
| pubmed:otherAbstract |
PIP: This is a summary review of the various legal, moral and policy issues that have contributed to changes in the courts' enactment of legislation on wrongful-birth and wrongful-conception suits in the United States. Both cases represent the Supreme Court's recognition of personal injury claims by parents who have received inadequate medical care that has led to the birth of an imparied or unplanned child. In wrongful-birth cases, the parents assert that if they had received proper genetic counseling or testing, the child's birth could have been avoided. Parents involved in litigation of this type argue that the doctor's negligence prevented them from making such decisions, and that they should be compensated for the financial hardships and emotional suffering they experience as a result of his mistake. In such claims, the physician is charged with malpractice, an aspect of the law of torts which gives the injured party the right to seek financial compensation for that injury. Generally, state courts have allowed parents to recover the costs of medical care and of training and treatment for the handicapped child. Similarly, state courts now routinely recognize the wrongful-conception claims of parents who seek damages from a doctor or pharmacist after the birth of a healthy but unplanned child, born as a result of a failed sterilization or abortion. The recognition of wrongful-birth claims is closely linked to the legalization of abortion and the refinement of diagnostic tests, e.g., amniocentesis, that can detect many genetic diseases before birth. Such legislation is due to changes i opinion since 1967 and was strongly reinforced by the Supreme Court's concurrent decisions that it is a couples' constitutional right to decide whether or not to have a child and whether or not to use contraceptives to prevent conception. The major controversy today in this type of claims is over the amount of damages the parents may recover. Some states have passed legislation barring such claims due to the influence of right-to-life groups. They contend that such barring legislation is necessary to protect doctors who are morally opposed to abortion from having to provide information that might lead to such a practice. Pro-life proponents also argue that the recognition of such claims compels doctors to seek out and abort imperfect fetuses to avoid possible financial liability, and that human life no matter how severely handicapped, or unwanted, should be valued and protected.
|
| pubmed:meshHeading |
pubmed-meshheading:6233171-Abortion, Induced,
pubmed-meshheading:6233171-Child Advocacy,
pubmed-meshheading:6233171-Disabled Persons,
pubmed-meshheading:6233171-Female,
pubmed-meshheading:6233171-Genetic Counseling,
pubmed-meshheading:6233171-Humans,
pubmed-meshheading:6233171-Infant, Newborn,
pubmed-meshheading:6233171-Jurisprudence,
pubmed-meshheading:6233171-Male,
pubmed-meshheading:6233171-Pregnancy,
pubmed-meshheading:6233171-Public Policy,
pubmed-meshheading:6233171-Sterilization, Reproductive,
pubmed-meshheading:6233171-United States
|
| pubmed:articleTitle |
Wrongful birth and wrongful conception: the legal and moral issues.
|
| pubmed:publicationType |
Journal Article
|