Posts
Woman Sues Doctors After Failed Abortion
Either people in Boston have officially lost their minds or this country is too sue-happy. Associated Press (AP) released this news a while back but long story short: Woman who got pregnant had an abortion that didn't kill the child, and proceeded to have the child, has sued every party involved in her pregnancy except herself and the father. She alleges that doctors owe her the money to pay for the cost of raising the child. Ms. Raper (that's her real name) apparently does not recognize who is responsible for her becoming pregnant.Setting aside my personal views on abortion, lets look at this logically.
Firstly, If she didn't want this child, why is she keeping this child? There is such a thing as adoption, and there are many people who will pay the costs to adopt, and there are many people who want to adopt.
Secondly, Medicine is still called a "practice" rather than an art for a reason: It's imperfect.
Thirdly, when she found out she was in fact pregnant, why didn't she proceed with some action, such as having the abortion again (assuming Mass state law allows such late abortions--I know not, and it matters not here), or again, putting the poor child up for adoption?
Fourthly, abortions are known to fail on occasion, just like birth control, just like medical practice.
Fifthly, the doctor who (allegedly) failed to detect she was pregnant could have made an honest mistake (no medicine is without mistakes, nor are people--get over it), or he could have been incompetent. That doesn't mean he is to blame for her stupidity. Yes, stupidity, nothing short of it.
I might add the lady is either a) 'blessed' to know nothing about being pregnant (unlikely, and I say 'blessed' because she didn't want the child, so to her being barren must be a blessing) or b) blessed to have had a good pregnancy to not know she was pregnant at 7 months?
Leaving the above aside, who bears the blame for getting pregnant in the first place? Don't rip into me yet--there is no mention of rape, so she willingly allowed herself to do what naturally in the course of human history has often resulted in pregnancy--she had sex. Whether or not she had some sort of protection or not is irrelevant, as no protection is 100% guaranteed. Even using multiple forms of protection (costly, defeats the alternate purpose of sex--pleasure, and rather impractical) isn't 100% guaranteed!
Must be great for the child. Can't wait to hear about those therapy sessions when the child finds out what happened. Will mom say "Daughter, you were supposed to be dead, but I sued the doctors because you're alive" or "I didn't want you, but hey, look at all the money I made!"
Just when I thought I had seen a new low in stupidity. Oh, look! Here comes a new low. I hope the judge or panel has some common sense here. Does anyone else think this is absolutely insane?
This article was written by Justin Swatsenbarg from Tech and other things. Credit for the thumbnail image which has a great quote by Albert Einstein. If you are interested in contributing to the thinking process and become a guest writer on The Thinking Blog, find out more information here and be my guest!
12 thoughts:
I agree. Your points are well thought out. Doctors are not God. Their services are to help, but never are they guaranteed.
If there is obvious malpractice or negligence then doctors should be taken to task like any other professional regardless of the sensitivity of the matter, as in the case of abortion.
I just pray for the child in this case. Hopefully he/she will be ok.
People in the US are too Sue-happy because it is too easy to do. I think it is part of the human condition to want to blame others for problems regardless of where the true blame lies. This is true of all humans across the globe. It just so happens that in America our legal system caters to this base level tendency.
And of course there are two sides to the legal coin. The US legal system provides power for the little guy. In other countries where you can be penalized for bringing a case where you don't win. That's not the right system either.
I say keep protecting the little guy, accept the inefficiencies of the system, and keep the big guys on their best behavior.
Unfortunately, a lot of people want to blame everyone else for the consequences of their own actions except themselves. My heart goes out to this poor child who is bound to find out mother tried to sue for the child being alive!
I think that if anything, the mother should be given back the cost of the abortion. The doctor didn't perform what she paid him for and she shouldn't have to pay for it.
I don't know why the mother and father originally wanted the abortion, but it isn't an easy decision to be made by anyone. The parents were probably trying to move on and forget about the whole situation. And instead they were hit in the face with the same issue that they thought was already dealt with. This is probably a nightmare to them and out of anger, they want their money back.
I think the parents should be acknowledged for the fact that they did decide to keep the child after they realized they still had it.
No one is entirely right or wrong here. It is just a bad situation.
If this poor child finds out that her mother tried to kill her, what is she to think? The problem is that the majority of this country thinks it's ok to kill babies, and ok to brainwash other people into thinking that they are actually not babies.
In Germany a similar case was tried and the plaintiff won; the doctor has to pay for child rearing expenses until the child is 18. Germans viewed it as a dangerous legal precedent. My view is for the plaintiffs, but I respect the other comments as well. The way I see it, the lady went in for an abortion, procedure, whatever it is you call it these days, she paid for a service that was not properly done. At a minimum she should get her abortion money back. Secondly, I agree that the practice of medicine is far from perfect, but these situations are so rare precisely because an abortion is a common procedure: the more common any procedure is the safer and more reliable it becomes. I believe one of the questions in the trial will be just HOW the doctor missed this one. Not an easy feat. Just speculating, but if the doctor did not perform his job because he was in a rush, had other things on his mind,or was using old equipment then he should be held liable. If on the other hand the woman had a condition making abortions more difficult then the doctor should not be penalized.
Those are my views on the story but I'd like to give a bit on feedback on the reporting of the story. While satire is a valid form of journalism, I think it takes away from your objectivity using words as "stupid" to describe the woman. I agree that this story should be thought about logically and with satire if you want, but don't sacrifice your objectivity.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I'm not a medical expert here, but couldn't the doctor perform another operation to remove the embryo if the first attempt fails?
P.S. I'm not the one who wrote this article but I thought it would be interesting to get people's views on the subject here.
Ah! I didn't know you didn't write that article. My apologies for questioning your objectivity without knowing anything about it.
I think the mother is sick for suing over her child that LIVED AND CAN BREATHE AND HAS A FUTURE!!!!! If she can't see the blessing in that even now that her daughter is 2 years old then she should have given her up for adoption where the child would be in LOVING arms of people who realize the blessing of a child! I also agree with this ENTIRE article!
People today need to take responsibility for their actions and realize that if something such as this happens and they are given a second chance for their mistakes then they should embrace it because the child was obviously SUPPOSE to live ... everything happens for a reason!
i think what the mother is doing is entirely wrong because no one would want to grow up to find out that their mother wanted them dead!!!
woww! i didn't think America was going this mad... anyway, i just hope the girl will be ok, and no matter for the mum, cause she sort of looks "ok"... only very procedurial, and cupid in all ways and means......
life's hard... and it's reverse (contrary) too...
I just read the original AP article and find it interesting that the mother is 45. When I was born my mother was almost 40 back in 1983. The doctors suggested to my mom that with such a high rate of birth defects, namely Downs Syndrome, for babies of mothers that old, she might want to consider an abortion. My parents are fundamentalist Baptists and although I am usually not very happy about this fact, in this case I am very grateful that my mother decided not to end my life. It is interesting how much has changed in 25 years. This woman was seeking an abortion for financial reasons and there was no mention of there being a concern such as this. Women are having babies at older ages and since we know much more about prenatal care now this seems to not be much of a problem.
Sorry, that was a bit of a tangent.
What do you think? Post your thoughts..