" The two terms ar used interchangeably and confusingly in California cases. whatever her cause of action may properly be called, the missy must show that the negligence of Dr. Well and General hospital was the proximate cause of birth defects. California is one of however three states that allow an action by the tyke for wrongful life, Washington and New Jersey being the others. In no(prenominal) of the reported cases in California has a healthy claw been allowed a sort out to recover against a health mete out provider. While California courts have recognized a right of action in parents for the wrongful birth of a child, as for example, where a normal child is born following a negligent sterilization procedure, see Custodio v. Bauer, 251 Cal. App. 2d 303, 54 Cal. Rptr. 463 (1967), or a negligently performed abortion, no right of the child non to be born of the child has been recognized. Witken narrates that recovery by the child in such cases has been uniformly denied because " a legal salvage contradicts the fundamental belief that human life has value.
" He besides says that "there can be no evaluation of a claimed right non to be born." In such cases, Bopp, Bostrom and McKinney say that "the pregnancy and delivery are asserted to be the wrong, not the resulting life. Damages are usually limited to the pain and suffering of pregnancy and delivery, lost, wages, and loss of consortium." |
Witken, B.E. compendious of California Law Ninth Edition. San Francisco: Bancroft-Whitney, 1988 and 1995 Supplement. | Order your essay at
Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.
No comments:
Post a Comment