Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Liability conceded in foetal-abnormality mistaken-diagnosis case.

Options
124»

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Calhoun
    Registered Users Posts: 7,447 ✭✭✭Calhoun


    Medical malpractice happens all the time, and will happen again.

    As they say hard cases don't make good law so removing choice and control from parents just because of one hard case is not the right way to do things in a compassionate society.


  • Options
    #93
    senordingdong
    Registered Users Posts: 10,673 ✭✭✭✭senordingdong


    Flinty997 wrote: »
    I think none of that is relevant. It probably more about the trauma of the circumstances and outcome, and could it been mitigated in any way. Judgments are also about encouraging change.

    It's hugely relevant, as jimmycrackcorn said above, the law sees the foetus now as an appendage more than a baby. This is a point of interest in how any matters like this will be treated by the courts going forward.

    How can you say it's not relevant and then state that judgements can shape change.


  • Options
    #94
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    senordingdong wrote: »
    It's hugely relevant, as jimmycrackcorn said above, the law sees the foetus now as an appendage more than a baby. This is a point of interest in how any matters like this will be treated by the courts going forward.

    How can you say it's not relevant and then state that judgements can shape change.

    Which law sees the foetus as an appendage?


  • Options
    #95
    Calhoun
    Registered Users Posts: 7,447 ✭✭✭Calhoun


    If i read the judgement correctly, when they settled was it for costs? or was there anything else?


  • Options
    #96
    lawred2
    Registered Users Posts: 24,401 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    lazygal wrote: »
    Which law sees the foetus as an appendage?

    Don't get yourself drawn into such stuff


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    political analyst
    Registered Users Posts: 4,560 ✭✭✭political analyst


    DubInMeath wrote: »
    Happens a lot.
    https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/health-family/why-do-thousands-undergo-unnecessary-appendix-removal-1.4108577

    That's not 'accidental removal' - that's the intentional (but probably unnecessary) removal of appendices.


  • Options
    #98
    political analyst
    Registered Users Posts: 4,560 ✭✭✭political analyst


    lazygal wrote: »
    I had this test on my third pregnancy. I wanted all the information so I could make an informed choice, including travelling for abortion care if necessary. I had a high risk result and needed amniocentesis to rule out Edwards syndrome. Most women know there are risks of abnormalities and some want testing to know for sure.

    What caused you to think of the possibility of Edwards syndrome?


  • Options
    #99
    political analyst
    Registered Users Posts: 4,560 ✭✭✭political analyst


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    Many people arguing for repeal of the 8th, myself included, pointed out that a case like this was not only possible but pretty much an eventual certainty. Why?

    Simply because in EVERY situation where a medical choice is made off the back of results of medical testing.... the results of the testing can be flawed and so the decision based on it the wrong one. We know this.

    I also predicted the people against repeal would sit waiting for such a case so they could score political points. Which suggesting this case of termination is "worse" than the death of actual, living, born babies in Portlaoise is a clear example of. It is not even close to "worse".

    But cases such as this are NOT the "gotcha" against repeal or abortion many would like to pretend. Not back when we were arguing it in theory, and not now that we are arguing an actual example of it.

    A couple got tests done. They acted on the results. The results were bad. This is deeply sad of course. As it would be in ANY medical choice made on faulty data. We should of course feel empathy and compassion for them on that.

    But as long as the couple was correctly informed of the risks of such testing at every juncture then there is nothing to see here. Nor is it "malpractice" as some people have jumped to call it. And I am not sure what compensation or damages they should even be offered or expect.

    If however the couple was not correctly informed of such risks, and as such their consent was not informed consent, then by all means should we be compensating them and looking very closely at process and procedure and the medical staff involved.

    This is about the sanctity of human life, not politics. The difference is that the plaintiffs in this case, unlike the parents of the Portlaoise babies, are not stricken with guilt over the taking of a child's life.

    Abortion is the only medical procedure that is the intentional ending of the life of a human being.


  • Options
    #100
    cruizer101
    Registered Users Posts: 3,205 ✭✭✭cruizer101


    Calhoun wrote: »
    If i read the judgement correctly, when they settled was it for costs? or was there anything else?

    I read/interpreted it as they settled, for an undisclosed amount, and costs were covered by the defendants.


  • Options
    #101
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    political analyst wrote: »
    What caused you to think of the possibility of Edwards syndrome?
    I had the test because I know things can and do arise. And I wanted all of the information possible to enable me to make an informed decision.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    political analyst wrote: »
    This is about the sanctity of human life, not politics. The difference is that the plaintiffs in this case, unlike the parents of the Portlaoise babies, are not stricken with guilt over the taking of a child's life.

    Abortion is the only medical procedure that is the intentional ending of the life of a human being.

    "Sanctity" is a religious term.
    Most women have no regret after an abortion and suffer no long term negative effects whatsoever.


  • Options
    #103
    jimmycrackcorm
    Registered Users Posts: 14,339 ✭✭✭✭jimmycrackcorm


    Faugheen wrote: »
    That's some warped sh*t right there. This couple wanted the baby and were told it wouldn't survive, so made the decision to terminate.

    About this point, the father could decide he wants the baby and the mother could decide she doesn't and makes the decision to terminate. Do you think he has any right to feel trauma?


  • Options
    #104
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    jimmycrackcorm wrote: »
    About this point, the father could decide he wants the baby and the mother could decide she doesn't and makes the decision to terminate. Do you think he has any right to feel trauma?

    Anyone can feel trauma.
    But no one is obliged to undergo something against their wishes to assuage possible trauma in someone else.


  • Options
    #105
    Flinty997
    Registered Users Posts: 12,262 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    senordingdong wrote: »
    It's hugely relevant, as jimmycrackcorn said above, the law sees the foetus now as an appendage more than a baby. This is a point of interest in how any matters like this will be treated by the courts going forward.

    How can you say it's not relevant and then state that judgements can shape change.

    Because we were talking about medical best practice.

    Not compensation for any perceived value of .... ( words fail me).


  • Options
    #106
    Flinty997
    Registered Users Posts: 12,262 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    jimmycrackcorm wrote: »
    About this point, the father could decide he wants the baby and the mother could decide she doesn't and makes the decision to terminate. Do you think he has any right to feel trauma?

    I fell trauma for just how far people are dragging this inappropriately off topic.


  • Options
    #107
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,348 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    political analyst wrote: »
    This is about the sanctity of human life, not politics.

    No. It is neither. YOU might want to make it about that in order to rehash failed arguments from the referendum. But that does not make it so.

    THIS story is about a couple who got results for a test that was erroneous, and they had an abortion off the results of those tests.

    That can, and should, raise questions that need answers. But it has nothing to do with the questions YOU want to pretend need answered.
    political analyst wrote: »
    Abortion is the only medical procedure that is the intentional ending of the life of a human being.

    No, the termination of the fetus and a pregnancy is not the same as "ending of the life of a human being".

    You are simply rehashing the same semantic arguments that lost you the referendum. People did not buy it when the "no" side simply played with language the last time. They are hardly likely to buy it now.

    You are taking the pain of this couple, and their regret, to rehash the abortion debate with arguments that simply lost the last abortion debate.


  • Options
    #108
    Faugheen
    Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    jimmycrackcorm wrote: »
    About this point, the father could decide he wants the baby and the mother could decide she doesn't and makes the decision to terminate. Do you think he has any right to feel trauma?

    Why do you compare this situation to others instead of acknowledging that this couple, together, wanted this baby?


  • Options
    #109
    political analyst
    Registered Users Posts: 4,560 ✭✭✭political analyst


    lazygal wrote: »
    "Sanctity" is a religious term.
    Most women have no regret after an abortion and suffer no long term negative effects whatsoever.

    The word "sanctity" can also be used in a secular context, e.g. a jury's decision at the end of a trial.


  • Options
    #110
    mohawk
    Registered Users Posts: 1,781 ✭✭✭mohawk


    lazygal wrote: »
    I wonder how exactly the test was explained to this couple, and if they read the literature provided when you have it.
    IME people who have this test are already pretty aware of what can go wrong in a pregnancy. Isn't the father in this case a doctor himself? Not that you need to be, but these tests are specialised and expensive. Out of 10,000 pregnancies in Holles St, approx 1,000 of these tests are done, and mostly people who are already under consultant private care request them. You're usually asking for this test because of your age, previous miscarriage, genetic history and so on, so I'd wager you're probably fairly au fair with what they're about before you even get the official information.
    I was told when I first inquired with my consultant that she would recommend it given my age and stressed that is will not give me a conclusive result, it is purely about the risk of an anomaly. When I went for the blood test a week later I was told the same thing by the nurse who took my bloods, and I kept all the info I was given which says the same thing.

    When I got that high risk result, it was again stressed that this was not conclusive, that I was not to panic or rush to make any decision (this was pre repeal) and that further tests were required for a conclusive result.

    Something somewhere went wrong with this couple, if it is communication or a mix up somewhere along the line.

    Your case sounds typical of the experience I have heard from others. Where doctors etc are very upfront about the limitations of these tests.
    Hopefully lessons can be learned after this case. I find it strange the wording of some of the newspaper articles discussing this when they say they got a positive result for Edward’s. From understanding of those tests is that your told if there is a high risk of something. When I looked into doing one of those tests it was abundantly clear they definitely are not a diagnosis only a screening tool.

    I am pro-choice myself but its really important that wanted, healthy babies don’t get aborted due to error.


  • Options
    #111
    political analyst
    Registered Users Posts: 4,560 ✭✭✭political analyst


    nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »
    No. It is neither. YOU might want to make it about that in order to rehash failed arguments from the referendum. But that does not make it so.

    THIS story is about a couple who got results for a test that was erroneous, and they had an abortion off the results of those tests.

    That can, and should, raise questions that need answers. But it has nothing to do with the questions YOU want to pretend need answered.



    No, the termination of the fetus and a pregnancy is not the same as "ending of the life of a human being".

    You are simply rehashing the same semantic arguments that lost you the referendum. People did not buy it when the "no" side simply played with language the last time. They are hardly likely to buy it now.

    You are taking the pain of this couple, and their regret, to rehash the abortion debate with arguments that simply lost the last abortion debate.

    Obviously, this case won't lead to constitutional change. However, it's possible that some pregnant women will be less inclined to undergo tests for Trisomy 18.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Flinty997
    Registered Users Posts: 12,262 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    political analyst wrote: »
    Obviously, this case won't lead to constitutional change. However, it's possible that some pregnant women will be less inclined to undergo tests for Trisomy 18.

    Or go to a hospital, see doctor... the list is endless.


  • Options
    #113
    Calhoun
    Registered Users Posts: 7,447 ✭✭✭Calhoun


    political analyst wrote: »
    Obviously, this case won't lead to constitutional change. However, it's possible that some pregnant women will be less inclined to undergo tests for Trisomy 18.

    That would be their choice, that I think is the point. They can choose the direction and journey that works for them in a dignified manner.


  • Options
    #114
    josip
    Registered Users Posts: 13,998 ✭✭✭✭josip


    Do the couple have any other children?


  • Options
    #115
    nozzferrahhtoo
    Registered Users Posts: 9,348 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    political analyst wrote: »
    Obviously, this case won't lead to constitutional change. However, it's possible that some pregnant women will be less inclined to undergo tests for Trisomy 18.

    I see no reason to think that likely at all. Most people know misdiagnosis can happen and do happen. It does not stop them getting tests. There have been stories of people being misdiagnosed with cancer for example. How many people reject tests for cancer because of this?

    But even if it was, so what? That is their choice. You are back tracking seriously fast from the narratives you STARTED into this thread with. If your position has now become so dilute that the only concern you can manufacture is that false test results might "possibly" make some people no longer seek test results..... then you have little to be worrying about I suspect.

    Abortion is perfectly fine and legal. The choice to have an abortion is perfectly fine and legal. The information that led this couple to choose abortion was flawed. That is unfortunate but it is going to happen.

    We can and should feel sad about it.

    We can and should try to minimise such occurrences.

    We should not manufacture a false political or moral narrative out of it to suit our own agendas.


  • Options
    #116
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    political analyst wrote: »
    Obviously, this case won't lead to constitutional change. However, it's possible that some pregnant women will be less inclined to undergo tests for Trisomy 18.

    Maybe but more than anything I would hope is the error of not fully informing the couple is not repeated. It's got absolutely nothing to do with the the 8th and you've just tried to exploit the topic.


  • Options
    #117
    12323499494
    Registered Users Posts: 1 ✭12323499494


    I couldn't not comment here, yet I know I shouldn't read these comments because I find it all so painful. I had this experience..the same experience...same hospital, same clinic.. same results that thank God..were wrong... and I have my healthy baby girl. This happened a few months after this ladies experience. I just wanted to say that I walked around with my bump and I wouldn't speak about being pregnant to anybody... because I was terrified that at any moment, it would be the moment I felt my baby move for the last time. I couldn't talk about being excited about the future...because I couldn't see past the birth.. going grocery shopping was my nightmare..bumping into someone who didn't know you were pregnant and their happy faces staring at you...I would just burst out crying. I have my beautiful baby beside me and despite that..I have PTSD from my pregnancy. If any woman was faced with that and told that termination was a possibility... I would never in my life judge them. The pain those parents must be facing I cant even fathom.


  • Options
    #118
    crossman47
    Registered Users Posts: 1,524 ✭✭✭crossman47


    lazygal wrote: »
    Most women have no regret after an abortion and suffer no long term negative effects whatsoever.

    A highly contentious point. I certainly find it almost impossible to believe. Women would have to be totally uncaring not to have some regret.


  • Options
    #119
    Flinty997
    Registered Users Posts: 12,262 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997


    crossman47 wrote: »
    A highly contentious point. I certainly find it almost impossible to believe. Women would have to be totally uncaring not to have some regret.

    They said most not all.

    I think uncaring is the wrong word and the wrong mindset. In life you often have to make hard decisions. You have to live with them afterwards. So you can't dwell on negativity, especially on past decisions. You also can't judge everything in hindsight. Equally having kids isn't always the right choice for everyone. You can't assume that. So not having them isn't automatically a negative as uncaring implies. It might be a positive for some people. .


  • Options
    #120
    lazygal
    Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    crossman47 wrote: »
    A highly contentious point. I certainly find it almost impossible to believe. Women would have to be totally uncaring not to have some regret.

    The stats are clear.
    https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/01/416421/five-years-after-abortion-nearly-all-women-say-it-was-right-decision-study


  • Advertisement
Advertisement