A wrongful life claim is a specific type of lawsuit brought by a child (through their parents) who claims to have been better off not being born.
These lawsuits typically arise in situations where a child is born with serious health issues, and the parents allege that a doctor’s negligence in prenatal testing, genetic prognosticating, or failure to inform of the risk of such issues led to a birth that should have been prevented.
A wrongful life lawsuit usually arises when a health care provider fails in their duty of care to detect or inform the parents about serious abnormalities or potential congenital disabilities in an unborn child.
If the parents had known about these conditions, they might have chosen to terminate the pregnancy. If the child is born with severe disabilities, a medical malpractice claim may be brought alleging that the medical professional’s negligence led to the “wrongful life.”
In the context of a wrongful life lawsuit, the duty of care is the obligation of the healthcare provider to provide appropriate prenatal testing, to accurately interpret these tests, and to inform the parents of any serious abnormalities or potential congenital disabilities in the unborn child. Failure to fulfill this duty may result in a wrongful life claim if the child is born with severe disabilities.
Let’s look at this in more detail.
The duty of care begins with conducting the appropriate prenatal tests. These could include routine tests such as blood tests, ultrasounds, and potentially more specific genetic testing if there’s a known risk of genetic disorders.
Met Duty: Suppose a healthcare provider conducts all the recommended routine tests and offers additional testing due to a family history of genetic disorders. All tests are performed accurately, and the results are communicated clearly to the parents. This would be a scenario where the duty of care is met.
Not Met: Suppose a healthcare provider fails to perform recommended tests for a pregnant woman over the age of 35 who has an increased risk of certain chromosomal abnormalities like Down syndrome. The child is born with Down syndrome, and the parents claim they would have chosen to terminate the pregnancy if they’d known. This could be an instance where the duty of care was not met.
Once the tests are done, it’s the responsibility of the healthcare provider to correctly interpret the results.
Met Duty: A healthcare provider accurately reads an ultrasound showing a serious congenital heart defect, informs the parents of the finding, and discusses potential outcomes, allowing the parents to make an informed decision. In this case, the duty of care is fulfilled.
Not Met: The healthcare provider misreads an ultrasound that shows a serious congenital heart defect, tells the parents that the fetus is healthy, and the child is born with the defect. This could be considered a breach of the duty of care.
The healthcare provider is also required to inform the parents about any detected abnormalities and the potential consequences of these abnormalities.
Met Duty: A blood test reveals a high risk of Down syndrome. The healthcare provider discusses these findings in detail with the parents, explaining what Down syndrome is, the potential challenges, and the options available to the parents. This would be a fulfillment of the duty of care.
Not Met: A blood test reveals a high risk of Down syndrome. Still, the healthcare provider only tells the parents that there’s a small risk of “some complications” without explaining what Down syndrome is or the full implications of the diagnosis. If the child is born with Down syndrome, the parents could argue that the healthcare provider breached their duty of care by not fully informing them of the risks.
Not every state allows for wrongful life lawsuits. These claims are controversial and are recognized only in a limited number of jurisdictions. In some states, the courts have decided that it is impossible to compare the value of an impaired life with non-existence, and therefore these claims cannot be adjudicated.
Only four U.S. states —California, Maine, New Jersey, and Washington—allow the child to bring a wrongful life cause of action for such damages. In other states, such lawsuits are either prohibited by statute or rejected by courts as contrary to public policy.
No, a wrongful birth claim is not the same as a wrongful life claim. While both types of claims involve a failure of the healthcare provider to inform parents about potential birth defects that would have led to a decision to terminate the pregnancy, the main difference lies in who the plaintiff is.
In a wrongful birth lawsuit, the plaintiffs are the parents of the disabled child. In a wrongful life claim, the plaintiff is the disabled child themselves, usually through their parents or guardians.
In a wrongful life lawsuit, the defendant is typically a healthcare provider, such as a doctor or hospital. The claim is that the healthcare provider was negligent in their duty to detect and inform the parents about the risk of a serious congenital disability in the child, resulting in pain and suffering.
Defenses in a wrongful life case may include arguments that the healthcare provider met the standard of care, did not cause the child’s disability, or that the parents would have proceeded with the pregnancy even if they had known about the potential disability.
Additionally, the defense may argue the philosophical and moral complications involved in comparing an impaired life with non-existence.
Let’s look at some hypothetical scenarios for each defense.
In this defense, the healthcare provider argues they met the accepted standard of care. For instance, let’s say a pregnant woman undergoes all the recommended screenings and tests, and none indicate any abnormalities or risk of severe disability in the unborn child. The child is born with a disability not detectable by the tests performed.
In this scenario, the healthcare provider could defend against a wrongful life claim by showing they followed all appropriate protocols and medical standards and the disability was simply not detectable at the time of testing.
This defense argues the healthcare provider’s actions or omissions did not cause the child’s disability. Suppose a child is born with a genetic disorder that was not identified during pregnancy. The healthcare provider could argue that the disorder is genetic, and therefore they did not cause it, as it was determined by the child’s genetics at conception.
In this defense, the healthcare provider or defense attorney would argue that even if the parents had been fully informed about potential disabilities, they would have chosen to proceed with the pregnancy. For instance, if the parents have strong religious or moral beliefs against abortion, the defense might argue that they would have continued with the pregnancy regardless of the potential for disability.
This defense argues the immeasurable nature of life itself. Suppose the healthcare provider argues that despite the child’s impairments, their life still holds value and that comparing the value of an impaired life with non-existence is impossible and potentially unethical.
When these defenses apply will largely depend on the specifics of the case. For example, if the healthcare provider can show they met the standard of care and that the disability could not have been detected, then the first defense would be applicable. The second defense would apply if the disability is clearly genetic and not due to any action or omission by the healthcare provider.
The third defense would apply if the parents have a clear and documented history of beliefs that would indicate they would continue the pregnancy. The fourth is more of a philosophical argument and might be employed alongside other defenses.
If you believe you have a wrongful life lawsuit, it’s essential to consult with a lawyer experienced in medical malpractice claims. These are complex cases that require a thorough understanding of both medical and legal issues.
If you need assistance with your wrongful life or wrongful birth lawsuit, LegalMatch can help. Connect with an experienced personal injury attorney in your area today through LegalMatch.
16 people have successfully posted their cases
