Advertisement
We've partnered up with Nixers.com to offer a space where you can talk directly to Peter from Nixers.com and get an exclusive Boards.ie discount code for a free job listing. If you are recruiting or know anyone else who is please check out the forum here.
If you have a new account but can't post, please email Niamh on [email protected] for help to verify your email address. Thanks :)

Liability conceded in foetal-abnormality mistaken-diagnosis case.

  • 22-06-2021 9:22pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,497 ✭✭✭ political analyst


    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/high-court-to-assess-compensation-for-couple-over-wrongful-termination-of-healthy-pregnancy-40568505.html
    The High Court is to assess compensation in the case over the alleged wrongful termination of a healthy pregnancy as a result of the parents being wrongly advised of a fatal foetal abnormality.

    <snip>

    The fact that mistaken diagnosis led to the termination of this pregnancy makes it even worse than the deaths of babies at Portlaoise hospital.

    Were the unborn child's parents informed of the possibility of the test for fatal foetal abnormality being wrong before the termination took place?

    I believe that this tragedy would not have happened if it had not been for the repeal of the 8th Amendment.


«134

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 111 ✭✭ Jaysci20


    The key point for me in this case is that the abnormality was reported as a fatal abnormality. They didn't abort a baby who was going to be just disabled, they aborted a baby who they were told had no chance of survival.

    Most babies with trisomy 18 die before they are born. The majority of those who make it to term die within five to 15 days, usually due to severe heart and lung defects.

    The case should be a wake up call to medics advising termination. They should present the facts, clearly explain that there is always a possibility of misdiagnosis and let the parents decide.

    Repeal the 8th wasn't as obvious a referendum as some liberals made it out to be - in this case a perfectly healthy baby boy has been killed.
    Does anyone remember Kate O'Connell's outburst in the Dail -

    "We won. We’ll get our way . . . Ye can talk for as long as ye like. . . Ye lost. It must be hurting". Is she hurting now about what has happened in this case?


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,727 ✭✭✭✭ astrofool


    Well, this is not true in the slightest, the couple could still have decided to travel to the UK for a termination so the 8th being repealed did nothing here and they would not have had any further tests in the UK that would have changed the result.
    I believe that this tragedy would not have happened if it had not been for the repeal of the 8th Amendment.

    What would have avoided the tragedy is if the doctors were up front about the testing procedure and the error levels involved in the initial test, allowing the couple to wait for the further test results to become available.

    I don't believe there is any space to argue any differently, but it will be interesting to see how some people try and do this.

    And the case itself is a tragedy.


  • Registered Users Posts: 111 ✭✭ Jaysci20


    astrofool wrote: »

    What would have avoided the tragedy is if the doctors were up front about the testing procedure and the error levels involved in the initial test, allowing the couple to wait for the further test results to become available.

    I don't believe there is any space to argue any differently, but it will be interesting to see how some people try and do this.

    And the case itself is a tragedy.

    As someone who voted in favour of repeal, what is clear to me is that prior to repeal the 8th, this baby would not have been killed legally in Ireland, and possibly not killed at all. It's why those who opposed repeal should not have been ridiculed. This type of case was always a possibility.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,383 ✭✭✭✭ Faugheen


    I can see this thread not being about this tragic case at all.

    This is malpractice. This couple wanted to have a baby. They only terminated based on malpractice and nothing based on some of the warped views of the no crowd.

    Those who say they have no sympathy (or that it's 'hard' to have any sympathy) should be ashamed of themselves.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,305 ✭✭✭✭ jimmycrackcorm


    It'll be interesting to see how the high court deals with the compensation question. It is completely legal to have an abortion and a mother choosing to do so for other reasons than a misinformed diagnosis, wouldn't be entitled to compensation.

    Logically, abortion is equivalent to removing an appendix. What's the compensation for an appendix being removed when it didn't need to be?

    But also, if the court awards compensation to both the father as well as the mother, doesn't that open a view for a father who disagrees with his partner having an abortion to claiming for wrongful termination?

    Of course, fathers have no actual rights before and minimal after birth anyway.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,462 ✭✭✭ SouthWesterly


    nullzero wrote: »
    Your sympathy is hardly relevant, this is a malpractice case end of story.

    I never said it wasn't malpractice but that absolves them. They made a decision, it was the wrong one. They've to live with it.
    The medical insurers will pay up and those who diagnosed and advised will move on.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,122 ✭✭✭✭ Donald Trump


    I never said it wasn't malpractice but that absolves them. They made a decision, it was the wrong one. They've to live with it.
    The medical insurers will pay up and those who diagnosed and advised will move on.


    Try to walk in their shoes before you judge them.



    And be happy that you will probably, and hopefully, never have to face the decisions they were faced with


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,187 ✭✭✭✭ Arghus


    I never said it wasn't malpractice but that absolves them. They made a decision, it was the wrong one. They've to live with it.
    The medical insurers will pay up and those who diagnosed and advised will move on.

    The Christian compassion is strong alright. Your comment is unbelievably crass.

    Like an above poster has already said this thread will only go one way and it won't really be about the specifics of the case, which is a truly tragic one.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,727 ✭✭✭✭ astrofool


    Jaysci20 wrote: »
    As someone who voted in favour of repeal, what is clear to me is that prior to repeal the 8th, this baby would not have been killed legally in Ireland, and possibly not killed at all. It's why those who opposed repeal should not have been ridiculed. This type of case was always a possibility.

    a) where the abortion happens does not affect the outcome
    b) it was highly likely that even if the 8th were retained that fatal fetal abnormality would have been legislated for independently thus having no impact on this case
    c) medical malpractice is always a possibility in any case


  • Registered Users Posts: 770 ✭✭✭ polydactyl


    Trisomy 18 is a horrific diagnosis for anyone to receive. Based on the Dads job he most likely had a clearer appreciation of the complexity of the diagnosis and the reality.

    I am confused by the separate legal cases as they seem to still be a couple.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,497 ✭✭✭ political analyst


    It'll be interesting to see how the high court deals with the compensation question. It is completely legal to have an abortion and a mother choosing to do so for other reasons than a misinformed diagnosis, wouldn't be entitled to compensation.

    Logically, abortion is equivalent to removing an appendix. What's the compensation for an appendix being removed when it didn't need to be?

    But also, if the court awards compensation to both the father as well as the mother, doesn't that open a view for a father who disagrees with his partner having an abortion to claiming for wrongful termination?

    Of course, fathers have no actual rights before and minimal after birth anyway.

    She had a termination that she would not have had if it hadn't been for an incorrect test result. Therefore, she must have been traumatised.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,305 ✭✭✭✭ jimmycrackcorm


    She had a termination that she would not have had if it hadn't been for an incorrect test result. Therefore, she must have been traumatised.

    Many women get terminations so it doesn't naturally follow that it is a traumatic event. Is getting your appendix accidentally removed a traumatic event?


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,447 ✭✭✭ Calhoun


    Very tragic case and i do really feel for both of them.

    To say it wouldn't happen if we hadn't appealed the 8th is incorrect, one of the main reasons the 8th resonated with so many was the undignified manner of parents having to go and terminate in Liverpool and how the remains came home.

    You also can imagine why they would do it, some very sober reading https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/edwards-syndrome/.

    It will be interesting to see the payout will be, unlike other medical malpractice related to children there wont be any life long care.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,497 ✭✭✭ political analyst


    Many women get terminations ...

    Not on the basis of a false diagnosis.
    Is getting your appendix accidentally removed a traumatic event?

    It's just not possible for that to happen!


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,497 ✭✭✭ political analyst


    Calhoun wrote: »
    Very tragic case and i do really feel for both of them.

    To say it wouldn't happen if we hadn't appealed the 8th is incorrect, one of the main reasons the 8th resonated with so many was the undignified manner of parents having to go and terminate in Liverpool and how the remains came home.

    You also can imagine why they would do it, some very sober reading https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/edwards-syndrome/.

    It will be interesting to see the payout will be, unlike other medical malpractice related to children there wont be any life long care.

    What could cause a pregnant woman to even consider having a test to determine whether the foetus has Edwards syndrome?

    I don't believe that Edwards syndrome is something that most pregnant women go around thinking about - except if a problem is detected during an ultrasound examination.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,447 ✭✭✭ Calhoun


    What could cause a pregnant woman to even consider having a test to determine whether the foetus has Edwards syndrome?

    I don't believe that Edwards syndrome is something that most pregnant women go around thinking about - except if a problem is detected during an ultrasound examination.

    I suppose it would depend on your knowledge and education. Most people have uneventful normal pregnancies, allot don't.

    "She claims she was advised a week later that a non-invasive prenatal test, known as a Harmony test, had been positive for Trisomy 18. "

    I would say in this case that as they more than likely were going through private consultancy it was offered.

    Why does it matter though?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,497 ✭✭✭ political analyst


    Calhoun wrote: »
    I suppose it would depend on your knowledge and education. Most people have uneventful normal pregnancies, allot don't.

    "She claims she was advised a week later that a non-invasive prenatal test, known as a Harmony test, had been positive for Trisomy 18. "

    I would say in this case that as they more than likely were going through private consultancy it was offered.

    Why does it matter though?

    I guess that this is an example of private healthcare being a double-edged sword because a working-class pregnant woman may be less likely to undergo a test for Trisomy 18 because she wouldn't be able to afford it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,447 ✭✭✭ Calhoun


    I guess that this is an example of private healthcare being a double-edged sword because a working-class pregnant woman may be less likely to undergo a test for Trisomy 18 because she wouldn't be able to afford it.

    I don't think that is an answer anyone in Ireland should be comfortable with, the only reason a public patient would not get it is because they are not treated at the same level.

    Understanding how healthy the baby is early on gives the parents a choice on how they can take it forward.


  • Registered Users Posts: 433 ✭✭ Housefree


    Shuh isn't it just a grouping of cells? Weren't we told to repeal the 8th? Why concern yourself over such trivial matters...


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,705 ✭✭✭✭ Mrs OBumble


    Calhoun wrote: »
    Understanding how healthy the baby is early on gives the parents a choice on how they can take it forward.

    What baby? I thought there wasn't an actual baby involved until birth.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,462 ✭✭✭ SouthWesterly


    Arghus wrote: »
    The Christian compassion is strong alright. Your comment is unbelievably crass.

    Like an above poster has already said this thread will only go one way and it won't really be about the specifics of the case, which is a truly tragic one.

    Im not the one who kept telling everyone for months before the referendum that it wasn't a baby, just a lump of cells (not saying you said it either for clarity)

    Why is everyone suddenly saying it's a baby when the narrative suits.


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,041 ✭✭✭✭ nullzero


    Im not the one who kept telling everyone for months before the referendum that it wasn't a baby, just a lump of cells (not saying you said it either for clarity)

    Why is everyone suddenly saying it's a baby when the narrative suits.

    I have to agree with you here, there's a clear double standard at play. Although it does track with how some of the Repeal people were bordering on zealotry at times, phrases were being regurgitated without thought being given to what they meant.

    Glazers Out!



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,482 ✭✭✭ Flinty997


    Many women get terminations so it doesn't naturally follow that it is a traumatic event. Is getting your appendix accidentally removed a traumatic event?

    Depending on the person yes it could be traumatic.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,107 ✭✭✭ cruizer101


    I haven't seen any mention in articles I've read of what are the chances of the third test showing up negative, when the first 2 have shown up positive as in this case, and to me that is fairly critical are we talking 1% or 0.0001%.
    The parents should have been informed of what the chances were anyway so they could make an informed decision.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,482 ✭✭✭ Flinty997


    Jaysci20 wrote: »
    As someone who voted in favour of repeal, what is clear to me is that prior to repeal the 8th, this baby would not have been killed legally in Ireland, and possibly not killed at all. It's why those who opposed repeal should not have been ridiculed. This type of case was always a possibility.

    It could still have happened just in a different location.

    So the question is why does the location matter to your argument.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,482 ✭✭✭ Flinty997


    cruizer101 wrote: »
    I haven't seen any mention in articles I've read of what are the chances of the third test showing up negative, when the first 2 have shown up positive as in this case, and to me that is fairly critical are we talking 1% or 0.0001%.
    The parents should have been informed of what the chances were anyway so they could make an informed decision.

    Were they not?


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,482 ✭✭✭ Flinty997


    What could cause a pregnant woman to even consider having a test to determine whether the foetus has Edwards syndrome?
    ....

    There are lots of reasons. Carrying a baby to term that won't survive is traumatic. Many would avoid that if they had the choice. The problem is having tests is are themselves not without some risk.

    Childbirth and pregnancy are not risk free. There are a lot of unsuccessful pregnancies. More than people realize.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,107 ✭✭✭ cruizer101


    Flinty997 wrote: »
    Were they not?

    I don't know, and it is not clearly mentioned in any article I've looked at, but I think is a fairly critical bit of information.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,499 ✭✭✭ Jequ0n


    Ffs, mistakes happen. They happened before the referendum, they will happen afterwards.
    No need to reheat the whole debate


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 389 ✭✭ Vaccinated30


    What could cause a pregnant woman to even consider having a test to determine whether the foetus has Edwards syndrome?

    I don't believe that Edwards syndrome is something that most pregnant women go around thinking about - except if a problem is detected during an ultrasound examination.

    When was the last time you gave birth? Because if it was anytime recent you would know that every outline patient in The Rotunda at least, is given leaflets about the Harmony test from the midwife at her 12 week scan. So when a midwife gives you a leaflet explaining g what this test is the yes you are now thinking this could be a possibility for your baby. And in that note, if someone plans and wants a baby then they do not see their baby as a clump of cells. If someone is pregnant unplanned and unwanted then they will not see it as a baby. Its not changing things to suit the narrative, it's literally completely different circumstances.


Advertisement