Liability conceded in foetal-abnormality mistaken-diagnosis case.

political analyst · 22-06-2021 10:22pm #1

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.

Jaysci20 · 22-06-2021 10:48pm

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?

astrofool · 22-06-2021 10:49pm

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not true in the slightest, the couple could still have decided to travel to the UK for a termination so the 8th being repealed did nothing here and they would not have had any further tests in the UK that would have changed the result.

political analyst wrote: »

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.

Jaysci20 · 22-06-2021 10:54pm

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.

Faugheen · 22-06-2021 10:58pm

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.

jimmycrackcorm · 22-06-2021 11:07pm

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.

SouthWesterly · 22-06-2021 11:19pm

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.

Donald Trump · 22-06-2021 11:22pm

SouthWesterly wrote: »

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

Arghus · 22-06-2021 11:26pm

SouthWesterly wrote: »

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.

astrofool · 22-06-2021 11:46pm

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

polydactyl · 22-06-2021 11:53pm

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.

political analyst · 23-06-2021 12:53am

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

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.

jimmycrackcorm · 23-06-2021 1:28am

political analyst wrote:

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?

Calhoun · 23-06-2021 1:30am

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.

political analyst · 23-06-2021 1:35am

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

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!

political analyst · 23-06-2021 1:38am

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.

Calhoun · 23-06-2021 1:42am

political analyst wrote: »

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?

political analyst · 23-06-2021 1:49am

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.

Calhoun · 23-06-2021 1:52am

political analyst wrote: »

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.

Housefree · 23-06-2021 2:00am

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

Mrs OBumble · 23-06-2021 2:26am

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.

SouthWesterly · 23-06-2021 7:31am

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.

nullzero · 23-06-2021 7:37am

SouthWesterly wrote: »

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.

Flinty997 · 23-06-2021 7:52am

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

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.

cruizer101 · 23-06-2021 7:55am

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.

Flinty997 · 23-06-2021 7:57am

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.

Flinty997 · 23-06-2021 7:58am

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?

Flinty997 · 23-06-2021 8:03am

political analyst wrote: »

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.

cruizer101 · 23-06-2021 8:12am

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.

Jequ0n · 23-06-2021 8:13am

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

Vaccinated30 · 23-06-2021 8:14am

political analyst wrote: »

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.

paw patrol · 23-06-2021 8:15am

SouthWesterly wrote: »

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.

Donald Trump wrote: »

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

you can both be correct and probably are.
Ultimately it was their decision based on the information given
My heart goes out to them as they felt it was the best decision based on the information provided.
They don't need points scoring but sympathy.

Leads to a wider point - that I feel many on boards should note that is very relevant around covid and the debates over what holds true and what does not.
expert opinion isn't infallible.

Smee_Again · 23-06-2021 8:16am

political analyst wrote: »

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.

We got one when we were pregnant, not specifically for Edwards syndrome but it would have been picked up in the test.

Our last pregnancy ended in a miscarriage and my fiancé was worried it would happen again and wanted the test to reassure herself.

paw patrol · 23-06-2021 8:18am

Vaccinated30 wrote: »

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.

a weird and untrue statement.
Many unplanned and unwanted pregnancies are seem as much more than a clump of cells. Anecdotally anybody with some life experience would know people who had a very much loved unplanned pregnancy.

lazygal · 23-06-2021 8:18am

political analyst wrote: »

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 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.

23-06-2021 8:23am

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

Is getting your appendix accidentally removed a traumatic event?

political analyst wrote: »

It's just not possible for that to happen!

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

As for your argument that this case wouldn't have happened if the 8th was not repealed you are also incorrect in saying so.

Vaccinated30 · 23-06-2021 8:58am

paw patrol wrote: »

a weird and untrue statement.
Many unplanned and unwanted pregnancies are seem as much more than a clump of cells. Anecdotally anybody with some life experience would know people who had a very much loved unplanned pregnancy.

Yes of course you are right, but unwanted and unplanned are two different things in my opinion. If someone really dosnt want to be pregnant then its dofferent than someone who finds out they are pregnant unplanned but chooses to keep the baby and of course has a very much wanted and loved child.

Flinty997 · 23-06-2021 9:08am

Vaccinated30 wrote: »

Yes of course you are right, but unwanted and unplanned are two different things in my opinion. If someone really dosnt want to be pregnant then its dofferent than someone who finds out they are pregnant unplanned but chooses to keep the baby and of course has a very much wanted and loved child.

Unwanted is irrelevant to this thread. It's an entirely different discussion. Tbh unplanned is also irrelevant to the thread.

Flinty997 · 23-06-2021 9:15am

cruizer101 wrote: »

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.

It's normal to be warned about risks in all medical treatments. When it comes to pregnancies even more so. It's highly unlikely (nothing is impossible of course) they weren't told about the risks. Especially with those tests. Which are all about risks and probabilities.

Medicine isn't perfect. It's a tragic case for all involved. Lessons will be learned and hopefully reduce the odds of it happening again.

keano_afc · 23-06-2021 9:20am

Just tell this couple that they haven't lost their baby. Kate O'Connell can deliver the news.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifNUlu1fWTQ

nozzferrahhtoo · 23-06-2021 9:24am

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.

Flinty997 · 23-06-2021 9:25am

keano_afc wrote: »

Just tell this couple that they haven't lost their baby. Kate O'Connell can deliver the news.

Your making this about the amendment when it's got nothing to do with it.

jrosen · 23-06-2021 9:28am

There is always a possibility of error where testing is concerned. If this couple were told and fully informed of the risks and possibilities around testing I fail to see how they have a case. If they were not fully informed thats a different matter.

Flinty997 · 23-06-2021 9:28am

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?
...

These tests and similar have been done long before the amendment. The repeal of the 8th made no difference to this.

nozzferrahhtoo · 23-06-2021 9:30am

Flinty997 wrote: »

These tests and similar have been done long before the amendment. The repeal of the 8th made no difference to this.

Exactly.

keano_afc wrote: »

Just tell this couple that they haven't lost their baby. Kate O'Connell can deliver the news.

Well that is a poor quality video with poor quality arguments that is just rehashing the arguments that were torpedoed during the referendum debates, and essentially lost the vote and lost it badly. I think if anyone in Irish Society wants to re-look at the abortion issue they are going to need to get new material. Rather than hijack one couples unfortunate pain to attempt (and fail) to score political points.

Especially as one of the dictionary definitions (of the word pregnant) pasted onto the video here actually torpedoes their own argument. Arguing semantics, which is all that video was doing, won the "no" side few votes I suspect.

I suspect when you suggest telling the couple they did not lose a baby... you are doing so with disdain. However you should not be. Because in fact that is precisely one of the valid approaches sometimes taken when treating the emotional well being of women who have lost a pregnancy. I wrote about this fact quite extensively in the past too, with links to sources on the subject.

Focusing on the narrative distinction between loss of a baby, and loss of a pregnancy is in fact one approach validly used to support women through the loss of a pregnancy.

KaneToad · 23-06-2021 9:32am

This is why this is an endless debate.

Some see baby and some see clump of cells. If you're on the "clump of cells" end of things then it makes perfect sense to agree with abortion. If you're on the "baby" end of the spectrum then being against abortion is a totally rational position to take.

Where it gets clouded is the portrayal of those against abortion as being Catholic zealots and those in favour as being ultra feminist liberals who want to use abortion as a form of contraception.

I remember when it was alleged that the X case was fake, it was hypothesised that it was that perfect case to challenge the abortion laws in Ireland - so 'perfect' that it was a creation of fiction. (This wasn't the case).

This current situation in the courts is similar. It is the perfect example of the intricate nuances that are involved. The debate will roll on...

Flinty997 · 23-06-2021 9:34am

You'd only associate this tragedy with repeal of the 8th if you either don't know much about pregnancies, or you do and want to deliberately create misinformation on a tragedy to build a soap box on.

nozzferrahhtoo · 23-06-2021 9:37am

^ Again: Exactly.

This has nothing to do with abortion or repeal. This is a case where an error in a test led a patient to make the "wrong" decision. Simple as that.

The only point of interest here really therefore is whether the couple in question were correctly informed about testing risks at all stages of the process.

If yes: Then this is a non story.

If no: Then that is awful and needs to be rectified and compensated for.

Jeremy Sproket · 23-06-2021 9:37am

Jaysci20 wrote: »

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?

I never understood this pro-abort logic.

Didn't the pro-aborts "lose" in several previous referendums in the 80's and 90's?

By their logic they should have piped down and accepted democracy.

I wonder if there was another referendum to reinstate the 8th would they accept democracy if they majority wanted it reinstated?

Flinty997 · 23-06-2021 9:38am

KaneToad wrote: »

This is why this is an endless debate. ...

This story isn't an endless debate. The repeal of the 8th might be, because that's subjective. But this case isn't anything to do with that.

eviltwin · 23-06-2021 9:39am

Sadly the only reason this has gained traction is because some people want to use it to push their agenda. Its a shame it comes down to that but not surprising. Empathy goes out the window when there is a point to be scored.

Liability conceded in foetal-abnormality mistaken-diagnosis case.

Comments