Jury Gives Parents $4.5 Million Because They Missed Chance to Abort Disabled Son
Parents hug and congratulate their lawyers for getting them millions for their child they wished they aborted.
Here’s a question for you parents. How much money is your child worth? What is the price tag you would print out and paste on their forehead before putting them on the shelf at Wal-Mart? I’m sure you would say priceless. But how much is a missed opportunity to abort your disabled child worth to you? One Florida couple said $9 million. The jury agreed but only gave them half.
On September 9, a West Palm Beach jury awarded parents Rodolfo Santana and Ana Mejia $4.5 million because they did not get accurate information from Dr. Marie Morel and OB/GYN Specialists of the Palm Beaches. Their son Bryan Santana, now age 3, was born disabled. He has no arms and only one leg. The argument made by his parents was that if the clinic had told them their son was so disabled, they would have aborted him. And since they didn’t get a chance to terminate Bryan in the womb, and obviously they can’t legally do it now, they wanted millions of dollars.
The woman, who certainly will not win any mother-of-the year awards, told the jury during the two-week trial:
Definitely, I would have had an abortion.
I hope when little Bryan grows up he never Googles himself or his parents. I can’t imagine the horror when he reads that his parents wish they would have killed him. I wonder how quickly he will grasp that his parents think his life, since he has disabilities, isn’t worth living. I wonder if that jury considered how the disabled community would feel if they knew that a jury awarded these parents millions because they missed the opportunity to abort their disabled son.
Shortly after the jury made its decision I contacted Marc Sherman, Program Director for AccessABILITY Center for Independent Living, Inc. Sherman, who has been diagnosed with C5/C6 quadriplegia himself, had a strong reaction:
A disability is just a natural part of life. A person with a disability has just as much worth and just as much as importance as anybody else. It doesn’t matter what kind of disability, they have just as much worth and importance. They should get to choose how they want to live.
Sherman went on to explain that people with disabilities are guaranteed the same rights as anyone else, and that this case says a lot about how our culture still sees the disabled as less than equal:
The disabled have rights just like women or minorities. This case would be the same as if these parents wanted to abort a child because of gender or race. It’s the same thing as in China where you have women aborting children because they are females and not males.
It’s a valid argument. What would that jury have done if the parents complained that the clinic told them they were having a male but they had a female? What would the reaction be to a parent openly saying that they deserve millions because they would have aborted their girl if they knew she was going to be a girl? Any ultrasound nurse will tell you that every once in a while they get the gender wrong. Does this give precedence for future lawsuits?
Few people realize how much sentiment exists out there that the disabled are less than human. If you want proof one only has too look at abortion. In the UK, for example, there are limits on when you can abort a baby unless that baby has severe disabilities. The UK law does not define those disabilities but allows abortion up until the moment of birth if the child is disabled. Why? Obviously the message is that a child with disabilities has less value or reason to live. The West Palm Beach jury would agree with that atrocious idea.
The numbers should shock you. In America, 90% of non-life threatening disabled babies are aborted. If you have a disability in the womb, you have a 1 in 10 chance of being born. You have a 9 in 10 chance of your parents deciding your life isn’t worth living. In 2003, a Gallup poll revealed that almost 6 in 10 Americans think it is okay to abort if a child has a mental or physical disability. Imagine if instead of a disability, 6 in 10 said it was okay to abort because a child is black or female.
Thankfully, these numbers are so shocking that even some on the pro-choice Left see this as a problem. The Left is conflicted in being pro-rights for all types of minorities, but being pro-choice on abortion. As one pro-choice writer put it:
There is clearly a double standard here. It seems that a large number of people are pro-life only for babies who are thought to be “perfect.” Polling indicates that people not faced with this decision personally would still be more likely to support an abortion in this situation. Reality indicates that people actually faced with this decision almost universally choose abortion.
We need more on the Left to realize their own double standard. Ted Kennedy, who was a huge pro-choice advocate, understood the poor treatment of the disabled. In 2005, Kennedy co-sponsored the Prenatally and Postnatally Diagnosed Conditions Awareness Act. That bill expanded federal financing to teach parents of children with Down Syndrome how to help raise them. Kennedy understood that parents needed to learn that disabled children had equal value, and if parents learned those skills, then they wouldn’t feel the need to abort. The goal of the bill was to stop the atrocious rate of abortions based on a child being diagnosed with Down Syndrome. That bill was co-sponsored by big pro-lifer Sam Brownback, it was signed into law by President Bush, and it was actually backed by the pro-abortion NARAL.
We can dream that someday Americans will again see the value in the lives of the disabled and turn the 90% abortion rate around. But for now, a jury in Florida all made it clear that they believe the disabled are not worthy of life. And missing out on the chance to kill the disabled when still in the womb is now worth millions.
As an experienced(20 years practice)pediatric anesthesiologist I have developed a deep cynicism re delivery of medical care for complicated pregnancy and sick baby cases. Hysteria defines the response(medico-legally)to adverse outcomes in these patients. I have abandoned(professionally)the care of these types of patients, I am not unique among experienced providers, we’ll leave this to our “younger and dumber” colleagues.
Yes. Once they get sued for a random act of nature, it’ll beat those nobler instincts right out of them. And it’s only a matter of time.
Rob. those parents? the jury their lawyer(ambulance chaser)and the judge” who allowed this travesty of judgement should be taken out once a week in the public and horse whipped. and I DO MEAN HORSE WHIPPED till they are unable to sit,
This family should have that child taken away and put up for adoption without their consent. If they didn’t want him and felt so strongly about it that they would go to court because they were deprived of the right to legally murder him then they are not fit to care for him and should not be able to touch one dollar of his money. Then the child’s name should be changed. There is no right to information so that one can murder a child, or any other person. That money that was unreasonably extorted from the physician should be divided up into 30-40 pieces and go for this child’s care and happiness. Every dollar’s use until the child is 18 should be be monitored carefully by an independent person or group.
“This family should have that child taken away and put up for adoption without their consent.”
By whom? Big Government? How very liberal of you!
Well… liberals do know what’s best for everybody. And we could use another government agency, such as “The Department of Taking Children Away and Changing Their Names.”
Why did the parents simply “sell” the child, once they saw how undeserving of their love he would be? The family, the lawyers, the courts, and the judge are beyond disdain!!!
This is a terribly unfair and one-sided analysis of an extremely complicated issue. Even the by-line is misleading.
How can someone who joined the media in jumping all over what should have been left as a private family matter (just to further their own political statements) lament what will happen if the child ever “googles himself”??
This isn’t a black-and-white issue. Of course the disabled are equal people and deserve to be treated as such. But you cannot callously ignore the fact that there are parents out their who are not emotionally or financially equipped to raise a severely disabled child! Why don’t you report the stats about how many parents of the severely disabled get dumped by their insurance companies and are left in the impossible dilemma of not being able to afford adequate care? Is it moral to bring a child into the world knowing you can’t even supply it with the basic care it needs to live a somewhat normal life?
The child of course does not have a price tag, but you can bet that the special care he needs and will need his whole life does – and while you are assuming that these parents are just monsters, I bet if you were faced with hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of care for your child that you knew you couldn’t afford, you’d say whatever you had to say to get you kid that care!! I know I would.
As the system stands, it is incumbent upon the plaintiff(patient) to recover damages from the defendent(physician/deep pocket) to pay for all medical expenses, current and future. In many instances, this blames/holds liable the physician for real problems that did NOT arise from actual negligence, ie it’s the doc’s fault my baby is disabled, sick, brain injured, pre-term etc. Everyone agrees that medical expenses need covered, it’s the mechanism(tort law)through which these resourses awarded that is dysfunctional. It FORCES good physicians to shun problematic cases, leaving the “worst” cases to the least experienced providers. Judging whether an expectant mom should or should not abort is an issue there will NEVER be consensus on, and is really a side issue.
Lauren, You are a very sick, cold hearted individual. I hope you are not a healthcare professional.
I suspect Lauren is indeed NOT “sick” or “cold hearted”. She is likely a compassionate woman(human) who is acutely aware of the cold realities of life in the material realm. Not to dicount our spiritual/metphysical nature, to suggest that a person who questions the wisdom of bringing hoelessly disabled, physically and mentally impaired persons into our limited(physically)world, is somehow heartless and cruel, is not realistic or fair. Bodies live on earth.
Rob, You are obviously a cold hearted individual yourself. You and Lauren demonstrate the lack of compassion that has overcome our society and you and your kind are turning mankind into a soulless society. You can justify your “compassion” in your mind, but anyone with a heart and soul would see you as an immoral person. Forgive me for judging you, but I am sick and tired of seeing individuals gather and justify murdering people for “logical” reasons. In a civilized society, this is unacceptable. No matter what!
As an anesthesiologist/critical care physician I encounter daily, situations that force patients, families, physicians and our culture(including danola) to consider the practical and realistic side of life and death issues. All resourses(including medical)are limited. I would never presume to know/judge another’s heart in these matters. I refer to matters of pragmatism. Whether you and I individually support, abortion, discontinuation of life support in medically hopeless cases, denial of advanced care for the terminally ill, etc., is NOT what I’m addressing. Finite, public funding of medical and social services demand that rational decisions be made, cold or warm hearted. Even in a “civilized society”, we are bound by God’s natural laws!
Danola – I do not forgive you for judging me. And you would do yourself a world of good to start reserving judgement a bit. That is exactly why I posted the comment I did. People are so quick to judge parents when you have NO IDEA what it’s like to spend even 5 minutes in their shoes. Have you ever had to face the situation of being told you were carrying a severely disabled child who may not even survive? Have you ever had to care for (and finance caring for) a severely disabled child? What about genetic conditions that would mean a life of constant physical pain? It would be wonderful if the world was as simple as no abortion = I’m a compassionate person, but it is not. I’m not an advocate of aborting disabled children at all, but I do appreciate the terrible, heart-breaking, agony that some parents must experience because their children are born with these severe problems.
AND if you would have actually read my comment to the end, you would see that it is entirely possible that claiming they would have aborted would have been their only legal way of recovering sufficient damages to guarantee their ability to care for their son!!! That’s not exactly a nice thing to do, but most parents in their shoes would do whatever they had to to be able to fund their disabled child’s care…. did anyone think of that?
What you are arguing is age old. It is called eugenics and it is evil.
It’s always candy coated in sweet, fluffy sounding rhetoric.
The Nazis used to refer to the disabled as “life not worthy of life.”
You have stated an accurate assessment of lauren. Her statement that she does not forgive you is irrelevant. What need is there of forgiveness from an evil being?
As for the so-called anesthetist, he would probably be in a better position as an executioner.
This is a terribly unfair and one-sided analysis of an extremely complicated issue. Even the by-line is misleading.
I will grant you that life will not be easy for the parents or the child if that is what you mean by “extremely complicated issue”, but I think that is the problem. If our lives will be terribly complicated or hard, because we have to sacrifice so much for our own children we have decided it is best to kill them or if they are never born. What a self-centered society we have become with all our pretensions about loving others.
How can someone who joined the media in jumping all over what should have been left as a private family matter (just to further their own political statements) lament what will happen if the child ever “googles himself”?
I really tire of this “private family matter” thing. Murder, abuse, and the taking of millions of dollars that we will all have to pay are not “private family matters”, but involve society at large.
We need to get past the idea that putting an infant up for adoption is not an option. It is always an option, even if the birth parents are married, employed, and not poor. There are many childless couples who would have adopted this child. Instead, the parents kept him, while bringing a lawsuit claiming that they didn’t really want him.
And, while many babies are born “normal”, or “perfect”, they don’t always stay that way. Accidents and disease are always a fact of life – if a six-year-old child loses a limb in an accident, do the parents have the right to suffocate him because they don’t want the financial or emotional burden? Do only the normal and perfect have the right to live? If so, then God help us all.
Well God used to “help us all” with situations like this. They were called late-term miscarriages (i.e., God’s/nature’s way of avoiding unnecessary suffering and ensuring survival of the fittest). But with modern medicine, it’s a total mess. Late-term miscarriages are now called “early labor”, and the child is delivered and saved (against God’s will). If the doctor didn’t do that and, instead, left it in the hands of God and the baby died, the doctor would be sued. And apparently, as the case above does illustrate, even if the doctor does do that, he still gets sued!
So all of you people on here calling names and claiming that Rob and Lauren are cold-hearted and etc., give them a break. Especially Rob. He is in the profession himself, so he sees on a day-by-day, hour-by-hour basis all the various sides of such an issue. And he is certainly right when he says it is an extremely complicated issue.
And thank goodness for modern medicine! My own son was born 2 months early and grew up to be a very healthy 6 foot 5 athletic software engineer with strong artistic talents as well. Other than minor allergies – never a sick day in his life. You never know.
and it is a stretch to say saving the sick is against God’s will… it is actually a bit of a logical fallacy.
Is it “Gods Will” that you die of an infection? Apparently so. If taking advantage of modern medicine is wrong for preemies, it ought to be wrong for you too, so no more penicillen or statins or surgery for you! Oh, what, it’s only when OTHER people die preventably that it’s God’s will? Hmmmm….
Well, the same medical community that invented all of the medical services you name also invented abortion. So I suppose that you want to pick and choose which medical procedures are “God’s will” and which are not.
Let me guess . . . every procedure you agree with is “God’s will.” Everything you disagree with is “against God’s will.” Right?
Healing the sick is a corporal work of mercy. It is God’s will that we try to heal the sick (sick here including the injured and the weak). Also, Proverbs says, “Rescue those unjustly condemned to death; hold back those stumbling toward the slaughter.” Saving an innocent life is ALWAYS noble, though scarcity limits the resources that are available to be committed to saving any one life.
Who’s to say that one or both of the parents were guilty of some previous selfish act leading to such fetal deformity. Death occurs from “correct” prescription at the rate exceeding 100,000 annually to patients in hospital care and that’s just counting reported cases.
TV is loaded with lawyers ads asking for victims of FDA approved pharmaceuticals. One more fat lawyer is really just what health care needs.
Honor has completely disappeared from more than one profession since dueling went out of style. Consumers now pay for both private health insurance and the doctors’ malpractice premiums and whatever insurance executives abscond with.
if a person can’t afford a child & what life may bring with it (as Anna said – a perfectly healthy child can become ill later…) DON’T GET PREGNANT! & the media did not make this public – the stupid parents did. When you bring such a case to court & jury you have exposed it to the public. Everyone knows that a secret is between 2 people. Once a third is invited in it is no longer a secret! Shame on the Jury – it shows that not only do we have some sour apples but 12 Jury members?!?!?!?! WOW!!! How sad!
“if a person can’t afford a child & what life may bring with it (as Anna said – a perfectly healthy child can become ill later…) DON’T GET PREGNANT!”
So I expect you will rush down to your local Planned Parenthood to start promoting and handing out free contraceptives, right? How very liberal of you.
“in jumping all over what should have been left as a private family matter”
It stopped being a private family matter when the family asked the government and a jury of their peers to punish their doctors.
Well?? Are they people or are they not?
If they are, then nobody has a right to KILL them simply because their existence is inconvenient or expensive.
What has that got to do with murdering a child? How can you callously just murder a child because he’s too expensive?
Come to think of it, I guess that’s the only way you CAN.
You’ve just said that he does. If he’s too expensive, then it’s okay to kill him. That’s YOUR standard.
This is what’s known as, “projection”. Since you have no moral standards yourself, you assume that no-one else can, either.
This child will be covered by Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security Disability for the rest of his life. The financial issues here are pretty small. This case is about getting the really big money, and this mom has won the lottery.
Dana she has proven to the world she is not a mom. simply because she has the ability to give birth does not make her a mom. incidently I can’t help but wonder just what kind of drugs she and her husband aere on during the time she became pregnant???
What you’ve just seemingly obliviously postulated…the “all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others” justification.
My heart goes out to the boy for the challenges he’ll deal with,but my heart aches more so for him because of his parents’ callousness. Does anyone really think that the blatant parental resentment for this child’s condition is not going to affect this boy, even before the eventual revelation that his own parents would have aborted him, given the opportunity? If there was any justice, that dear child would be better placed with a family that is capable of selfless love.
Murder should never be a private family matter.
Are you seriously suggesting that all of us with kids with disabilities should sue an individual for our kid’s care?
I’m a tax-&-spend, lefty, pinko, liberal, commie-wannabe, litigious Democrat, and even I don’t believe that.
It is a specious argument to say that you have to be financially able to raise a disabled child. My daughter has Down syndrome, and my insurance, the county, the school district provide for all her needs. When I needed a fence to secure her at home from running away, the Dept Developmental Services gave me a grant.
I work with poor immigrants who have disabled children, and their kids are more than cared for with all these programs, regardless of their immigration status.
These parents are opportunists, that 9 million dollars they requested was for their “pain and suffering”. Yet they wanted to kill their son, not caring if this could cause him pain and suffering. They should be forced to give him, and the money up.
They need to learn about Tony Melendez, a Thalidimide baby with no arms from Nicaragua, his father brought the family to the USA for the opportunities here. Tony plays the guitar with his feet, and played for Pope John Paul. We met him he is so delightfully joyful, because his parents loved him. See his website here. http://www.tonymelendez.com/Main/Language.html
The parents could have given the child over to the state if they could not take care of him. The doctor did not cause the birth defect.
There was no reason for this lawsuit and the judge should have dismissed it.
Lauren – I am blessed to be in a family with multiple people with disabilities. I have a brother with one arm, a sister-in-law with paralyzed legs, and a quadriplegic brother-in-law. So maybe I have somewhat more of a grasp then you expect. My brother-in-law is disgusted by this court case and its implications. I would love for any parents of disabled children to have all the financial help they can find. Lying in court about having abortion is not the answer (and is a crime) – as you have said they might have been doing. And getting the medical clinic that did the ultrasound to pay for the care is certainly not the answer. And the implications of their case is that the disabled are of less value. And that should break all our hearts.
Lauren, The pro-life arguement is totally disgusted with this situation here because basically the parents could look into their child’s eyes and say they would have killed it.
No, Lauren the issue is NOT complicated. It is simple. And it IS black and white. “You shall love your neighbor as yourself”.
It is murder to abort a baby. Got it? It is a sin which results in eternal damnation, whether you believe the scripture which says so or not. IJn.3.15.”No murderer has eternal life”.
Your babble is illogical, hysterical and wrong.
I find the “someone ought to pay” syndrome being deemed correct both disturbing and disgusting. Life will be much harder for the parents because of the child’s disabilities. Seems that the jury and others believe life comes with an “always fair and easy” guarantee. I’m sure that they can receive assistance from many sources.
When will post-partum abortions be considered acceptible?
Bob, it may be sooner than you think that post-partum abortions will be acceptable. After all, Margaret Sanger is a darling of the leftists.
They already are in some countries. The Netherlands comes to mind.
Absolutely. The Groningen Protocol. There’s even been a proposal to expand it to older children and adults who are unable to consent for themselves. Because, you know, any reasonable person would want to off themselves in certain dire situations, so what’s the harm in making that decision for them?
Welcome to our Brave New World: Fourth-Trimester Abortion
Of course, it’s only what the Death Cultists have had in mind all along. But I’m sure you already knew that.
It already is in Canada so I’m sure it will be here soon. Sorry, can’t get the link, but it’s on http://www.theblaze.com. A Canadian mother strangled her newborn and they compared it to abortion.
If 90 percent of potential parents abort when the fetus has a disability, that means that, no matter what the polls say, when push comes to shove, 90 percent actually favor abortion. And that means the pro-life side hasn’t a prayer of ever getting it outlawed.
I’m sorry, but your math here is way off. You’re looking at 90% of disabled babies being aborted. The average of non-aborted babies with Down’s Syndrome, for example, is 1 out of 800-1000 live births. That’s no where near 90% of all potential parents being in favor of abortion….
Jeff wrote: “If 90 percent of potential parents abort when the fetus has a disability, that means that, no matter what the polls say, when push comes to shove, 90 percent actually favor abortion.”
Mommycon responsed: “I’m sorry, but your math here is way off. You’re looking at 90% of disabled babies being aborted. The average of non-aborted babies with Down’s Syndrome, for example, is 1 out of 800-1000 live births. That’s no where near 90% of all potential parents being in favor of abortion….”
Sorry, Mommycon, but the above exchange shows you are the one who’s math is off. Re-read Jeff’s post. Jeff is claiming that 90% of “potential parents” (that means every person who is pregnant, normal pregnancy or not) would choose abortion if the fetus were disabled. And you are citing statistics regarding the percentage of Downs Syndrome babies born vs non-afflicted births.
You are comparing apples to oranges. No, more like cherries to watermelons.
No, it means that 90% of couples WHO ACTUALLY CONCEIVE A DISABLED CHILD are pro-abortion. There is an age bias in this sample (older women are more likely to have children with birth defects than younger women), as well as a selection bias (the tests are invasive, so pro-life parents are less likely to request them, since they wouldn’t abort anyway).
No doubt there is an age bias, but without some good reason to believe that people younger (or older) than the aborting couples are very different, I don’t see why the age bias would cut one way or the other.
Your point that pro-life parents would not do the testing to determine if the baby is normal is well-taken. But I wonder how large this effect really is. It may be that only 80 percent, rather than 90 percent, favor aborting disabled babies. I doubt that the number is much less than that.
Outside of highly politicized groups on the left and the right, most people don’t spend much time discussing abortion or even thinking about it. Sure, you’ll get visceral horror at the idea of aborting daughters in hopes of getting sons from subsequent pregnancies. But that only means that people don’t think that’s a good reason to have an abortion. As evidenced by the 90 percent figure quoted in the original post, the vast majority thinks that a fetus with major disabilities is a good enough reason to abort.
Well well, at least the non-aborted son might not think this is so bad. Money, isn’t everything, but it’s worth the mere inconvenience of allowing an innocent helpess human to live?
I can’t wait to see the lives saved from now on, over the real important thing -money.
Hmmm. Let’s see. I had a daughter who, although physically normal, later turned to a life of crime and drug abuse. If I had known that, I would have aborted her. Isn’t that the compassionate thing to do to spare her such a life of misery?
i think social services need to look into the mental abuse of this child and he should be taken away from these “parents” post haste
Along with the 4.5 mil to take care of him!!!
They were going after money to, ostensibly make their lives better and ensure they were able to provide him the medical care and other services he needed. That’s mental abuse??
Lauren says exactly what I would say, so I’ll just endorse her comment, add a note to Jeffe, and then ask Lauren’s critic to take a little poll:
Jeff:
Let’s have that constitutional amendment and end the discussion once and for all. Are 90% in favor of abortion? I don’t know, but I do know flatly outlawing abortion will NEVER EVER happen and, IMO, as many Catholics and evangelical women will secretly vote against a total ban, as the rest of us.
To Lauren’s critics:
How many of you listened to recent Republican debate and were among those who said–hooray for you–when host asked that question– What would YOU do (to Ron Paul) with a 30 year old guy, who doesn’t carry insurance, gets in an accident and is dying? Ron Paul said let him die, he made that choice when he failed to have health insurance.
That Republican crowd in Tampa applauded and a few called out equivalent of “Right on!” What about you?
I say this Mom was simply being a good Libertarian-leaning Republican–making her choices (once those doctors gave her the chance!) and is now living with them
If the mother in this case had, instead of suing the doctors, expected from them and others the services involved in caring for a triple amputee, and added: “Will you pay for this, I have no insurance.” You-all would applaud a firm No from the hospital/government/etc.
Pro-lifers just RESENT that this mother had the wit to provide for best-possible survival of herself and her child because of implication that had she known she might have made a different decision, thereby declaring herself in charge of her own body. Indeed, the physicians WERE at fault for not letting her make that decision before delivering the baby.
So let’s have a constitutional amendment on who owns one’s body, and carry it through to final vote. And then for God’s sake, have the empathy to consider something other than your own dogma. You haven’t a clue anyway HOW you would decide until you faced same situation. None of us does.
To close, here’s a quote from Mike Lofgren’s astonishing (all should read it) inside look at Republican party strategy in Congress:
“If you think Paul Ryan and his AynRand-worshipping colleagues aren’t after your Social Security and Medicare, I’m here to disabuse you of your naivete. They will move heaven and earth to force through tax cuts that will so starve the government of revenue that they will be ‘forced’ to make ‘hard choices’–and that doesn’t mean repealing those very same tax cuts, it means cutting the benefits for which you worked.”
From: http://www.truth-out.org/goodbye-all-reflections-gop-operative-who-left-cult/1314907779
i am here to inform you that not every single thing in life is split with democrats on one side and republicans on the other. i am an independent who has voted democrat more often than not.i am pro choice, pro gay marriage, anti strict gun laws and pro a government so small you can drown it in a bathtub (this is what liberal use to mean). to insist that everyone registered as a democrat things exactly alike on every single issue and everyone registered as a republican things exactly alike on every single issue is not democracy but totalitarianism
you really need an edit button here
to insist that everyone registered as a democrat THINKS exactly alike on every single issue and everyone registered as a republican THINKS exactly alike on every single issue is not democracy but totalitarianism
Uh, did you completely miss the point of this lawsuit? She wanted to KILL her child.
How is that “provid[ing] for best-possible survival of .. her child”?
There is no mental gymnastic too absurd for the pro-death crowd!
Well she’s claiming that the mother perjured herself in order to convince the jury that she would have aborted even though she wouldn’t have. Of course, that’s not something to brag about. It’s bearing false witness and it’s scandalous (she was asking the jury to approve of her hypothetical decision to abort). I condemn this as heinous whether or not she actually would have aborted.
She has claimed a lot of things…The mother is just lying (And “had the wit” to lie in our courts) to get money; none of us knows our own minds or what we would do in the same situation; Dr. Ron Paul said people without health insurance should be left to die (She just forgot to add the part about a “slow, agonizing death”.); Somebody named Mike Lofgren is the be-all and end-all when it comes to the Republican party; and on and on about what everybody except a few mouth-breathers in America obviously knows.
The only insight she has provided is insight into the twisted thinking of liberals. Especially telling, as you point out, is that she seems so proud to support a woman who (she claims) is committing perjury to get money.
You are a liar.
aurora1920, You’re message does not have too much to stand for itself. You claim that “Pro-lifers just RESENT that this mother had the wit to provide for best-possible survival of herself and her child” but if she chose to kill the child while a baby in the womb, like you claim is a good thing, then what good choice would she have done for the baby? Your arguement that it should be a woman’s right to choose, is then flip flopped into this mother was making the best decision for herself and her child. Since you’re interested in mothers looking out for the child’s best interest,NEWSFLASH: Killing your child while still in the womb is NEVER a good decision for that child. That child going through a grisly death because momma didn’t want to put it up for adoption(she can get a C-section if she really doesn’t want to go through the labor. A mark on one’s stomach is not as important as the life of a child.) is NEVER a good decision, but is flat out murder! The life of a child should be protected and loved, just as much as the life of a mother.
Ron Paul did not say he would let him die. That is what Debbie Wasserman -Shultz said Ron Paul said– so at least we know where you are getting your news.
Ron Paul said that we need to take responsibilty for our own lives. If somebody does not want to but health insurance, that should be their right in a free society. But if that same somebody needs healthcare, nobody except the strawman (Real popular with your crowd)said “let him die.”
If you actually listened to what Dr. Paul said instead of what Debbie said, you would know that Dr. Paul talked about his experience as a doctor, and how he has provided free services in the past, and how charities used to do so much of what the government wants to be in charge of. Friends and family will hold fundraisers, doctors may provide free care, the community that used to always chip in for neighbors would be involved again. But it is not up to the government to tell people how they spend their money.
Not surprised you would listen to Debbie to find out what DOCTOR Paul really said, but most of us don’t need you or Debbie to interpret for us.
this story really disturbs me and i am pro choice. nothing is mentioned about the child’s metal ability. is his only disability missing arms and one leg? is he mentally disabled? i can see not wanting to bring a child into this world if he/she is mentally disabled to the point that he/she would never have any kind of quality of life, but for missing limbs? with the progress that has been made and is still being made with artificial limbs this child could grow up to be a football star.
This sounds like amniotic band syndrome- where the baby’s extremities got tangled up in a loose piece of amniotic sac. The chances are very good that the baby’s mental status is quite normal.
You have to be kidding with your comment about understanding not wanting a child with mental disabilities, right? good God. I have a child with mental disabilities and she has an awesome quality of life. what a horribly mean thing to say. It was already said, but this is eugenics. Anyone that believes it is better to abort a disabled child than bring them into life and try is a Nazi. or just so unbelievably selfish that they would rather a child die than alter their life at all. Where does it stop? Next will we test for whether your fetus is gay, or what their IQ is? This is all trying to build a “perfect” race and it is horrifying. My daughter is physically and mentally disabled and I wouldn’t change a thing about her, and I think these parents are hurting all disabled folks by making it more likely that doctors will suggest abortion. It is open genocide on babies with disabilities.
When pregnant, I had a test that said my kid likely has Down Syndrome. I didn’t care and didn’t know until the day she was born whether she had it or not. She’s 13 years old now, the light of my life–and on the honor roll at school. No Down Syndrome.
This article is less that helpful. The writer doesn’t have what it takes to understand what he is expounding about. Obviously he is not alone in that.
This situation is not uncommon. For a very good exposition, read this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/17/AR2005101701311.html
The bottom line is that the parents have a handicapped baby and want the money (though there is no question that the baby would qualify for both Medicaid and Social Security Disability so it’s unclear whether they really need it), and they only way they can prove that damages were incurred is to assert that there was an option available that would have avoided all of this. Since there’s no treatment for the condition, the only option is abortion.
This happens all the time in the world of OB/GYN- after all, it’s what prenatal genetic testing is all about. A few rare souls just want to know if their baby is affected in order to prepare for it, but the vast majority of problems detected by routine prenatal screening- from Down’s Syndrome to cystic fibrosis- have no known cure. Most people don’t understand that when they sign up for these tests- they think they’re doing it to “make sure everything is all right.” They don’t know the path they’ve stepped on if the baby ISN’T all right. Ultrasound is a different matter, since there are often problems that can be ameliorated or corrected before the baby is born or shortly after, and it definitely helps to know.
I used to go along with this, which is taught without any question or reservation in OB/GYN residencies, until the day I heard the mother of a severely afflicted baby lecture at a gathering of medical professionals. She knew her baby had a fatal condition, and carried it anyway. One thing she said has stuck with me to this day- the fact that her other children knew, without question, that they were loved. Because the family had literally lived out what Jesus said- “Whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers, you do to me.” I wondered if the rest of us were doing to ourselves in making these kinds of decisions.
I won’t lie–the idea of bringing a kid into the world with severe disadvantages, who would never be able to live entirely normally, terrifies me. But I can’t see choosing to kill that unborn baby for something that’s not their fault, let alone for something that’s only physical!
I realize that raising a disabled child can be expensive, and may be impossible for some people. But again, there’s the option of putting the child up for adoption. Basically declaring to the world that you would’ve wiped out your kid if you could is going to do more damage to him than anything genetics did.
A pediatrician friend of mine once pointed out to me that there is a waiting list of people wanting to adopt children with disabilities, including Down’s Syndrome. And this child probably has a very normal mental capacity.
Really? Where, pray tell, is this “list”? Both of my husband’s and my kids are adopted, and from having gone through the process I can tell you that there is no great demand for severely disabled children. It is sad, but it is true.
I live in a conservative part of the country. Since all adoptions are local affairs, I would guess that the relative ease of placing these children could partly be a reflection of that.
At any rate, why ask me where “the list” is? Obviously, I don’t know- my pediatrician colleague does. But I suspect that wasn’t your real motive behind that question.
And by “all adoptions”, I mean all the adoptions he’s involved in, professionally.
Certainly, I have many friends who’ve gone overseas for adoptions, or out-of-state for mixed race adoptions because I live in the whitest state in the USA. And one acquaintance who a adopted a “little person” because they are a family of dwarfs. Truly, there is a family for every child, disabled or not.
What I didn’t understand from the article is, didn’t the mother have an ultra-sound done while she was pregnant? An ultra-sound or some other diagnostic test would have shown that the child was missing two arms and a leg. Also, was the mother at high risk for having a deformed child? Did she drink or did she use drugs or was she in some other hi-risk category? If the doctor did, indeed, NOT tell her that she was having a severely deformed baby, then the doctor WAS wrong. Sad to say, the parents should be the final judges on what to do with the fetus. But, once the child is born, every effort should be used to help such a child. This kid needs help now, so I’m also wondering who will provide it?
My kids have big ugly ears like their daddy. How much can I get for them?
In our current industrial era, nearly all children inflict economic damage on their parents. I think we should go after all our doctors, for not advising us to avoid the expensive little things in the first place. And our financial advisers, too!
Lets just clear all of this up once and for all….
When each and every one of face God on Judgement day, then we shall see what your answers will be. Bottom line… God has the final say on what was done here on earth.. Good and Bad… God help this nation..Help this world……
maybe they only got 4.5 million because the other 4.5 million was used to pay off the jury lol.
This article is really scary – I was hoping frivolous lawsuits were becoming a thing of the past. This will do nothing but make it super expensive for the rest of us to have children at the hospital. (more than it already is)
“The disabled have rights just like women or minorities.” Anyone missing from that?
Now that you mention it, there is somebody missing from that. It must have been an oversight. Or reality.
Why are we so surprised? It was a Florida jury, after all, that acquitted Casey Anthony for the murder of her own 2 year old baby. Apparently children have no value to society in Florida. As for this thing that just got millions, someone should keep a real sharp eye out for abuse of that poor child.
Oh, it’s not just a Florida jury.
It’s a West Palm Beach jury. This is the same West Palm Beach that was so confused by their “butterfly ballot”, they voted for Pat Buchanan instead of Gore. This is the same West Palm Beach that made a mess of the 2000 election with tens of thousands of “disqualified” ballots.
Now, they are not in the same category as Port. St. Lucie, where they call 911 if they aren’t able to get chicken mcnuggets at the local McDonalds, but
still… This is no ordinary jury pool they have to choose from in West Palm Beach.
It shouldn’t be missed the sleight of hand that occurs in the various “quality of life” debates: The unspoken, but obvious, reality is the only quality of life being weighed is that of those who might actually be expected to care for the target individual.
It has been my experience, as a first responder for several years, that most people fight to live. They do this because they value the life, of unknown quality, they hope to continue.
The infirm and the unborn are the most obvious targets, since they are at a distinct disadvantage in defending their interests. The state, who one might hope would take up their defense, has become an advocate against the weakest parties in the debate. After all, unborn children do not vote, nor do the mentally infirm.
The crisis we have entered is largely based upon the immorality that we have adopted.
If a large segment of society expects to have themselves comforted at the expense of someone else, then why should the imposed burden stop merely at the taxpayer, and not continue onward to any other realm that might impose some pesky burden on someone.
It isn’t suprising that vampire movies are in vogue these days.
Poor baby, not for his disability but for having the parents tell world that they would have aborted hIm. I hope all the money goes into a trust for his future, because the poor child will need it. Teenage angst?
Why don’t they take the child to Canada? A court there has just put its seal of approval on post natal abortion.
Now that these folks are millionaires, someone needs to sue them on behalf of Bryan and award HIM the 4.5 million.
Interesting that no parent of a child with disabilities has posted here.
I have 4 children the youngest was born with Spina Bifida and Hydrochesphalus. We have lived for 19 years in the world of disabilites. Is it a lot tougher than having a ‘normal’ child? Yes you live with hospital visits, surgeries and knowing that you child may or may not live to adulthood. Would I trade the last 19 years no. Would I have aborted my son if I have known before hand. Definately NOT… Do I blame the doctors because my son was born with a birth defect. NO….
For those who talk about the quality of life that a child who has disabilities has. Please define quality of life? My son is a child who has things that physically does not work in his body. But he is a child first and formost. To say that a person can not have a ‘good’ quality of life becuase his or her life does not measure up to our standards is wrong. Your quality of life is what it is. It is what you know not what someone else defines for you.
Thank you for adding your voice Lorraine. You would have been a good person to quote in my article.
The problem here is one of isolation. It is VERY rare to find anyone, medical professional or otherwise, who will encourage a parent who is facing the adversity of having a disabled child. Read many of the comments above and you can see it. “This will destroy your life” is the loud and resounding message. What does this mean??? Facing adversity will destroy you? Think about it. Running from adversity is more likely to actually destroy you.
I have a son, 12, who has cerebral palsy along with a host of other significant problems. He has largely defined me. Do I wish he didn’t have these problems? Of course. However, if he didn’t, my understanding of humanity, worth, the tenuous nature of life and health… all would be diminished.
My wife and I have recently adopted two girls, both with Down Syndrome… Unbelievably wonderful children, both of them. Well in excess of 90% of Down Syndrome pregnancies are terminated by abortion in the US. In the case of the birth parents for both of our girls, their birth parents were simply terrified that they could not cope. This is not surprising, given the nearly universal negative message. Their loss is our bittersweet gain.
I’ll tell you the same thing I told Lorraine. Thank you for adding your voice and perspective. You would have been a good person to quote in my article as well.
You are absolutely right, K&S. In my medical education, and throughout the hallowed halls of academia even now, it was taken as a given that patients would both desire, and be counseled to, abort their unborn handicapped children. It wasn’t until I was out of residency and actually dealing with my own patients in the community that THEY educated ME regarding what it was all about.
This court decision is disgusting and tremendously depressing. And the gall of the parents simply mind-blowing. Check out
http://www.hliamerica.org/truth-and-charity-forum/the-story-of-laci-faith-lowell/
for a tremendous story and witness to the preciousness of every human life – disabled or not.
Thank you for covering this.
I’ve seen this kind of case, time & time again. These parents (nor the child will see one dime of this money. It will get lost in appeals courts for MANY years to come, (if any). The only people that will benefit are the lawyers.
This is an issue that has so many variables that it is impossible to proclaim a one-size-fits-all solution. Just because one family can handle the challenges of a special needs child does not mean that the next family can. And just because one special needs person is happy with their life does not mean the next one will be.
I recall back in junior high school (yes, it was not called middle school back then) there was a boy in my grade and in some of my classes who had some sort of affliction that caused him to walk with braces (the kind that you rest your forearms on, one in each hand). I believe he had a severe form of rheumatoid arthritis. Anyway, soooo sadly, he took his own life at the end of seventh grade. He left a note behind saying that he could no longer stand living in constant pain, and also that he didn’t have any friends (as we all know, “normal” kids at that age don’t tend to hang out with special needs kids).
Clearly, the hardships of raising a profoundly disabled child go even further beyond the question of whether or not a family has the ability and the resources to provide adequate care for such a child. There is also the issue of as a parent having to watch your child suffer 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
So to those who have posted that other posters are “callous” or “cold-hearted” for saying that it would be really hard to bring a severely disabled child into the world, maybe those posters are the ones who are cold and callous for the apparent ability to not be affected by the thought of having to watch their beloved son or daughter spend 10 years or 20 years or whatever in constant and endless and excruciating pain and suffering.
How convenient you suddenly managed to “remember” this “kid’s” story after all your other posts. I think you are full of it. I was born with a congenital anomaly. I know pain and I know the cruelty of others. However, I also know that not once did I ever think “I would rather be dead than live like this”. What you are advocating is a bold faced lie.
Striving to overcome physical limitations and the thoughtless actions of others makes one stronger. Regardless of what nincompoops like you think the disabled are not weaker than you, they do not have poor “quality of life”. They are stronger than you. They have walked the fire and faced the tests. You have slogged along content with being one of the many. Pathetic!
Oh, and just to solidify my first assertion, how would you know what a 7th grader wrote in his suicide note? Do you think that the police would make public the last renderings of a minor? You should think about the plausibility of what you post before putting it up for any logical thinker to debunk.
Disabled individuals deserve the right to have a go at life. To deny that to them as a matter of course because you, in your high and mighty position of morality, think they may suffer or pose too big a burden on others is as presumptuous and immoral as anything I’ve ever heard. My children would not thank you for ending their lives as well as mine. You should be ashamed at the shallowness of both your thought and your compassion…
Severely disabled doesn’t equal no life. Go Google Nick Vujicic, motivational speaker and writer, and Dustin Carter, a wrestler. Stephen Hawking is severely disabled and look at what he has done. These people need encouragement and purpose, not disregard and death.
So, the parents felt they shouldn’t have an amniocentesis for fear of losing their baby to miscarriage (it was recommended because they thought he might have Down’s Syndrome), then, after delivering a baby with missing limbs did they see a financial opportunity to go back to the big pocket doctors and sue for damages. Check out this article about the trial.
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/jury-awards-west-palm-beach-parents-of-child-1831553.html
What does a life without limbs look like?
WATCH THIS:
http://www.youtube.com/user/harrish0789
This man has inspired THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE around the world!!!
How could you say he would be better off dead????
Every life is precious! Even if you are just lying around in a coma, you are helping others to have a chance to show caring and love which enriches their life!!!
See more at:
http://www.lifewithoutlimbs.org
You WILL BE INSPIRED!!!!!
Justice Delayed, Denied, Subverted
Lady Justice can be one fickle animal, at least when courts intervene.
The application of the ancient legal maxim dating back centuries that “Justice delayed is justice denied” becomes a legal minefield when activist jurists and ignorant juries delay, deny, and subvert fairness and equity in the interests of ideology or misperceived guilt.
Convicted murderer Duane Buck is an individual currently benefiting from delayed justice.
Found guilty and sentenced to death by lethal injection in Texas, Buck ultimately appealed his sentence to the Supreme Court of the United States which finally and tersely said it would consider his appeal hours before his scheduled execution.
Buck was supposedly praying in his Death Row cell when advised of the reprieve and said, “Praise the Lord! God is worthy to be praised. God’s mercy triumphs over judgment. I feel good,” as well he should, although he made no mention of whether his former girlfriend, another man, and his stepsister felt very good when he shot all three on July 30, 1995.
Buck’s appeal was based on his lawyers’ allegation that race had been a factor . . .
. . . I don’t know if Floridians Rodolfo Santana and Ana Mejia wanted a baby but they conceived and gave birth to one.
They had consulted Dr. Marie Morel and OB/GYN Specialists of the Palm Beaches and subsequently contended they weren’t told that Bryan Santana, now three, would be born with no arms and just one leg, horrible deformities Ana admitted they would have averted by aborting Bryan had they known in advance.
They wanted $9 million in recompense for inadequate information from Dr. Morel and OB/GYN Specialists. A West Palm Beach jury gave them half, $4.5 million, for giving birth to a severely disabled child . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=5490.)