What is Digg?109 Comments
- TheClone, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Did any of you even read the arcticle?
The doctor is being sued doctor becasue the doctor didn't inform the mother than an infection that her mother got would be passed on to the fetus, causing her to be born blind and deaf. They're claiming that becausee of this, the doctor should be responsible for the years of medical bills to take care of her condition (that has no chance of improving). - capn_caveman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Paradox. A woman sues because she was born to win a lawsuit. She could not win a lawsuit unless she was born.
- Xibby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Sounds crazy. Read the article.
#1: Parents are suing on behalf of their disabled daughter.
#2: The doctor being sued improperly diagnosed a rubella infection in the mother during the first trimester. Under Aussie law, she would have been permitted to have an abortion as the infection was likely to cause birth defects.
So the Doctor is being sued for somewhat legitimate reasons, he didn't do his job when he should have, and because of it a person is disabled for life, though some would argue that disabled for life is better than no life at all. - subtle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"OMFG even in America, land of the free and home of the frivolous lawsuit, we've never had anything like that..."
Of course you have - can't you read?
>>
Studdert also cited rulings from foreign courts, including the United States, which addressed the esoteric difficulties of putting a dollar tag on "the value of non existence" as compared to the costs of living with a disability.
"Whether it is better never to have been born at all than to have been born with even gross deficiencies is a mystery more properly to be left to the philosophers and the theologians," the New York Court of Appeals wrote in a 1986 decision rejecting a similar "wrongful life" claim. "The implications of any such proposition are staggering."
A similar claim had greater success in California, where the state appeals court found that a testing laboratory was responsible for the medical costs associated with the care of a child whose parents were not informed of the potential for a certain genetic disease being passed onto the fetus. - dstart, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Paradox. A woman sues because she was born to win a lawsuit. She could not win a lawsuit unless she was born."
- litchinsky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It's not this case that is realy interesting but where the Legal Precedent derived from it will turn up
- TheClone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Oh, Helen Keller wasn't born blind and deaf. It happened sometime after 19 months of age.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Keller
Wikipedia really gives a far better explanation of it than I can, but apparently, she remember several things from before she went deaf (the word "water," I think).
I think they just forced her to learn, for example, by giving her bread and then making the sign for bread on her palm. (The way you would, example, tell a dog to give you his paw, then grab his paw to show him HOW). - fiend.lord, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If you retards actually read the brief, the doctor misdiagnosed a pre-natal disease on, possibly on purpose, because he didn't want the mother to have an abortion. At first I saw the title too and thought "how dumb" but that fact changes it, doesn't it. I think it's silly in some ways, but read the ***** article first.
- listentothis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Read the story. Her parents are suing on her behalf.
- CanEHdian, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2The point of this case is not that the doctor let her be born, it is that he mis-diagnosed the illness of the mother and its ability to be passed to the child causing the birth defects. If the mother had known this she could have exercised her right to abort the pregnancy. So really this is a mal-practise suit
- nicklcl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Well, if I'm not mistaken from medical ethics and health law in Australia, they're claiming this case is valid for some reasons.
1. Duty of care which was owed by the doctor to the patient, which was breached.
2. There was actual damage.
3. There was causation that had the damage been found earlier that they would have not gone through with the birth.
HOWEVER! This case is not valid as a case of negligence since the doctor did everything that is expected that another competent doctor would do in the exact same instances. Like you can't sue a doctor if
they make an honest mistake. We're human too, and work 36 hour shifts, noone can maintain perfection 100% of the time.
I don't condone the litigation of doctors since it gives the Medical Indemnity Insurances a reason (though false) to raise their premiums. And doctors pay anywhere from $32,000 to $150,000 a year just to be able to keep you healthy. If a doctor can't pay insurance, we can't work. Since interns at hospital get paid $40,000 a year, if you have to pay $32,000 to insurance, then you take home $8,000, so doctors aren't exactly rolling in the dough. - vernsan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Thanks for clearing this up jakepaulus
- shooby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0someone shoot her PLEASE! end her endless misery!
- Rojahon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The doctor should have to pay for her lethal injection.
- vernsan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0If she's blind and deaf, how did she learn how to use wrongfile life to sue. I don't know of how her condition came to be, but if she was born that way, I see this really annoying if her family put her up to this to get money to pay for her bills.
- knightblade2oo4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0What a dumb bitch [no pun intended].... if she cant see or hear how the ***** does she
a) know what a doctor/lawsuit is, or anything for that matter.
b) spend this money? - nene7070, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0a couple of things:
1. this shouldnt be on digg.com as it currently stands... instead, there should be another version of digg that has non-tech related stories. Theres a number of stories i would have liked to have dugg to something like that.
2. This is the most depressing thing ive read today. I am a 22 year old man with a disability. I find that someone would see that having a disability as a negative thing as insulting. Just because one is not exactly like everyone else, does not make them any less of a person. This is also why i am against abortion in cases of disability. I wonder how many potential Stevie Wonders or Stephen Hawkings (although this doesnt fit cause he got his disability after birth) have not survived because they were aborted. Yea its the woman's "right" to control her body, but its, im not afraid to say, damn selfish to have an abortion because the child might be a little hard to raise- there are thousands of parents willing to raise that child (because THEY CANT HAVE THEIR OWN KIDS). I understand if theres another reason (health of the mother, ibcest, rape) for the abortion- those are fine, obviously.
Oh well, just my two cents - capn_caveman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Unbelievable example of what humanity is capable of. The vast majority of all of you should be deeply ashamed. I'm not a right winged conservationist... quite the opposite. But something is very wrong with these comments.
- swoosh_bnd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is just retarded and stupid.
- jakepaulus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0According to the article, the "victim" was born mentally retarded, spastic, deaf and blind. The person doing the sueing is not the disabled person.
- über, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I had an idea like this. I thought it would be interesting to sue my parents for giving birth to me against my will. I thought it would be funny to see how far into the legal system I could drag the case. Of course, I don't think that my parents would appreciate it very much, and I might accidentaly set some outrageous legal precedent...
- zenghost, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This for some reason is funny in such a sick way. I'm laughing my ass off.
- 5had0w, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0When you have children its your choice, if it comes out not how you wanted... to bad, it was your choice. People need to get real!
- ModernTenshi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Great. Something new for all the right-wing conservatives to latch onto.
- SonInTheFaith, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is just sick.
- shaft, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0If the doctor didn't allow her to be born in the first place she wouldn't even have the ability to sue. She should sue her parents. For inbreeding...
- avatarpalin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Is it just me, or is Digg becoming a bit tabloid orientated....
- Widmaniac, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0To all you folks who are asking how she's going to enjoy the money, I'm sure she has tons of bills she could pay. It cost a lot of money living as a blind and deaf person. A lot.
- copper, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Well the headline is misleading. For anyone who read the article, it turns out the girl is completely retarded and that it is her parents suing by power of attorney or somesuch.
I say this: If they did not consider the possibility that their child could impaired and that the doctor would not be able to diagnose it (even if he was NOT negligent), then they were not properly prepared to have a child.
Case closed. - Dustin3737, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is taking it too far... stop with the god damn sueing, just live with it! If your fat, dont sue mcdonalds cuz u spend ur money buying their food and get fat on ur own time. If you are born with a problem, live with it, thats live, dont try to use it to an advantage and try to sue a doctor for money. LIVE WITH IT!
- litchinsky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0People don't read the articles because of preconceived feeling on the topic of abortion and "frivolous lawsuits". It's a very loaded title for some that is all they need to form an opinion.
- wiu_life, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0+1 Digg just for the WTF factor
- tikz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0she should add God to the lawsuit
- mancat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0You know, back in the day when police were not everywhere, and it was largely up to the individual to control their own lives, parents would have been within their right to drag this child out back and end its life. Nobody would have turned a blind eye to it. They all would have done the same thing if they gave birth to a virtual meatstump.
- Mongoose, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Wow. That's ridiculous. WTF is wrong with the world? Is there NOTHING you can sue someone over?? While we're at it, I think I might sue zc_au for posting above me.
- Nessguy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I feel bad for doctors. :( All these stupid people blaming them for everything that goes wrong in their life.
- litchinsky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0What this really is about is the cost thus far to sustain this women and futures costs. This isn't a lawsuit to end her life now only that had the doctor done his job past a future pain would have been avoided. All you people saying she should kill herself or the doctor should kill her miss the point that this is not about ending a life anymore
- SpeedyG, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Thank goodness this is in Australia. I think *I* might have jumped off a bridge over the inevitable media coverage if it happened here in the States.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"PROFOUNDLY DISABLED" LOL, Never heard that before.
- oohBattman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0You're all idiots, expert idiots, except for the people who arn't idiots, you know who you are
- Andrico4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0She should sue her mom for making her not the doctor.
- mrkoje, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Sounds to me they are after money to pay for her existence. How can a suit be filed in her name since she is supposedly mentally retarded? Does the person in question even know whats going on?
- JPhilipson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0That's just dumb...this is the demise of culture and society
- Hollywood, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Why doesn't she just sue God??
- thewebguy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0if he did it on purpose, of course he should be liable, but suing doctors out of existence will help no one.
why did they wait till she was 24, anyway - modularsky, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Put that in your pipe and smoke it, 'pro-life'ers. With your charred lips!
- Computer_Kid, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0WOW! Maby I can sue for not having a social life because I was born!
- Yoda716, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0How can she enjoy the cash she gets?
- nene7070, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0that should have said "incest" of course... should have done the spell check.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 105 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is