Law Woman who sued mom’s doctor claiming she never should have been born wins millions

Lord Coke said:
What exactly is wrong with her? If she can go the horse thing and she is pretty hot so what's her disease do to her?
Click to expand...

It covers all that in the article, it's not particularly long.
 
Well, it comes off as weird because NYP left out the context of why this was done this way. That this was a medical negligence case started by the parents years ago.

They sued the doctor, saying if you had given me correct advice, I would have delayed my pregnancy and had a healthier and cheaper baby. That we had a special relationship in which you knew I was heavily reliant on your advice, you then gave poor advice, against a legal standard, I relied upon it to my detriment and harm occurred, which is measurable and you are therefore liable for.

Which wouldn't be that weird.That doesn't mean you don't love your child, it's satisfying an element of the claim so you can be awarded damages.

The daughter then continued on the parents claim when she became of age, as she would now bear the costs. Not so much a whinging teenager crying about how 'I should never have been born'.

Whether they started it in their names or on her behalf would be just an issue of legal standing to allow for them/her the right to sue, a technical thing. The issue of standing frames the rest of the arguments.

The real takeaway, rather than their weird reductionist headline:

The ground-breaking ruling means that a healthcare professional can now be found liable for negligent pre-conception advice which results in the birth of a child with a serious health condition. Tim Spring, solicitor and clinical negligence specialist at Moore Barlow, said: “This was an unusual and challenging case requiring the law to be clarified. My client has the condition she has due to the result of poor advice. It is of utmost importance that medical professionals follow best practice when giving patients advice, and only depart from established clinical guidelines when there are good and specific reasons to do so, which they discuss with their patients.
Evie Toombes wins landmark lawsuit - Moore Barlow LLP​
 
Last edited:
It makes sense in a way.

If I was born severely disabled and it could have been prevented I would be pissed.
 
My other takeaway is that the New York Post and The Sun are a garbage papers that aren't to be taken seriously. This is a TMZ/National Enquirer type headline.
 
BAM said:
My other takeaway is that the New York Post and The Sun are a garbage papers that aren't to be taken seriously. This is a TMZ/National Enquirer type headline.
Click to expand...
Pretty much. You’ve seen their handy work at play here. Got all the knuckleheads riled up over a phony headline.
 
BAM said:
Well, it comes off as weird because NYP left out the context of why this was done this way. That this was a medical negligence case started by the parents years ago.

They sued the doctor, saying if you had given me correct advice, I would have delayed my pregnancy and had a healthier and cheaper baby. That we had a special relationship in which you knew I was heavily reliant on your advice, you then gave poor advice, against a legal standard, I relied upon it to my detriment and harm occurred, which is measurable and you are therefore liable for.

Which wouldn't be that weird.That doesn't mean you don't love your child, it's satisfying an element of the claim so you can be awarded damages.

The daughter then continued on the parents claim when she became of age, as she would now bear the costs. Not so much a whinging teenager crying about how 'I should never have been born'.

Whether they started it in their names or on her behalf would be just an issue of legal standing to allow for them/her the right to sue, a technical thing. The issue of standing frames the rest of the arguments.

The real takeaway, rather than their weird reductionist headline:

The ground-breaking ruling means that a healthcare professional can now be found liable for negligent pre-conception advice which results in the birth of a child with a serious health condition. Tim Spring, solicitor and clinical negligence specialist at Moore Barlow, said: “This was an unusual and challenging case requiring the law to be clarified. My client has the condition she has due to the result of poor advice. It is of utmost importance that medical professionals follow best practice when giving patients advice, and only depart from established clinical guidelines when there are good and specific reasons to do so, which they discuss with their patients.
Evie Toombes wins landmark lawsuit - Moore Barlow LLP​
Click to expand...
Well you know, a lot of posters around here can barely read and prefer their articles summed up into neat little outrage packages.
 
HARRISON_3 said:
Seems like she turned lemons into lemonade.
evie.toombes-11.jpg

woman-sues-about-birth-592.jpg

Good for her.
Click to expand...

Id smash. She'd prolly sue me for my bad performance though.
 
A person with tremendous spinal problems is riding horses? Weird.

Almost as weird as being able to sue for anything you can imagine.

Honk honk!
 
Anyone with problems after the are born can go after medical people ? Iron deficiency, Down syndrome etc ? Weird
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,917
Messages
55,455,060
Members
174,786
Latest member
Gladiator47

Share this page

Back
Top