The best person to ask is sigkapgurl. Her mother is an OB/GYN. Maybe she'd have some insight.

Honestly I can't see why not. Mainly because there have been pregnant women and they think they are having a single birth and it turns out they have twins. Usually the second twin was so high up the baby wasn't detected. I'm not an OB so I'm not sure why they wouldn't have detected a heartbeat but you never know.

3 years for statute of limitations. Hmm.

The lawyers on here, does it vary per "incident"? I ask because isn't rape like a 5 year statute of limitations?

Not a lawyer, but I do know that it does vary. It varies by state as well.

Rape is usually 5 years, and murder I believe is indefinite in all 50 states.

Makes you feel bad for those women (and even men) who were raped but because DNA wasn't used all the time until recently, their five years came and went. Some crimes I just don't feel there should be a statute of limitations, but that is a whole nother thread. LOL :D

Well, to begin with statutes of limitations vary from state to state. They also vary with causes of action (grounds for suit) -- for example, breach of contract, trespass, wrongful death, libel. And it also varies from state to state as to whether statutes of limitations apply to criminal charges, or only to some criminal charges.

Typically, statutes of limitations can range anywhere from six months to ten years. Three years is often a common 'default" statute of limitations -- that is, unless a statute specifically provides otherwise (such as one year for libel), the statute of limitations is three years.

I actually read an article about a woman in the UK suing the hospital because her abortion only aborted one twin. So, I don't think it's a stupid question.

If this was the case, I could see negligence being a pretty good case here. If the woman was obese, had other issues, perhaps moral issues with aborting after the point where the fetus was viable, etc., she might have a decent case. The law doesn't require one to take morally repugnant steps to mitigate losses.

There is a case in the UK of this happening. A woman had one of the fetuses aborted, but the second one was missed somehow... She sought and won money for the expenses incurred, if I remember correctly.

Edit: I should read all replies before posting.

So in some JAMA article I read, and I don't remember which one, some "judgemental groups" set their name up just like major "traditional" groups scaring women who choose to have abortions into keeping their babies.

And even if the defense lawyers checked, and homegirl didn't show up for her appointments before, we are not talking about someone that has all her marbles in place. We are discussing a women who does NOT want to have a baby, has sex with a man, 'cuz last I checked, it takes 2 to tango and winds up pregnant.

Because homegirl was 45 and not 15, it is highly likely she had superovulatory drugs, because generally after 35ish+, ovulation is brokedown. But, normally, one does not take superovulatory drugs if they absolutely do not want to get pregnant.

Say she was trying to "sell" her eggs... Most company's cut off limit is 25-32ish. And if a woman wants to freeze her embryos, after 35, they charge $10=$20K for the process. Generally, human eggs do not freeze well.

OB/GYN's malpractice insurance is high for that reason.

So unless homegirl has some wierd mutant alien impregnanting chimeric teratoma, then I have no idea how a highly trained physician, board certified, pay his or her insurance would want to mistakenly miss a pregnancy.

And if homegirl was THAT special and actually did mistakenly miss a pregnancy after a gross (meaning huge) procedure like an abortion, then she would not be at "podoock planned parenthood clinic", she'd be at Harvard/Mass General/Brigham's Women's/John Hopkins being evaluated.

Big Pharma would salivate because the molecular biotech rights would be worth figuring out the problem alone...

I think homegirl had a mental problem that requires psychiatric eval and medication--even before Post-Partum issue. And that's my professional opinion.

You'd have to ask BlueAngel how a medical situation can happen like this, she's a better judge and these issues.

Oh, I agree that the story sounds freaky.

I didn't mean that I was second guessing your professional opinion.

(I do think the doctors named in the suit are Planned Parenthood and she is suing them, so they were at least one of the first stops. I've heard of anti-abortion groups listing themselves as if they performed abortions too, but I never knew they faked them. Sounds like a way to get sued or damage your cause. )

ETA: "mutant alien impregnanting chimeric teratoma" makes me laugh. It really sounds like an episode of the X-files.

Not a stupid question at all. I've been told of two women (who my mother knew) who had illegal abortions, and one of them was pregnant with twins. One twin was aborted, and the second twin "miscarried" later that night - much to the woman's surprise.

These were both in the 1950's, so I would imagine it would be really hard for this to happen with today's technology.

IMHO, any ultraconservative doctor who claims to give abortions has to be a bigger nutjob than pro-choice people think of other ultraconservatives. If you don't believe in abortion, don't masquerade as an abortionist!

I could see in 1950's where there was no ultrasound techology only X-ray to localize the presence of fetuses.

But now, they have these piezo-tropic crystal, near MRI type, linear transducers for ultrasound, they can "see thru" the chair or board with these things--in this country.

And an ultrasound is done after a urine pregancy test, which is the SOP...

I dunno, but it is misleading to younger women who choose not the keep their pregnancies. I wish I could remember what year--1/2 years ago--that JAMA article. I have been unable to do a search...

I do know there was some NY Times article last year on "these groups" setting up shops with these high-end ultrasound machines some that folks can recreate their baby's image in 3-D.

Visual Sonics is the high-end ultrasound. We will be doing it for the heart.

Oh man. I feel really bad for the child when she finds out about all of this. :( IMO it's kind of messed up for the woman to be suing..