![]() |
Woman Sues for Failed Abortion. Your Thoughts?
Saw this article today. Just wondering what you all thought about it. I consider myself pro-choice but I'm wondering why she didn't choose adoption.
BOSTON Mar 7, 2007 (AP)— A Boston woman who gave birth after a failed abortion has filed a lawsuit against two doctors and Planned Parenthood seeking the costs of raising her child. The complaint was filed by Jennifer Raper, 45, last week in Suffolk Superior Court and still must be screened by a special panel before it can proceed to trial. Raper claimed in the three-page medical malpractice suit that she found out she was pregnant in March 2004 and decided to have an abortion for financial reasons. Dr. Allison Bryant, a physician working for Planned Parenthood at the time, performed the procedure on April 9, 2004, but it "was not done properly, causing the plaintiff to remain pregnant," according to the complaint. Raper then went to see Dr. Benjamin Eleonu at Boston Medical Center in July 2004, and he failed to detect the pregnancy even though she was 20 weeks pregnant at the time, the lawsuit alleges. It was only when Raper went to the New England Medical Center emergency room for treatment of pelvic pain in late September that year that she found out she was pregnant, the suit said. She gave birth to a daughter on Dec. 7, 2004. She is seeking damages, including child-rearing costs. Raper and her lawyer, Barry C. Reed Jr., refused comment when contacted by The Boston Globe. A spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood said the organization does not comment on pending litigation. Neither doctor responded to requests for comment. Raper alleges in the suit that Planned Parenthood and Bryant were negligent for failing to end her pregnancy and that Eleonu was negligent for failing to see she was still pregnant. The state's high court ruled in 1990 that parents can sue physicians for child-rearing expenses, but limited those claims to cases in which children require extraordinary expenses because of medical problems, medical malpractice lawyer Andrew C. Meyer Jr. said. Raper's suit has no mentions of medical problems involving her now 2-year-old daughter. As with all medical malpractice suits in Massachusetts, Raper's complaint will have to be screened by a tribunal consisting of a Superior Court judge, a lawyer, and a doctor to determine whether it has merit to go to trial. |
|
It was my understanding that the small print on abortions was always that it was not 100% effective...just like condoms.
I know we all learned in 7th grade health class, that the only way to be sure to not be pregnant is to be...(say it with me) ABSTINENT. :) I am very interested to see how this case turns out though. Hopefully it doesn't drag out for too long. How would feel to know that the lucrative case your mother is fighting is regarding how she didn't want you to begin with???:confused: :o :( |
People sue for everything!
|
Quote:
Quote:
Abortions are supposed to target an ENTITY and remove it, right? Why shouldn't patients expect it to be 100%? |
Quote:
|
WoW!
Quote:
7th |
Isn't this still malpractice, even considering the small print? (Maybe our lawyer friends can enlighten us). It doesn't surprise me she sued.
|
The question
Quote:
7th |
I agree with Chaos that this needs to be looked at more generally as a botched surgical procedure--one that the patient paid for. Take out the issue that it was an abortion.
This is a 45 year old woman who felt she could not afford to have the child. That includes the medical costs of having the baby. That also might explain why she didn't consider adoption--she would still have the medical costs with no guarantee of an adoptive family to pick them up. As for abstinence. Come on, let's not be naive. I envy her for having an active sexual life :D . And at the age of 45 she may be going through menopause, which could make one think they can't get pregnant anymore because of irregular or missed monthlies. Bottom line is she paid to have a medical procedure done, the procedure was botched so now she is suing for malpractice and to recoup the future costs associated with the mistake. IMO, no different than other such lawsuits where a procedure was not done correctly and the lawsuit includes on-going medical care. ETA: My guess is that the fine print about not being 100 percent effective may be for preventive measures such as vasectomies and tube ligations. |
Quote:
|
sidenote: i thought Planned Parenthood did abortions for free or low-cost?
if the abortion was free, could she even seek $? i mean, it sucks but can the "you get what you pay for" maxim work here? on another note, (and these are more legal questions) when children are killed, dont parents tend to sue for the dollar amount of the expected financial worth of the child? i remember something about a teenager who was killed and the lawsuit was for the $ he couldve made had he went to college, graduated and worked a healthy career (i forget what the field was). i can KINDA see how this works if your child(ren) is/are approaching adulthood, but if the kid is like 3 or 4, then that doesnt really work... my point to all that was, if parents can sue when their child dies (therefore no longer making them a parent, then that logic says an adult can sue when their child lives (making them a parent, in this case when she didnt intend to be). man, talk about "the customer is always right" ETA: i also don't believe that this woman is suing purely for "financial reasons." that is her and her lawyer's cover to make this lawsuit as cut and dry as possible. i mean abortions happen because the pregnancy is UNPLANNED. which is why PLANNED Parenthood swoops in and is "supposed to save the day." but they just made it worse. well, the doctors anyway. AND ANOTHER THING. when women are artificially inseminated, they are paying for a service, yet its known that pregnancy is not 100% guaranteed. are abortions going to start being advertised as "not 100% effective?" will you have to go to the doctor for a follow-up, to make sure that sucka aint kickin anymore? (i know, that's kinda insensitive) |
I just need for people to stop trying to pimp the system. Abortions are not 100% effective! So instead of being angry at the drs maybe she should be made at herself for having no self control in the area of sex!! This angers me because there is much more to this abortion issue than she is even thinking of.
|
Quote:
that's like telling someone who gets hit by a drunk driver "well maybe if you werent on the road late at night where you KNOW people may be drunkdriving, this may not have happened." are you gonna blame the victim for having no self-control in the desire/need to drive? or are you going to poin the finger at the person who ACTUALLY did wrong? the failed abortion was NOT this woman's fault. not one but TWO doctors screwed up. not only was the procedure done wrong, but it wasn't even noticed by the next doctor! let's not even get into the issue of pre-natal care: lots of women are inaccessible to such and given that this women got an abortion (or tried to) at a Planned Parenthood and her reasoning being "financial reasons," i cant imagine her access to proper pre-natal care (ie a trusted doctor she could continuously visit that would track her pregnancy and know her needs) was all that great. p.s. anyone having a tongue-in-cheek moment about the woman's last name? |
Quote:
More self-control! You make it sound as if this woman was wantonly having sex. And even if she was, as a person who has been 45, I know that the body can send off false signals. And guess what wanting sexual intimacy does not stop at age 35!!!!! And the article doesn't go into it, so for all we know the father could be her husband. Again, imo this is not an abortion issue, it is a botched medical procedure issue. And unfortunately they are made more often then we would like to think. It is easy to be judgemental of others when you think you are above a particular "sin." |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:56 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.