Woman sues doctors after failed abortion

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Oh, I need a life.

LOL.

You're fine because you're typing about this where it applies. If we have a thread on green apples and you type about law, then you should worry.

[shinerbock]

I need a majority rule here.

[texas*princess]

Maybe I'm missing something... and maybe it's already been mentioned, but the abortion and everything took place in 2004. Why is this suit just happening NOW?

Timing issues aside, it said she decided to have an abortion due to financial reasons (which may or may not be true since I don't know her).... so the fact that she is suing for the costs of raising her child makes some sense to me... although I am definitely not a lawyer by any means.

[ufdale]

This woman only wanted an abortion for financial reasons, but many many women have abortions for health reasons. Their life would be in danger if they carry through with the pregnancy and birth. What if that was the case with this woman and the abortionist put her life in danger by not performing the abortion right? I think this woman has a case, but why did she keep the baby?

[kddani]

Originally Posted by texas*princess

Maybe I'm missing something... and maybe it's already been mentioned, but the abortion and everything took place in 2004. Why is this suit just happening NOW?

Plenty of reasons. People have a certain amount of time in which they can bring a lawsuit, which is called the "statute of limitations." She may not have realized she had a legal claim. They may have been trying to settle it without filing suit (very likely). Maybe she wasn't emotionally ready to deal with it. Who knows. But there are plenty of reasons why she would wait. Litigation, even before a complaint is filed, can be a lengthy process.

[AlexMack]

Originally Posted by texas*princess

Maybe I'm missing something... and maybe it's already been mentioned, but the abortion and everything took place in 2004. Why is this suit just happening NOW?

Timing issues aside, it said she decided to have an abortion due to financial reasons (which may or may not be true since I don't know her).... so the fact that she is suing for the costs of raising her child makes some sense to me... although I am definitely not a lawyer by any means.

Well, (excuse me for not reading the article but it's late), if this is a civil matter, it takes time. I'm involved in a lawsuit that began in 2003 and is only now really starting to be pursued. Of course the lawyery sorts would know a lot more and are going at it quite nicely here. Carry on GC lawyers

[honeychile]

Just out of curiosity, does the child involved get to sue for psychological damages, once she finds out exactly how unwanted she is or was?

[AKA_Monet]

2 medical situations here:

1) Most doctors that do abortions, mainly board certified OB/GYN's, don't EFF up on ALL fetus removals. They may EFF up of other finishing factors, i.e. rupturing the endometrium in the uterus or clipping the fallopians. But generally, they really cannot MISS the fetuses. They are visualized by ultrasound that is rather accurate. And the supersuction is scanned throughout the uterus...

2) There may be negligence of the doctors. The doctors may have actually not done the procedure because they were a part of this ultraconservative groups that say they'll do something and neglected to do it because they disagree with it due to personal convictions. They may have had a "mock pre-opt" work-up, there was anesthesia involved, but the procedure just was not done.

So basically, homegirl never got the procedure...

The real thing that probably happened is homegirl never followed thru with her appointments. She failed to show up for the actual procedural operation abortion. She showed up for her first one, where they do the ultrasound and see the location, the size of her uterus, safety and efficacy issues, then schedule the procedure date. And homegirl failed to show up...

The judge will throw out when the appointment records show her failure to comply.

And since she wants money, she's saying that she had a botched abortion because she's a crack whore that needs her slop and now she's lame enough to blame everyone else for her situation but herself.

[UGAalum94]

AKA Monet,

Wouldn't it seem that the chances that Planned Parenthood doctors are part of the super-conservative group would be pretty low? (That's who they are in this case, I'm pretty sure.) And surely such a group would be getting sued right and left right for malpractice? It's really shocking to me that a doctor could just get away with pretending to perform a specific procedure for very long.

I'm not second guessing you on this next point but wouldn't a lawyer investigate to see that woman showed up for her actual abortion appointment before she filed suit. That would seem to be a rock solid defense in any case. "We failed to perform your abortion because you didn't actually show up for it." You're right, I think, that it would get thrown out.

Anybody who lives where there's local coverage of the case have any additional information?

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by texas*princess

Maybe I'm missing something... and maybe it's already been mentioned, but the abortion and everything took place in 2004. Why is this suit just happening NOW?

Originally Posted by kddani

Plenty of reasons. People have a certain amount of time in which they can bring a lawsuit, which is called the "statute of limitations." She may not have realized she had a legal claim. They may have been trying to settle it without filing suit (very likely). Maybe she wasn't emotionally ready to deal with it.

Exactly, and my guess is that the statute of limitations in this case is three years, meaning that even if she had been trying to deal with the matter without bringing suit, she was now at the point where she either had to file the suit or lose the right to sue. The news article seems to indicate that the statute of limitations would have begun to run in March 2004.

[lyrelyre]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

The news article seems to indicate that the statute of limitations would have begun to run in March 2004.

I think the statute would actually be tolled until she knew or had reason to know that she was still pregnant. So that could be as late as September when she found out she was still pregnant. (I guess I need to get a life too)

I found an article about a study of first trimester abortions that said that 46 in a series of 65,000 had unintentional continued pregnancy.

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by Alphagamuga

AKA Monet,

Wouldn't it seem that the chances that Planned Parenthood doctors are part of the super-conservative group would be pretty low? (That's who they are in this case, I'm pretty sure.) And surely such a group would be getting sued right and left right for malpractice? It's really shocking to me that a doctor could just get away with pretending to perform a specific procedure for very long.

I'm not second guessing you on this next point but wouldn't a lawyer investigate to see that woman showed up for her actual abortion appointment before she filed suit. That would seem to be a rock solid defense in any case. "We failed to perform your abortion because you didn't actually show up for it." You're right, I think, that it would get thrown out.

Anybody who lives where there's local coverage of the case have any additional information?

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.

[UGAalum94]

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.