Abstract
This Comment argues that the ways in which disparities between wrongful pregnancy and wrongful birth claims are handled by judges has set up a subconscious bias against those who are born with genetic, developmental or other defects. This article proposes that the current distinctions among such claims be abolished in favor of other alternatives that actually carry out the stated goals of the judges making these decisions: respect for all human life. To do so, judges must abolish the distinctions between wrongful life and wrongful pregnancy claims because they ignore the benefits disabled children bestow on their parents. These distinctions cannot be supported by the unprincipled, philosophical “excuses” given by judges, nor can they be supported from an economical standpoint. This Comment urges courts to adopt a new, unified framework that focuses on the tortfeasor. By employing traditional negligence principles to decide these cases, judges will be able to adequately compensate wronged plaintiffs, which will, in turn, protect disabled persons.
Recommended Citation
Stephanie R. Fueger,
The Unexamined Life is Not Worth Living . . . Or is It? Preserving the Sanctity of Human Life in American Courtrooms,
33
S. Ill. U. L.J.
571
(2009).
Available at:
https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/siulj/vol33/iss3/9