He should’ve thought of that BEFORE he was male

The payout was as a result of the failed procedure was it not? It was compensation for a procedural mess. It wasn’t a pay out for the death of the child..

Also, if you would care to read the article, the judge acknowledged the impact on “the boys parents”, the “s” at the end of the word “parent” indicates that both were included in that statement..

But not the payout

Hang on..
She paid for a sterilisation procedure that failed resulting in pregnancy.
She was awarded compensation for this error. It says in the article that the child’s death was not attributed to the procedure – so the child’s death is a tragic, but completely separate, issue.

Are you trying to suggest that if a woman has say, a laparoscopy that goes wrong – and is awarded damages, that her husband should be compensated for this error too? Because that’s just batshit crazy..

No, I’m saying that where the court acknowledges the harm done to both people (as you pointed out) the court should compensate both people

That would set a dodgy precedent. Implying that parents could claim for the grief of losing a child even when the death was not caused by medical error..

The compensation was for a failed procedure. The procedure was carried out on her body. The Judge is free to comment on the level of hurt caused, but who exactly would be paying the compensation to the father? It was the HSE / Gynaecologist that were held liable – explain how legally the judge could award damages to the husband please.

You’ve completely changed your argument!! You started off saying that the husband’s pain had been acknowledged and now you’re saying it shouldn’t be!

Of course it should be acknowledged. It was a terrible experience. But that’s not what the woman was compensated for, she was compensated for the Gynaecologist and vicariously the HSE mucked up her sterilisation!! How exactly should the husband be compensated for that?
The original poster claimed that the father was ignored – his pain was acknowledged, as I pointed out. You complained that he didn’t get any money for his pain – neither did the mother. She was compensated for botched surgery.. The husband is not entitled to compensation for that!

The court found that this womans resulting pregnancy was caused by doctor negligence. The judge said so during his summation.

Ex partner, where oes it say that?

Would that be a problem????

Yes it would. No clinic for example Marie stopes would preform an abortion due to a blood clotting disorder. The procedure would have to be carried out in King’s college hospital in London at a cost of around 2500 sterling.

What is the justification for a higher payment?

Pay for the possibility that you may die? How about take a case to raise awareness of errors and/or negligence but not look for compensation when no one gets hurt? Then I would believe someone was acting for the greater good..

When you chose to have #3 were you not worried about the risks then and that 2 kids would be left without a mum?

You chose to put your life at risk each time you became pregnant. Why should someone have to pay for exposing you to a risk you chose three times previously? Accidents/mistakes happen. Why do people always look for money as a result?

I chose to have my first 2 children due to the excellent care I recieved from my cardiologist, haematologist and maternity team in Northern Ireland. Unfortunately I moved thereafter to this country where I had my 3rd child. I naively thought at the time that I would recieve the same standard of care that lessened the risk from my clotting disorder that I recieved in Altnagelvin. The standard of care I recieved in this country is the reason why I’ve chosen to have a sterilisation procedure done. Having experienced the ways that doctors in this country deals with my type of clotting disorder has shown me first hand how doctors put patients lives at risk. By what your stating no patient ever has the right to compensation due to negligence.

Compensation is not a right.

So for doctors negligence we should just point out failures. The doctors say sorry and thats ok then and we all move on. What if the doctor kills somebody with negligence? Does the same apply?? Doctors say sorry and that should be enough. Never mind that a family has potentially been left without a family member. What if doctors negligence causes disability to a child during labor? By your account parents aren’t entitled to seek compensation to pay for their sick child. The doctor should say sorry and that should make the family happy. If thats the case then if your injured in a car accident that wasnt your fault you shouldn’t claim of the person that caused the accident insurance company. They should just point out failures and say sorry and that should make you happy.

Uneducated and ignorant have very different meanings. What do you actually mean, dislike for a particular word aside?

How do we know? For all we know the court proceedings may have started when the mother was still pregnant. The truth is, we don’t know – and as this is the way it panned out, we can’t know..

If they had botched any other surgery no one would second guess her motives for seeking damages.. Why is it when a woman’s reproductive organs are involved everyone rushes to assume the worst?

Totally agree. Too many after a quick buck.mistakes happen, doctors are human, live and learn from mistakes. Massive pay outs only further curtail the health system.

This is what professional indemnity insurance is for.. And all doctors are obliged to have it when in practice. As are nurses, therapists, vets, vet nurses etc..

And the high cost of insurance to cover these crazy claims is a burden on the health system. Just because the ‘insurance’ pays the claim does not mean the health service is not paying. Imagine what your car insurance would be if you had a claim every week.

Each doctor / nurse whatever pays their own Insurance. They generally do as good a job as they can, if a doctor / nurse / therapist was putting in a claim every other week they would be before the medical council as there would be massive concerns about their ability to practice safely.

If a doctor has one or two claims against them in a career that’s probably all they will have. Any more would raise questions.
In my line of work I have to have similar insurance – I’m covered up to €4m and pay less than €300 per year. Have never claimed, but even if it doubled its really nothing like what is paid for car or home insurance as it really isn’t paid out from that often.. Most claims are against drug manufacturers (and the state if it is part of a state programme – ie vaccines) and not doctors / nurses.

No no no no, MANY DOCTORS AND THERAPISTS do not pay their own insurance, instead they work a measly 8 hour week in a public hospital and the gov rewards them by paying their indemnity. They scam the system and run back to their private practices to charge as many patients as possible an obscene amount of money. Standard medical practice, they want you to think they are doing their bit for society. But in reality it’s money first, then patient second. Think about that before u send your ENT a Christmas card.

not really anyones business if they knew or not…

Harsh

Harsh? I would say bloody ignorant.

@ Andrew, your comment was very insensitive and ignorant !!

I can’t think of a better argument for an abortion.

If you chose and were medically advised to not have children, underwent a procedure that failed and left you pregnant with fatally unviable child….

Shame on you.

@Andrew – She had two successful pregnancies, maybe she wanted to keep baby? Either way a distasteful comment

Your comment is so insensitive and ignorant Andrew .

The truth hurts kiddies…

Your as bad as the pro life brigade passing judgement on whether someone ‘should’ have an abortion.

Andrew I agree,don’t mind them still stuck in the 40s.
It’s people like this who hold Ireland back from catching up with the rest if the world

I am pro-choice, but what does this have to do with the option of an abortion? There is no mention of whether she WANTED one or not. Did it ever occur to you that she may have wanted to keep this baby.

No indication if she wanted one or not… She had a sterilization procedure

Andrew,
Did it occur to you that the woman in question may not have been comfortable with the idea of an abortion and so did not wish to have one?
If she got herself sterilised it indicates that she was trying to prevent pregnancy, that doesn’t imply that she would be willing to abort. And really – the whole point of the pro choice side of the argument is that it should be her decision to make. We shouldn’t be telling her that she should just as much as no one should be telling her she can’t.

Probably best not to assume..

A religious objection is a moot point… She already medically interfered with conception process which the church forbids.

The point is she had a choice in which situation to place herself and the tragedy of her circumstances and subsequent lawsuit is a situation in which she choose… In all fairness however it was likely influenced by the lack of options presented to her due to the Irish Victorian age legislation on abortion

Who mentioned religion Andrew?
Like I said, perhaps she didn’t like the idea of abortion, that’s HER prerogative. Whoever said up above that you were as bad as an anti choicer wasn’t wrong..

He’s simply taking the “it’s just a cluster of cells” argument to its logical home; flippant indifference

(He gets abortion bonus points for assuming that any objection to abortion must be grounded in religion)

No – he’s trying to assert that this woman should have had an abortion because he thinks so – which is the exact same thing as telling another woman that she cannot because you think so.
Religion has nothing to do with it, and those using religion as a reason to oppose abortion do so from shaky foundations at best.

It’s got nothing to do with religion Andrew. If she fell pregnant, even after the procedure she chose to have, she had her own reasons to carry it to term and give birth to her child. You’re an ignorant fool for being so callous and insensitive.

Well said Ian..

He’s saying neither.. He’s saying don’t come crying, expecting sympathy and filing lawsuits against tax payer funded entities for the direct results (tragic as they may be) of choosing to not have an abortion, although he recognizes the likely failure of the state to provide her with this option

Why does this warrant a 100k payment??

But the gynaecologist and HSE were found guilty of negligence.. As in, they mucked up the sterilisation. Perhaps it is due to the headline that people are muddling this up – the compensation isn’t because of the baby or it’s death. It’s about the sterilisation procedure being botched.
For that – of course she is entitled to compensation. As the judge has ruled.

She doesn’t deserve €100,000 for that. That procedure doesn’t work 100% of the time and she would have been aware of that. It was just bad luck.
Just because you’re unlucky doesn’t mean you should given €100,000.

Well, seeing as we weren’t in the court room and we didn’t hear the evidence, how do we know it was standard failure? Would the judge have awarded this amount if it had been? He ruled negligence. This would indicate that something went wrong.

i don’t think it would have been advisable to have an abortion given her medical condition. As far as I know you can’t have an abortion if you are at risk of blood clots. You can’t really make a fair comment when you don’t know ALL the facts.

I know someone in a similar situation. About 10 years ago, she received sterilisation, but the female in question got pregnant again. She had the baby. Healthy etc. Luckily no complications. Point being, she had a sterilisation to prevent pregnancy, but once she was pregnant, she kept the baby. The reasons weren’t to do with having the option of abortion or not (the female is pro-choice regardless). She just decided to keep the baby, because that’s what she chose. There was no reasons related to abortion, religion, morality etc etc etc. she just wanted to keep him. So why can’t the woman in the article be in the same situation? Maybe she did consider abortion, maybe she didn’t. The reasons aren’t anyone’s business, but it extremely presumptuous to assume she wanted one.

Harsh but true :(

Would you ever get a life and stop passing judgment on every topic on journal .ie