She gave her doctor good money to kill her fetus. Was the fetus killed? No. Now she’s got a live, apparently healthy baby girl on her hands.
And someone has to pay.
[Jennifer] 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…
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.
Why didn’t she exercise her right to choose adoption? It seems unlikely that she’s just looking to get paid given that it took her two years to file suit. Maybe she had a change of heart after the baby was born? But in that case, where’s the “mal” in the malpractice claim?
Update: Plaintiffs in tort cases generally have a duty to mitigate damages. Does that mean Raper had a duty to give up her unwanted child for adoption before a significant financial burden could accrue?