“[W]e are unwilling to say that life, even life with severe defects, may ever amount to a legal injury.”
How later courts described this case
- “[W]e are unwilling to say that life, even life with severe defects, may ever amount to a legal injury.”
- cause of action denied for healthy child born as a result of failed sterilization
- The “physician cannot be said to have caused the defect. This disorder is genetic and not the result of any injury negligently inflicted by the doctor.”
- potential that wrongful life liability would “place increased pressure upon physicians to take the ‘safe’ course” cited as justification for refusing to recognize such a claim
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Justice Frye
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur in the holding of part III of the majority opinion with respect to the siblings’ claim. I concur in the result reached by the majority in denying the wrongful life claim on behalf of the child.
I dissent from that portion of the opinion which denies the validity of a medical malpractice claim in this State on behalf of the parents for the wrongful birth of an unhealthy child. The decision of the majority is contrary to that reached by the great majority of courts which have considered such a claim. See generally W. Keeton, D. Dobbs, R. Keeton & D. Owen, Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts, p. 372 (5th ed. 1984). The fact that courts differ as to the measure of damages in such cases is insufficient reason to deny the validity of the underlying claim. This Court should recognize the validity of the claim and determine an appropriate measure of damages, while realizing that the General Assembly of North Carolina could, by appropriate legislation, adopt a new or different standard.