Comments on: A wrongful birth nets $23.5 million http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/07/wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html Tue, 14 Feb 2012 19:56:00 +0000 hourly 1 By: Ming-Chihhttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/07/wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78266 Ming-Chih Fri, 27 Jul 2007 18:47:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/07/a-wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78266 <a HREF="http://genetests.com/servlet/access?db=geneclinics&site=gt&id=8888891&key=59xNNlHl-W6CG&gry=&fcn=y&fw=ljC5&filename=/profiles/slo/index.html" REL="nofollow">GeneReviews</a>.<br/><br/>Screening tests that may have been suggestive:<br/><br/>"<br/>In pregnancies in which there is no FH of SLOS<br/>* The combination of low concentrations of unconjugated estriol, HCG, and AFP on routine maternal serum testing at 16-18 weeks' gestation <br/>* U/S findings such as cardiac defects, cleft palate, genital abnormalities, growth retardation, or apparent female phenotype with 46,XY karyotype from CVS or amniocentesis <br/>* Low maternal serum concentrations of unconjugated estriol levels<br/>"<br/><br/>So the prenatal triple screen and prenatal U/S *may* have detected this. But these tests are tuned for screening more common congenital abnormalities like Down's. The test characteristics are not great for a rare disorder like SLOS. (GeneReviews quote a PPV of 1% using triple screen) GeneReviews.

Screening tests that may have been suggestive:

“
In pregnancies in which there is no FH of SLOS
* The combination of low concentrations of unconjugated estriol, HCG, and AFP on routine maternal serum testing at 16-18 weeks’ gestation
* U/S findings such as cardiac defects, cleft palate, genital abnormalities, growth retardation, or apparent female phenotype with 46,XY karyotype from CVS or amniocentesis
* Low maternal serum concentrations of unconjugated estriol levels
“

So the prenatal triple screen and prenatal U/S *may* have detected this. But these tests are tuned for screening more common congenital abnormalities like Down’s. The test characteristics are not great for a rare disorder like SLOS. (GeneReviews quote a PPV of 1% using triple screen)

]]> By: Anonymoushttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/07/wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78255 Anonymous Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:09:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/07/a-wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78255 "Which do you think is more predictable?"<br/><br/>If the one who knows nothing is another physician, clearly that person. “Which do you think is more predictable?”

If the one who knows nothing is another physician, clearly that person.

]]> By: Anonymoushttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/07/wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78231 Anonymous Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:57:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/07/a-wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78231 Did the parents do anything to mitigate their risk?<br/><br/>Did they seek a second opinion from another geneticist about their first child that at least might have confirmed they were not at greater risk of having a second child with the same disorder? Did they consider adoption regardless of the fact that no definitive diagnosis was given to them of their first child's disorder? Did they consider an anonymous sperm donor to further diminish the risk? Did they have CVS or amniocentesis done after conceiving their second child, given their after-the-fact expression in their willingness to abort? If not, why not?<br/><br/>It seems to me that the couple had many choices: no more children, adoption, further consultation befor conceiving, post-conception testing.<br/><br/>It seems to me a court-ordered advocate should represent the second child and sue the parents, if his birth is in fact so wrong as to merit that gigantic award. Since when does the doctor pick the kid's genes? Did the parents do anything to mitigate their risk?

Did they seek a second opinion from another geneticist about their first child that at least might have confirmed they were not at greater risk of having a second child with the same disorder? Did they consider adoption regardless of the fact that no definitive diagnosis was given to them of their first child’s disorder? Did they consider an anonymous sperm donor to further diminish the risk? Did they have CVS or amniocentesis done after conceiving their second child, given their after-the-fact expression in their willingness to abort? If not, why not?

It seems to me that the couple had many choices: no more children, adoption, further consultation befor conceiving, post-conception testing.

It seems to me a court-ordered advocate should represent the second child and sue the parents, if his birth is in fact so wrong as to merit that gigantic award. Since when does the doctor pick the kid’s genes?

]]> By: Anonymoushttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/07/wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78230 Anonymous Thu, 26 Jul 2007 21:36:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/07/a-wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78230 >>"Paid for it and saw the evidence v. you, someone who hasn't seen the evidence and not surprisingly, wasn't paid for his opinion. Which do you think is more valuable?"<br/><br/><br/><br/>Which do you think is more predictable? >>”Paid for it and saw the evidence v. you, someone who hasn’t seen the evidence and not surprisingly, wasn’t paid for his opinion. Which do you think is more valuable?”

Which do you think is more predictable?

]]> By: Anonymoushttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/07/wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78226 Anonymous Thu, 26 Jul 2007 20:52:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/07/a-wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78226 Paid for it and saw the evidence v. you, someone who hasn't seen the evidence and not surprisingly, wasn't paid for his opinion. Which do you think is more valuable?<br/><br/>Did the defense expert work for free? Paid for it and saw the evidence v. you, someone who hasn’t seen the evidence and not surprisingly, wasn’t paid for his opinion. Which do you think is more valuable?

Did the defense expert work for free?

]]> By: Anonymoushttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/07/wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78222 Anonymous Thu, 26 Jul 2007 19:38:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/07/a-wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78222 "Well, we know at least one doctor who has seen the evidence agreed with it"<br/><br/>Yeah the doctor who was payed for his testimony. Some unbiased source. “Well, we know at least one doctor who has seen the evidence agreed with it”

Yeah the doctor who was payed for his testimony. Some unbiased source.

]]> By: Anonymoushttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/07/wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78213 Anonymous Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:20:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/07/a-wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78213 Well...in future cases I think the doctor should just say "No I don't know what your 1st child has, but yes I do think its going to happen again" even if they think differently and for no other reason than to cover themselves. <br/><br/>that'll show em. Well…in future cases I think the doctor should just say “No I don’t know what your 1st child has, but yes I do think its going to happen again” even if they think differently and for no other reason than to cover themselves.

that’ll show em.

]]> By: Anonymoushttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/07/wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78211 Anonymous Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:09:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/07/a-wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78211 Well, we know at least one doctor who has seen the evidence agreed with it. Those of you who disagree, what in the records did you disagree with? Well, we know at least one doctor who has seen the evidence agreed with it. Those of you who disagree, what in the records did you disagree with?

]]> By: Anonymoushttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/07/wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78210 Anonymous Thu, 26 Jul 2007 11:56:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/07/a-wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78210 That is an outrageous jury finding. First is the presumption that a disease with variable expression, and a very rare one at that, is going to be diagnosed with certainty enough to reliably advise this couple to abort a second pregnancy. Second is the entire underlying presumption that this couple was somehow guauranteed healthy children simply because they consulted with a specialist.<br/><br/>Where was the judgment of the court in this? So the jury was derelict, does the judge have to be as well? The traditional common law holding is that there is no such thing as a "wrongful birth." Is Florida asserting some new foundation to its laws? That is an outrageous jury finding. First is the presumption that a disease with variable expression, and a very rare one at that, is going to be diagnosed with certainty enough to reliably advise this couple to abort a second pregnancy. Second is the entire underlying presumption that this couple was somehow guauranteed healthy children simply because they consulted with a specialist.

Where was the judgment of the court in this? So the jury was derelict, does the judge have to be as well? The traditional common law holding is that there is no such thing as a “wrongful birth.” Is Florida asserting some new foundation to its laws?

]]> By: Cathyhttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/07/wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78208 Cathy Thu, 26 Jul 2007 05:52:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/07/a-wrongful-birth-nets-235-million.html#comment-78208 The biggest issue is the kind of parents this poor little boy is going to have.<br/><br/>I dont understand what is wrong with people in today's world. When I was having my kids you didn't worry about every imaginable illness, and demand they been checked during gestation for them. You took what you got and you loved them unconditionally. The biggest issue is the kind of parents this poor little boy is going to have.

I dont understand what is wrong with people in today’s world. When I was having my kids you didn’t worry about every imaginable illness, and demand they been checked during gestation for them. You took what you got and you loved them unconditionally.

]]>