![]() ![]() ![]() The Court of Appeals held that the existence of a physician-patient relationship was not a prerequisite to recovery for negligent failure to diagnose. However, the Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of Teddy’s claim of wrongful life because he failed to allege legally cognizable damages. The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court, in part, holding that (1) the parents stated a claim for relief under established negligence principles in Oregon, notwithstanding the lack of a physician-patient relationship between plaintiffs and defendants (2) the parents adequately alleged causation and (3) the parents could seek emotional distress damages from defendants without alleging and establishing physical impact. ![]() The trial court agreed with defendants’ arguments and granted their motions to dismiss the case. Teddy sought $10 million in noneconomic damages and $2 million in economic damages.ĭefendants moved to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that: (1) no physician-patient relationship existed between plaintiffs and defendants (2) the parents had failed to adequately allege causation on their claim for wrongful birth (3) the parents could not seek emotional distress damages from defendants without pleading and proving physical impact and (4) Oregon law does not support a claim for claim for “wrongful life,” so Teddy’s claim failed as a matter of law. The parents sought $5 million each in noneconomic damages, and approximately $1 million in economic damages for Teddy’s future care. The parents’ claims were therefore styled as wrongful birth, while Teddy’s claim was wrongful life.Īll three plaintiffs alleged resulting damages. Plaintiffs alleged that as a foreseeable result of that breach, the parents conceived and bore Teddy, who suffers from the same genetic condition. Plaintiffs argued that the providers breached the professional standard of care that they owed to Manny by failing to diagnose him with his genetic condition, failing to inform Manny’s parents of that condition, and failing to inform the parents of the reproductive risks associated with having a second child. Kerry and Scott, as well as Teddy, then filed suit against the children’s medical providers. Teddy was later born with the same condition. Manny, the elder son, was born with a rare genetic condition, which went undiagnosed at the time of his birth. ![]() Kerry and Scott Tomlinson, an Oregon couple, have two sons, Manny and Teddy. If defendant-physicians are alleged to have negligently failed to diagnose a genetic disorder in a child, with the consequence that the parents of the child gave birth to a sibling with the same genetic disorder who will experience a life of progressive incapacity and a premature death, does the sibling have a viable claim for compensation for his physical and mental suffering and the post-majority expense of his care resulting from the genetic disorder?.Can a person sue for emotional distress damages caused by medical malpractice in the absence of a physical impact or a heightened and specific duty by the defendant-physician to protect the plaintiff from emotional harm?.Can a physician be sued for medical malpractice (specifically, negligent failure to diagnose a patient) by a third party, such as a parent, who has never been a patient of the defendant-physician?.Metropolitan Pediatrics, LLC, the Supreme Court is poised to rule on three questions: The Oregon Supreme Court recently accepted review of a case that could have far-reaching implications for those in the medical community in Oregon. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |