Wrongful life and birth

Abstract

The main scope of the article is the bioethical and legal issues of wrongful birth and wrongful life with reference to doctors' medical liability. Nowadays, prenatal tests tend to substitute the eugenic practice of Spartan inspection to raise a strong and healthy child. Should the doctor misinform the parents that the child is healthy and the parents do not exercise the right to abort the pregnancy, the doctor can be held liable and claims on wrongful life or birth are raised against him. "Wrongful life" is an oxymoron itself since "life" which has an intrinsic value and sanctity is attributed a negative aspect and is regarded as damage. Courts around the world have awarded parents compensation on that legal ground. In the Perruche affair (2000), where the mother was wrongly diagnosed and gave birth to Nicholas, who had serious neurological problems, the court conferred the right on the child itself, causing an uproar in France. The decision was criticized for encouraging eugenics and diminishing the value of handicapped people. The different approaches to the above issues by different courts around the world (US, EU) with reference to (bio) ethical concerns are going to be examined. We will try to give an answer on whether it is possible for courts to support on legal and bioethical grounds that a child with disabilities should not have been born as a result of the doctor's negligent conduct. In such cases, the limits of normality and the value of life are challenged