SINGAPORE (dpa) - A 2-year-old boy with Down's syndrome to sue a doctor for the pain and financial hardship resulting from his birth, news reports said Wednesday.
In a legal first in the city-state, the boy was named as a co-plaintiff in the suit brought by his mother, Katharine Soh Lea Chin, 47, against her obstetrician.
Psychiatrist Lim Yun Chin testified Tuesday that caring for the child was "physically and emotionally draining" for Soh and her husband and had affected their relationship, The Straits Times said. Lim said that Soh gave him the impression that her in-laws were extremely hostile and blamed her for the boy's condition.
The mother claims that Dr. See Tho Kai Yin, 59, failed to advise her to have prenatal screenings tests that might have diagnosed the foetus as suffering from Down's syndrome, in which an extra chromosome cause mental retardation, distinctive facial features and health problems.
Soh carried the pregnancy to term, without considering the option of aborting the foetus. She is seeking S$700,000 (US$409,000) in damages from the doctor and his practice.
The defence denies liability, contending that Soh was already 24 weeks and two days' pregnant when the doctor saw her for the first time on October 30, 2001, past the 24 weeks when a pregnancy can be terminated under Singapore laws.
So she's saying that if she'd know about the testing, she would have had it done and if she'd then found out that her child had Down's Syndrome, she would've aborted if she'd found out in time. That's way too many "ifs" for my liking.
If the woman is 47 years old now, and her son is two years old, that would have made the woman 45 years old at the time of her son's birth.
Anyone who knows anything about pregnancy, especially people of that age, should know that the chances of having a child with downs syndrome is much greater for women over the age of 35.
Maybe the son should have someone sue his mother for him.
No wonder her husband's family blames her... I didn't know that about women over 35. I knew that they ran a higher risk of complications, but I didn't know about a greater chance of having a Down's baby.
If anything, the doctor is negligent of not informing this woman about the risks and complications of having a child at her age. That is, assuming that he didn't caution her.
"What one believes to be real, will be real in it's concequences"
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world"
I agree with Anomaly, a doctor not providing information or testing for an at risk pregnancy is negligent. But geez what a biatch! She'll probably raise that boy to believe he's a burden. There are plenty of people out there with Down Syndrome who are some of the sweetest individuals on the planet. I second Dekka's motion, let's abort the mother.
Holy War....You're basically killing each other to see who's got the better imaginary friend. - Richard Jeni
Sierradaddy said this in post #5 : No wonder her husband's family blames her... I didn't know that about women over 35. I knew that they ran a higher risk of complications, but I didn't know about a greater chance of having a Down's baby.
24 wks and 2 days.... lol
At age 40 it is 1 out of every 109
At age 35 it is 1 out of 365.
At age 45 her chances were 1 in 32.
The eggs are old and the quality is not as good as in a younger woman.
here is the link if anyone wants to know the source http://www.gynob.com/obage.htm
She should no that at 45, she has 45 year old eggs in her. Thos are sticky eggs, which leads to higher rates of extra-chromosomal diseases. I can understand the claim of the doctor being negligent, but to sue, I mean come on...
I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody.
- Bill Cosby
The guy who takes a chance, who walks the line between the known and unknown, who is unafraid of failure, will succeed.
- Gordon Parks
One problem I have (among others), but this one sticks out...
Putting the boys name on the suit.
Thats gives me the willies.
I wont get into the abortion argument and what I believe...but the boy is in the world now, and I think it is freaky to put his name on the documents to sue for not aborting him. I realize the suit isnt claiming that outright, but isnt that the bottom line?
Of course thats just my opinion....I could be wrong. (Dennis Miller)
"You might be the toughest little whacker. . .but in my world, you're about as worrisome as a cloudy day." (Dutch Dooley)
The whole suit is absurd. She was past the date that she could have an abortion when she first saw the doctor.
The significance of 24 weeks is that it is the very earliest date of viability. The chances are extremely slim that a fetus could survive, but once in while one does.
10-01-2004 06:13 AM
