Abstract
Wrongful birth cases were initially brought most often for failed contraception, sterilisation or termination of pregnancy. Claims have since arisen from alleged failures in the provision of pre-conception and antenatal advice leading to a loss of opportunity to commence or terminate a pregnancy, or for failures in assisted reproduction. Within that second category, breach of duty leading to the birth of a child with disabilities has not always been enough for the claimant parent/s to recover compensation or at least for all of the child's disabilities. Two key cases show the courts' focus on scope of duty issues - Waller v James and Khan v Meadows. Arguably the same outcomes could have been arrived at by consideration of normative causation. This article examines the two cases, but emphasises the fact-sensitive nature of those judgments in which scope of duty and normative causation filters may or may not apply.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 481-488 |
| Number of pages | 8 |
| Journal | Journal of Law and Medicine |
| Volume | 29 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Jun 2022 |