Texas Supreme Court denies woman damages after failed sterilization led to pregnancy

[harumph]

Source: Austin American-Statesman

The Texas Supreme Court on Friday ruled against an El Paso woman who sued her doctor for failing to perform a sterilization procedure she paid for, finding that she is not entitled to damages for emotional distress, physical pain or the costs of raising the child that resulted from her unintended pregnancy.


"Texas law does not regard a healthy child as an injury for which a parent must be compensated but, rather, as a life with inherent dignity and profound, immeasurable value," Justice Rebeca Huddle, one of nine Republican justices on the state's highest court, wrote in the opinion.

The 21-page opinion reverses a state appellate court's finding that a wrongful pregnancy would entitle Grissel Velasco, a mother of four, to damages for emotional anguish. The Supreme Court ruling aligns with previous appellate court decisions that find parents are not entitled to compensation for the cost of raising a child born from an unplanned pregnancy, the opinion notes.





Read more: https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/state/2024/05/10/texas-supreme-court-rules-against-el-paso-woman-seeking-damages-failed-sterilization-pregnancy/73640377007/

---

A new low - when you didn't think they could go any lower.

[Attilatheblond]

1. Texas now assures women THEY are slaves.

[RandySF]

2. Mordor

[GB_RN]

3. Wow.

And just when I thought the Texas (not so)Supreme Court had hit the max level for douchebaggery, being shit-tastic and despicable, barely-sentient fuckwits, they go and prove me wrong.

Douchebaggery, shit-tasticness and despicable-ness have been turned up past 11. Sentience is no longer detectable.

[ZonkerHarris]

4. she paid for something she didn't get and got a fuck you from the courts. judges are corrupt

[TomSlick]

5. Wrongful birth is a fraught cause of action.

Why isn't there a simple breach of contract case?

[Hekate]

9. She is on solid ground with this. If the doc didn't want to tie her tubes he shouldn't have taken her money

As for the pregnancy itself — a C-section is major surgery, risky and with a lengthy painful recovery. She had already determined that for her own physical, psychological, and economic health, she should not have another child. She was behaving like a mature and responsible adult. Instead this *hole led her to believe she and her husband were safe to engage in the act of love and she was put thru all of that pain and risk again.

I would want to do some damage to that doctor if it were me. She sued — and has been slapped down with the message that it does not matter in the slightest what she wants. The judges might just as well have told her and her husband the old “aspirin between the knees” story.

Now, that’s “fraught.”

[TexasDem69]

6. To clarify

The story says she did get damages, just not the ones she asked for.

The state's highest court found that the mother in this case could only recover damages for costs directly caused by the negligence that were incurred during the pregnancy, delivery and postpartum period.

That’s a bullshit outcome though.

[LeftInTX]

7. That is absolutely disgusting. She suffered because she believed he had performed a tubal ligation.

However, it sounds like she never signed the consent for the procedure, so it sounds more like there was miscommunication rather than deception on the doctor's part. It's very sad that this miscommunication happened and it seems like she may have had lower education and not realized.

Appellant testified that the day before her scheduled Cesarean, a Sun City employee named "Jackie" or "Jennifer" gave her permission over the phone to come to the practice and pay for the tubal ligation with her mother's credit card. When Appellant arrived, the same employee asked Appellant if she intended "to make the $400 payment so we can do the ... tubal ligation?" A Sun City receipt issued on July 15, 2014, for a $400 Master Card payment from Martha Enriquez does not indicate the reason for the charge.

According to her deposition testimony, when Appellant arrived at the hospital the next day for her delivery, she "told the staff that [she] was going to have [her] tubes tied," and any notation hospital staff made in the medical records to the contrary was incorrect. Dr. Noe did not counsel Appellant about having a tubal ligation

following her Cesarean surgery, and the record does not contain an informed consent signed by Appellant granting Dr. Noe permission to perform the procedure. Dr. Noe also did not tell Appellant during the C-section that he was not going to perform a tubal ligation.

Sun City's surgical scheduling form indicated Appellant would report to the hospital at 6:30 a.m. on July 16, 2014 for her C-section. Underneath "BTL Yes/No," the form bears a handwritten notation of "Chip can't afford," and "Yes/No" are not circled. The maternity card Sun City issued to Appellant has "No" circled in response to "For BTL," with "CHIP" handwritten across the word "No".
https://case-law.vlex.com/vid/velasco-v-noe-08-928731704

[Hekate]

10. Somebody screwed up in their care of this woman, and I don't think it was her

[sinkingfeeling]

8. And there you have it. Forced pregnancy is a Texas reality.

[Darwins_Retriever]

11. Almost state court would have ruled the same

This isn't the first time it has happened. And in an overwhelming number of cases, the court ruled that a healthy child is not an injury. Now in this case she should win for paying for a procedure that was not performed by the doctor. But not injury due to birth.