The right to be aborted
Sureau, C.
Bulletin et Memoires de l'Academie Royale de Medecine de Belgique 156(5-6) 237-246; Discussion: 247-248
2001
ISSN/ISBN: 0377-8231 PMID: 11928228 Document Number: 530862
This lecture deals with the difficult problem of so called "wrongful life". Two Court decisions have been issued recently in France and lead to a very ambiguous situation since they differ dramatically. In the "Perruche affair" where a diagnosis of rubella was not done, the parents prevented to get an interruption of pregnancy, and the child severely affected, the Court (Cour de Cassation, i.e. Supreme Court in charge of civil affairs) decided to compensate the child for "not having be aborted". In the "Quarez affair" where a diagnosis of Down syndrome was not done, the parents prevented to get an interruption of pregnancy, the Court (Conseil d'Etat, i.e. Supreme Court in charge of "administrative" affairs, affairs opposing individuals to state administration since the hospital in cause was belonging to the public sector) decided not to compensate directly the affected child. The consequences of these opposite decisions are analysed according to medical, legal, ethical and economic considerations.