Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!nike!ucbcad!ucbvax!UOFT01.BITNET!ASPDMM
From: ASPDMM@UOFT01.BITNET
Newsgroups: mod.legal
Subject: BITNET mail follows
Message-ID: <8608251048.aa00177@SEM.BRL.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 25-Aug-86 09:14:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: SEM.8608251048.aa00177
Posted: Mon Aug 25 09:14:00 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 25-Aug-86 21:42:06 EDT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 31
Approved: info-law@brl.arpa

Dear Colleagues,

   Has anybody heard  or seen anything about  Wrongful Birth
and/or Wrongful Life cases recently? I am writing a critical
casenote about  a case that came  down in the  Idaho Supreme
Court last year, BLAKE v.  CRUZ, 698 P.2d 315, which allowed
the claim for WB but not for  WL.   As far as I know,  there
are only two cases that allowed WL, CURLANDER v. BIO SCIENCE
LABS, 106 Cal. App. 3d 811, 165 Cal. Rptr.  477  (1980)  and
HARBESON v. PARKE DAVIS, 98 Wash. 2d 460 (1983).

   What I'm interested in is critical comment on whether any
court has taken the position that  WL should be allowed as a
claim indepenent of WB.   Your own opinions would be equally
as welcome as those of courts and/or legal scholars, since I
am trying to ferret out a  sourt of "national conscience" on
this issue.

Thanks for your help
Dave Massey

P.S.  Wrongful Birth is an action brought by PARENTS seeking
to recover damages for a planned-for child  which  was born
impaired, assuming that the parents would have aborted or not
conceived had they known the child would have been born in an
impaired state and that the negligence of the doctor prevented
them from making an informed choice.  Wrongful Life is a suit
brought by the CHILD, on the same set of facts as above, but
stating that being born in this state was worse than not being
born at all, therefore seeking damages from having to live in
such a state at all. (this is VERY brief, I hope it helps)