A WOMAN could re-ceive up to #500,000 damages for raising the child she would not have borne had she been told that she was suffering from a life-threatening heart condition.
The former nurse gave birth to a daughter by emergency Caesarean section in November 1989 - soon after being told that she had pulmonary hypertension, a potentially fatal condition made worse by pregnancy.
The case is thought to be the first damages award for the cost of rearing a child who was ''unwanted'' at birth - but was wanted and planned at conception.
Ruling on liability, Mr Justice Astill said in the High Court: ''Although she was very much wanted at conception, the child would not have been born had a proper diagnosis been made.''
The 39-year-old mother - who was not named - sued Croydon Health Authority for damages for failing to interpret correctly a chest X-ray she had in November 1988, five months before she became pregnant.
The authority, while denying liability, accepted that its reading of the X-ray, which was part of the selection process for a new job, was negligent.
Her relationship with her husband had been affected and they were now contemplating div-orce.
''I don't accept she would have suffered in the same way if the diagnosis was made at the proper time,'' said the judge.
The award - to in-clude damages for pain and suffering, loss of earnings, costs of raising the child from birth to 18, and pregnancy expenses - will be as-sessed at a later date.
The authority said it would appeal against the decision.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article