Torts (Medical Malpractice; Wrongful Birth/Wrongful Life)
Smith v. Cote, 128 N.H. 231, 513 A.2d 341 (N.H. 1986)
Study notes for Smith v. Cote: professor notes, cold call prep, exam angles, and memory aids.
New Hampshire recognizes wrongful birth claims for negligent prenatal care but rejects wrongful life claims by children born with impairments.
In Smith v. Cote, the New Hampshire Supreme Court established the viability of a wrongful birth claim, recognizing that negligent prenatal testing and counseling can deprive parents of their ability to make informed reproductive choices. The court notably distinguished the concept of wrongful birth from wrongful life by denying the latter, underscoring the emphasis on parental rights to information and decision-making. The ruling leans toward protecting the autonomy of parents and their interests in family planning, highlighting the complexities of navigating medical malpractice in reproductive contexts.
Additionally, the court's recognition of recoverable damages, including extraordinary expenses and emotional distress while negating general childrearing costs, raises interesting discussions about the valuation of parental care compared to the implications of medical negligence. This case sets precedence in tort law regarding the balance of rights and responsibilities in light of reproductive and medical decisions, aligning New Hampshire with a growing recognition of wrongful birth claims nationwide.
B.E.D. – Birth (wrongful), Expenses (recoverable), Distinction (between wrongful birth and life)
| Case | Distinction |
|---|---|
| Moore v. Regents of the University of California | Moore dealt with informed consent regarding tissue harvest rather than the prenatal context of wrongful birth. |
| Harbeson v. Parke-Davis, Inc. | Harbeson involved wrongful life claims specifically and its scope, which was rejected by the court in Smith. |
Recognizing wrongful birth claims promotes accountability in medical practices, ensuring that parents are fully informed during pregnancy and allowing them to make timely decisions.
Critics argue that wrongful birth claims could challenge the value of life, leading to complex moral and ethical implications regarding the desirability of offspring.
This case often appears on exams in discussions around tort liability for medical malpractice and the emerging issue of wrongful birth, emphasizing the distinction from wrongful life claims and analyzing recoverable damages.