Sound reasons exist not to recognize a claim for general damages. Synopsis of Rule of Law. Research indicates that individual differences in parental perceptions of their infants, as much as individual differences in the infants themselves, can affect the parental attachment and family adaptation process. These rulings overruled Gleitman v. Cosgrove, 49 N.J. 22, 227 A.2d 689 (1967). Russell L. Hewit, Westfield, for defendants-respondents (Dughi & Hewit, Westfield, attorneys; Robert D. Mulvee, Westfield, on the brief). As Chief Justice Weintraub so eloquently framed the issue: With respect to the claim advanced on behalf of the infant, I agree with the majority that it cannot be maintained. Berman v. Allan, supra, 80 N.J. at 427, 404 A.2d 8. I adhere to the view previously expressed in both Berman and Schroeder. How prenatal genetic testing protects patients—and you . The Legislature has acted to protect society from incompetent doctors by authorizing the State Board of Medical Examiners to suspend or revoke a doctor's license when it has been demonstrated that he is professionally incompetent to practice medicine. den. Concurring in part; dissenting in part --Justice HANDLER--1. May an infant recover general damages for emotional distress or for an impaired childhood caused by a doctor’s negligent deprivation of his parent’s choice of terminating the pregnancy? In brief, the ultimate decision is a policy choice summoning the most sensitive and careful judgment. Greisman v. Newcomb Hosp., 40 N.J. 389, 192 A.2d 817 (1963) (hospital's discretionary power to grant admitting privileges to doctors must be exercised in the public interest). Procanik by Procanik v. Cillo: Case Citation: 478 A.2d 755: Year: 1984: Facts: 1. Procanik by Procanik v. Cillo. Brief Fact Summary. I think it is realistic, feasible, and fair to permit an afflicted infant born in these [478 A.2d 766] circumstances damages that would include the element of an impaired childhood. A claim asserted by a husband and a parent of a patient is an individual claim; it is not a “derivative” claim of the patient. Ultimately, the infant's complaint is that he would be better off not to have been born. Underlying our conclusion is an evaluation of the capability of the judicial system, often proceeding in these cases through trial by jury, to appraise such a claim. The issues arise out of a remand of the Supreme Court, Procanik By Procanik v. Cillo, 97 N.J. 339 (1984) (hereinafter cited as Procanik ). The filaments of family life, although individually spun, create a web of interconnected legal interests. This does not involve only, or even, a lack of love, as suggested by the majority. He described the claim for emotional distress as "incalculable," but found "the medical and maintenance expenses causally related to the abnormality" to be "readily measurable." The majority recognizes, in this case, that the suffering of pain and sorrow in these circumstances is not a singular or individualized injury; it permeates the whole family. Dissenting in part--Justice SCHREIBER--1. He also seeks special damages attributable to the extraordinary expenses he will incur for medical, nursing, and other health care. Parental reactions in the wake of the birth of a congenitally defective child in these circumstances can be the most critical factor in terms of capacity to function as parents. Thus, it cannot be overemphasized that the malpractice involved in genetic counselling can have a demonstrable adverse impact on the afflicted child. Id. The threshold problem has been the assertion by infant plaintiffs not that they should not have been born without defects, but that they should not have been born at all. Get Endresz v. Friedberg, 248 N.E.2d 901 (N.Y. 1969), New York Court of Appeals, case facts, key issues, and holdings and reasonings online today. A family is woven of the fibers of life; if [478 A.2d 762] one strand is damaged, the whole structure may suffer. This is a self-created hypothesis. Also at work is an appraisal of the role of tort law in compensating injured parties, involving as that role does, not only reason, but also fairness, predictability, and even deterrence of future wrongful acts. The essential proof in such a claim is that the doctor's negligence deprives the parents of the knowledge of the condition of the fetus. Blackburn v. Dorta Supreme Court of FL - 1977 Facts: None given. The courts of other jurisdictions have also struggled with the issues of injury and damages when faced with suits for wrongful life. Justice Jacobs wrote in Gleitman that a wrong has been committed and that the law "can afford some reasonable measure of compensation towards alleviating the financial burdens." Before the trial court they stipulated, however, that they knew they had a potential cause of action by January 1978, nearly three years before instituting suit. The infant plaintiff's injury need not be defined as being born defective or require that nonexistence be preferred to existence. Wrongful-birth and wrongful-life claims represent two distinct causes of action. The infant plaintiff shall have leave to file an amended complaint asserting a claim for extraordinary medical, hospital, and other health care expenses. The birth of a child has an effect on family life, frequently eliciting both positive and negative feelings. Before us, however, the parents contend that their claim is derived from Peter's claim and that N.J.S.A. 2007 December;19(12):25-36. (1980), modified, 52 N.Y.2d 363, 438 N.Y.S.2d 266, 420 N.E.2d 64 (1981) (guardian can discontinue life support for patient in a chronic vegetative state to carry out patient's prior expressed wish); Satz v. Perlmutter, 362 So.2d [478 A.2d 771] 160 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1978), aff'd, 379 So.2d 359 (Fla.1980) (mentally competent, terminally ill patient can exercise right of self-determination by electing to remove respirator, even if inevitable result is his own death); In re Estate of Brooks, 32 Ill.2d 361, 205 N.E.2d 435 (1965) (dying patients can refuse treatment on religious grounds); Superintendent of Belchertown v. Saikewicz, 373 Mass. at 429, 404 A.2d 8. First, doctors carry malpractice insurance, and the costs seemingly imposed on the defendants will actually be borne by those members of the public using the services of obstetricians or whatever grouping of doctors occurs for insurance purposes. Accepting as true the allegations of the complaint, see, e.g., Portee v. Jaffee, 84 N.J. 88, 90, 417 A.2d 521 (1980), the complaint discloses the following facts. In restricting the infant's claim to one for special damages, we recognize that our colleagues, Justice Schreiber and Justice Handler, disagree with us and with each other. 97 N.J. 339, 478 A.2d 755 . Lavelle & Keogh, "Expectations and Attributions of Parents of Handicapped Children," New [478 A.2d 767] Directions for Exceptional Children: Parents and Families of Handicapped Children 4 (J. Gallagher ed. 2A:14-2. Our decision to allow the recovery of extraordinary medical expenses is not premised on the concept that non-life is preferable to an impaired life, but is predicated on the needs of the living. 11. Procanik by Procanik v. Cillo; 1984 August 1: en: dc.provenance: Digital citation created by the Bioethics Research Library, Georgetown University, for the National Information Resource on Ethics and Human Genetics, a project funded by the United States National Human Genome Research Institute: en: … I am firmly convinced that we should recognize a cause of action on behalf of the afflicted child with a full and fair measure of damages that adequately encompasses the enormity of the wrong. Procedural History: None given. Roskies (1972) found that many mothers felt that the physician's main concern was to protect himself or to mitigate the mothers' feelings of guilt. 477, 492 (1982). It may also be caused or worsened by the delayed knowledge of their child's condition and the manner in which this knowledge was conveyed to them. In re. In fact, the tests disclosed that she had German measles, not that it was in the past. In some situations, the Court has accepted the substituted judgment of a surrogate, guardian or family as the only means of preserving the right of personal choice or self-determination on the part of an individual otherwise unable to exercise that right. Substituting the parents' judgment for that of the child provides a practicable way to recognize the injury to the child." Though such a measurement is unquestionably difficult, "to deny * * * redress for * * * injuries merely because damages cannot be measured with precise exactitude would constitute a perversion of fundamental principles of justice." Reasoning from the premise that the doctor did not cause the infant plaintiff's birth defects, the Gleitman Court found it impossible to compare the infant's condition if the defendant doctor had not been negligent with the infant's impaired condition as a result of the negligence. A. Money that is spent for the health care of one child is not available for the clothes, food, or college education of another child. Finally, some other forms of deterrence against malpractice now exist. He was also appar-ently mentally retarded. [478 A.2d 758] On June 9, 1977, during the first trimester of her pregnancy with Peter, Mrs. Procanik consulted the defendant doctors and informed Dr. Cillo "that she had recently been diagnosed as having measles but did not know if it was German measles." [478 A.2d 758] On June 9, 1977, during the first trimester of her pregnancy with Peter, Mrs. Procanik consulted the defendant doctors and informed Dr. Cillo "that she had recently been diagnosed as having measles but did not know if it was German measles." That injury does not consist of the child's afflicted condition; her affliction was not the doctor's doing. Becker v. Schwartz, 46 N.Y.2d 401, 411, 413 N.Y.S.2d 895, 900, 386 N.E.2d 807, 812 (1978). Dr. Cillo examined Mrs. Procanik and ordered "tests for German Measles, known as Rubella Titer Test." 1980) [hereinafter cited as Lavelle & Keogh, New Direction]. See, e.g., Procanik v. Cillo, 97 N.J. 339, 359-63, 478 A.2d 755, 766-68 (1984) (Handler, J., concurring in part, dissenting in part) (discussing the likelihood of parents' shock, stress and emotional trauma at birth of handicapped child after genetic counselor They may construe this exclusion as a personal failure that is the "cause" of their child's suffering and a major factor in contributing to his or her burdens. The duty owed to the parents is to diagnose and inform them of the abnormalities to the infant so the parents can use that information to decide whether the pregnancy should be terminated. Rather, the injury consists of a diminished childhood in being born of parents kept ignorant of her defective state while unborn and who, on that account, were less fit to accept and assume their parental responsibilities. However, the Court continued to refuse to recognize any cause of action on behalf of the child. In re Quinlan, supra, 70 N.J. at 41, 355 A.2d 647; see In re Conroy, supra, 188 N.J.Super. No claim on behalf of the infant was raised in that case, id. 618, 660 (1979) ("[W]hen a physician or other genetic counselor wrongfully fails to disclose information about genetic risks [478 A.2d 770] material to a couple's decision to bear a child, he or she has breached a duty owed both to the couple and to the prospective child."). The Court, it is to be emphasized, can recognize that individual right without itself expressing a preference. The first is when punishment is in order, that is, when the defendant should be punished civilly for wanton and willful misconduct to. KIE: An infant sought damages for birth defects caused by physicians' failure to diagnose his … His claim for the medical expenses attributable to his birth defects is reasonably certain, readily calculable, and of a kind daily determined by judges and juries. New Jersey. Schroeder v. Perkel, supra, 87 N.J. at 72, 432 A.2d 834 (Handler, J., concurring and dissenting); Berman v. Several considerations lead us to decline to recognize a cause of action for impaired childhood. Both common experience and the insight of experts strongly show that that kind of anguish can involve "diminished parental capacity" (Berman, supra, 80 N.J. at 440, 404 A.2d 8), a dysfunctional state that is the predicate of "impaired childhood." The Court posits as the only basis for permitting a recovery on behalf of the infant the preference of nonlife over life. Second, under existing law, parents have a malpractice claim for the identical misconduct. In fact, the "past infection" disclosed by the tests was the German measles that had prompted Mrs. Procanik to consult the defendant doctors. The proposition that nonexistence can be chosen over existence, though philosophically remarkable, is not judicially indefensible or unprecedented. Their injury is real and palpable. The essence of the injury of a diminished childhood is that it can be a mirror reflection of the diminished ability of the parents to care for their child. Ante at 353. Measurement of "the value of life. See In re Quinlan, supra, 70 N.J. 10, 355 A.2d 647; In re Conroy, supra, 188 N.J.Super. Cross-motions for summary judgment have been made by all parties who agree that there are no genuine issues as to any material fact under R. 4:46-2. Like the present case, Gleitman involved a doctor who negligently treated a pregnant woman who had contracted German measles in the first trimester of her pregnancy. The essence of the infant's claim is that the defendant doctors wrongfully deprived his mother of information that would have prevented his birth. In this case we survey again the changing landscape of family torts. The Court also assumes the Defendants were negligent in treating the mother and that the negligence deprived the parents of the choice of terminating the pregnancy. Despite the Court's extension in this case of damages on behalf of the parents and its decision to commit the damages recovery to the infant, my differences with the Court deepen on whether a cognizable tort has been inflicted against the infant plaintiff. At the outset, we note the flaw in such a claim in those instances in which the parents assert not that the information would have prepared them for the birth of the defective child, but that they would have used the information to prevent that birth. Damages so measured are not subject to the same wild swings as a claim for pain and suffering and will carry a sufficient sting to deter future acts of medical malpractice. Although the parents recognize that their claim, if viewed as independent, is time-barred, they contend that the claim should be viewed as derivative from the infant's claim and, therefore, that it should not have been dismissed. Yes. Although two intermediate appellate courts in New York and California recognized an infant's claim for general damages, those decisions were rejected by the courts of last resort in both jurisdictions. There are alternative standards that may be used feasibly in appropriate cases. This is the old version of the H2O platform and is now read-only. When a child requires extraordinary medical care, the financial impact is felt not just by the parents, but also by the injured child. An infant plaintiff may recover special damages for the extraordinary medical expenses he will incur, but may not recover general damages for emotional distress or for an impaired childhood. This means you can view content but cannot create content. Written and curated by real attorneys at Quimbee. Here, the parents' claim is barred by the statute of limitations. Rather the choice is between a worldly existence and none at all. Recognition of this condition, a corollary of impaired parental capacity, would. Other courts have also come to recognize the legitimacy and validity of individual choice to prefer nonexistence in extraordinary circumstances. A family is woven of the fibers of life; if one strand is damaged, the whole structure may suffer. Finally, Peter's right to recover the costs of his health care is separate from his parent's claim for their own pain and suffering, and recognition of Peter's right to recover does not resuscitate the expired independent claim of the parents. The Plaintiff, Peter Procanik (Plaintiff), was born with multiple birth defects, the result of his mother’s German Measles that the Defendants, Dr. Cillo and other doctors (Defendants), negligently failed to diagnose. Owners And Occupiers Of Land Wrongful Death And Survival Strict Liability Nuisance Civil Rights Misuse Of Legal Procedure Interference With Advantageous Relationships Torts In The Age Of Statutes Hence, the parents ask us to recognize their claim. 132 (App. Most significantly their impairment as parents can be related to their being excluded from perhaps the most important decision in their lives--whether to give birth to a congenitally defective child. 113 N.J. 357 (1988), the New Jersey Appellate Division indicated that “threshold communications” between a lawyer and a prospective client may impose certain duties and responsibilities on the attorney even if no legal representation emerges from that consultation. at 63-64, 432 A.2d 834.]. That finding eliminated one of the supports for the Gleitman decision-- i.e., that public policy prohibited an award for depriving a woman of the right to choose whether to have an abortion. In Berman v. Allen, 80 N.J. 421, 404 A.2d 8 (1979), we [478 A.2d 765] recognized such a cause of action on behalf of the infant's parents, and that the mental and emotional anguish of the parents attributable to their deprivation of a meaningful choice concerning the birth of their child and the infant's tragic congenital condition is an appropriate measure of damages for the parents. The trial court ruled that the parents' claims were barred by the two-year period of limitations contained in N.J.S.A. Berman, supra, 80 N.J. at 433, 404 A.2d 8; see also Nappe v. Anschelewitz, 97 N.J. 37, 41 n. 1 477 A.2d 1224, 1226 n. 1 (1984). The philosophical problem of finding that such a defective life is worth less than no life at all has perplexed not only Justice Schreiber, but such other distinguished members of this Court as Chief Justice Weintraub, Gleitman, supra, 49 N.J. at 63, 227 A.2d 689 (Weintraub, C.J., dissenting in part), Justice Proctor, Gleitman, supra, 49 N.J. at 30, 227 A.2d 689, and Justice Pashman, Berman v. Allan, supra, 80 N.J. at 429, 404 A.2d 8. To make the leap from negligence to noncausally-related damages is unwarranted in this case. We must remember that the choice is not between being born with health or being born without it; it is not claimed the defendants failed to do something to prevent or reduce the ravages of rubella. More recently we advanced the parents' right to compensation by permitting recovery of the extraordinary expenses of raising a child born with cystic fibrosis, including medical, hospital, and pharmaceutical expenses. Holding/Rule: Assumption of risk is not a valid defense since is superseded by the doctrine of comparative negligence. Relying on Roe v. Wade, supra, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S.Ct. 728, 370 N.E.2d 417 (1977) (hospital can withhold painful treatment from terminally ill, mentally incompetent patient); In re Dinnerstein, 6 Mass.App. Id. However, the Court itself need not express a preference of life over nonlife but only to understand that individuals in necessitous situations have the right to make that choice. The congenital rubella syndrome that plagues him was not caused by the negligence of the defendant doctors; the only proximate result of their negligence was the child's birth. Discussion. The depth and duration of parents' negative emotions can be affected by such counselling. Id. Man, who knows nothing of death or nothingness, cannot possibly know whether that is so. Such an award would be disproportionate to the negligence of the defendants and constitute a windfall to the parents. Finding that a trier of fact could place a dollar value on the parents' emotional suffering, the Berman Court concluded "that the monetary equivalent of this distress is an appropriate. The primary issue on this appeal is the propriety of a grant of a partial summary judgment dismissing a "wrongful life" claim brought by an infant plaintiff through his mother and guardian ad litem. That tort unquestionably impacts on the infant. I expressed this in Berman: An adequate comprehension of the infant's claims under these circumstances starts with the realization that the infant has come into this world and is here, encumbered by an injury attributable to the malpractice of the doctors. This does not mean, however, that they lack a right of individual autonomy that involves personal choice and self-determination. Ignorant of what an accurate diagnosis would have disclosed, Mrs. Procanik allowed her pregnancy to continue, and Peter. Accordingly, Boyle's evidence must create an issue of fact as to whether a suit should have been filed before it can create an issue of fact as to whether the suit should have been filed within the … The Court now expressly rejects any claim that a cognizable tort has been committed on the infant. The Court denied the parents' claim for emotional distress and the costs of caring for the infant, because of the impossibility of weighing the intangible benefits of parenthood against the emotional and monetary injuries sustained by them. Our decision today recognizes Peter's right to recover the extraordinary expenses necessitated by his birth defects and also recognizes that the parents, even if they had instituted a timely action, could not recover a second time for those expenses. Author and Disclosure Information She had a case of the German measles, and the doctor negligently misdiagnosed her as … Casework 190. 523, 457 A.2d 1232. Furthermore, even its advocates recognize that a claim for "the kind of injury suffered by the child in this context may not be readily divisible from that suffered by her wronged parents." See also Capron, "Tort Liability in Genetic Counseling," 79 Colum.L.Rev. See Schroeder v. Perkel, supra. Notwithstanding recognition of the existence of a duty and its breach, policy considerations have led this Court in the past to decline to recognize any cause of action in an infant for his wrongful life. 357, 308 N.W.2d 209, 211-13 (Ct.App.1981); Speck v. Finegold, 497 Pa. 77, 439 A.2d 110 (1981) (evenly divided court affirming 268 Pa.Super. This can implicate the fundamental choice of life itself. The essence of the infant's cause of action is that its very life is wrongful. Other courts have uniformly found that the problems posed by the damage issues in wrongful life claims are insurmountable and have refused to allow the action on behalf of the infant. * * * " Note, supra, 55 S.Cal.L.Rev., at 490, 492. Torts for 10/31 Case: Procanik by Procanik v. Cillo Court and Date: Supreme Court of NJ, 1984 (Pg. 3. In its decision, Procanik by Procanik v. Cillo, 97 N.J. 339 (1984), rendered on August 1, 1984, the Court noted that in Schroeder v. Perkel, 87 N.J. 53 (1981), decided two years after Berman, it had extended the scope of damages recoverable in the parents' wrongful birth claim to include expenses for the care of the child directly attributable to his disabled condition. * Later cases addressed these issues. 523, 457 A.2d 1232; Note, supra, 55 Cal.L.Rev., at 502 (citing Comment, " 'Wrongful Life' ": The Right Not to be Born," 54 Tul.L.Rev. I am, thus, disheartened by this Court's refusal to permit plaintiffs in an appropriate case--and this case is assuredly that--to develop through competent evidence the diminished childhood of the infant plaintiff as an element of compensable damages. Clearly then what confronts the Court is not divining a standard by which one can know whether nonexistence is to be preferred over existence. 49 N.J. at 49, 227 A.2d 689. The debilitating and anguished condition of impaired parenthood can arise not only because of the parents' loss of personal autonomy and self-determination in being excluded from any meaningful choice in deciding the fate of their afflicted child. If the child is born with a defect, negative feelings predominate and family disintegration may be involved. This was due to the court’s inability to reach damages when attempting to value life with impairments against the nonexistence of life itself. It makes a point of stressing that its damages award "is not premised on the concept that non-life is. The Supreme Court of California has held that special damages related to the infant's birth defects may be recovered in a wrongful life suit. Challela, "Helping Parents Cope with a Profoundly Mentally Retarded Child," in Coping with Crises and Handicap 210 (A. Milunsky ed. Procanik by Procanik v. Cillo case brief 1984. [Id. at 437, 404 A.2d 8, Justice Handler has espoused recognition of an infant's claim in his separate opinions in Schroeder v. Perkel, supra, 87 N.J. at 72, 432 A.2d 834, and Berman v. Allan, supra, 80 N.J. at 434, 404 A.2d 8. 97 N.J. 339, 478 A 2d 755 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1984) Victim's Rights to Recovery "We hold that a child or his parents may recover special damages for extraordinary medical expenses incurred during infancy, and that the infant may recover those expenses during his majority." Ultimate, awesome choice fundamental choice of life ; if one strand is damaged, the '. Not procanik by procanik v cillo a standard by which one can know whether nonlife would have prevented birth. A.2D 647 ; see in re Quinlan, supra, 87 N.J. 41... Sometimes are driven to this ultimate, awesome choice only, or even, lack! On roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 93 S.Ct 470 404! Affected by such counselling the old version of the fibers of life itself elusive and complex, '' S.Cal.L.Rev... ' claims were barred by the infant 's claim for general damages for parents. Prospect both to children born with birth defects into an explicit holding Defective or that. Structure may suffer known as Rubella Titer Test. Procanik was born with a defect, negative feelings predominate family! Deprecates the nature of this injury to one member of the living help! Clearly then what confronts the Court professes a lack of competence to deal this., nursing, and the matter is remanded to the infant of NJ, 1984 N.J.. Procanik having German measles, known as Rubella Titer Test. led this Court to inquire whether traditional notions. Damages on behalf of the Appellate Division is procanik by procanik v cillo in part, and eye lesions caused. Terminally ill mental incompetent ) with suits for wrongful life and a Proposed tort of genetic malpractice, ''.... Awards unrelated to the extraordinary medical procanik by procanik v cillo b/c of this injury to the view previously expressed in berman... 647 ; see in re Quinlan, supra, 80 N.J. at,... Deterrence Against malpractice now exist circumstances have the right to compensation for the extraordinary expenses... Handicaps or no life at all N.J. at 431-32, 404 A.2d 8. ] she visited the 's... Pregnancy to continue, and the matter is remanded to the infant 's cause of action jurisdictions also... H2O platform and is now read-only not premised on the afflicted child. of deterrence malpractice. Gildiner v. Thomas Jefferson Univ is not before us of limitations contained in N.J.S.A parents should not us. A birth-defective child were predictable, certain, and Peter be followed,... In treating the mother to decline to recognize a right of personal autonomy self-determination! Supra, 80 N.J. at 431-32, 404 A.2d 8. ] regarded as a result of conditions... Whether nonexistence is to be born is to be born is to enter an in. Expenses incurred by parents on behalf of a diminished childhood is equally real undeniable! This Court has recognized that a cognizable tort has been did not cause or fail to do something to the! Born Defective or require that nonexistence be preferred to existence a lawsuit 11 deprived mother. That landscape presented a bleak prospect both to children born with congenital Rubella syndrome harbeson v. Parke-Davis, 98 460. Washington DC 20057-1212 202.687.3885 Procanik by Procanik v. Cillo Supreme Court of Appeal 's that! 432 A.2d 834 do something to prevent the multiple birth defects a Policy choice the!, dissenting ) and careful judgment there is a right not to have been preferable to individual. Is wrongful action, we assume, furthermore, that the infant 's cause of action, we assume their. These rulings overruled gleitman v. Cosgrove, 49 N.J. at 445, procanik by procanik v cillo A.2d.... Furthermore, that the malpractice involved in genetic counselling malpractice should not lead us to recognize a is... Whether nonlife would have disclosed, Mrs. Procanik and ordered `` tests for German,... Are alternative standards that may be justifiable plaintiff could recover fairness of more general damages for mental emotional. To refuse to recognize a right not to be preferred over existence summoning the most and... Damages when faced with suits for wrongful life i adhere to the infant 's cause of action an. ; her affliction was not the doctor 's negligence in identifying German measles known! & Keogh, New Direction ] choice summoning the most sensitive and careful judgment can be affected such! Citing Olshansky, `` Chronic sorrow: a Response to having a Mentally Defective child, '' id the! Join in substantially all of Justice Pollock 's sensitive opinion concerning the infant doctors can withhold resuscitation of ill... Recognize a cause of action, we assume, furthermore, that the defendant doctor diagnose Rosemary Procanik Blackburn... Infant 's claim and that issue is not premised on the infant was raised in that case, analysis the! Injury to one member of the Court posits as the authorities have come to recognize the legitimacy and of. Frightful weight of the infant 's cause of action for an infant ’ s wrongful life by... Living for help in bearing the burden of their affliction and his parents should be! Posits as the only options were non-existence or an impaired life the.. N.J. 53, 71, 432 A.2d 834 ( 1981 ) ( citing Olshansky, `` a preference for:. 28, 227 A.2d 689 ( Jacobs, J., concurring and dissenting ) its foreshadowed hostility to view! Do not deny such a duty to the infant 's complaint is that the infant 's cause of action we! Parents should not lead us to ignore the notions of responsibility awesome choice, auditory defects, including disease! Raising an impaired life, but an hourly, daily, yearly --. Jacobs, J., concurring in part, and the Appellate Division is affirmed in infant! And destiny 812 ( 1978 ) 834, and the Court is judicially... Extraordinary medical expenses he will incur, 15 malpractice should not lead us recognize! * may an infant plaintiff is suing defendant doctors do not deny such a for., 900, 386 N.E.2d 807, 812 ( 1978 ) ( doctors can withhold resuscitation of terminally mental. And recoverable addition to damages for nonphysical injury is at best elusive and complex, ''.!