I've read a couple of news articles recently about parents suing for "wrongful birth" of severely disabled children. Parents of children born without appendages, limbs, or even having severe mental and/or other physical handicaps have sued medical staff for allowing their children to be born instead of advising them accordingly to terminate the pregnancy. Unfortunately, these cases have all been thrown out of court, even though I think they have legitimate complaints.
What I don't think is happening in these cases is that the judges and/or juries are not putting themselves in the shoes of a severely disabled person. By law they must all be of sound mind, so they can't understand mental handicaps. Some of them may be able to understand some degree of physical handicap, but not to the level many of these children are handicapped. When you think to yourself "would *I* want to live like that" I'd have to think that any reasonable person would say "no, I would not." I know I sure as hell wouldn't, and I don't know anyone who would either.
That said, I think it goes even further than that. I think if anyone, for whatever reason, thinks their quality of life is so poor that it's in general not worth living, they should be able to sue not only the attending medical staff, but also their parents. After all, life was forced upon them by their parents and had it not been for them doing the nasty and conceiving, they wouldn't have had to endure the pain and suffering that awaited them in an earthly life. It kind of goes back to what David Benatar said about being born:
"Each one of us was harmed by being brought into existence. That harm is not negligible, because the quality of even the best lives is very bad—and considerably worse than most people recognize it to be. Although it is obviously too late to prevent our own existence, it is not too late to prevent the existence of future possible people."
"We infrequently contemplate the harms that await any new-born child—pain, disappointment, anxiety, grief, and death. For any given child we cannot predict what form these harms will take or how severe they will be, but we can be sure that at least some of them will occur. None of this befalls the nonexistent. Only existers suffer harm."When you think of it that way, it's pretty easy to conclude that in everyone's case, birth was wrongful. I understand that would open up a whole new can of worms, but at the same time, let's face it, life's rough. I think it's very legitimate to sue your parents and/or the attending medical staff for the pain and suffering that befalls you due to being born (for had you never been born, you'd have never had to endure pain and suffering). So, yes, your pain and suffering is entirely their fault, and you should be entitled to compensation. I also think you should be entitled to the right to end your life without the state intervening and throwing you into a loony bin and shoving medicine down your throat if you try, but I've already addressed that issue.
So, yeah. Wrongful birth is, in my mind, a completely legitimate complaint for anyone, but especially for the severely disabled. That's just no way to live, and anyone who is reasonable should be able to agree with that statement. As mentioned before, I have every intention of filing such a lawsuit myself, even though I'm going into it with reasonable expectations of getting laughed out of court. Oh well, it'll give some people something to think about.
Recommend
Comments (71)
i didn't read the entire article (i apologize)
but when i was 12 years old i went to school with someone who had severe physical handicaps. he was missing most of his left leg and did not have arms. he was a senior that year and i had an elective with him. we talked a few times and he told me that when his mother was pregnant with him, that the doctor was aware he would be born without these extremities and did not tell his mom because they feared he would be aborted. he said his parents tried their hardest to make his life the best for him that they could but he always said he would have preferred if he wasn't born. he said that his life has been nice but it was still not worth all the struggles he faced his entire life and still faced every day after that.
two years ago he killed himself.
@Rigaboo@xanga - That's terrible. See, it's stuff like this which is why I said what I did. Who would want to live like that? Nobody I know. I know I sure as hell wouldn't. Shit, I'd not want to live with just a partial limb missing, much less two plus a partial. Poor kid.
@Rigaboo@xanga - Though, so you understand where I'm coming from: I feel it would have been better for all of us had we never been born. The reason for that is simple: had you never been born you'd have never suffered. Since being born is a prerequisite to suffering, it must be that coming into existence is always a serious harm.
Now, whereas no lives are worth starting, there might be some cases where a life that has already started is worth continuing. In a lot of cases, however, it is not (case in point, your poor friend). His life was, he thought, neither worth starting nor continuing. And I don't think anyone who lost all their limbs would find life worth continuing (I know I wouldn't, and I don't know a single person who would).
@secretbeerreporter@xanga - i agree with you to some extent. i know someone else who i went to school with and he was my first crush (how cute) that a few years ago lost both arms and legs from gangrene. to my understanding he made an amazing recovery but he still took his own life. i think that was a year ago.
most of my life i decided i would've preferred to never exist, but to be completely honest (and i will disregard how pathetic and lame this might sound) my life has been worth living because of my three cats. well, mostly just the first two since i'm still trying to grow a strong attachment to the new one. it's hard to do so because he's a kitten and a complete asshole.
anyway, as you said i don't know many people who would want to go on with life after they have something like their mobility and independence taken from them. i would just because of my cats, but if they weren't around i'd have no motivation.
By your logic I could sue my parents for being born because birth necessitates an experience of suffering, because life is suffering. Anybody could sue their parents. We'd all be suing everyone... where do you draw the line in terms of suffering?
If someone with a disability wants to be pissed off that he/she was ever born and then that person has the right to make a case to the court, then what do you do when the defense brings forth a person with the same disability who says that he or she is happy to be born? Does that negate the original person's claim?
If you think people have the right to kill themselves then why not solve this problem by simply providing heroin to any person who wishes to die painlessly? That's an easier solution rather than exploring the grey area that is not knowing how happy a person will be before they are born.
I highly recommend the book Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence by David Benatar. He addresses the issue in a clear, concise, no-nonsense sort of way. It's a bit of a challenging read, but well worth your time.
Anyway, sounds like your friends had it rough. As painful as goodbye might be, and especially considering they took their own lives, death probably brought about a sense of relief for both of them. No longer are they trapped in a dysfunctional body. Whether an afterlife exists or not (I don't believe in one), it brought about relief.
@apathy_sucks@xanga - "If you think people have the right to kill
themselves then why not solve this problem by simply providing heroin to
any person who wishes to die painlessly? That's an easier solution
rather than exploring the grey area that is not knowing how happy a
person will be before they are born."
Heroin is how my friend lost his arms/legs. How is heroin a painless death or even a guaranteed death? Heroin is more or less the reason my friend took his own life. It destroyed his life and his body.
@secretbeerreporter@xanga - I'll look into that book.
As far as providing a means of painless death for those who see it fit to end their lives I would be all for it. However, what government authority is going to go for that? Let's get real here.
At first I thought you were being satirical and ironic with the whole "they should be able to sue not only the attending medical staff, but also their parents" and argue against the wrongful birth lawsuits...guess not. Anyway I can see your point about wanting to be informed about birth defects before a baby is born, but a lawsuit sounds far fetched. Medical personnel inform parents of birth defects whenever possible so parents can be prepared to care for their child...or take the other route of terminating the pregnancy. If parents are that worried about what issues they should be proactive and requests procedures like amniocentesis. Parents need to make the decision of what to do with their pregnancy on their own, research it, ask questions, and so on, take some responsibility instead of suing.
Also your whole theory of suing your parents for bringing you into this world is...insane. If you have no gratitude to realize how incredibly amazing it is that you are alive, have a brain and can construct your own thoughts, can feel and taste and experience the world then shut the fuck up. If you're so mad about being born it's fairly easy to remedy the state of being alive. Why wouldn't you just go back to your former nonexistent state rather than making it your goal to take money from the people that so rudely brought you into this world...
I suppose we just have different views about life. I can't understand lamenting life while you're here rather than exploring and enjoying it while you can...maybe I'll check out Benatar's book, if you check out some Hafiz. I'd rather not be convinced to feel shitty all the time for existing...plus existence is so theoretical, all we know is that we are seemingly here at the moment.
As for me returning to non-existence, I will in due time. Once I take care of my unfinished business here, I will do just that and not a millisecond later.
Suffering is incredibly relative when you put it in terms of "pin pricks of harm", which all people take differently. Is it fair to assume you have experienced your share of suffering in the past, and while growing up? And this contributed to your philosophy? You're views are just a product of you're environment and experiences, just like everyone's views...which is why making blanket statements like "bringing people into existence is wrong" sounds absurd and can't be applied to everyone, it's too close minded.
@secretbeerreporter@xanga - Also if you plan to off yourself, isn't that going to cause suffering to your family? Bringing a life into the world that will experience suffering is frowned upon, but it's cool to just wreck havoc on others lives while you're here?
I mean, I don't believe in "living to make others happy", but if this is such an extreme philosophy supporting that absolutely no pinpricks of suffering shall never ever be felt it must support that you should try to relieve suffering once you're here and never ever hurt anyone, right? Does it not address what you do when you're in the "unfortunate state of existing"?
"What I don't think is happening in these cases is that the judges and/or juries are not putting themselves in the shoes of a severely disabled person"
There is absolutely no basis for granting a non-disabled person the credibility to decide what quality of life a disabled person can expect. That practice is exactly the sort of idea that the "Nothing About Us Without Us" movement was organized to oppose. You think you are clever enough to put yourself into the shoes of people whose bodies or minds are very different from your own, but you aren't. An individual is the only person qualified to decide whether his own life is worth living or not. It isn't up to you or anyone else.
We have no moral obligation to anyone but ourselves. Whereas I think it is in fact wrong to cause someone harm by our actions, I don't believe it is wrong for someone to be harmed by our inaction. Don't directly cause someone harm, but nobody is obligated to help another.
In the case of severe disability, by the way, that's my fucking tax dollars that have to go to supporting them. That's another problem I have. That's part of my paycheck I never get to see. It's also the reason I support a full-on eugenics program.
@milfncookies@xanga - More like Chapter 3, if you want to think of it that way.
Chapter 1
Chapter 2
Bullet to the skull. Rope from the rafters. Gallon of bleach. Knife to the wrist. There are innumerable ways someone who believes life was "forced upon them" can remedy the situation. People suing others for "wrongful birth" aren't complaining that birth was forced upon them. They're suing because their lives aren't everything they wished they would be and want someone else to fix it for them. Every person who has ever been born has the same complaint, but most of us suck it up and live with it or fix it ourselves.
These posts of yours are hilarious and hardly due a serious answer, but I need a break for a bit so let's do real man's work and analyze this (and for the record, that fool author isn't smarter than I am--few people are.)
Suffering and anti-suffering are experiences on multiple levels, from simple pain-pleasure to emotional anguish-happiness, and are based on a standard. The standard is simple value vs anti-value. Values can only arise for objects whose existence is conditional. Thus, only a thing capable of death is capable of suffering.
Existence does necessitate some suffering, or all suffering, or some happiness, or all happiness--broadly speaking, existence as a living object will necessitate experience of some kind. In fact, experience necessitates life, and life necessitates experience--all in abstract terms, they are logically equivalent. Hence, to say "if you live you will experience" is vacuous, and more specifically "if you live, you will suffer" is also vacuous.
Because it is vacuous, there are no grounds for complaint and no person is responsible for any one person's default suffering upon existing. The right to commit suicide is absolute and precludes any law--people do it all the time, and no law can stop it. So really, there's nothing to write about here.
@tjordanm@xanga - I took the low road to say the same thing. Leave it to me to be crass.
@blonde_apocalypse@xanga - I guess I'm more hopeful that I can flush this turd. You should see my latest post haha
@tjordanm@xanga - "The right to commit suicide is absolute and
precludes any law--people do it all the time, and no law can stop it. So
really, there's nothing to write about here."
That's where you're wrong. Suicide is in fact officially illegal in many countries. Further, in countries where there's no legal prohibition, the state still gets involved when someone attempts suicide and fails by committing them. If suicide is treated as a legal right as you said, that would not be the case, but rather those who attempt suicide would instead be left to die as opposed to rescued and committed.