Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

[Reflections on the Perruche judgment].

B Feuillet-Le Mintier1

  • 1Centre de recherche juridique de l'Ouest (IODE, UMR CNRS no. 6050), 9, rue Jean-Macé, 35042 Rennes, France. brigitte.le-mintier@univ-rennes1.fr

Archives De Pediatrie : Organe Officiel De La Societe Francaise De Pediatrie
|May 15, 2002
PubMed
Summary

The Perruche case established a doctor's liability for diagnostic errors leading to a child's disability. This ruling controversially implies that the birth of a disabled child constitutes a compensable harm.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Biotechnology and human rights.

Cellular and molecular biology (Noisy-le-Grand, France)·2002
Same author

Ethics education in medical schools: the role of jurists.

Medicine and law·2001
See all related articles

Area of Science:

  • Medical Law
  • Bioethics
  • Tort Law

Background:

  • The Perruche case involved a doctor's failure to diagnose rubella in a pregnant woman.
  • This diagnostic error led to the birth of a disabled child.

Observation:

  • France's highest court of appeal recognized a causal link between the doctor's diagnostic error and the child's disability.
  • The court conceded the doctor's responsibility for the child's condition.

Findings:

  • The decision is legally contentious, as the disability stems from maternal rubella, not solely the doctor's error.
  • Ethically, the ruling implies that the birth of a disabled child is a legally recognized prejudice.

Implications:

  • This precedent suggests that medical malpractice can extend to the "wrongful birth" of a disabled child.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Judicial decisions, while intending to compensate disabled children, raise significant ethical and legal debates.
  • The case prompts critical re-evaluation of causality and harm in medical malpractice litigation.