Congenital diseases.

United States v. University Hospital (1984)

<a href="/search?text=United%20States%20v.%20University%20Hospital%20%281984%29" title="" class="lexicon-term">United States v. University Hospital (1984)</a>

The US Second Circuit Court of Appeals’ 1984 decision United States v. University Hospital, State University Hospital of New York at Stony Brook set a significant precedent for affirming parental privilege to make medical decisions for handicapped newborns, while limiting the ability of the federal government to intervene.

The Baby Doe Rules (1984)

The <a href="/search?text=Baby%20Doe%20Rules" title="" class="lexicon-term">Baby Doe Rules</a> (1984)

The Baby Doe Rules represent the first attempt by the US government to directly intervene in treatment options for neonates born with severe congenital defects. The name of the rule comes from the controversial 1982 case of a Bloomington, Indiana, infant Baby Doe,

Smith v. Cote (1986)

<a href="/search?text=Smith%20v.%20Cote%20%281986%29" title="" class="lexicon-term">Smith v. Cote (1986)</a>

The 1986 Supreme Court of New Hampshire case Smith v. Cote held that parents in New Hampshire could sue their physicians based on a claim of wrongful birth of their children, but that such suits warranted only qualified damages for emotional distress.

Weber v. Stony Brook Hospital (1983)

Weber v. Stony Brook Hospital (1983)

The New York Court of Appeals’ 1983 case Weber v. Stony Brook set an important precedent upholding the right of parents to make medical decisions for newborns born with severe congenital defects. A pro-life New York attorney, Lawrence Washburn, attempted to legally intervene in the case of Baby Jane Doe, an infant born with disorders.

Subscribe to RSS - Congenital diseases.