Failed sterilisation and economic loss: Justice law and policy in Mcfarlane v Tayside health board

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Judicial arguments for and against awarding damages for mother's pain and suffering during pregnancy and costs of bringing up unwanted child resulting from failed vasectomy.
LanguageEnglish
Pages76-87
Number of pages12
JournalTottels Journal of Professional Negligence
Volume16
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2000

Fingerprint

pain
pregnancy
damages
justice
Law
costs
health
economics

Keywords

  • clinical negligence
  • damages
  • vasectomy
  • wrongful birth
  • Scotland

Cite this

@article{eb39a0ab20f2437b8e484a3d54cf67b0,
title = "Failed sterilisation and economic loss: Justice law and policy in Mcfarlane v Tayside health board",
abstract = "Judicial arguments for and against awarding damages for mother's pain and suffering during pregnancy and costs of bringing up unwanted child resulting from failed vasectomy.",
keywords = "clinical negligence, damages, vasectomy, wrongful birth, Scotland",
author = "Kenneth Norrie",
year = "2000",
language = "English",
volume = "16",
pages = "76--87",
journal = "Tottels Journal of Professional Negligence",
issn = "1746-6709",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Failed sterilisation and economic loss

T2 - Tottels Journal of Professional Negligence

AU - Norrie, Kenneth

PY - 2000

Y1 - 2000

N2 - Judicial arguments for and against awarding damages for mother's pain and suffering during pregnancy and costs of bringing up unwanted child resulting from failed vasectomy.

AB - Judicial arguments for and against awarding damages for mother's pain and suffering during pregnancy and costs of bringing up unwanted child resulting from failed vasectomy.

KW - clinical negligence

KW - damages

KW - vasectomy

KW - wrongful birth

KW - Scotland

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 76

EP - 87

JO - Tottels Journal of Professional Negligence

JF - Tottels Journal of Professional Negligence

SN - 1746-6709

IS - 2

ER -