Comments on: Ignoring reality: Attacks on SB1359 are nonsense

By: Stacey Lihn

Stacey Lihn — Sat, 05 May 2012 07:21:30 +0000

Jo, you’re dead wrong. The facts of the Oregon case will ABSOLUTELY ban parents for filing a suit. This bill BANS suits for negligent actions – on the lab or physician. You must proove that a physician lied or withheld info – an intential negligence action, not simply negligence. This is exactly the problem; people supporting this bill don’t even understand the language or what it does. And Jo, I’m pretty sure a VERY small percentage, if anyone, would adopt a child with $2-plus mil in medical bills. Hell, if you won’t even reinstate KidsCare, do you think the right wingers will adopt a kid with special needs. FAT CHANCE. Stop blowing smoke, I’m sick of it.

By: Jo

Jo — Wed, 28 Mar 2012 22:41:02 +0000

The parents had one other choice when they had this baby and that was adoption–they didn’t have to keep her. Problem solved and no issue to the parents.

The obvious screw up in the Oregon case would not exclude the parents from suing for negligence in AZ either under this law since they were mis-informed by the doctor due to the negligence of the labs. The case would not be against the DR because he didn’t do the tests, it would be against the labs. But, again, the parents still have the right to adoption.

having worked with downs kids I think these parents will find more love from this child than they thought possible. I never talked to a single parent who had a downs child that wished they’d had an abortion. Imagine my surprise since I am pro-choice.

By: michelle

michelle — Sun, 25 Mar 2012 00:45:58 +0000

Thank you, Stacey Lihn, for posting a cogent response. I’m having trouble managing more than a string of expletives, which never helps…

I’m finding CAP will say just about anything to justify pushing their “christian” agenda…

By: Stacey Lihn

Stacey Lihn — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 18:07:57 +0000

I’d like to add that had the testing been done accurately (within the standard of care for a medical professional) in the Oregon case, the parents would’ve been provided accurate information so that they could make an informed decision. We have checks and balances already in place to protect physicians from “predatory” lawsuits. If you’re not aware of them already, let me educate you. This attempt at barring people’s rights to protect physicians is absurd. You cannot even site to ONE Arizona ‘wrongful birth/life’ case. Why limit legitimate rights of citizens when there is no basis for it? http://thelihns.blogspot.com/2012/03/response-from-sen-nancy-barto.html

By: Stacey Lihn

Stacey Lihn — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 16:58:09 +0000

If you’re claiming that the \left\ is misrepresenting, you need to take a good look in the mirror. The Orgeon suit you site is completely misrepresented. Have you spoken with the jurors, the ones that actually sat in the courtroom and listened to testimony from BOTH sides of the argument? The Oregon suit was filed because the physician was negligent – he peformed a CVS test and took tissue from the mother instead of the fetus. The lab could have picked up on the error as well, recognizing that the tissue was maternal and not fetal. The parents, given inaccurate information due to substandard care provided (which both experts and the jury acknowledged), were told their child was 100% healthy. Had they known their child would be born with a congenital anomaly, they would’ve chosen termination. That is their right – to terminate a pregnancy (for whatever reason, be it financial or otherwise). I cannot sit back and allow the \right\ to ignore the fact that they are pro-life, yet when a family choses life for their special needs child, they turn their backs on the family and argue against government programs that provide care and payment for medical treatment (i.e. cutting KidCare, AHCCCS, the Affordable Care Act.) It’s hypocritical at best.