About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


34 Wake Forest L. Rev. 915 (1999)
McAllister v. HA: Wrongful Conception or Misconception

handle is hein.journals/wflr34 and id is 925 raw text is: NOTES McALLISTER v. HA: WRONGFUL CONCEPTION OR MISCONCEPTION? INTRODUCTION In a recent decision, the North Carolina Supreme Court applied the theory of wrongful conception to a case involving the intentional conception of a child who was afflicted with unintentional genetic impairments.! This holding was surprising because, generally, wrongful conception claims stem from unintentional pregnancies that result from negligently performed sterilization or contraceptive procedures.2 Because the plaintiffs' claim alleged the element of preconception negligence, however, the court found the case to be analogous to prior cases involving wrongful conception3 and pur- portedly applied traditional medical malpractice standards in its resolution.4 Because of the strong presumption that the existence of life can never be the basis for a legal remedy, however,5 the court only allowed the plaintiffs to recover the expenses associated with the pregnancy, as opposed to the costs arising from the effects of the child's impaired state.6 North Carolina allows wrongful conception recovery for the medical costs associated with pregnancy and birth on the theory that the injury sustained in these cases is the medical condition of pregnancy.7 Therefore, in labeling McAllister v. Ha' as a wrongful conception case, the court apparently determined that the plaintiffs' damages arose from the physical state of the mother's pregnancy. However, North Carolina does not permit the plaintiffs in these cases to recover the costs of raising the wrongfully conceived child because the court refuses to recognize that life can ever constitute 1. See McAllister v. Ha, 347 N.C. 638,496 S.E.2d 577 (1998). 2. See Lisa A. Podewils, Note, Traditional Tort Principles and Wrongful Conception Child-rearing Damages, 73 B.U. L. REV. 407, 407 (1993). 3. See McAllister, 347 N.C. at 647, 496 S.E.2d at 584. 4. See id. at 644, 496 S.E.2d at 582. 5. See id. at 647, 496 S.E.2d at 583-84. 6. See id. at 648, 496 S.E.2d at 584. 7. See Jackson v. Bumgardner, 318 N.C. 172, 181, 347 S.E.2d 743, 748 (1986). 8. See McAllister, 347 N.C. at 638,496 S.E.2d at 577.