Just when I thought I'd seen it all

This woman tells her doctor that she has had her right fallopian tube removed
already so he only removes the left one.

She was wrong.

Somehow this constitutes the doctor "bungling the operation" and he has a
child-support order slapped on him.

And women wonder why nobody wants to do ob-gyn anymore, not even females.

__________________________________________________ _______


Doctor must pay to raise boy

By Cynthia Banham
July 17 2003

The High Court stunned doctors yesterday with a landmark finding that a surgeon
who bungled a woman's sterilisation is liable for the cost of bringing up her
child to the age of 18.

[...]

The parents, Kerry and Craig Melchior, already had two daughters when they decided
they did not want any more children in 1991. Dr Stephen Cattanach, an obstetrician
and gynaecologist, performed a tubal ligation on Mrs Melchior a year later.
Mrs Melchior told the doctor she had already had her right fallopian tube removed
during an an appendectomy when she was 15, so he only operated on the left tube.
In fact, she still had her right fallopian tube and in 1997 gave birth to a
healthy son, Jordan.

She then successfully sued the doctor and the Queensland Health Department for
medical negligence and was awarded more than $200,000. An appeal was lodged
against one component of that sum - the $105,000 cost of raising Jordan until 18.

Full story

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...035079058.html

On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 12:07:44 +1000, "Brettg" wrote:

-This woman tells her doctor that she has had her right fallopian tube removed
-already so he only removes the left one.
-
-She was wrong.

It sounds more like a good scam than anything else.

-
-Somehow this constitutes the doctor "bungling the operation" and he has a
-child-support order slapped on him.
-
-And women wonder why nobody wants to do ob-gyn anymore, not even females.
-
-_________________________________________________ ________
-
-
-Doctor must pay to raise boy

-Mrs Melchior told the doctor she had already had her right fallopian tube
removed
-during an an appendectomy when she was 15, so he only operated on the left
tube.
-In fact, she still had her right fallopian tube and in 1997 gave birth to a
-healthy son, Jordan.
-
-She then successfully sued the doctor and the Queensland Health Department for
-medical negligence and was awarded more than $200,000. An appeal was lodged
-against one component of that sum - the $105,000 cost of raising Jordan until
18.
-
-Full story
-
-http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...035079058.html
-
-
-

Brettg wrote:
This woman tells her doctor that she has had her right fallopian tube removed
already so he only removes the left one.

She was wrong.

Somehow this constitutes the doctor "bungling the operation" and he has a
child-support order slapped on him.

And women wonder why nobody wants to do ob-gyn anymore, not even females.

__________________________________________________ _______


Doctor must pay to raise boy

By Cynthia Banham
July 17 2003

The High Court stunned doctors yesterday with a landmark finding that a surgeon
who bungled a woman's sterilisation is liable for the cost of bringing up her
child to the age of 18.

[...]

The parents, Kerry and Craig Melchior, already had two daughters when they decided
they did not want any more children in 1991. Dr Stephen Cattanach, an obstetrician
and gynaecologist, performed a tubal ligation on Mrs Melchior a year later.
Mrs Melchior told the doctor she had already had her right fallopian tube removed
during an an appendectomy when she was 15, so he only operated on the left tube.
In fact, she still had her right fallopian tube and in 1997 gave birth to a
healthy son, Jordan.

She then successfully sued the doctor and the Queensland Health Department for
medical negligence and was awarded more than $200,000. An appeal was lodged
against one component of that sum - the $105,000 cost of raising Jordan until 18.

Full story

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...035079058.html


My question. Does he get visitation? Obviously, since he's now
responsible he should get the same rights as both the
other parents, right? Just another example of a womyn expecting a guy to
pay for her mistake and refusal to do anything about it.

She had two chances to come clean.

1) To tell the Doctor the truth in the first place.

2) Abortion

Typical womyn. Typical court. Maybe the judge should pay too.

WTF.

~dani

On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 12:07:44 +1000, "Brettg" wrote:

-This woman tells her doctor that she has had her right fallopian tube removed
-already so he only removes the left one.
-
-She was wrong.

It sounds more like a good scam than anything else.

-
-Somehow this constitutes the doctor "bungling the operation" and he has a
-child-support order slapped on him.
-
-And women wonder why nobody wants to do ob-gyn anymore, not even females.
-
-_________________________________________________ ________
-
-
-Doctor must pay to raise boy

-Mrs Melchior told the doctor she had already had her right fallopian tube
removed
-during an an appendectomy when she was 15, so he only operated on the left
tube.
-In fact, she still had her right fallopian tube and in 1997 gave birth to a
-healthy son, Jordan.
-
-She then successfully sued the doctor and the Queensland Health Department for
-medical negligence and was awarded more than $200,000. An appeal was lodged
-against one component of that sum - the $105,000 cost of raising Jordan until
18.
-
-Full story
-
-http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...035079058.html
-
-
-

"Mr. F. Le Mur" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 12:07:44 +1000, "Brettg" wrote:

-This woman tells her doctor that she has had her right fallopian tube removed
-already so he only removes the left one.
-
-She was wrong.

It sounds more like a good scam than anything else.

Hehe. I love it when somebody is even more cynical than I am

:-)




-
-Somehow this constitutes the doctor "bungling the operation" and he has a
-child-support order slapped on him.
-
-And women wonder why nobody wants to do ob-gyn anymore, not even females.
-
-_________________________________________________ ________
-
-
-Doctor must pay to raise boy

-Mrs Melchior told the doctor she had already had her right fallopian tube
removed
-during an an appendectomy when she was 15, so he only operated on the left
tube.
-In fact, she still had her right fallopian tube and in 1997 gave birth to a
-healthy son, Jordan.
-
-She then successfully sued the doctor and the Queensland Health Department for
-medical negligence and was awarded more than $200,000. An appeal was lodged
-against one component of that sum - the $105,000 cost of raising Jordan until
18.
-
-Full story
-
-http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...035079058.html
-
-
-

The debate is heating up over that stupid woman who was awarded CS from her
obstetrician after she lied to him regarding her prior medical status.

Unfortunately, the woman in question isn't commenting as she has a commercial
exclusivity agreement with a television network. There's nothing quite like a
mothers love for her child is there, especially when it is such an excellent
money spinner as this one is.

__________________________________________________ _


Fury over the 'DVD player' kid

By Cynthia Banham and Daniel Dasey with AAP
July 18 2003


Australia's largest medical insurer warned of an imminent rise in indemnity
premiums yesterday as the acting Prime Minister launched an extraordinary attack
on a High Court ruling forcing a doctor to pay for the upbringing of his patient's
child.

John Anderson described as "repugnant" the ruling against the doctor, who had
botched the woman's sterilisation, saying it raised "critical questions about the
value we place on our children" and significant issues for medical indemnity.

It was a further sign of the trend "towards regarding our children as a consumer
durable there for our pleasure, rather like an expensive fridge or a new DVD
player" and cut away at the "very foundation stone" of civilisation.

United Medical Protection's general manager of professional services, Alan Hunter,
said it would have an immediate flow-on effect to the cost of insurance premiums
for such doctors.

The High Court ruled on Wednesday that a Queensland obstetrician and
gynaecologist, Dr Stephen Cattanach, must pay for the raising of Jordan Melchior,
6, until he is 18. The boy's mother, Kerry, gave birth to him five years after the
sterilisation operation.

Mr Anderson accused the court of finding the boy's birth was a basis for
compensation "like a car crash or an accident in the workplace".

"I can't help wondering what Jordan will think in later life when he discovers
that his parents demanded compensation for his Christmas and birthday presents,
because he was born against their wishes.

"Do we no longer understand that when we devalue and cheapen one life, we devalue
and cheapen all life - and with it threaten our cherished freedoms?"

But Mrs Melchior - who refused to talk to the Herald because, her lawyer's
spokeswoman said, she had an agreement with the Seven Network - told Today Tonight
that if she had not wanted Jordan, she "would have terminated the pregnancy".

She had sued because "I'm sick and tired of people getting away with murder . . .
I'm tired of the underdog being mistreated . . . we're Aussies, we've got to stand
up and be counted for."

As the ruling sunk in, legal experts and medical groups warned that it would lead
to fewer contraception services and an increase in medical insurance premiums and
the cost of such services.

Mr Hunter said insurers would have to have to pay a "substantial amount of money
on claims where sterilisation has failed or contraception has failed", leading to
increased premiums.

The Australian Medical Association's vice-president, Dr Mukesh Haikerwal, said
doctors performing other reversible contraception procedures could face greater
liability.

Phil Gleeson, an associate with Slater and Gordon, said it was clear that where
women conceived after having had contraception devices wrongly inserted could now
claim the costs of raising the children.



http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...035139251.html

A Damned stupid Aussie one I am so not proud to be Australian right now.


"Tiffany" wrote in message
...

Brettg wrote in message
...
The debate is heating up over that stupid woman who was awarded CS from
her
obstetrician after she lied to him regarding her prior medical status.

Unfortunately, the woman in question isn't commenting as she has a
commercial
exclusivity agreement with a television network. There's nothing quite
like a
mothers love for her child is there, especially when it is such an
excellent
money spinner as this one is.



Am I wrong in the belief that getting your tubes tied/burned is NOT 100 %
to
begin with?? That there is always a chance of pregnacy? So this women
could
have ended up with a baby regardless of what happen? I am so sick of
people
suing Doctors. Are they the almight perfect being? Not.
This story is just beyond any normal moral system. What jury awarded this
women money? Geez.

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...

Brettg wrote...

The debate is heating up over that stupid woman
who was awarded CS from her obstetrician
after she lied to him regarding her prior medical status.

Hmmm. Still, this could be a delicious precedent
for the men exploited by women who make 'oops'
babies after assuring the men from whom such
women solicit sperm that copulation will be sterile.

"It's an ill wind that no one blows good."
--actor Jimmy Stewart discussing the bagpipe

Unfortunately, the woman in question isn't
commenting as she has a commercial
exclusivity agreement with a television
network. There's nothing quite like a
mother's love for her child is there,
especially when it is such an excellent
money spinner as this one is.

Uh huh. This tale illustrates the womanly
tendency to treat children as her property.

Am I wrong in the belief that getting your
tubes tied/burned is NOT 100 % to begin with??

No.

That there is always a chance of pregnacy?

Uh huh. Same goes for a man whose _vas deferens_
tubes are cut/tied/burned -- aka 'vasectomy'. And if
that operation fails, the woman who expects that
making a baby qualifies her to win a prize has long
been able to demand cash from her sex partner.

So, this tale is woman's business as usual: making
someone else pay for her baby-raising hobby.
Sheesh!

So this women could have ended up with a baby
regardless of what happened?

Yup. But now she has a baby + cash. Sweet, huh?

I am so sick of people suing Doctors. Are they
the almight perfect being? Not. This story is
just beyond any normal moral system. What jury
awarded this women money? Geez.

Well, a lot of Aussies have a soft spot in their
heads when it comes to populist politics. Likely,
the jurors fancied themselves some sort of
latter-day Robin Hoods who were relieving the
rich doctor of some burdensome cash and
handing it over to some woman (feigning) being
in distress.

--
We should hold women responsible for their own
decisions. Blaming others only makes matters worse.
But the ethos of the victim compels them to seek
an oppressor. Hence, utterly rejecting responsibility,
they perpetuate a vicious cycle of blame.

from "Blame" by Rod van Mechelen
http://www.backlash.com/book/sexism.html

glow wrote:
A Damned stupid Aussie one I am so not proud to be Australian right now.

Not just Australia:

"A Dutch doctor who made a mistake with a women's contraception has been
ordered to pay for her baby's education"
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_790117.html

Isn't the logical outcome that child support organisations should stop
concentrating on non-resident parents / NCPs and start looking for everyone
who may have contributed? Doctors, teachers, contraceptive manufacturers,
alcoholic drink suppliers, (lawyers) ....?

"Tiffany" wrote in message
...

Brettg wrote in message
...
The debate is heating up over that stupid woman who was awarded CS
from her obstetrician after she lied to him regarding her prior
medical status.

Unfortunately, the woman in question isn't commenting as she has a
commercial exclusivity agreement with a television network. There's
nothing quite like a mothers love for her child is there, especially
when it is such an excellent money spinner as this one is.

Am I wrong in the belief that getting your tubes tied/burned is NOT 100
% to begin with?? That there is always a chance of pregnacy? So this
women could have ended up with a baby regardless of what happen? I am
so sick of people suing Doctors. Are they the almight perfect being?
Not.
This story is just beyond any normal moral system. What jury awarded
this women money? Geez.

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.Barry.Pearson.name/photography/
http://www.ChildSupportAnalysis.co.uk/