Talk:Wrongful birth

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Abortion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Abortion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AbortionWikipedia:WikiProject AbortionTemplate:WikiProject AbortionAbortion articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Law

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted on 7 May 2009 by reviewer SharkxFanSJ (talk · contribs).

Arguments Against/For Sections

While this article needs a lot of help, the arguments against section is particularly sophomoric and un-sourced - probably WP:OR. In a nutshell, all of this section reads like a high school debate about abortion and brings in issues that are not germane to the legal foundation of this article. The first paragraph in particular is a hodgepodge weakly linked criticisms that boil down to abortion is bad, and anything that leads to an increase in abortions is bad. As for "State-sponsored Eugenics", from what I can read here, this is more of an argument against genetic testing of a fetus in utero rather than a failure to accurately diagnose a problem and a resulting tort claim. The fact that the courts are involved is a tenuous link that really needs a reliable source. As for psychological harm to a child.....We'll need some Reliable (non-fringe) sources for that argument. As an aside, the same argument could be used for child custody battles, divorce courts, and Reality television. Mattnad (talk) 14:53, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Malpractice shielding?

This does not appear to address the kind of legislation passed in Arizona in 2012, which allows doctors to conceal potential problems from prospective parents, so that the parents have no chance to choose abortion, without the doctor being liable for a wrongful birth suit.
--Monado (talk) 23:15, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Example link:

Senate approves bill on wrongful births. This also says that intentional actions, e.g. intentional cover-up of defects, would not be protected.
Text of Arizona bill SB 1359

There are also nine other states that have passed similar bills against wrongful life and wrongful birth suits.
--Monado (talk) 23:26, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Misnomer

The begining of this article reads "Wrongful birth is a legal cause of action in some common law countries in which the parents of a congenitally diseased child claim that their doctor failed to properly warn of their risk of conceiving or giving birth to a child with serious genetic or congenital abnormalities".

This definition is more suitable to wrongful life claims, a wrongful birth claim does not require the child to be disabled as the claim revolves around the assertion that the birth itself shouldn't have happened, where as a wrongful life claim asserts that the child should not have had to suffer a life of disability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.204.82 (talk) 04:58, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wrongful pregnancy

"Wrongful pregnancy" is a tort claim for becoming pregnant after a failed sterilization. This tort was recognized in Chaffee v. Seslar, 786 N.E.2d 705, 710 (Ind. 2003). "By contrast, more than a decade ago this jurisdiction determined that the cause of action labeled “wrongful pregnancy” existed in Indiana." Id. Maybe this should be in the article. Waters.Justin (talk) 05:30, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]