Rochester Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
Medical malpractice claims involving childbirth often raise complex questions about patient autonomy, informed decision-making, and the limits of recoverable damages. A recent decision from New York’s highest court addressed whether a parent may recover purely emotional damages based on an alleged lack of informed consent when prenatal medical care results in catastrophic injury to a child who is born alive. The ruling clarifies how long-standing precedent governs these emotionally charged cases and reinforces the boundaries courts apply when evaluating malpractice claims grounded solely in emotional harm. If your child suffered an injury at birth, you should speak with a Rochester medical malpractice attorney to better understand how these legal principles may affect your rights.
Case Setting
It is reported that the plaintiff was admitted to a hospital after surpassing her due date and came under the care of medical providers who attempted to induce labor. Over an extended period, labor did not progress as anticipated, and the treating physician attempted to deliver the infant using vacuum extraction techniques before ultimately performing an emergency cesarean section. The child was delivered alive but in critical condition and later died after several days of intensive medical treatment.
Allegedly, the plaintiff commenced an action asserting multiple causes of action, including medical malpractice and lack of informed consent. Some claims were brought on behalf of the child’s estate, while others were asserted on the plaintiff’s own behalf. With respect to the lack of informed consent claim asserted personally, the plaintiff sought recovery solely for emotional injuries stemming from the procedures performed during delivery.
Reportedly, the treating physician moved for summary judgment seeking dismissal of the claims for personal medical malpractice and lack of informed consent. The plaintiff opposed dismissal of the lack of informed consent claim, arguing that factual disputes existed regarding whether proper consent had been obtained and whether the procedures caused her injuries.
It is alleged that the trial court denied summary judgment on the informed consent claim, and the appellate court affirmed, reasoning that such a claim was distinct from traditional medical malpractice and therefore not barred by precedent limiting recovery for emotional damages. The defendants appealed, and the court granted review to determine whether that ruling was proper.
Emotional Damages in Birth Injury Cases
On appeal, the court undertook a detailed review of New York’s tort jurisprudence governing recovery for emotional damages and the doctrine of stare decisis. The court explained that, as a general rule, New York law disfavors recovery for purely emotional injuries absent physical harm, subject only to narrow and carefully defined exceptions. In the context of prenatal medical care, the court reaffirmed its prior holding that when a child is injured in utero but born alive, the child may pursue claims for physical injury, but the parent may not recover solely for emotional distress unless an independent physical injury is shown.
The court analyzed whether a lack of informed consent claim should be treated differently from other medical malpractice claims. Although lack of informed consent has distinct elements and focuses on a physician’s duty to disclose risks, benefits, and alternatives, the court concluded that it remains a form of medical malpractice grounded in negligence. As such, it falls within the same framework governing damages as other malpractice claims.
Applying that framework, the court held that precedent barred the plaintiff’s claim for purely emotional damages. The court rejected the Appellate Division’s reasoning that lack of informed consent claims warrant special treatment and emphasized that distinguishing between malpractice theories would undermine consistency in tort law. The court also declined the invitation to overrule its earlier decisions, finding no compelling justification to depart from settled precedent. Accordingly, the court reversed the Appellate Division’s order and dismissed the plaintiff’s lack of informed consent claim asserted on her own behalf.
Consult with a Trusted Rochester Medical Malpractice Attorney for Birth Injury and Informed Consent Claims
Cases involving childbirth injuries and informed consent raise deeply personal and legally complex issues. The knowledgeable Rochester medical malpractice attorneys at DeFrancisco & Falgiatano Personal Injury Lawyers assist families throughout Rochester, Syracuse, and across New York State in matters involving birth injuries, failure to obtain informed consent, and other forms of medical negligence. To discuss your situation and learn how the law applies to your case, contact us at 833-200-2000 or visit us online to schedule a free and confidential consultation.
