Court orders Bt1 million payout to celebrity chef over child’s birth defects

[anon789561]

3 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

It is nto true that abortion is altogerher illegal in Thailand.

 

It is legal under certain circumstances, inlcuding any that in the docto'r judgment put the mental or physical health of the mother in jeopardy.

 

There is no specific provision for abortion on the basis of fetal deformity but it is widely done, in fact women with pregnancies that test positive for things like thalassemia (disease, not trait) are encouraged to abort.

 

And yes, the implicit assumption here is that the family would have opted to abort had they known. Which will indeed create problems for the child if he comes to understand this.

 

While in a  situation of missing limbs, the only option is to abort or continue the pregnancy, there are many problems which can be addressed while the fetus is still in the womb and there have been great advances in fetal surgery. Hence accurate assessment is important.

 

To have missed the absence of limbs indicates that the ultrasound was either not well interpreted or done too early to give much information. The pre-natal screening was indeed inadequate.

doctor has spoken

[dwcrist]

1 hour ago, KKr said:

that is a sensitive issue.
Many people do believe that a deformed or mentally disabled child will not have a chance in life to obtain happiness as we understand it.
Hence, fetuses are tested and inspected, and if deformed or incapacitated the pregnancy is interrupted.
So, for doctors that claim they are capable to do such testing, and moreover refuse to make a second test, surely there is culpability in case of a misdiagnosed child.

Of course there is the question why the parents did not get a third opinion, if they felt uncertain about the capabilities of the attending physicians at this prestigious hospital.

1 hour ago, Happy enough said:

the kid still has the right to live and i am sure will learn to be happy. not really anything to do with the doctors IMO. when you say happiness as we understand it, that causes concern. that kid has the right to live and deal with it's life as handed to it

 

I agree with you, Happy. They could be charged with being incompetent and providing false information or misdiagnosis. But the accusation was for "contributing to his son’s deformity", I don't see how the doctors could have prevented or corrected his deformity had they identified it. They are not responsible for causing or contributing to it at all.

 

The only way to claim damages for them being responsible for the costs of the deformity itself is to assert that they would have aborted their son had they known, so as to save money on treatment and care. Other than that, there is no other monetary loss that the doctors could have helped avoid. They should have sued for emotional trauma from misdiagnosis, not for not for contributing to the deformity itself.

 

If this is the case, the worst part of this is that by pressing these charges they are admitting that they would have rather aborted and not have their son today.  This father and son gave a TEDx talk in Chiang Mai which moved everyone to tears.  I now have much less respect for the father and even more pity for the son knowing that saving or gaining money is worth more to the father than the life and love of his son, or if not that, at the very least, worth more than their honor and the message they are sending with this law suit.

 

My son was born with a heart deformity and died after treatment at 5 days old. I did not sue because nothing the doctors did caused the defect. I especially would not sue had he survived, I would have been thrilled! I guess to some people money is more important than the life of their disabled child. Maybe he loves his son and he's just trying to make a buck where he can. But you can't pretend to stay on the high road if you get down and dirty like this. Actions speak louder than words, people.

 

I apologize and am open to correction if I have misunderstood the case and accusations. This is based on what I know and have read here.

 

 

[KKr]

1 hour ago, Happy enough said:

good argument and some valid points especially rape victims. but i will still say a kid has a right to live in the same way i think an adult should have the right to choose when to die.

yes, in principle agree with both.
a right to live unless there are extenuating circumstances, and that can have a different meaning in different cases, cultures, villages.

[jak2002003]

3 hours ago, GarryP said:

I had a daughter with severe disabilities. She was unable to walk or talk or do anything for herself.  Do you think that if I had known in advance, I would still have agreed for my wife to go through with the birth? As I said, I understand the parents too.  Unfortunately, sometimes, you don't get the choice.    

Very sorry to hear that about your daughter. 

 

But the boy in this story seems like he is quite healthy and does not have severe mental or physical disabilities. He looks really happy and like he is enjoying is life.

 

 

[GarryP]

6 minutes ago, jak2002003 said:

Very sorry to hear that about your daughter. 

 

But the boy in this story seems like he is quite healthy and does not have severe mental or physical disabilities. He looks really happy and like he is enjoying is life.

 

 

I don't dispute that. That is why I also said "Poor kid to grow up knowing that if his parents had known, he would not have been born in the first place ." I assume that he doesn't know that he would have been aborted had his parents known. It seems to be the basis of the case against the doctors.  

[2008bangkok]

3 hours ago, Happy enough said:

good argument and some valid points especially rape victims. but i will still say a kid has a right to live in the same way i think an adult should have the right to choose when to die.

Everybody has different views on the subject that for sure, I suspect a family who already have 2-3 healthy children may choose to have an abortion where a family with no children may not. Purly my opinion no fact to back that up.

I think in this case for the person to sue the hospital they were probably going to go down the abortion route and used that as there defence otherwise as another poster has said - what has the hospital really done wrong.

[1duckyboy]

5 hours ago, Tongjaw said:

 

 

https://www.topmastersinhealthcare.com/30-most-technologically-advanced-hospitals-in-the-world/

 

https://www.advisoryhq.com/articles/best-hospitals-in-the-world/

 

http://www.healthcareglobal.com/top-10/top-10-hospitals-world

 

 

 

 

The first list shows absolutely no objective criteria for being put on the list. 

 

The second list is for best MS degree programs, no patient care

 

The third list's only criteria for being on the list is the patient volume of the facility, not quality.

 

Edited March 15, 2018 by 1duckyboy

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

5 hours ago, Sheryl said:

To have missed the absence of limbs indicates that the ultrasound was either not well interpreted or done too early to give much information. The pre-natal screening was indeed inadequate.

 

That's very medically diplomatic of you, Sheryl...

 

I would have, and did, put it a bit more bluntly and forcefully above.

 

And for the court to deliberately minimize the award to the family because, according to the article, the hospital and doctors didn't act with "criminal or malicious intent" is equally shocking.

 

So here in Thailand, that means it's OK to commit medical malpractice due to mere incompetence or neglect or whatever it was, and that's not going to be seriously punished by the court so long as it's not done with criminal or malicious intent?

 

That's like a liability get of jail free card for every merely careless or incompetent thing a supposed professional might do here. Which actually, probably isn't that surprising given the state of medico-legal-liability law here.

 

 

 

Edited March 15, 2018 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[1duckyboy]

22 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

That's very medically diplomatic of you, Sheryl...

 

I would have, and did, put it a bit more bluntly and forcefully above.

 

And for the court to deliberately minimize the award to the family because, according to the article, the hospital and doctors didn't act with "criminal or malicious intent" is equally shocking.

 

So here in Thailand, that means it's OK to commit medical malpractice due to mere incompetence or neglect or whatever it was, and that's not going to be seriously punished by the court so long as it's not done with criminal or malicious intent?

 

That's like a liability get of jail free card for every merely careless or incompetent thing a supposed professional might do here. Which actually, probably isn't that surprising given the state of medico-legal-liability law here.

 

 

 

Intent plays a huge role in sentencing in a Thai court. That's why you often read the perpetrator of a crime saying he/she was angry, depressed, drunk, an accident, etc. after committing the crime. This also makes malpractice suits difficult to collect a fair amount of damages on.

 

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

It's very unfortunate none of the news reports posted here, in typical shoddy fashion, give any version of what defense the hospital and the doctors offered at trial.

 

I would very much like to hear how they explained away failing to catch/notice the fetus developing with "half a right arm, no right leg and an incomplete left leg with three toes and dislocated hip joints."

 

Equally interesting, I suppose, would be what kind of things would cause that extent of birth defects?

Edited March 16, 2018 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[greenchair]

On 3/15/2018 at 10:18 AM, jak2002003 said:

The hospital did not cause the deformities.  The child would be born deformed anyway as nothing could be done in the womb.  

 

Is everyone who has a baby that is not 'perfect' going to demand compensation from the hospital.. like buying faulty good from a shop and wanting a refund?!!

 

Unless the couple wanted an abortion... which I thought was illegal here.  

Abortion is not illegal here under special circumstances. This couple have money so they are able to pay the millions of baht extra healthcare, physiotherapy, and all the other extra expenses. Most people do not. It's possible the doctor did know of the deformity and did not inform the parents out of bias towards terminating a pregnancy. 

However, it's not his right or yours to say a parent must accept the complicated birth just because they should. 

Because you nor he would have to walk in their shoes for the next 20 years. 

An arm and 2 legs missing. most doctors in the west would terminate if the parents wished. 

[greenchair]

On 3/16/2018 at 4:12 PM, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

It's very unfortunate none of the news reports posted here, in typical shoddy fashion, give any version of what defense the hospital and the doctors offered at trial.

 

I would very much like to hear how they explained away failing to catch/notice the fetus developing with "half a right arm, no right leg and an incomplete left leg with three toes and dislocated hip joints."

 

Equally interesting, I suppose, would be what kind of things would cause that extent of birth defects?

Yes, one wonders if there was medicine prescribed by those same doctors, which in turn caused them to deliberately keep quiet. 

That's right, how could he not see 2 legs and an arm missing? 

[jak2002003]

23 minutes ago, greenchair said:

 

However, it's not his right or yours to say a parent must accept the complicated birth just because they should. 

 

Was the actual birth complicated?  Its not the birth that was the problem.  It was the baby.

 

I never said they must accept the 'complicated birth'!  

 

But, I do say they should not be demanding huge sums of money from the hospital because they feel they don't like the look of their child.

 

That money would be better spent on the hospital and helping other patients.  

 

That boy looks beautiful, very happy and healthy.  So what it he has no legs and one arm?  There are plenty of people worse off than him.  He is a beautiful child and if anyone thinks he should have been aborted for his looks than shame on them.  

[Just Weird]

 

On ‎3‎/‎15‎/‎2018 at 6:59 AM, Happy enough said:

well the kid was going to be born with disabilities regardless of whether the doctors noticed it or not. can't really see how they are to blame

Not necessarily, those are the sort of circumstances that would make many people consider abortion.

[Just Weird]

The Thaivisa legal eagles are out in force already on this one, pity that they didn't offer their sage advice during the court case instead of telling a handful of forum members after the fact what should really have happened.

 

Nice to see the morality police getting in on the act also, seems that some posters think that parents would or should discuss with their children whether they were considering aborting them when problems justifying termination were discovered. 

[greenchair]

7 hours ago, jak2002003 said:

Was the actual birth complicated?  Its not the birth that was the problem.  It was the baby.

 

I never said they must accept the 'complicated birth'!  

 

But, I do say they should not be demanding huge sums of money from the hospital because they feel they don't like the look of their child.

 

That money would be better spent on the hospital and helping other patients.  

 

That boy looks beautiful, very happy and healthy.  So what it he has no legs and one arm?  There are plenty of people worse off than him.  He is a beautiful child and if anyone thinks he should have been aborted for his looks than shame on them.  

He is a beautiful child. 

Had they have known he probably would have been aborted. But he has the best doctors and assistance that money can buy. That's why his life is shining. 

The time and money needed to care for a child like this is insurmountable. 

I have raised a child, that was going to be aborted. He just won a full scholarship. 

I have also seen the devastating effects of going through with a pregnancy and not having the skills or money to care for the child. They have horrible lives. 

It's not up to you. 

You won't live it day after day. 

It's up to the parents. They have a right to know. 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

6 hours ago, greenchair said:

He is a beautiful child. 

Had they have known he probably would have been aborted. But he has the best doctors and assistance that money can buy. That's why his life is shining. 

The time and money needed to care for a child like this is insurmountable. 

I have raised a child, that was going to be aborted. He just won a full scholarship. 

I have also seen the devastating effects of going through with a pregnancy and not having the skills or money to care for the child. They have horrible lives. 

It's not up to you. 

You won't live it day after day. 

It's up to the parents. They have a right to know. 

 

One difference in this case, apart from the legal case, is the parents have/had some resources, so have/had some ability to do all the extra things necessary to deal with the child's birth defects.

 

On the other hand, the typical Thai family, not so much. In the more common example, the kid probably would be squatting under a BTS station all day with a cup seeking donations, or left alone in a room crawling around on the floor all day. Sorry, sad to say, but it's true.

 

 

[greenchair]

11 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

One difference in this case, apart from the legal case, is the parents have/had some resources, so have/had some ability to do all the extra things necessary to deal with the child's birth defects.

 

On the other hand, the typical Thai family, not so much. In the more common example, the kid probably would be squatting under a BTS station all day with a cup seeking donations, or left alone in a room crawling around on the floor all day. Sorry, sad to say, but it's true.

 

 

It is true. 

It is a miracle that they did not know. 

It is a miracle that he has turned out so well. 

50 percent agree with abortion, 50 percent don't. It's a whole different argument. 

They had the right to know. The choice was theirs and only theirs. 

The compensation was pitiful. 

[greenchair]

37 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

One difference in this case, apart from the legal case, is the parents have/had some resources, so have/had some ability to do all the extra things necessary to deal with the child's birth defects.

 

On the other hand, the typical Thai family, not so much. In the more common example, the kid probably would be squatting under a BTS station all day with a cup seeking donations, or left alone in a room crawling around on the floor all day. Sorry, sad to say, but it's true.

 

 

If the parents were poor the doctor most likely would have ordered a second scan and advised termination. He let his beliefs interfere with his duties. They asked for a second scan, he refused. 

Why? 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Of course, the parents could have always gone to a different doctor/hospital to obtain the second scan, and have gotten a second opinion. But they didn't. And there's nothing in the reporting on this case that I've read that suggests they had any reason to suspect there was a problem pre-birth.

 

Well, it was the big shot hospital, and the average person might expect to get qualified, competent medical advice/care there.   But, apparently not always, as this case would seem to show.

 

[pedro01]

On 15/03/2018 at 6:59 AM, Happy enough said:

well the kid was going to be born with disabilities regardless of whether the doctors noticed it or not. can't really see how they are to blame

I think the point is they would have aborted the kid.

 

And there's a pic there of him high-fiving the kid he would rather have not had.

 

Quite f****d up, that.

[pedro01]

On 15/03/2018 at 5:01 PM, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

That's very medically diplomatic of you, Sheryl...

 

I would have, and did, put it a bit more bluntly and forcefully above.

 

And for the court to deliberately minimize the award to the family because, according to the article, the hospital and doctors didn't act with "criminal or malicious intent" is equally shocking.

 

So here in Thailand, that means it's OK to commit medical malpractice due to mere incompetence or neglect or whatever it was, and that's not going to be seriously punished by the court so long as it's not done with criminal or malicious intent?

 

That's like a liability get of jail free card for every merely careless or incompetent thing a supposed professional might do here. Which actually, probably isn't that surprising given the state of medico-legal-liability law here.

 

 

 

They wanted 390 Million Baht because the doctors didn't give them information that would have helped them decide to kill the kid.

 

I think anything above 50 satang is too much for those heartless gold diggers.

[OldSiamHand]

On 3/15/2018 at 11:05 AM, Happy enough said:

i have a cousin who's got downs syndrome. they reckoned he'd live to 25 max. still going strong and one of the happiest guys i've ever known, now mid 40's. relevant? yes. the kid has a right to choose for himself and science and technology changes day by day.

You don't have rights as a fetus, even in Thailand.  If the doctors had detected the deformities, they could have opted for a legal abortion in Thailand.

[OldSiamHand]

On 3/15/2018 at 11:50 AM, Happy enough said:

good argument and some valid points especially rape victims. but i will still say a kid has a right to live in the same way i think an adult should have the right to choose when to die.

the "rape victim" exception makes no sense if you are a pro-lifer.  children do not have the option of choosing their parents, even if one of them is a rapist.  by allowing abortion for rape victims, you are saying that the potential child has lost his right to life due to the unfortunate circumstances of who his father is.

[anon789561]

1 hour ago, OldSiamHand said:

the "rape victim" exception makes no sense if you are a pro-lifer.  children do not have the option of choosing their parents, even if one of them is a rapist.  by allowing abortion for rape victims, you are saying that the potential child has lost his right to life due to the unfortunate circumstances of who his father is.

where did i say i make an exception. just said i understand why a girl might not want to keep it. also i'm hardly a pro lifer(didn't know they had categories of opinions) when i believe that adults should have the choice the euthanize themselves if they so choose

Edited March 20, 2018 by Happy enough

[OldSiamHand]

13 minutes ago, Happy enough said:

where did i say i make an exception. 

I don't know.  I never said you made an exception.