The headline in the June 14 Oregonian reads: "Prenatal testing goes to court."  The accompanying article describes a Portland couple suing a doctor for $14 million to cover the costs of raising their daughter, who was born in 2007 with Down syndrome.  The suit alleges that the doctor assured the couple their child would not have the disability. The couple says that had they known of the condition, they would have chosen abortion. Read more about the suit on OregonLive. 

Similar lawsuits -- called “wrongful birth” and “wrongful life” cases -- have raised complex legal, ethical and moral issues across the country.  Some would say that a botched prenatal test is like any other mishandled medical procedure and should be treated as medical malpractice.  Others would ask if a person can truly be damaged because she is alive.

One sentence in the article particularly grabbed my attention:  “Several studies show 90% or more of women who discover they’ll give birth to a baby with Down syndrome choose to have an abortion.”  Angela Jarvis-Holland of the Northwest Down Syndrome Association comments that this seems to reflect a “tyranny of perfection.”  As medical science advances, parents will be able to test for “virtually every conceivable disadvantage facing their fetus.”   Will parents of the future sue their doctors if their child does not have the desired height, athletic ability or IQ? 

 An approach to addressing these issues is contained in a section of the Pregnant Women Support Act (S.270), now pending in the U.S. Senate.   It would require health care providers to provide information to parents who receive a positive test result from a prenatal test for Down syndrome.  That information is to include written, up-to-date, scientific information about the syndrome and referral to support services including a hot-line, website, peer-supports and national registry of adoption options.

One’s view of this proposal is bound to be highly affected by one’s position in the larger abortion debate.  But if I can gingerly sidestep that issue, I would like to raise the relationship of  “wrongful life” cases to health care reform.

 I wonder: What if everyone had insurance that covered the additional costs of raising a child with disabilities?  What if there were no fiscal incentives to abort a child with Down syndrome? It would not affect the choice of a person who only wants to carry a child that has a good shot at Harvard or the Trail Blazers' roster; but it could save us from putting a negative price on life.