
Cramblett is not saying that they do not love Payton, now 3, who is obviously a beautiful child. However, they insist that the sperm bank violated their agreement, impregnated her with sperm that she did not consent to, and imposed a burden on her and her family. They live in a predominantly white area of Uniontown, Ohio, and she says that there is a feeling of Payton being an “outcast” and that even haircuts are an added burden.
The mistake appears to be due to the use of paper records that allowed the misreading of the numbers — something that sounds remarkably casual and negligent.
Judge Sutter however threw out the lawsuit as lacking legal merit. The sperm bank lawyers prevailed in arguing that the only successful “wrongful birth” cases tend to be babies with severe birth defects. Sutter also rejected the claim of “breach of warranty.” In Sutter’s favor, I was surprised by the limited grounds of the complaint — particularly the absence of the obvious negligence claim. The case can be refiled with a negligence claim. It would seem that negligence is rather obvious. The question will be right to or level of injury or damages. The baby is healthy and the impregnation obviously was successful. What remains is highly controversial in treating a mixed race baby as an injury. Yet, this couple was offered and agree to impregnation with a specific man’s sperm. That raises an array of tort and contract claims that could be made. In the end, however, you are left with the notion of a baby being an injury due to its race.
She sought at least $50,000 in damages.
What do you think? Should a mother be able to recover damages for having a mixed race baby?
Source: Washington Post
