If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
!ACC claim for pregnancy
Kerry scribbled:
A woman who fell pregnant after having her tubes tied has won the right to claim ACC compensation - based on the argument her pregnancy was a "personal injury". A woman who fell pregnant after having her tubes tied has won the right to claim ACC compensation - based on the argument her pregnancy was a "personal injury". According to the woman's lawyer, the decision could now be applied to other failed contraceptive measures - including broken condoms or falling pregnant while on the pill. The judgment came after the woman - who cannot be identified - applied to ACC for compensation when she became pregnant after having a tubal ligation. Her initial compensation claim was denied and the woman appealed, resulting in the district court judgment. ACC has since appealed to the High Court. In his decision released last week, Wellington District Court judge John Cadenhead found the 31-year-old woman's pregnancy could be considered a "personal injury' and she had the right to lodge a claim with ACC. ROTFLOL I await in anticipation the first ACC claim from a man who says his vasectomy/condom failed and his wife/girlfriend/mistress is pregnant; He needs compensating for the pain and suffering for this 'personal injury' and for the future (or current) very real risk of having to pay child support after doing all he could to prevent himself becoming a father.... I wonder if the ACC would insist of both parties getting a DNA test to prove parentage..... This case/precedent has the distinct possibility of revealing a lot of things many women and men would not want revealed. Maybe that's why the ACC took it to court.... Would the court accept the same/similar argument of 'personal injury' from a man that it accepted from this woman???? -- Replace the obvious with paradise.net to email me Found Images http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~mlvburke |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
!ACC claim for pregnancy
"Max Burke" wrote in I await in anticipation the first ACC claim from a man who says his vasectomy/condom failed and his wife/girlfriend/mistress is pregnant; Perhaps a failed vasectomy could be compensated, just as this woman's tube tied procedure failed. This is a reasonable request as these invasive operations show people are taking extrodinary measures to prevent pregnancy. I applaud that woman for having the courage to make a point! Failed condoms on the other hand, we all know the risks when using substandard equipment. LOL |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
!ACC claim for pregnancy
I am responding to this post because I did not see the original post
in the newsgroup I frequent. This whole thing sounds ridiculous to me given my experience with tubal ligation and my understanding of it. Just as with any other birth control measure, there is a margin of error in tubal ligations. When I had my tubal ligation, I had to sign a form that indicated that I understood that there was a margin of error (albeit, much smaller than any other form of birth control available to women). The form also indicated that a subsequent pregnancy would be ectopic which could be deadly if not treated immediately. I suppose I could entertain the thought that this woman was never properly informed or, perhaps, there is evidence that the procedure was not performed correctly (or at all) which might give her standing in a civil suit. Without more information, it would be difficult to determine why the judge at the appellate level felt that this pregnancy could qualify as a personal injury or to what extent that injury was (i.e. she had to undergo a procedure to remove an ectopic pregnancy and was never warned?), but I find it ludicrous that her lawyer feels the decision could be applied to other failed contraceptive measures. None of them carry a guarantee against pregnancy and, oftentimes, the packaging or insert contains a warning about effectiveness (I know my pills did when I used to need them... i.e. "95% effective in preventing unwanted pregnancy, 99% when used in conjunction with a condom and spermicide"). Do you have any idea how many "diaphragm babies" walk the earth today? The diaphragm was notorious for failing because its use was so difficult (i.e. if the woman had long fingernails, should could cause a small puncture when spreading the spermicide... it could dislodge during intercourse... it could be removed too early). The same is true about condoms... effectiveness is only as good as its use and it takes very little to cause damage to it. At any rate, the only guarantee against pregnancy is abstinence (or historectomy) and most adults should know this. NOT knowing it is contributory negligence in my opinion. On Sun, 23 Oct 2005 21:48:00 +1300, "Max Burke" wrote: Kerry scribbled: A woman who fell pregnant after having her tubes tied has won the right to claim ACC compensation - based on the argument her pregnancy was a "personal injury". A woman who fell pregnant after having her tubes tied has won the right to claim ACC compensation - based on the argument her pregnancy was a "personal injury". According to the woman's lawyer, the decision could now be applied to other failed contraceptive measures - including broken condoms or falling pregnant while on the pill. The judgment came after the woman - who cannot be identified - applied to ACC for compensation when she became pregnant after having a tubal ligation. Her initial compensation claim was denied and the woman appealed, resulting in the district court judgment. ACC has since appealed to the High Court. In his decision released last week, Wellington District Court judge John Cadenhead found the 31-year-old woman's pregnancy could be considered a "personal injury' and she had the right to lodge a claim with ACC. ROTFLOL I await in anticipation the first ACC claim from a man who says his vasectomy/condom failed and his wife/girlfriend/mistress is pregnant; He needs compensating for the pain and suffering for this 'personal injury' and for the future (or current) very real risk of having to pay child support after doing all he could to prevent himself becoming a father.... I wonder if the ACC would insist of both parties getting a DNA test to prove parentage..... This case/precedent has the distinct possibility of revealing a lot of things many women and men would not want revealed. Maybe that's why the ACC took it to court.... Would the court accept the same/similar argument of 'personal injury' from a man that it accepted from this woman???? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | General | 13 | December 10th 03 03:30 AM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | Foster Parents | 3 | December 9th 03 12:53 AM |
Kids should work. | LaVonne Carlson | General | 22 | December 7th 03 05:27 AM |
Kids should work. | ChrisScaife | Spanking | 16 | December 7th 03 05:27 AM |
Kids should work. | ChrisScaife | Foster Parents | 16 | December 7th 03 05:27 AM |