A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » alt.support » Child Support
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

!ACC claim for pregnancy



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 23rd 05, 09:48 AM
Max Burke
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default !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  
Old October 23rd 05, 05:41 PM
Mobile
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default !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  
Old October 23rd 05, 07:05 PM
Beverly
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default !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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.