McFarlane v Tayside Health Board
Parents of a healthy child born after a negligent vasectomy cannot recover the costs of bringing up the child, although the mother can recover damages for the pain and suffering of pregnancy and birth.
Facts
Mr McFarlane had a vasectomy and was told that his sperm count was negative and that he and his wife no longer needed to use contraception. In fact, the vasectomy had not been effective, and Mrs McFarlane became pregnant and gave birth to a healthy daughter. They sued the health board for negligence, claiming damages for the pain and discomfort of pregnancy and birth, and for the cost of bringing up the child.
Legal principle
The House of Lords held that the parents could not recover the costs of bringing up a healthy child, although Mrs McFarlane could recover damages for the pain, suffering and inconvenience of the pregnancy and birth. Their Lordships gave various reasons, including that it would not be fair, just and reasonable to impose liability for such economic loss, that the benefits of a healthy child could not be calculated and set off against the costs, and that society would regard the birth of a healthy child as a blessing, not a detriment. Lord Steyn invoked the views of the commuters on the London Underground, who would consider that the law of tort has no business to provide legal remedies consequent upon the birth of a healthy child.
Related cases on clinical negligence, informed consent and wrongful birth
- Bailey v Ministry of Defence [2008] EWCA Civ 883, [2009] 1 WLR 1052
- Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington Hospital Management Committee [1969] 1 QB 428
- Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582
- Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority [1998] AC 232
- Chester v Afshar [2004] UKHL 41, [2005] 1 AC 134
- Darnley v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust [2018] UKSC 50, [2019] AC 831
- Gregg v Scott [2005] UKHL 2, [2005] 2 AC 176
- Hotson v East Berkshire Area Health Authority [1987] AC 750
Studying medical law and ethics? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
