I think these are a couple of assholes. Regardless of whether they told the doctor, they should have had him make that in commitment in writing long before they got as far as the operating room instead of tossing that in during a conversation just before the procedure.
Also, to claim that having an additional child prevents you from loving… I suppose that it’s possible, but since they’re asking for $400k, it seems pretty clear they’re in it for the money.
Where does it say that she lost her ability to love? I didn’t see anything about that in the first article.
My wife and I did IVF as well as other couples we know.
Discussing with the doctor well beforehand, in previous visits, multipe times, about how many embryos will be implanted is normally a big part of the process.
It sounds odd that it would be brought up “minutes” before she was put under.
Typically the doctors make it LOUD AND CLEAR that while implanting multiple embryos increases your chances of becoming pregnant, you also run the chance that ALL embryos will take. I think you even sign an agreement sheet stating you understand this risk.
A couple we knew who were both 40 were doing their final round of IVF after multiple failures. For a last ditch effort they and the doctor agreed to implant 3 embryos hoping at least one would attach. And of course they knew the risk that all 3 may take… And they did. They have 3 two-year old boys right now.
No complaints from them.
To answer the OP, in the United States (all jurisdictions I believe, but am more than happy to be corrected if that’s not the case) the answer is “nobody”.
“Wrongful life” is not a permissible cause of action. In the cases of this nature (and there have been several) that have been brought in the US, the only amounts the plaintiff was allowed to seek were the purely medical extra costs associated with prenatal care and delivery of twins (or more) as opposed to a single child.*
Provided the mother consented to the IVF procedure, unless the doctor performed it in a manner inconsistent with accepted standards and practices for such a procedure, medical battery is also not permissible.
Of course, that’s in the United States, not down under, so there you go.
*Most of the case law in this area centers around failed contraception rather than additional embryo implantation, but in the very few cases I’ve read where additional embryo implantation was part of the fact pattern, the judges stuck to the “malfunctioning condom” caselaw precedents like glue.
From here:
“*She said the couple considered a selective termination of one of the fetuses but ruled it out after being told they risked losing both.
They also considered adopting one of the children out, an option the birth mother’s partner found “horrifying”. *”
Here and in the above link. Quoth the partner of the birthmother:
““She (the twins’ birth mother) always said that she had a big heart filled with love,” the woman said, weeping. “I find (now) that she doesn’t have the same ability to love that she used to and the same capacity to, I guess, embrace differences and issues as a couple or as a team.””
I would like to slap them for implying that if she’d had only one baby she wouldn’t be having PPD. “Lost a lot of her shine” and similar sentences are things I’ve heard about many recent mothers (who may have PPD and be deadly tired or only be deadly tired).
Those two thought that babies were made of plastic. They’re trying to make it credit-card-sized with a magnetic strip, now.