Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
A Critique of the Motivational Analysis in Wrongful Conception Cases Cover

A Critique of the Motivational Analysis in Wrongful Conception Cases

Open Access
|May 2000

Abstract

Most states now recognize a tort cause of action for wrongful conception, typically resulting from a failed sterilization. States differ; however; in determining whether damages should be awarded for child-rearing expenses and what factors juries can consider in setting such damage awards. This Note argues that one commonly used factor; the parents’ motivation for selecting sterilization, is irrelevant and leads to inequitable results. Since the right to use contraception is constitutionally protected, the choice to sterilize in order to avoid financial burdens associated with childrearing should not be given preferential treatment to sterilizations motivated by concerns of genetic defects or for the mother’s health.

Journal eISSN: 1930-661X
Language: English
Page range: 585 - 626
Published on: May 1, 2000
Published by: Boston College Law School
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

© 2000 Iraida J. Alvarez, published by Boston College Law School
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons License.