RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously??

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously??

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously??

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? - 4/9/2009 8:55:08 AM

subtlebutterfly

Posts: 2230
Joined: 6/15/2008
From: Not your hood
Status: offline

LMFAO yea very sacred

I agree with igor..science aint that perfect and I doubt the technology was as well on it's way back in 1995 as it is now.
However I don't know, my granpa has this disease that is inherited. My dad didn't get tested for it until I was around ..16 or sum, even though he doesn't have it I mean heck it could just be a recessive gene..maybe it could pop up in me one day, or my kids (if I were to have one..but anyway)
I don't really know much about genetics, but I did read sometime that recessive genes may just need a little *push* to come forward, same thing with hidden diseases..you maybe fall and the disease strikes with full power.
You always take some risk, there's no guarantee - especially not when it comes to conception. The science isn't perfect heck it wasn't many years (k decades) ago that people didn't think it was possible to go out in space.
I just can't possibly justify that the bank should be held liable.
Is it justifiable that they want to sue the bank? of course...but is it justifiable enough? I don't believe it is. We have to draw the line somewhere.

< Message edited by subtlebutterfly -- 4/9/2009 8:56:31 AM >

(in reply to UncleNasty)

Profile

Post #: 21

RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? - 4/9/2009 3:37:26 PM

FullCircle

Posts: 5713
Joined: 11/24/2005
Status: offline

The lawsuit is nonsense the analogy is incorrect because it is like me suing a car manufacturer for a car I never bought.

She wouldn't have existed at all since you can't separate the defective from the rest of the genes that make her who she is. Injury was not caused it always existed, it's not as if she could have had a perfectly normal life if only she didn't have that father. Just an exercise in money grab, the mother can sue for getting a defective daughter perhaps, if she thinks of her daughter as a product.

Let us be realistic the 13 year old isn't suing anyone; her parents are and they are terming it in ways to not make it look like they hate what they got.

< Message edited by FullCircle -- 4/9/2009 3:42:55 PM >

_____________________________

∞ ﮒuקּƹɼ ƾɛϰưϫԼ Ƨωιϯϲћ.

(in reply to UncleNasty)

Profile

Post #: 22

RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? - 4/9/2009 4:00:59 PM

aravain

Posts: 1211
Joined: 8/26/2008
Status: offline

~FR~

(I didn't read the article, it wouldn't play nice for some reason) I don't even think screening is *required* in the US...

however, if the sperm bank had stated "Yep, we screened for all of those diseases" or the parents paid extra to have it done then, well, they're liable. *shrug*

I haven't got a soul to sue for having arthritis, a genetic auto-immune disorder, *and* a mental illness at 21... just like anyone who has a disease that can be tested for but was a natural-birth doesn't, and while I understand it might not hold a candle to whatever this girl's gone through, I don't see why suing someone for being alive makes sense.

(in reply to UncleNasty)

Profile

Post #: 23

RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? - 4/9/2009 4:19:26 PM

Vendaval

Posts: 10297
Joined: 1/15/2005
Status: offline

Fast Reply - Anyone here remember the Beavis and Butthead episode where they go down to the sperm bank to try and raise cash for rock concert tickets? One of them fills up all the jars by himself. lmao

_____________________________

"Beware, the woods at night, beware the lunar light.
So in this gray haze we'll be meating again, and on that
great day, I will tease you all the same."
"WOLF MOON", OCTOBER RUST, TYPE O NEGATIVE

http://KinkMeet.co.uk

(in reply to aravain)

Profile

Post #: 24

RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? - 4/9/2009 4:20:04 PM

kazzaslave

Posts: 291
Joined: 12/12/2008
Status: offline

~FR~

Fragile X can be passed on from either the mother or the father, so it's *possible* that there was a recessive gene on her mother's side and that's where she got it. Unless they still have some of her father's sperm it's almost impossible to prove conclusively that it's the sperm bank's fault this girl has Fragile X.

kazza

_____________________________

I had no choice but to hear you ~Alanis Morrisette

All kazza's postings are approved by Master Malkinius

tsfka phoenix

Member of MoGa's In Crowd

Honorary member of the Fabulous Michigan Clique

(in reply to aravain)

Profile

Post #: 25

RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? - 4/9/2009 5:26:14 PM

DarkFury

Posts: 264
Joined: 4/1/2009
Status: offline

Which brings up a point: if the defective gene was passed through the sperm, then what responsibility has to fall on the donor?

_____________________________

Like a dagger you stick me in the heart and taste the blood from my blade
And when we sleep would you shelter me in your warm and dark embrace

Did you eat a bowl of stupid for breakfast?

The Chosen Bear & RESIDENT MANWHORE

(in reply to kazzaslave)

Profile

Post #: 26

RE: is nothing sacred I mean...seriously?? - 4/9/2009 8:16:54 PM

Kirata

Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: igor2003

I believe the article said the girl was 13 wasn't she? Meaning she would have been conceived about 14 years ago or about 1995. Did the technology even exist at that time to test for genetic defects of that nature? If not, then I really don't see how the sperm bank could be held responsable for not detecting a defect for which there was no test available.

Exactly. I agree that all due diligence should be required, and that liability for negligence is just. Where the legal system is crazy, in my opinion, is here:

Donovan does not have to show that Idant was negligent, only that the sperm it provided was unsafe and caused injury. "It doesn't matter how much care was taken," says Daniel Thistle, the lawyer representing Donovan, based in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

K.

< Message edited by Kirata -- 4/9/2009 8:22:19 PM >

(in reply to igor2003)

Profile

Post #: 27