Opinion ID: 1355690
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: prenatal injury statutes and case law from other jurisdictions

Text: The first American decision to address prenatal injury and wrongful death was Dietrich v. Inhabitants of Northampton, 138 Mass. 14, 52 Am.Rep. 242 (1884). In Dietrich, the mother fell when she was four or five months pregnant and thereafter gave birth prematurely to a child who lived only fifteen minutes. Justice Holmes held that because an unborn child was a part of the mother, no action could be maintained for wrongful death of the child, but that any damage to the child, if not too remote to be recoverable at all, was recoverable by the mother. Until the 1940's, nearly all jurisdictions considering the issue reached the same conclusion. See W. PAGE KEETON ET AL., PROSSER AND KEETON ON THE LAW OF TORTS § 55, at 367 (5th ed.1984). Beginning in the 1940s with Bonbrest v. Kotz, 65 F.Supp. 138 (D.D.C.1946), courts around the country abandoned the holding of Dietrich. Today, every jurisdiction permits recovery for prenatal injuries if a child is born alive. See Farley v. Sartin, 195 W.Va. 671, 466 S.E.2d 522, 528 (1995). This generally holds true regardless whether the injury occurred either before or after the point of viability. Id. The majority of jurisdictions also recognize a cause of action for the wrongful death of a stillborn, viable fetus. [5] Many of the jurisdictions recently reviewing the issue have specifically held that a cause of action for wrongful death does not lie for a nonviable, stillborn fetus. See, e.g., Ferguson v. District of Columbia, 629 A.2d 15, 17 (D.C.1993); Humes v. Clinton, 246 Kan. 590, 792 P.2d 1032, 1037 (1990); Kandel v. White, 339 Md. 432, 663 A.2d 1264 (1995). [6] The only state judicially providing recovery for a stillborn fetus in the absence of viability is West Virginia. In West Virginia, the Supreme Court of Appeals recently held that the term `person,' as used in [the West Virginia wrongful death statute] ... encompasses a nonviable unborn child and, thus, permits a cause of action for the tortious death of such child. Farley v. Sartin, 195 W.Va. 671, 466 S.E.2d 522, 534 (1995). Previously, in Baldwin v. Butcher, 155 W.Va. 431, 184 S.E.2d 428 (1971), that court had recognized a cause of action for a viable, stillborn fetus. A few jurisdictions have enacted additional statutes or amended their wrongful death statutes to include coverage for a fetus. [7] For example, South Dakota has amended its wrongful death statute to provide that the death or injury of a person, including an unborn child, gives rise to a cause of action for wrongful death. [8] Illinois has enacted a fetal death statute which specifically allows wrongful death actions to be maintained regardless of a fetus' gestational development at the time of injury. [9] The Missouri legislature has enacted a statute providing life begins at conception and further, that the laws of the state should be interpreted to confer to unborn children at all stages of development all of the rights available to other citizens of the state. [10] Although Montana has not amended its wrongful death act to include a fetus, it has enacted a separate statute defining unborn child which states, A child conceived but not yet born is to be deemed an existing person, so far as may be necessary for its interests in the event of its subsequent birth. [11] Louisiana has a similar provision which states, An unborn child shall be considered as a natural person for whatever relates to its interest from the moment of conception. If the child is born dead, it shall be considered never to have existed as a person, except for purposes of actions resulting from its wrongful death. [12]