Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
If a sterilization procedure fails due to medical negligence and a woman thus gets pregnant and subsequently dies from complications of her pregnancy, would the doctor be held responsible for this woman's death in a wrongful death lawsuit and thus be forced to pay financial compensation to this woman's family for her death? Or would such a lawsuit fail due to the belief that this woman's death was "too remote" from the act of sexual intercourse? Futurist110 (talk) 19:59, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You may need to wait for an actual court case to find out. The outcome may depend on details. Did the woman seek the procedure because it was known she was at high risk in case of pregnancy, and was the negligent professional aware of this? Did they know, or should they have known, that the procedure failed? Did they cover this up, or was the woman properly informed about the failure? It may also depend on the jurisdiction. Remoteness means no one could "reasonably" foresee the adverse outcome as a result from the alleged tort (in the hypothetical case the negligence causing the procedural failure, not the act of sexual intercourse). But one person's reason is another person's folly. There is no coherent generally accepted doctrine, and, as our Negligence article states, "Such disparity of views on the element of remoteness continues to trouble the judiciary." See also Causation in English law. --Lambiam21:06, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
