Liberty Alerts, Liberty Counsel
Today the Alabama Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling that a mother may pursue a wrongful death claim on behalf of her pre-viable unborn child.
In the case of Hamilton v. Scott, Amy Hamilton filed suit against several doctors and a medical group for the wrongful death of her unborn child, claiming that the lack of proper medical intervention resulted in the child’s death, which all the experts agreed was at the pre-viable stage of pregnancy and could not have survived if born at that stage of pregnancy.
Justice Tom Parker, joined by three other Justices, issued a special concurring opinion, in which he specifically addressed that Roe v. Wade does not prevent such a ruling and that viability is arbitrary and changes with medical technology.
Parker wrote that Roe is out of step with every other area of law in which many state legislatures and courts have recognized the rights of the unborn child in wills and estates, tort or criminal law, and more. He also wrote that “Roe’s viability rule was based on inaccurate history and was mostly unsupported by legal precedent. Medical advances since Roe have conclusively demonstrated that an unborn child is a unique human being at every stage of development.”
Parker concluded by saying, “Roe’s viability rule is neither controlling nor persuasive here and should be rejected by other states until the day it is overruled by the United States Supreme Court.”
This decision by the Alabama Supreme Court is an example of a ruling consistent with legal precedent and logic. The life expectancy of Roe is limited and is being undermined by every other area of law and medicine.
Used with permission of Liberty Counsel.