A 34‑year‑old Polish woman whose prenatal tests were declined by her doctor ended up giving birth to a child with Down syndrome, and a series of court decisions ultimately capped the compensation she could receive.
Pregnancy and Initial Requests
The 34‑year‑old woman sought routine prenatal testing, including the PAPP‑A blood test, during her first obstetric visit. She expressed concerns about potential genetic disorders owing to her age.
Her doctor dismissed the requests, citing that prenatal ultrasound alone was sufficient and that further testing would only be warranted if abnormalities appeared in the scan.
Ultrasound Findings and Medical Assessment
On 6 July 2010 an ultrasound was performed focusing on chromosomal abnormalities. The scan revealed a nuchal translucency at the upper end of normal limits.
Despite the minor elevation, the gynecologist deemed the result normal, failed to recommend additional genetic testing, and assured the patient that no further intervention was necessary.
Child’s Diagnosis and Family Impact
On 11 January 2011 the woman delivered a child who was diagnosed with Down syndrome on the third day of life. The newborn also manifested hypotonia, hypothyroidism, and intellectual disability.
The parents entered psychological care, suffered depression and anxiety, and estimated the monthly cost of multi‑specialist care at roughly 2½ thousand PLN.
Legal Proceedings and Court Findings
In court the judge appointed a forensic obstetrician who confirmed that the ultrasound performed was not equivalent to a full prenatal screening, which includes biochemical tests and risk assessment.
The court held that the woman could have been included in the statutory prenatal programme because she was under the qualifying age of 35, but the hospital failed to offer the programme’s additional tests. No fault was attributed to the parents for their ignorance of fetal abnormalities.
Damages were limited to 100,000 PLN for each parent, despite the parties seeking 200,000 PLN.
Supreme Court Ruling
The Supreme Court ruled that the right to terminate a pregnancy does not constitute a personal injury that would justify compensation. It concluded that the absence of prenatal diagnostics could not be tied causally to the child’s condition.
Thus, the court refused to increase damages beyond those already awarded by the appellate court, emphasizing that the child’s birth does not constitute a financial loss or harm to the parents.
