Abstract
The law on wrongful conception is rather confused. Currently, judges appear to decide claims on the basis of their own values, presenting their decision as one which the ordinary person would reach. This approach has allowed policy considerations to motivate decisions without a full discussion of the relevance or importance of that policy. Furthermore, this situation has resulted in inconsistency and uncertainty. This paper argues that one of the merits of the conventional award, adopted recently by a majority of the House of Lords in relation to wrongful conception claims, is that it has the ability to restore a judicial approach which fosters certainty and consistency and does not allow weak policy justifications to prevent the recovery of some compensation by genuine victims of medical negligence.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.