In an Indiana Court of Appeals case issued yesterday, it appears that Indiana law may be changing. While Indiana’s conservative public policy forbids same sex marriage and obstinately refuses to honor surrogacy agreements, the Court seems to be loosening its belt when it comes to surrogacy law. (see ILB article, “Surrogate not necessarily legal mother”; NWI Times article, “Court: Surrogate Not Necessarily Legal Mother, Appeals Judges Order Evidentiary Hearing to Prove Maternity”)
In Term. of Parent-Child Rel. of I.B.; M.L. v. IDCS, an intended mother and father had an embryo created and implanted in a surrogate, the intended mother’s sister. After the birth, the couple initiated paternity, flying in the face of Indiana precedent. According to Indiana law prior to the case, a father, through a suit for paternity, could establish parental rights to a child. The birth mother, on the other hand, was forever bound as the child’s mother, regardless of biological maternity. In a sweeping move yesterday, the Indiana Court of Appeals remanded to the Porter Circuit Court that it must conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine the remedy most equitable under the circumstances. This could mean that a woman, other than the woman who gave birth to the child, can be established as the child’s mother. This is a move away from completely disfavoring surrogacy according to Indiana law.
What do you think, NWI?
{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
Medical negligence occurs when a medical provider fails to exercise the kind of care and prudence that other providers in the same field of medicine provide. Medical negligence can occur in the form of recklessness, inattentiveness, or an omission. Common types of malpractice include misdiagnosis, failure to provide proper treatment of a patient's ailment, administration of the wrong medication, and the failure to inform the patient of the risks associated with a treatment or with information about alternative treatments. Tort law governs medical negligence. To establish that a provider's negligence was malpractice, a claimant must establish the following:
1. The healthcare provider owed a duty to the plaintiff;
2. The healthcare provider breached the duty;
3. The healthcare provider's breach caused the injury; and
4. The patient suffered damages because of the defendant's negligence.
Visit Medical negligence claims to get more information about this.