Harm Paradox Tort Law and the Unwanted Child in an Era of Choice

Can a healthy child resulting from negligence in family planning procedures constitute 'harm' sounding in damages, when so many see its birth as a blessing? Can a pregnancy constitute an 'injury' when many women choose that very event? Are parents really harmed, when they choose to keep their much loved but 'unwanted child'? And why don't women seek an abortion if the consequences of pregnancy are seen as harmful?These questions constitute The Harm Paradox . Offering the first comprehensive theoretical engagement with actions for wrongful conception and birth, the author examines the significance of these questions in explaining the recent retraction of liability for claims of 'unsolicited parenthood' in the UK. Centralising gender as a critical axis of enquiry, the author argues that the concept of autonomy, though an important value for promoting women's reproductive freedom, is transforming into a reproductive expectation. Not only has autonomy become central to the law's response that enforced parenthood is a harmless outcome, but as Priaulx reveals, similar discourses have come to inhabit the reproductive landscape generally. Seeking to challenge such accounts and pernicious assumptions which inform them, the author questions: Just what is it that we value about the concept of autonomy?Priaulx, Nicolette is the author of 'Harm Paradox Tort Law and the Unwanted Child in an Era of Choice', published 2007 under ISBN 9781844721085 and ISBN 1844721086.