Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital NHS Trust [2003] UKHL 52

Facts

• The claimant, a severely visually impaired woman, underwent a sterilization procedure to prevent pregnancy due to her disability.
• The sterilization was negligently performed by Darlington Memorial Hospital NHS Trust, and the claimant subsequently gave birth to a healthy child.
• The claimant sought damages, arguing that her disability increased both the financial and personal burdens of parenthood resulting from the negligence.
• The case arose in the context of wrongful birth claims, particularly following failed sterilization procedures.
• The legal environment was shaped by the earlier case, McFarlane v Tayside Health Board [2000], which denied recovery of the costs of raising a healthy child born after a failed sterilization.

Issues

1. Whether damages should be awarded beyond existing heads for the birth of a healthy child following negligent sterilization.
2. Whether a conventional award for "loss of autonomy" is permissible and appropriate in wrongful birth cases.
3. Whether the court should revisit or modify the principles laid down in McFarlane v Tayside Health Board regarding compensation for raising a healthy child.
4. The extent to which policy considerations should influence the compensation framework in wrongful birth claims.

Decision

• The House of Lords rejected the claimant's request for full financial compensation for the costs of raising the child.
• Instead, the court introduced a conventional award of £15,000 specifically to acknowledge the loss of autonomy imposed upon the claimant by the negligent sterilization.
• The award was intended to recognize harm to the claimant’s reproductive autonomy, not compensatory for child-rearing expenses.
• The amount of the conventional award was set uniformly, regardless of the particular circumstances of individual claimants.
• Claimants remained eligible for compensation under traditional heads, such as pain and suffering or loss of earnings, distinct from the conventional award.
• The court emphasized balancing the claimant’s right to compensation against broader public policy and societal interests, particularly the potential ramifications for the National Health Service.

Legal Principles

• The decision confirmed that damages for raising a healthy child after negligent sterilization are not recoverable in wrongful birth claims, as reaffirmed from McFarlane v Tayside Health Board.
• Introduction of a fixed, conventional award may be made to recognize loss of personal autonomy when a claimant's reproductive choices have been infringed.
• The award for loss of autonomy represents symbolic recognition of harm, distinct from direct financial costs associated with raising a child.
• Policy considerations, including consistency, avoiding excessive liability, and preventing double recovery, are central to determining the scope of recoverable damages in medical negligence cases of wrongful birth.

Conclusion

Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital NHS Trust [2003] UKHL 52 established the principle of a fixed conventional award for loss of autonomy in wrongful birth cases resulting from negligent sterilization, marking a significant departure from awarding full child-rearing costs and reinforcing the importance of policy considerations in determining compensation.