Texas Supreme Court Says Parents of Stillborn Infant Cannot Sue Doctors on Its
Behalf, Fetus Not a 'Person' Under State Law
[Aug 30, 2004] The Texas Supreme Court on Friday ruled 7-1 that the
parents of a stillborn infant cannot sue medical practitioners for negligence
on behalf of their infant because under state laws a fetus is not a "person" or
an "individual," the Houston Chronicle reports (Elliott, Houston Chronicle,
8/29). The case involved a Texas couple seeking permission to sue the Fort
Worth Osteopathic Hospital and its medical staff on their stillborn infant's
behalf for its wrongful death. Tara and Donnie Reese, who have already reached
a settlement with some of the hospital's doctors, say that the hospital failed
to properly manage Tara's labor and delivery and caused their infant to be
stillborn. The Reeses said they believe their infant would have been born alive
if the hospital had performed an emergency caesarean-section delivery. However,
the hospital has said that Tara Reese's pregnancy was high-risk due to
pre-existing medical conditions and that the stillbirth was unavoidable and
without negligence. Although Texas law allows people to sue on behalf of
infants who are born alive, state District Judge Fred Davis in 2001 dismissed
the Reeses' wrongful death claim, saying that the Texas Supreme Court had ruled
that fetuses have no legal standing until birth. The 2nd Court of Appeals in
Fort Worth in 1999 ruled in a separate case that parents could sue for wrongful
death on behalf of a "viable" fetus even if it is never born alive. However,
other appeals courts have referred to a 1985 Texas Supreme Court ruling that
said the Legislature must change the wrongful death statute before people can
file a lawsuit on a fetus's behalf (Kaiser Daily Reproductive Health Report,
10/9/03).

Ruling Details
Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice Thomas Phillips wrote in the majority opinion
that the ruling was based on actions by the Texas Legislature, which has
declined to rewrite the state's wrongful death statute, the Fort Worth
Star-Telegram reports. Phillips said that the ruling was not aimed at deciding
"whether a fetus is a person in either a philosophical or a scientific sense,"
according to the Star-Telegram (Baker, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, 8/28). Justice
Steven Smith in a dissenting opinion said that a fetus should be considered a
person under the wrongful death statute, according to the AP/Denton
Record-Chronicle (AP/Denton Record-Chronicle, 8/30).

Reaction
Kyleen Wright, president of the Texans for Life Coalition, said she was
disappointed by the court's decision but not surprised by it, the Star-Telegram
reports. "The average person has a sonogram picture on the refrigerator and the
baby book, and those are not non-persons," Wright said, adding, "Those are our
babies and some day the law will catch up, and we hope it comes soon." Kelly
Hart, public affairs director for Planned Parenthood of North Texas, also said
she was not surprised by the ruling. She added that she believes allowing
parents to sue medical practitioners for negligence following a stillbirth
would be a step down a "slippery slope" that would result in more restrictions
on reproductive rights, according to the Star-Telegram. The Reeses said they
were "pretty upset" by the ruling. Tara Reese said, "It is kind of ridiculous
that they are not recognizing him as a human being. It is a slap in the face."
Donnie Reese said that their legal fight on the issue will continue, adding, "I
have no intention of ending it this way" (Fort Worth Star-Telegram, 8/28).