What qualifies as wrongful death litigation?

Written by Granny's Mettle

Continued from page 1

On another note, one interesting case that is being syndicated in every press available isrepparttar lawsuit filed by a couple whose frozen embryo was accidentally discarded at a fertility clinic. This is a case whererepparttar 119157 parents ofrepparttar 119158 deceased filed a lawsuit, and had a judge ruled forrepparttar 119159 case.

According torepparttar 119160 Associated Press,repparttar 119161 couple hasrepparttar 119162 right to file a wrongful-death lawsuit in accordance torepparttar 119163 Illinois laws. The judge rules onrepparttar 119164 case inrepparttar 119165 opinion that "a pre-embryo is a 'human being'… whether or not it is implanted in its mother's womb." The judge further added thatrepparttar 119166 couple is entitled to seek compensation as any parents whose child has been killed.

Based onrepparttar 119167 state's Wrongful Death Act, lawsuits are allowed to be filed if unborn fetuses are killed in an accident or assault. This is whererepparttar 119168 judge based his ruling on. In addition,repparttar 119169 law states that "the state of gestation or development of a human being" does not preclude taking legal action.

The couple who stored nine embryos atrepparttar 119170 Center for Human Reproduction in Chicago filedrepparttar 119171 suit. Their doctor told them that one embryo looked particularly promising. However, six months later, they were informed thatrepparttar 119172 embryos hade been accidentally discarded.

The attorney forrepparttar 119173 fertility clinic said that an appeal would be filed byrepparttar 119174 defendants.

For additional information and comments about the article you may log on to http://www.personalinjurydefenders.com

Book Review: Toxic Deception

Written by Granny’s Mettle

Continued from page 1

Unfortunately, federal health agencies have all but abandonedrepparttar long-term testing of chemicals on animals. This type of testing has beenrepparttar 119156 only method known to accurately predict a substance from causing cancer in humans. The authors contend thatrepparttar 119157 change was brought about byrepparttar 119158 barrage of public relations produced byrepparttar 119159 big chemical industry players. Animal-rights advocates are no match torepparttar 119160 manufacturers' clout and financial advantage. This was duringrepparttar 119161 time when information came out thatrepparttar 119162 manufacturers' products cause rat tumors and abnormalities.

Onrepparttar 119163 EPA's part, instead of conducting their own tests, they often evaluate and rely onrepparttar 119164 tests that have been designed and conducted byrepparttar 119165 chemical manufacturers themselves. On other occasions, it was found out thatrepparttar 119166 EPA evaluatedrepparttar 119167 tests conducted by companies hired byrepparttar 119168 manufacturers.

In effect,repparttar 119169 federal government providesrepparttar 119170 opportunity for these chemical manufacturers to testrepparttar 119171 toxic effects of their own products and produce results that are advantageous to their cause. One review provided a perfect description: "It is a fox-guarding-the-henhouse system that lends itself to manipulation and even outright fraud."

For additional information and comments about the article you may log on to http://www.personalinjurydefenders.com

    <Back to Page 1
ImproveHomeLife.com © 2005
Terms of Use