WRONGFUL BIRTH AND WRONGFUL LIFE: LEGAL DOCTRINES, ETHICAL DILEMMAS, SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS, AND COMPARATIVE JURISPRUDENCE

Abstract

The emergence of wrongful birth and wrongful life claims within tort law marks one of the most contested intersections of medical negligence, reproductive autonomy, and bioethical reasoning in modern jurisprudence. This article examines these two related yet doctrinally distinct causes of action through analytical and doctrinal approaches, using Nigeria as the primary jurisdiction of study while drawing comparative insights from the United Kingdom, the United States, France, and Australia. Relying on applicable legal principles, landmark judicial decisions, and statutory provisions, the article interrogates the conceptual foundations of both causes of action, evaluates the ethical tensions they generate, and assesses their broader implications for disability rights, healthcare accountability, and reproductive autonomy. It finds that while wrongful birth claims have increasingly been accommodated within negligence frameworks across several jurisdictions, wrongful life claims remain both philosophically and legally intractable, with most courts rejecting them on the ground that no legal system can meaningfully compare existence with non-existence for the purpose of awarding damages. Drawing on comparative jurisprudence, the article offers policy recommendations tailored to the Nigerian legal context, seeking to strike a careful balance between parental rights, child welfare, medical accountability, and the dignity and equal worth of persons living with disabilities.