Woman Misled About Abortion Can Sue for Malpractice

November 1, 2002—Trenton, NJ: A woman who was misled by an abortion practitioner to have an abortion can sue for severe emotional distress, an appeals court ruled Tuesday.

Rosa Acuna says she was incorrectly told by Dr. Sheldon Turkish that she was not aborting a human life when she had an abortion in 1996, according to court papers.

Turkish had told Acuna that the pregnancy was causing damage to her kidneys and an immediate abortion was needed, according to court papers. She then asked if "the baby was already there" and Turkish replied that "it's only blood," court papers said.

In its 22-page ruling, the appeals court said Acuna's argument that her doctor did not give her enough details before the abortion is a question of medical malpractice. If Acuna can convince a jury that is a fact, she can demand damages, the panel said.

"Based on the circumstances, background and beliefs of a mother, inducing her to terminate a pregnancy, even at eight weeks, because of the physician's failure to obtain an informed consent may also result in severe distress and mental anguish," the court said.

Acuna's lawyer praised the ruling, saying a jury will now decide if a baby is indeed a human life.

"This case exposes the conflict between a mother's fundamental rights and a conflicting philosophy of an abortion doctor who devalues the mother's interest," lawyer Harold Cassidy said.

Turkish's lawyer, John Zen Jackson, did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

Acuna sued Turkish, saying the abortion caused psychological traumas including depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and psychosexual dysfunction.

A trial court agreed with the abortion practitioner and dismissed the lawsuit. Acuna had no grounds to seek damages in part because the U.S. Supreme Court has declared an unborn child is not a person, that judge ruled.