Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Oops! Mom sues pharmaceutical firm for cost of raising daughter after mislabeled birth control pills

Posted by   + Show Post



A single mom is suing a pharmaceutical firm for the cost of raising her daughter after a packaging error allowed her to become pregnant.

Shanta Russell, 33, is demanding compensation from Qualitest Pharmaceuticals after the firm admitted her birth control pills had been put in the wrong order in the blister pack.

Placebo pills, to be taken when a woman has her period, were placed in the packs where active pills should have been.

This rendered Russell's contraceptives, which she had been taking for more than 12 years, ineffective.

The Kansas City native found out she was pregnant in June 2011.

Three months later she received a letter from Qualitest informing her of the mix-up.

She gave birth to her baby girl in early 2012, and filed the lawsuit in Jackson County Circuit Court on Feb. 6.

Qualitest's parent firm and the company that packaged the drugs are also being sued.

The Kansas City Star reports Russell, a self-confessed workaholic, had not intended to become pregnant so soon as she was working two jobs.

"I was devastated," Russell told The Star.

"I questioned myself. After all these years, how could this happen? Then I received a letter in the mail. Of course I was angry. There was nothing I did that was a mistake."

But she also revealed that she "adored" her little girl, saying that she now "can't live without her"

Endo Pharmaceuticals, Qualitest's parent company, has refused to comment on the case.

It is also facing similar lawsuits from women in California, Tennessee, Texas and Georgia.


by on Feb. 20, 2013 at 12:03 PM
Replies (71-80):
Momniscient
by Ruby Member on Feb. 20, 2013 at 2:26 PM

Adoption being an option as well.

Quoting Traci_Momof2:

 The thing is, when it comes to legal obligation, individual morals have little to do with it.  Her views on abortion do not change the fact that abortion was a legal option for her.

If I was the company, I would say "Ok, here's the $300 it would've cost you to end the pregnancy that our screw up caused.  The rest was your decision so your financial obligation."


Quoting lilbit53009:

not everyone is ok with just going out to get an abortion. (i'm VERY pro choice too...but i'm just throwing that out there)

Quoting pansyprincess:

 Fine ... so she was sue happy and decided to sue.  Cause she has a child she obviously wanted.  Cause if she didn't want her, she could have had an abortion for $300.  But I guess she didn't feel like that was enough money to ask for?  Now she wants someone else to pay for her raising her child?  It's all crap.



Quoting catrig:

No, but their mistake enabled her to get pregnant. She was taking them as directed.


Quoting pansyprincess:

Ridiculous.  Fine if they want to give her some sort of compensation ... but the cost of raising her daughter?  No one said she had to have it. 









GoddessNDaRuff
by Silver Member on Feb. 20, 2013 at 2:38 PM
Well i figured a lot of people would be suing. Having a kid you were trying to prevent and can't afford and it not being due to your own error would make anyone upset. If i am not mistaken this is the company that misdyed and thus mispackaged their bc pills. On the grounds that they are not even allowed to placebo people in bc trials, suing for not getting the product you paid for and the resulting consequence makes sense. I hope all the women win. It's too serious of an issue.
Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
annabl1970
by Platinum Member on Feb. 20, 2013 at 2:40 PM
I could never put my personal morals aside. I am not against abortion. But IMO abortion should the last choice.
Company should pay. Period.


Quoting Traci_Momof2:

Ridiculous suit.  She is suing them for the cost of raising her daughter because of their mistake.  But their mistake did not force her to birth and raise her daughter.  Her own personal morals aside, she had the legal option to abort the pregnancy, which then would lead to zero child-rearing expenses.


Regardless of their mistake, she chose to birth her baby and she chose to raise her baby herself.  The child-rearing costs are solely from her choices, not from the pharmaceutical company's mixup.


Posted on CafeMom Mobile
christina0607
by on Feb. 20, 2013 at 2:50 PM

The company owes her compensation for their mistake. 

GoddessNDaRuff
by Silver Member on Feb. 20, 2013 at 2:59 PM
Well for those whining she could have sued for mental and emotional anguish, physical damage to her person as the result of a pregnancy, the cost of the pregnancy, the cost of plastic surgery to repair the damages, loss wages due to pregnancy and child birth and it would equal out about the same.

Fact is saying she should have had a medical procdeure because they messed up is wrong. Plus i personally don't know where she lives but you also have to consider she might have had to travel to be able to obtain and abortion and couldn't afford that on top of the cost of the abortion. Then again folks would be bitching if she sued them to recover the costs and the hardship it causes her to get abortion saying she could have kept the kid. And if she sued the company after an adoption (forget the father has to consent to that as well) for the fact they put her in that position through neglience folks would be saying the same things. Either way the company was wrong and if they mismanaged any other medication with life changing consequences for the person relying on it no one would say they were wrong for them suing for the cost of said consequence. Everyone is bitching because in this case the cost is a child.
Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
Traci_Momof2
by Silver Member on Feb. 20, 2013 at 3:37 PM

 I'm not saying she should have put her personal morals aside.  I am saying that the courtroom should when they consider this case.  In the courtroom, her personal beliefs on abortion (whatever they may be) should not be considered.  Only that it was a legal option and the accessibility of it depending on her location.


Quoting annabl1970:

I could never put my personal morals aside. I am not against abortion. But IMO abortion should the last choice.
Company should pay. Period.


Quoting Traci_Momof2:

Ridiculous suit.  She is suing them for the cost of raising her daughter because of their mistake.  But their mistake did not force her to birth and raise her daughter.  Her own personal morals aside, she had the legal option to abort the pregnancy, which then would lead to zero child-rearing expenses.


Regardless of their mistake, she chose to birth her baby and she chose to raise her baby herself.  The child-rearing costs are solely from her choices, not from the pharmaceutical company's mixup.



 

LindaClement
by Linda on Feb. 20, 2013 at 3:39 PM

Brain dead.

What a twit.

USBrit
by Bronze Member on Feb. 20, 2013 at 3:45 PM
1 mom liked this

This is ridiculous! If she didn't want a child, she could have given it up for adoption. What next.....suing the condom makers for torn condoms? I believe that this person is just looking for a big payout.

Traci_Momof2
by Silver Member on Feb. 20, 2013 at 3:52 PM

 First off, no one is saying she "should have" had a medical procedure.  It was "an option".  There is a difference.  She had the option, therefore the error did not force her to raise a child.

Honestly, I would feel better about it if she was suing for physical damage to her person.  That would make more sense.  Because no matter what, their screw up caused physical damage to her body.  No matter what choice she made, her body would have to go through something as a result of their screw up.

But she's not suing for physical damage.  She is suing for child-rearing expense.  The fact of the matter is that their screw up did NOT force her to pay child-rearing expenses.  She made that choice on her own.

Perhaps it's just semantics, but I think it's an important distinction.


Quoting GoddessNDaRuff:

Well for those whining she could have sued for mental and emotional anguish, physical damage to her person as the result of a pregnancy, the cost of the pregnancy, the cost of plastic surgery to repair the damages, loss wages due to pregnancy and child birth and it would equal out about the same.

Fact is saying she should have had a medical procdeure because they messed up is wrong. Plus i personally don't know where she lives but you also have to consider she might have had to travel to be able to obtain and abortion and couldn't afford that on top of the cost of the abortion. Then again folks would be bitching if she sued them to recover the costs and the hardship it causes her to get abortion saying she could have kept the kid. And if she sued the company after an adoption (forget the father has to consent to that as well) for the fact they put her in that position through neglience folks would be saying the same things. Either way the company was wrong and if they mismanaged any other medication with life changing consequences for the person relying on it no one would say they were wrong for them suing for the cost of said consequence. Everyone is bitching because in this case the cost is a child.


 

Sisteract
by Whoopie on Feb. 20, 2013 at 3:58 PM
1 mom liked this

AMEN! 

Finally someone with a lick of common sense-

Quoting catrig:

I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree.



Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)



Featured