Two women were confused in the delivery room in 1965 – have sued the state

Two women were confused in the delivery room in 1965 – have sued the state

– This trial is about a serious mistake that had disastrous consequences, said lawyer Kristine Aare Hånes in the Oslo district court on Monday, according to TV 2.

She represents one of the two women who in 1965 were confused at the delivery room in Herøy in Møre og Romsdal. Thus they grew up with each other’s biological parents.

The change was first discovered by the women in 2021 when one of the women entered DNA samples into the family database “My Heritage”, but was discovered by Herøy municipality and the Directorate of Health in the 80s.

Now the two women and one woman’s biological mother have filed a lawsuit against Herøy municipality and the state at the Ministry of Health and Care for violations of human rights. They also demand restitution.

– Documentation from that time indicates that those involved found the assessments difficult, partly because it was legally unclear what they could do. In court, we will therefore argue that there is no basis for compensation, says lawyer Asgeir Nygård at the government attorney.

Nygård also believes that the case is obsolete.

The case is unique in Norwegian legal history, and that makes it difficult to determine any compensation. Lawyer Aare Hånes said in court that a likely compensation sum could be around NOK 20 million.

#women #confused #delivery #room #sued #state

**Interview with Lawyer⁢ Kristine Aare Hånes**

**Interviewer:** Kristine, this⁣ case you⁣ are involved in has garnered significant attention. Can you explain the circumstances that led to this ‌trial?

**Kristine Aare ⁢Hånes:** Certainly. In 1965, two ​women were mistakenly switched at birth during their‍ delivery in a hospital in Herøy. This error only‍ came to light years ‍later, when one of the women⁤ used a DNA testing service in 2021. Up until then, they lived their⁣ lives unaware of this tragic mix-up, which had profound implications for their identities and families.

**Interviewer:** What are the primary claims being made against Herøy municipality and the Ministry of Health and Care?

**Kristine Aare Hånes:** We are filing a lawsuit for violations of human rights due to the distress and confusion ​caused by this mix-up. The plaintiffs are seeking ​restitution for the impact this experience has had on ‌their‌ lives. A potential compensation figure discussed is around NOK ​20 million, given the unique circumstances.

**Interviewer:**​ The government’s lawyer argues that the case is obsolete and that the assessments​ at the time were legally unclear. How do you respond to that?

**Kristine Aare Hånes:** While it’s true that documentation from the⁢ time suggests there were difficulties in ​decision-making, that doesn’t negate the seriousness of their mistake. The emotional and psychological impact on the women cannot be understated and should ⁤warrant compensation. We believe the court can recognize the profound consequences of⁣ this error.

**Interviewer:** This case is unprecedented in Norwegian legal history. What do you think that ‌means for potential outcomes? And do you believe this will set a precedent for⁢ similar cases in the future?

**Kristine ​Aare Hånes:** Being unique indeed makes it challenging, but it also provides an opportunity to address the ⁤rights of individuals in medical settings. If ⁢we succeed, it⁣ could⁣ pave the ⁢way for future cases where similar errors occur, reinforcing the necessity for accountability ‍in the healthcare system.

**Interviewer:** what‌ do you hope the ‌public will take away from⁢ this trial?

**Kristine Aare Hånes:** I hope this case raises awareness about ⁣the ‌importance of​ accuracy and‌ accountability in medical practices.‍ It’s a​ profound reminder that mistakes can have lifelong consequences, and the healthcare system must take such errors seriously to protect the​ rights and well-being of all patients.

**Interviewer:** Thank you, Kristine, for shedding light on this ⁢critical issue.

**Question for Readers:**⁤ In light of this case, how do you feel about⁤ the implications of this ‌mix-up on the rights of individuals? Should there be a limit to compensation in cases of such catastrophic⁢ mistakes? What do you think should happen next?

Leave a Replay