title: Gold v. Haringey Health Authority, 14 April 1987.
abstract: The plaintiff, who became pregnant and gave birth to her fourth child after having been sterilized by the defendant health authority, brought an action for damages for negligence against the defendant. She claimed that the defendant had not warned her of the risk of failure and that a statement made to her that the operation would be "irreversible" constituted negligent misrepresentation. The Court of Appeal reversed a lower court decision awarding damages. It held that the defendant's failure to warn of possible failure did not constitute negligence, but met the required standard of care, because at the time of the operation a substantial body of responsible doctors would not have made a warning. It also ruled that the defendant's statement could not be viewed as a "representation" either expressed or implied that the operation would be a success.
mesh_terms: D019049:Developed Countries; D005060:Europe; D005193:Family Planning Services; D007258:Informed Consent; D007603:Jurisprudence; D013245:Sterilization, Reproductive; D006113:United Kingdom
keywords: Court Decision; Developed Countries; Europe; Family Planning; Informed Consent--legal aspects; Medical Liability--legal aspects; Northern Europe; Sterilization, Sexual--legal aspects; United Kingdom