Cynthia and Perfecto Provencio v. Steven Wenrich, D.O.

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Mexico held that damages for a subsequent pregnancy and the costs of raising a child to the age of majority after a failed sterilization procedure are available only when the physician breached a duty to inform the patient of continued fertility. Because the plaintiffs were informed that the sterilization had failed before conception, the court affirmed dismissal of their claim for child-rearing expenses. The court reversed the Court of Appeals and clarified that wrongful conception is a medical negligence claim, not a distinct tort.

Holdings

1. Wrongful conception is not a distinct tort; it is a medical-negligence claim involving a unique category of damages.
2. Following a failed sterilization, damages for an additional pregnancy and the costs of raising resulting children to the age of majority are available only when the plaintiffs prove a breach of the physician's duty to inform.
3. The district court properly entered judgment for Dr. Wenrich because Mrs. Provencio understood that she remained fertile before conceiving, and therefore the plaintiffs could not establish the informational injury necessary for recovery of Mendez-type child-rearing damages.
4. The court defines the duty to inform, but the timeliness and adequacy of a physician's warning are questions of fact for the jury.

Questions Presented

1. Whether damages for the costs of raising a healthy child to the age of majority are available after a negligently performed sterilization when the physician informed the patient of the failed procedure and the patient's continued fertility.
2. Whether wrongful conception is a distinct tort or a form of medical negligence.
3. Whether the physician's disclosure of continued fertility is an issue of causation and comparative fault for the jury or instead relates to the physician's duty to inform and limits the availability of child-rearing damages as a matter of law.

Disposition

reversed