When Sonia and her husband, Eddie, had their third child, they agreed that they desired no additional children and that Eddie should undergo sterilization. They consulted Dr. Leonard, who performed a vasectomy. Although Dr. Leonard pronounced the operation a success, he in fact performed the vasectomy carelessly and neglected to order routine follow-up tests. Eddie impregnated Sonia within six months after the failed sterilization procedure.

1. In the process of developing the state's common law of torts, should a state court permit Sonia and Eddie to sue Dr. Leonard on a negligence theory of "wrongful conception"? If so, should the damages include only the medical expenses and other costs associated with childbirth, or should they more broadly include the costs of raising the fourth child?

1. Suppose that the fourth child was born with severe birth defects, but that the failed sterilization procedure did not contribute to the birth defects. Should these facts affect the court's evaluation of the parents' claims based on wrongful conception? Should the court recognize a cause of action on the behalf of the fourth child for "wrongful life," permitting the child herself to collect damages on the theory that she would have been better off had she not been conceived?

1. Should the analysis of any of these questions be affected by the fact that Sonia could have legally aborted her fetus soon after discovering her pregnancy?