Published by Arfaa Law Group
In medical malpractice lawsuits involving reproductive care and genetic testing, plaintiffs must plead their claims with particularity. If they fail to articulate what standard of care applies and how a provider’s conduct violated it, the courts may dismiss the case at the pleading stage. This was demonstrated in a recent medical malpractice case in which claims brought after an erroneous embryo transfer were dismissed for failure to plausibly allege negligence. If you experienced harm due to a provider’s deviation from accepted reproductive care standards, it is critical to seek guidance from a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to understand your legal rights.
Factual Background and Allegations
It is reported that the plaintiffs sought in vitro fertilization (IVF) services in order to have a child free of Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD), a serious genetic disorder that had affected their other children. The plaintiffs pursued IVF in conjunction with preimplantation genetic diagnostics, aiming to ensure that only embryos unaffected by DMD would be implanted. Although several embryos were tested and deemed healthy, others were identified as genetically compromised.
Allegedly, during a June 2020 embryo transfer, a DMD-affected embryo was mistakenly transferred to the plaintiff, resulting in a pregnancy that was ultimately terminated after the error was discovered. The plaintiffs later filed a lawsuit asserting claims of negligence, gross negligence, and breach of contract.
It is alleged that the plaintiffs initially filed suit against the IVF clinic, two of its doctors, and a physician employed by a federal military hospital. The complaint also named the United States as a defendant under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), asserting liability for acts committed by the government-employed physician. The court previously dismissed certain claims but granted plaintiffs leave to amend their pleadings to address noted deficiencies.
Reportedly, the amended complaint reiterated prior allegations with only minimal revisions. It maintained that the government physician referred the plaintiffs to the IVF clinic and allegedly failed to confirm the genetic status of the embryo prior to the transfer. The plaintiffs further alleged that the clinic’s embryologists selected the affected embryo and that the clinic failed to follow protocols requiring the destruction of genetically compromised embryos. A subsequent claim asserted that the federal physician “actually transferred” the affected embryo without verifying its health status.
Particularity of Medical Malpractice Claims
On review, the court dismissed the plaintiffs’ claims against all defendants for failure to state a claim. As to the physicians affiliated with the IVF clinic, the court emphasized that the amended complaint added no new facts plausibly linking those doctors to any negligent act. The claims against them were therefore dismissed with prejudice.
Regarding the claims against the government-employed physician, the court noted that Maryland law requires plaintiffs in medical negligence actions to plead a breach of an applicable standard of care and proximate causation. While the plaintiffs asserted that the physician failed to check the embryo’s genetic profile, the complaint failed to articulate what duty the physician owed in the context of a coordinated IVF and genetic screening procedure involving a third-party clinic. Because the IVF clinic was responsible for selecting and discarding embryos, the court found it implausible to assume that the physician had an independent duty to verify the embryo’s health.
The court held that plaintiffs’ allegations were insufficient to show that the physician’s conduct deviated from the standard expected of a reasonably competent OB/GYN in such a specialized reproductive setting. The court further observed that a general allegation that a provider failed to “check” the embryo’s health was conclusory and did not support a plausible negligence claim.
The claims against the federal hospital under a respondeat superior theory also failed, as no plausible negligence claim remained against any government employee. Moreover, the court dismissed the breach of contract claim for lack of jurisdiction, noting that such claims against the federal government must be brought in the Court of Federal Claims. Lastly, the court emphasized that “respondeat superior” is not an independent cause of action and dismissed that count as legally noncognizable.
Because the plaintiffs had already been given an opportunity to amend and failed to cure the deficiencies, the court dismissed the negligence and respondeat superior claims with prejudice. The contract claim was dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction.
Discuss Your Case with a Baltimore Medical Malpractice Lawyer
Claims arising from fertility treatments and genetic testing involve complex questions of medical duty, standard of care, and procedural compliance, and the courts will not hesitate to dismiss complaints that fail to plead these elements with specificity. At Arfaa Law Group, our experienced Baltimore medical malpractice attorneys understand the unique challenges presented by reproductive and genetic care malpractice claims. If you or your family has been harmed due to an error in fertility treatment, contact us at (410) 889-1850 or complete our online form to schedule a free consultation.