Readers Write: Trump’s win, ‘wrongful conception’ lawsuit

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Postelection letters seem to reflect the general public discourse I hear. One side is distraught, horrified and, among other things, interprets the presidential election as evidence that racism and misogyny still rule the day. The other side says that’s bogus and unfair — they voted on a range of issues, beginning with the economy and immigration. Fair enough.

But here’s the thing, and the heart of the reason I believe we’re talking past each other: Donald Trump threw hateful mud at Kamala Harris using repugnant gender and race stereotypes — both at rallies and on social media. That is a deal-breaker for a lot of us. It reveals a mean-spirited, offensive man who dishonors the office of president and portends a future of fear and grief for those who are presumed “different” from the majority in power. Once president, especially given Trump’s prowess in using a megaphone, these supremacist sentiments become official national values that dictate policy.

Forget the issues — that Trump’s hatefulness is not a deal-breaker for a majority of Americans is the rub for me, and I think many others. I, for one, would do my utmost to listen with an open mind to a reasoned response that is more than canned talking points.

Rich Cowles, Eagan

•••

In the Star Tribune’s Nov. 13 Readers Write (”Crying sexism is a lazy analysis”), a reader wrote that the Trump victory over Harris could not have been due to sexism because voters chose female candidates (such as Sen. Amy Klobuchar) over male candidates in nonpresidential races.

We may never know the exact reason(s) a convicted criminal was preferred over a Black woman with excellent qualifications (district attorney, attorney general, senator, vice president). When I read some explanations, I hear many misinformed people. For example, the Star Tribune featured one woman who voted for Trump who said she did so because she didn’t believe women should be allowed to have an abortion to save the life of the mother because she did not think pregnancy could risk a woman’s life without warning! She lacked knowledge of the dangers of pregnancies. Another woman Trump voter said she voted for Trump because she believed he was a “family man”! She did not seem to have the knowledge that he has been married three times with infidelity as the theme. Many people defend their vote for Trump saying it was about the economy even though Trump will almost certainly inherit a better economy than when he left office in 2021.

We can analyze the defeat forever. I can’t help but recall the Devah Pager 2003 study “The Mark of a Criminal Record,” published in the American Journal of Sociology, in which we learned that when applying for a job and having the exact same qualifications, a white person with a criminal record is more likely to get a return call from a potential employer over a Black person without a criminal record.

This study is about race, but maybe Harris had a fatal combination of being both a woman and a person of color. Voters seem accepting of voting for women in many high-powered positions like governors and senators. The U.S. voters have yet to prove they accept that a woman can be commander in chief even when the opponent is a convicted criminal.

I hope someday soon, we will be able to address our prejudices and our misinformation.

Sadie McKinley, Minneapolis

•••

Five years ago, Trump would not meet with the incoming President Biden. This week, Biden met with the incoming President Trump. I believe that says it all.

Chad Mead, Buffalo

As one of thousands of mothers who have conceived and given birth to a child after a vasectomy (including a negative post sperm check), I found the story of a large monetary jury award to a wealthy family absolutely appalling (“Over $1M awarded in vasectomy lawsuit,” Nov. 14). This award reinforces the current culture’s trend toward devaluing children, pricing them as a burden and drain on resources, and somehow worthy only if they arrive as planned by parents. Children are a blessing from God.

Stephanie Schmit, Richfield

•••

So sad that a family, so richly blessed with four healthy children, sued for a “wrongful conception” that has inconvenienced their career plans. Unfortunately, Minnesota is one of the few states that allow such a claim and set a new legal precedent for other “wrongful conceptions” to follow. I underwrote medical malpractice insurance for hospitals and nursing homes back in the 1970s and saw many unusual cases, but this one takes the cake! Unfortunately, all such court awards continue to drive up the cost of health care and malpractice insurance premiums.

True, the clinic should have fail-safe testing and competent surgeries, but mistakes happen in spite of years of adhering to strict safeguards and procedures. Religious affiliation is not mentioned, but God acts in strange ways sometimes, and a family could fare far worse than adding another healthy child. The family could have chosen abortion (under current Minnesota law) or given the child up for adoption. This public trial could eventually be revealed to this “unwanted” child, now established as “the poster child of wrongful conception.” They sought over $6 million for the cost of raising this child and loss of career earnings, but a jury trial awarded $1.1 million, still a substantial sum.

Some families would give millions to have such a healthy child. My parents of our large family added two surprise latecomers five years after the rest of us, affectionally termed “the trailers,” and loved them well into their retirement years. Such is life. We can only hope that this family stabilizes, the money helps, and this child receives all the love and attention they deserve.

Michael Tillemans, Minneapolis

•••

Minnesota courts permit what have been labeled “wrongful conception” claims. These are the opposite of the more common wrongful death claims allowed everywhere. The wrongful conception claim is allowed in a minority of jurisdictions, most courts having concluded that the birth of a normal, healthy child causes no harm as a matter of law even in the case of an unwanted pregnancy. The Minnesota Supreme Court compromised on the issue, however, when it required any damages awarded for the wrongful conception to be offset by the joy and love attached to giving birth to and raising a normal, healthy child. The jury is assigned the duty of valuing this offset. A Hennepin County jury has just returned a verdict in such a case where the parents of a normal, healthy child sued a clinic for misreading a vasectomy as effective and an unwanted pregnancy ensued. In their verdict the jury valued the joys attached to having a normal healthy child as zero. It awarded over $1 million for the emotional and financial cost of the child.

When I read this verdict, I wondered what has happened to us in Minnesota. Is this jury conclusion a product of the abortion debate in Minnesota, which has produced one of the most liberal abortion statutes in the country, if not world? Has the Hennepin County jury answered this question? The joy of a child is zero!

Phillip Cole, Eden Prairie

The writer is a retired lawyer.