The wife asked for the divorce and he's really bitter about that and the settlement she's going to get.

This "bitter" doctor lives a couple towns south of me.

Unbelievable! Here is the story from today's NEWSDAY...

When Dr. Richard Batista's wife needed a kidney, he gave her one of his.

And now that Dawnell Batista has filed for a divorce, he wants it back.

If he can't get the kidney, his attorney, Dominic Barbara of Garden City, said Wednesday that his client wants $1.5 million -- which, he said, reflects in part the value of the kidney transplant.

Dawnell Batista, 44, of Massapequa, could not be reached and her attorney, Douglas Rothkopf of Garden City, declined to comment in detail.

Medical ethicists agreed that the case is a nonstarter. Arthur Caplan of the University of Pennsylvania's Center for Bioethics said the likelihood of Batista getting either his kidney or cash was "somewhere between impossible and completely impossible."

Robert Veatch, a medical ethicist at Georgetown University's Kennedy Institute of Ethics, noted that "it's illegal for an organ to be exchanged for anything of value." Organs in the United States may not be bought or sold. Donating an organ is a gift and legally, "when you give something, you can't get it back," he said.

"It's her kidney now and . . . taking the kidney out would mean she would have to go on dialysis or it would kill her," Veatch said.

Barbara said his client isn't really looking for Dawnell Batista to give back her kidney. "Does he really want the kidney back? Of course not," he said.

Batista said his aim instead was to draw attention to her not allowing him agreed-upon visitation with the couple's three children, ages 14, 11 and 8.

Batista, 49, of Ronkonkoma, said he donated his kidney to his wife in June 2001, after she had undergone two other failed transplants when her kidneys ceased working.

"My first priority was to save her life," Batista said at a news conference in Garden City. "The second bonus was to turn the marriage around."

Batista, a surgeon at Nassau University Medical Center since 1992, said the marriage had been shaky because of his wife's illness.

Initially, Batista said he was happy with his gift of life: "I was walking on a cloud. I did the right thing for her and to this day I would do it again."

Dawnell Batista, a nurse, filed for divorce in July 2005, and her husband countersued that same year. The demand for the kidney was not part of the original countersuit, but was introduced Wednesday, Barbara said.

Barbara said the $1.5 million his client feels he's entitled to reflects damages, including how much money she made as a result of being able to continue working and not having to go on dialysis. "A price can't be placed on a human organ but it does have value," he said.

Caplan disagreed. "There's nothing later you can get in terms of compensation if you regret your gift," he said.

I'd like to see what happens when this gets to court!

And again, children are caught in the middle. Even in his own words, his motives come across as vengeful and out of pain.

Hmmm. In a "community property" state, would he be entitled to take half the kidney??? It's interesting now that she feels better, has what she wanted, she files for divorce.

Of course there'll be no award, but they both should be ashamed of themselves.

Should've gotten that kidney claus in the prenup. I joke, but I really do feel sad for the entire family. I'm sure if someone had prophecied on their wedding day that it would end in a court case over a kidney they would *never* have believed it. How much hurt they must have inflicted on each other to get to this point... very sad.

I can't think which thing is worse! I too am interested to see what happens when this gets to court.

Blessings,
Haley

I hope the judge tosses this lawyer in prison if it is possible. It is required that an attorney perform a due diligence investigation concerning the factual basis for any claim or defense. This guy, Atty Barbara even says in the article that there is no factual basis in the argument. He is not even acting 'in good faith'. How dumb is this guy to even try to pull this with the courts?

This stuff wastes the court's time and our tax dollars. Sanctions may be imposed by a court upon the party or the lawyer who presents the frivolous defense or claim. The law firm can be sanctioned or even held in contempt. I hope he gets disbarred for this stunt. I've seen lawyers sanctioned for waaaaaay less than this.

Well said dilly_dally. Cases like this and the dumb broad that spilled coffee in her lap who sued, should give jail time to the attorneys who file these frivolous cases. But that so seldom happens. Courts, aka judges, take care of their own.

OMG How revolting and pathetic this Dr. and his Attorney are!!!!!!!In the USA it is not LAWFUL to charge for a Organ donation and it is not legal to sell human organs to transplants recipients. Hmmmm this Chump of a Dr. and his silly divorce attorney must know that. He gave her the kidney to save her life and to turn the marriage around. Hmmmm?????? Methinks Doc. needs some therapy with a prfessional to get some of his own issues worked out!!! If you love someone and wish to save their life How wonderful. If you love someone and wish to keep them with you even it makes them unhappy there is something greatly wrong with what you percieve Love as!
Giving a gift of life in the form of a transplant is a heroic thing but to ask for it back or pay for it is downright disgusting and lowlife.
Why be so silly in an attempt to see his children? It only takes speaking to a judge to get court ordered visitation in a legal separation. Let her defy a court order and deny his visitation and she will be in front of a judge for contempt. There may also be reasonable objectin to him seeing his children unsupervised and that can be dealt with by the court as well. All the estranged wife has to do is show cause why he should not be allowed unsupervised visits with his kids.
Poor kids to have to be caught in such childish and spiteful behavior.

CT