408. In that context, when the plaintiffs injuries result from tortious conduct related to the use of the plaintiffs sperm without his permission, “mental anguish and economic harm in connection with the birth” are not recoverable. Id. at 410. The prohibition on mental-anguish damages in this context is an extension of an earlier limitation that prevented those who became parents despite their efforts to contracept from recovering damages for the costs of rearing and educating their child under a wrongful-pregnancy claim. See, e.g., id.; Crawford v. Kirk, 929 S.W.2d 633, 637 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1996, writ denied); Terrell v. Garcia, 496 S.W.2d 124, 127-28 (Tex. Civ. App.—San Antonio 1973, writ ref'd n.r.e.); but cf. Flax v. McNew, 896 S.W.2d 839, 841-45 (Tex. App.—Waco 1995, no writ) (<HOLDING>). Recently, our sister court, in Pressil, held
holding in wrongful pregnancy suit that expenses of raising and educating child were not recoverable elements of damages but emotional distress was recoverable element holding attorneys fees not generally recoverable unless party prevails under cause of action for which attorneys fees are recoverable and damages are recovered holding emotional distress damages for a willful violation of the automatic stay were recoverable against the social security administration holding that emotional distress damages are not recoverable under section 504 holding damages for emotional distress are not recoverable in an action for breach of contract whether express or implied in the absence of a showing that the parties contemplated such damages at the time the contract was made