PRO-LIFE campaigners were outraged last night after a Law Lord told a North-East mother that she could have aborted or given away her unwanted child.

Karina Rees, 31, a virtually blind single mother, gave birth to a son, now aged six, after a botched sterilisation operation at Darlington Memorial Hospital.

Last year, she won a landmark victory at the Appeal Court to seek damages, which could have been worth more than £1m, from the trust in charge of the hospital.

But yesterday, the House of Lords overturned that decision and told her she was entitled to only £15,000 for "being the victim of a legal wrong".

Lord Scott said County Durham and Darlington NHS Trust's appeal against the Appeal Court's decision should be allowed because the costs of looking after an originally unwanted child occurred as a result of a parent's decision to keep the child.

"If the parents decided, for example, to place the child with an adoption society with a view to adoption they would not incur these costs and expenses," he said.

"Nor would they incur them if, for whatever reason, the mother had had her unwanted pregnancy terminated.

"Why should the negligent doctor be liable for the economic consequences of the parents' decision to keep and rear the child?"

Nuala Scarisbrick, a trustee of national anti-abortion charity Life, denounced his comments.

"It's particularly shocking that someone in the position of a Law Lord should make that kind of comment," she said.

"Whatever the rights of the case that he is commenting on, the way in which the life of the child has been referred to as completely disposable is shocking and sickening.

"There are a lot of people who don't want to have an abortion."

Miss Rees's solicitor, Annabel Beattie, said after the verdict that her client and child faced a "difficult and uncertain future".

And she revealed that the boy had recently been diagnosed with Perthes disease - a bone disease which can cause disability.

"We are obviously very disappointed at the decision given by the House of Lords," she said. "It has been a very difficult and sensitive case and Miss Rees obviously wanted compensation for the additional costs of bringing up her son.

"Karina does very much love her son and never considered an abortion or having him adopted."

Miss Rees, of St Paul's Place, Darlington,who is blind in one eye and has only partial sight in the other, had the sterilisation operation in 1995 because she feared her disabilities would pose difficulties for her in bringing up a child and that he or she might inherit her genetic condition.

Lord Bingham, the country's senior law lord, said yesterday that the operation was carried out negligently and that she became pregnant with a son, Anthony, born in April 1997.

But the traditional legal view is that a healthy child is always a blessing and so damages cannot be sought.

Lord Justice Millett said ordinary people would think it unfair that a disabled person should recover the costs of looking after a healthy child when an able-bodied person could not.

The lords overturned the Appeal Court's decision by a four to three majority.

The trust's chief executive, John Saxby, said: "The trust has always accepted its responsibility in what has been a very difficult case. We are sorry for the distress caused to Miss Rees."