"I felt like rather than going to a meeting to have the explanation," he said recently, "I'd rather have the child alive."
Nearly a year later, in February 2011, he and his wife, Erica Allen-Blake, both of Philadelphia, filed suit. The meeting with Kelly formed a fundamental part of the suit:
"At the meeting the defendants expressed regret over Destinee's death and described the course of treatment provided to Destinee, and admitted the death was caused by the hospital."
The suit went on about the meeting for eight paragraphs.
The hospital's lawyers objected. They maintained in court papers that this meeting was confidential by law, and that nothing about this conversation could be used in court.
Many doctors feel that an apology - accepting responsibility for errors, telling what went wrong - is a dramatic advance and the right thing to do since doctors have long been loath to admit mistakes.
But they say the trend will continue only if doctors know they can speak openly, without fear of being bludgeoned in a lawsuit.
"Isn't that a little like testifying against yourself?" asked Jim Redmond, head of legislative affairs for the Hospital Association of Pennsylvania.
Trial lawyers disagree. They say doctors and hospitals either have the courage of their convictions - telling the truth, accepting the consequences - or they don't.
"Sit around and sing 'Kumbaya' as long as nobody faces any consequences? And we're supposed to be OK with that? Come on," said Jonathan M. Cohen, the lawyer for Destinee's parents.
Cohen characterized the medical community's position as this: "We will tell you the truth, but only if it doesn't hurt us."
Trial lawyers also argue that evidence of fault and error sometimes isn't in a medical record, that the talk between doctor and patient may be the only evidence of it.
