Cherry Hill, New Jersey Personal Injury Lawyer

Ensuring Patient Safety Would Cost Fewer Lives AND Less Money

Mike Ferrara — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 22:12:56 GMT

Despite laws in New Jersey and Pennsylvania requiring hospitals to report major medical errors, unanticipated complications, and near misses to state agencies for the purpose of reducing medical mistakes, experts say that hospitals in both states are neglecting to report these kinds of incidents.

In 2007, major medical errors in Pennsylvania included accidentally leaving surgical equipment inside two separate patients at Fox Chase Cancer Center. At Abington Memorial Hospital in 2005, a woman recovering from hip surgery developed open bed sores after being left lying on a bedpan for several hours. In a total violation of state law, none of these incidents was reported by the hospitals responsible.

When serious medical errors don’t lead to a patient’s death, they require additional health care spending—often tens of thousands of dollars per patient—to correct.

"Anybody that is supposed to report close calls and has zero reports is clueless," said James Bagian, head of the Department of Veterans Affairs’ National Center for Patient Safety. "Management is asleep at the switch and just waiting until they kill someone." Josh Goldstein, Philadelphia Inquirer

Since 2003, though the health department has cited four hospitals in Southeastern Pennsylvania for failing to report serious medical errors, none of these hospitals has been fined.

In the current climate of sloppy enforcement, medical malpractice lawsuits are one of the only ways to protect patients against medical errors. They are also the only way to ensure that hospitals and doctors are held responsible if and when they do cause serious patient harm.

Rather than threaten patient safety and take away the patient’s right to compensation by limiting malpractice claims, health care reform needs to focus on ways to make patients safer. Insisting on better monitoring of hospital errors would be an excellent start.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Ferrara

Ruby Tuesday Sexual Harassment Suit Settles for $225,000

Camryn Hansen — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 22:04:52 GMT

The Ruby Tuesday restaurant in Stroudsburg, PA has agreed to pay a total of $225,000 to five female employees who were allegedly sexually harassed by their male supervisors.

The harassment included making crude sexual propositions to women, frequently making sexually explicit and graphic remarks to them about their appearance, and making lewd comments in their presence about female customers, the suit said. The EEOC said that some of the women harassed were teenagers.

"Sexual harassment is always unacceptable, but when some of the victims are vulnerable teenagers, it is especially unconscionable," EEOC Acting Chairman Stuart J. Ishimaru said in a released statement. –The Morning Call

The EEOC filed the lawsuit against Ruby Tuesday’s general manager, Christopher Mendoza, and other supervisors in August 2008. More than a dozen female employees were involved in the suit, but only five were ultimately paid in the settlement, in amounts ranging from $5,000 to $101,000.

In addition to the monetary settlement, Ruby Tuesday has promised to offer annual sexual harassment training to its Stroudsburg management team.

Having worked in numerous restaurants, I can readily vouch for the ubiquity of sexual harassment in every single one of them. It’s gratifying to see our legal system command meaningful consequences for such unprofessional behavior.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Camryn Hansen

E. Coli Ground Beef Death Toll Reaches 2

Mike Ferrara — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 20:38:26 GMT

An outbreak of E. coli in ground beef products has sickened more than two dozen people and killed at least two—one in New Hampshire and another in upstate New York.

Now, Fairbanks Farms, the New York State company suspected of producing the tainted beef, has issued a recall of 545,699 pounds of ground beef products.

E. coli is a dangerous bacterium which can cause bloody diarrhea, dehydration, and kidney failure, especially in young children, the elderly, and those with weak immune systems. It was recently found in contaminated beef from Illinois producer Valley Meats; hundreds of consumers became sick from the E-coli in these products.

The products in question are ground beef or packaged beef patties that were made from Sept. 14 to Sept. 16 and distributed mostly in the Northeast. All are stamped “EST 492,” either within the Department of Agriculture’s mark of inspection or near the nutrition facts.

The products went to retailers in eight states: Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Virginia. The stores receiving them included Trader Joe’s, Giant, Price Chopper, Wild Harvest and Shaw’s.

Donna Rosenbaum, executive director of Safe Tables Our Priority, a food safety organization, said…that the nation’s food inspection system needed reform.

“To this day,” she said, “contamination problems are not found by any checks on the products by companies. They’re found when people get sick, and that’s a failure in the system.”–New York Times

As of today, since all of the recalled products are at least three weeks past their sell-by dates, none should still be on store shelves.

If you have ground beef at home with an EST 492 stamp, please do not eat it, and either dispose of it immediately without opening it, or return it to the store for a refund. Even if you cook the beef thoroughly, which can kill the bacteria, preparing it in the kitchen can contaminate utensils and surfaces. Even tiny doses can cause harm.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Ferrara

“Jobs, Not Lawsuits”: A False Dichotomy

Camryn Hansen — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 18:01:59 GMT

In response to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s annual “legal reform summit,” an event whose slogan fallaciously called for “jobs, not lawsuits” (as though lawsuits were somehow responsible for the country’s current economic crisis), the AAJ has released a report called “They Knew and Failed To.”

The AAJ report, found at www.justice.org/clips/TheyKnewAndFailedTo.pdf, demonstrates the country’s dire need for corporate accountability in the face of products that companies have known were dangerous, but have kept on the market due to their profitability.

Examples in the report of company-approved hazards include AstraZeneca burying evidence linking the anti-psychotic Seroquel to massive weight gain and diabetes; Johnson & Johnson doctoring study results to hide the increased risk of blood clots, strokes, and heart attacks associated with its birth control patch, OrthoEvra; Second Chance Body Armor deliberately manufacturing defective bullet proof vests (used by police officers, the military, and the president); and Firestone’s refusal to act after discovering its tires were falling apart on the road and killing hundreds of people.

All of these companies were ultimately held responsible for the harms they deliberately caused because of the civil protections generations of Americans have fought for. The Chamber of Commerce’s continued scapegoating of lawyers and lawsuits as the root of all American evils is irresponsible at best; democracy-killing at worst.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Camryn Hansen

Medical Malpractice Reform: A Doctor’s Perspective

Camryn Hansen — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:58:59 GMT

If you’re getting mad about the mainstream media’s perpetual refusal to fact-check, telling you that So-and-So says X while another So-and-So says Y but refusing to tell you whether X or Y is in fact true, you will appreciate the recent Salon.com article by Rahul K. Parikh, M.D.—“I'm a doctor. So sue me. No, really.”

In this article, Dr. Parikh thoughtfully and rigorously examines the evidence that tort reformers have been touting for years as reasons why states should limit patient compensation for medical injuries. He finds that:

· We do not have an epidemic of malpractice suits in this country, and the numbers are not growing. Studies show that between 1996 and 2006, the number of suits has actually declined eight percent.

· Capping medical malpractice claims would not translate to significantly lower health care costs. Currently, malpractice costs amount to two percent of our $2 trillion total.

· Contrary to tort reformers’ claims, the cost to the system of “defensive medicine” is marginal at best.

· Although tort reformers claim that “junk lawsuits” account for the majority of malpractice claims and clog up the legal system, and have cherry picked misleading study statistics to back up their arguments, a comprehensive Harvard study in the New England Journal of Medicine found that a full 2/3 of malpractice cases involve errors made by doctors. Of that 2/3, 73% resulted in payments to plaintiffs. Of the suits that did not involve an actual doctor error, 72% did not result in payments. As Parikh says, “Those conclusions do not paint the picture of a medical-legal system burdened by ambulance-chasing lawyers and their litigious clients.”

· The cost of malpractice insurance does not drive doctors out of business in rural areas. Rural areas have always had a shortage of doctors relative to highly populated areas, and “with or without tort reform, access to care is likely to stay tight outside of big cities.”

The real culprit for high costs, according to Parikh, are the malpractice insurance companies, who are simply adhering to the tradition of making up for declining investments by increasing their premiums:

Public Citizen…notes "that a historical pattern has been established that insurance rates rise also based on the investment market...Earlier 'crises' (in 1975-6 and 1985-6) similar to today's 'crisis' were due to declining investment fortunes and failed pricing practices of the insurance industry rather than an increase in medical malpractice filings and awards. Then, as now, the insurance industry covered its losses by raising rates dramatically, then blamed the lawyers of innocent patients rightfully seeking compensation for negligence-related injuries." -Salon.com

Most importantly, as Parikh points out, no amount of malpractice reform will help doctors save the lives of more patients. Any humanitarian discussion of health care reform will need to pay a lot more attention to the issue of patient safety.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Camryn Hansen

Blair Women's Robes Recalled for Serious Burn Hazard - 9 Deaths So Far

Mike Ferrara — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 22:47:55 GMT

As nine deaths have now been linked to women’s full-length chenille bathrobes sold by Blair LLC, the company is expanding its garment recall.

These robes have failed to meet federal flammability standards, and will catch on fire quickly and easily when near an open flame. These robes have burned and killed nine women—most of whom were wearing them while cooking—and have injured several more.

Blair initially recalled the full-length chenille robes in April, after receiving reports of three of them catching on fire. Now that the death toll has reached nine, Blair is also recalling similar products as well:

Full Length Women’s Chenille Robes

Women’s Chenille Jacket

Women’s Chenille Lounge Jacket

Women’s Chenille Top

All products were manufactured by A-One Textile & Towel, of Karachi, Pakistan.

If you have any of these products, please don’t wear them, and discard or return them. For more information about the recall, call Blair at 877-392-7095 or visit http://www.blair.com/recall or http://www.cpsc.gov.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Ferrara

Health Care Reform - Not Enough Attention to Medical Error Prevention

Mike Ferrara — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 22:38:27 GMT

According to a report just released by the NJ Department of Health and Senior Services, in 2007, hospital doctors, nurses and other medical workers committed nearly 9,400 "serious medical errors'' that threatened patient health by leading to infections, blood clots, and other unnecessary complications.

The report is the first in the state to compare hospitals with one another, showing exactly where the errors are occurring. Together, New Jersey’s hospitals fared worse than the national average on numbers of post-surgical infections and frequency of wounds re-opening. In other areas, such as surgical equipment being left inside patients after surgery or the wrong blood type being given, New Jersey fared better than other states.

AARP'S Kelmar said matching the national rate in mistakes is not good enough. She noted there were 63 incidents statewide of a foreign object left in the body after surgery -- a rate that is about the national norm.

"The expected rate of occurrence for this incident is zero,'' Kelmar said.

"Disconcerting numbers of preventable medical errors are occurring in our health facilities. Now consumers will know these results,'' said Patricia Kelmar, associate state director for advocacy for AARP-New Jersey, which pushed for the tougher reporting requirements. "Equally important, every hospital can see their own levels of mistakes compared to others, which we hope will encourage them to make the changes necessary to improve patient safety throughout the state." -The StarLedger

While state hospital “report cards” are a great step on the road to reducing medical errors, there is still not enough focus on preventable medical errors in the national health care legislation. All the talk of medical malpractice reform and tort reform has taken attention away from the real issue, which is that more than 100,000 patients die every year from preventable medical errors. Tort reform will do nothing to prevent this, and will only make it more difficult for patients who are needlessly harmed to get the compensation they deserve.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Ferrara

First Paxil/Birth Defect Case Gets Major Win for the Plaintiff

Mike Ferrara — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 16:17:46 GMT

This week in Philadelphia, jurors ruled 10-2 that the drug company GlaxoSmithKline behaved negligently in connection with its antidepressant Paxil, which allegedly caused birth defects in a baby whose mother took it while pregnant.

The case is the first of about 600 similar lawsuits to go to trial, and the 10-2 ruling constitutes a big win for the plaintiff, Michelle David of Bensalem, whose son Lyam was born with heart problems that subsequently required a number of surgeries to correct.

The jury awarded David $2.5 million in compensatory damages, seeing a clear connection between Paxil and baby Lyam’s birth defects. It did not, however, award any punitive damages, finding that Glaxo’s behavior had not been “outrageous,” in that it had not deliberately ignored or covered up evidence that Paxil caused birth defects in order to better profit from drug sales.

According to the jury, Glaxo’s negligence revolved around its failure to adequately inform David’s doctor of the risk of birth defects associated with taking Paxil during pregnancy.

Glaxo apparently plans to appeal the ruling.

The process is like a battle where eventually the plaintiff "cries uncle" and drops the suit or the drug company agrees to settle, said Philadelphia plaintiffs' lawyer Tom Kline, who is handling some Paxil birth-defect cases.

Kline said last week's jury verdict was a strong win because birth defects were fairly common whether or not a pregnant woman takes a drug. That can make it hard to convince a jury that a product caused a birth defect, he said.

"The real hurdle is proving causation," said Kline, who has represented plaintiffs at trial in many cases involving birth defects. –Philadelphia Inquirer

The fact that causation was so overwhelmingly obvious, in this case, to the jurors sets a strong precedent for future cases involving Paxil’s relationship to birth defects.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Ferrara

Railroad Pays $4 Million for Misconduct & Cover-Up after Train Accident Kills 4

Mike Ferrara — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 22:42:14 GMT

This week, a judge in Washington Country, Minnesota awarded $4 million to the families of four young people who were killed in a 2003 accident with a train run by Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp.

Judge Ellen Mass, who granted the award, found that Burlington Northern had committed “staggering” misconduct in covering up its role in the accident, which had been caused largely by a faulty crossing gate. (The train engineer originally testified that the youngsters’ car had gone around a lowered crossing gate to cause the accident; later, the jury determined that the gate hadn’t been working at all.)

Maas found that the railroad company lost or fabricated evidence, interfered with the families' investigation of the accident and "knowingly advanced lies, misleading facts and/or misrepresentations" in order to conceal the truth.

The railroad, Maas noted, "has attempted to explain away each instance of misconduct as either an innocent mistake or a mere coincidence. ... This court is not persuaded."

"When encountering conduct as egregious as that of BNSF, this court ... has a duty to impose sanctions of a sufficient severity in order to deter future misconduct of the same caliber,'' Maas ruled. –StarTribune.com

According to evidence presented at trial, Burlington Northern began trying to cover up its role in the accident within the first few minutes after it had happened. The $4 million award, intended to punish the company for its egregious behavior, comes on top of a previous $21.6 million jury award, issued last year, when the jury determined that Burlington Northern was 90% at fault for the accident.

A company should never get away with this kind of cover-up. Kudos to Judge Maas for her decision.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Mike Ferrara

Chubby Babies – Lovable but Uninsurable

Camryn Hansen — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 21:35:57 GMT

After denying health coverage to a four-month-old infant because he was too fat, Colorado-based Rocky Mountain Health Plans received negative media coverage all around the country.

The company’s policy was to refuse coverage to anyone—even babies—whose weight was above the 95^th percentile, citing the pre-existing condition of obesity as the reason why.

Alex Lange, the 17-pound boy from Grand Junction, Colorado who was turned down for coverage for being in the 99^th weight percentile for his height, was 100% breast-fed, and was, apart from being heavier than his peers, exceptionally healthy.

The baby’s father, who works at a local NBC affiliate, was able to get the story of his son’s rejection picked up by the national news.

In light of the negative media coverage and the national outrage it received, Rocky Mountain Health Plans has now decided to “change its policy” toward chubby babies, and has agreed to offer coverage to little (big) Alex.

The insurer said Monday it would change its policy for babies who are healthy but fat. The company attributed the boy's rejection for health coverage to a "flaw in our underwriting system."

"We have changed our policy, corrected our underwriting guidelines and are working to notify the parents of the infant who we earlier denied," Rocky Mountain Health Plans said in a statement. -AP

What a powerful force for positive change a media spotlight can be, when its focus is universally clear, direct, well-intentioned, and reasonable. Is there any way we can convince the public-option haters that the 47 million uninsured are all just a bunch of helpless, chubby babies?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Camryn Hansen