Blog
Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category
Thursday, May 17th, 2012
On May 4, 2012, a Philadelphia medical malpractice jury returned a verdict in the amount of $78.5 million in favor of the plaintiffs for the severe and permanent brain damage suffered by their newborn that the obstetrician delayed in delivering because he believed that the baby had died in the womb. The damages awarded were for future medical care, lost earnings, and pain and suffering and emotional distress for the now 3-year-old child.
The Underlying Facts Of This Medical Malpractice Case
On August 10, 2008, the 36-weeks-pregnant expectant mother went to the local hospital with complaints of abdominal pain. An ultrasound done at that time using allegedly outdated and unmaintained equipment could not detect fetal cardiac activity. Further testing was ordered but it took more than one hour for a confirming ultrasound to be performed. The pregnant woman underwent an emergency cesarean section delivery of her baby, which was born lethargic and hypotonic at the time of birth.
The baby received emergency medical transport for further treatment at a larger, better equipped Philadelphia hospital. However, it was alleged that the newborn’s endotracheal tube became clotted with blood during the emergency medical transfer that the neonatologist who accompanied the baby during the transport negligently failed to monitor that resulted in compromising the baby’s respiratory status. As a result, the baby was in poor respiratory condition upon arrival at the Philadelphia hospital.
The baby sustained a permanent but allegedly preventable hypoxic brain injury resulting in spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy.
The defendant obstetrician reportedly maintained throughout the medical malpractice litigation that he had performed the ultrasound properly and that he was certain that the baby had died in the womb but then miraculously came back to life 81 minutes later.
Source
The Philadelphia medical malpractice jury verdict may seem extraordinarily high until you consider the enormous costs of the child’s future medical expenses during her entire lifetime, the child’s and her parents’ huge emotional pain and suffering associated with a lifetime of “what ifs” and the loss of what the child may have achieved had her treatment during labor, delivery, and immediately after birth been handled appropriately and timely.
The miraculous birth of a child is a warmly anticipated but anxious time for the expecting parents. Many parents-to-be hold their breaths for the entire pregnancy until a healthy and happy newborn is delivered into their waiting arms. Only then do the parents enjoy some relief until they step into the next phase of parenthood, which lasts a lifetime.
When the birthing process is negligently performed or monitored by the health care providers upon whom the expecting parents must fully and completely rely, the consequences may be insurmountable for the parents and their baby. The enormous costs associated with providing for the unanticipated needs of the child must be incurred either by the innocent parents or by the health care providers whose negligent care resulted in the terrible outcome. Who should be responsible for such losses and expenses that should have and could have been avoided — the parents who were promised that they and their baby would receive competent and necessary care or the health care providers who were in the sole position of avoiding the bad outcome?
If you have suffered the emotional pain and incurred the devastating expenses associated with medical negligence that resulted in birth injuries, the prompt advice from a medical malpractice attorney in your local area may help you decide if you wish to bring a medical malpractice claim against the responsible medical providers.
Click here to visit our website or call us toll free at 800-295-3959 to be connected with medical malpractice lawyers in your state who may be able to assist you with a medical malpractice claim and represent you in a medical malpractice case, if appropriate.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.
Tags: bad baby cases, birth injuries, birth malpractice, medical malpractice, medical malpractice attorney, medical malpractice claim, medical malpractice lawyers, medical negligence, Philadelphia medical malpractice
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
Saturday, March 17th, 2012
Wrongful birth claims and wrongful life claims are medical malpractice claims arising out of the allegation that the parents were negligently deprived of the opportunity to avoid a pregnancy or to terminate a pregnancy, usually involving a deformed fetus or a fetus with a severe medical condition, because their doctor or another health care provider failed to timely and appropriately advise the parents.
What’s The Difference Between A Wrongful Birth Claim And A Wrongful Life Claim?
The difference between a wrongful birth claim and a wrongful life claim is that a wrongful birth claim seeks damages for the parents’ costs of raising a child born with deformities or severe medical conditions whereas in a wrongful life claim, the child seeks damages for being born with deformities or severe medical conditions rather than not being born.
What’s The Reasoning For Allowing Wrongful Birth Claims?
Maryland recognizes wrongful birth claims because ”when prospective parents, relying on the negligent act or omission of a health care professional, elect to continue a pregnancy that they otherwise would have lawfully terminated and, as a result, are burdened with the cost and expense of raising a child with a serious genetic or other physical or mental defect, they have been injured and have a right to seek damages for that injury from the person whose negligence led to the injury. That right is a matter of important public policy in this State, flowing not only from this Court’s considered view but as well from statute. See Maryland Code, § 20-209 (b), of the Health General Article, precluding the State from interfering with the decision of a woman to terminate her pregnancy at any time during the pregnancy if the fetus is affected by genetic defect or serious deformity or abnormality.” Reed v. Campagnolo, 332 Md. 226, 630 A.2d 1145 (1993).
What’s The Reasoning For Disallowing Wrongful Life Claims?
Maryland does not recognize the premise that life itself, even in an impaired state, is an injury and therefore does not recognize a negligence action by a child against the mother’s obstetrician where the only effect of the alleged negligence was non-termination of the pregnancy and the birth of the child.
In disallowing wrongful life claims in Maryland, the Maryland courts have stated,”We align ourselves with the majority view and hold that, for purposes of tort law, an impaired life is not worse than non-life, and, for that reason, life is not, and cannot be, an injury.” Millicent Kassama, Individually, et al. v. Aaron H. Magat, et al., 368 Md. 113 (2002).
What’s Arizona Trying To Do?
On March 6, 2012, the Arizona Senate voted 20 to 9 on a bill that would outlaw wrongful birth cases in Arizona. The proposal now moves to the Arizona House for its consideration. If the bill becomes law in Arizona, Arizona would become the tenth state in the U.S. to outlaw both wrongful birth and wrongful life claims.
Source
There is an overlap between the abortion debate in the U.S. and attitudes toward wrongful birth claims because one of the requirements for a wrongful birth claim is that the pregnancy would have been terminated had the parents been timely provided the information regarding their fetus’ deformity or severe medical condition. Therefore, because people who feel strongly that abortions should not be allowed under any circumstance would likely be against the right to bring a wrongful birth lawsuit under any circumstance.
If you or someone you care about may have the basis for bringing a wrongful birth claim or a wrongful life claim, the timely advice of a medical malpractice attorney would be important.
Click here to visit our website to be connected with medical malpractice lawyers in your state who may be able to advise you regarding your possible wrongful birth or wrongful life claim and bring such a claim on your behalf, if appropriate. In the alternative, please feel free to call us on our toll free line at 800-295-3959.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.
You can follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Google+, and LinkedIn as well!
Tags: Arizona medical malpractice, Arizona medical malpractice attorneys, Arizona medical malpractice lawyers, Maryland medical malpractice attorney, Maryland medical malpractice lawyer, medical malpractice, medical malpractice attorneys, medical malpractice lawyers, wrongful birth, wrongful birth attorney, wrongful birth claim, wrongful birth lawsuit, wrongful birth lawyer, wrongful life, wrongful life attorney, wrongful life claim, wrongful life lawsuit, wrongful life lawyer
Posted in Arizona Medical Malpractice, Client Updates, Lawyer Updates, Maryland Medical Malpractice, Medical Malpractice Claims, Medical Malpractice Facts, Medical Malpractice Lawyers, Uncategorized, Wrongful Birth, Wrongful Life | No Comments »
Tuesday, February 21st, 2012
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a safety alert on February 20, 2012 regarding a counterfeit (fake) cancer medication that may have entered the U.S. from overseas that does not contain the required active ingredient. The only FDA-approved version of the cancer drug Avastin is marketed by a company called Genentech, which is part of the larger drug company Roche. (Roche markets Avastin for use outside of the United States.)
The FDA issued 19 letters to medical practices in the United States, warning them that they may have purchased the unapproved, counterfeit Avastin from a source outside of the United States. The unapproved Avastin was purchased by the medical practices from a foreign supplier known as Quality Specialty Products or Montana Health Care Solutions. The Tennessee company Volunteer Distribution is a distributor for Quality Specialty Products.
The counterfeit Avastin has been confirmed to not contain the active ingredient of Avastin, which is bevacizumab. Therefore, patients who receive the counterfeit Avastin are not receiving the medication that they were prescribed and are not receiving the benefit of the real Avastin.
Avastin is an injectable cancer medication used to treat various forms of cancer. Avastin is packaged in vials. The labels on the counterfeit vials contain the Roche logo whereas the FDA-approved Genentech vials do not. The counterfeit vials may contain the batch numbers that start with B6010, B6011, or B86017 (the FDA-approved Genentech vials have a 6-digit numeric batch number and expiration dates expressed in a 3-letter month and 4-digit year, such as JAN 2014).
The FDA-approved version of Avastin is not currently in short supply in the United States.
Source
What Is Avastin Used For?
Avastin (bevacizumab) is a cancer drug that is in a class of medicines known as antiangiogenic agents that work by stopping the formation of blood vessels to tumors that may slow the tumor’s growth and stop the spread of the tumor. Avastin is used in the treatment of colon and rectal cancer that has spread to other parts of the body, certain lung cancers, and a type of brain cancer known as glioblastoma that has already been treated with other cancer medications. Avastin is also used in combination with another drug to treat renal cell carcinoma that has already spread to other parts of the body.
Avastin was used in the past to treat breast cancer patients but the FDA determined that its risks in use for breast cancer did not justify the benefit in most cases. (See our blog posting for November 21, 2011 entitled, “FDA Withdraws Approval Of Avastin For Use In Treating Metastatic Breast Cancer”)
Avastin is administered slowly into a vein once every 14 days to treat colon cancer, cancer of the rectum, renal cell cancer, or glioblastoma, and once every 3 weeks to treat certain lung cancers. The first dose is given over a period of about 90 minutes to check for reactions to the medication and subsequent doses are usually given over 30 to 60 minutes.
Source
Drug shortages are a continuing and worsening problem in the United States (see our blog posting for October 1, 2011 entitled, “Drug Shortages In The U.S.”; our blog posting for November 3, 2011 entitled, “Drug Shortages: Get Your Drugs While You Still Can!”; and, our blog posting for December 17, 2011 entitled, “Drug Shortages Are Getting Even Worse!”).
Unscrupulous drug manufacturers, suppliers, and distributors see a potential to earn outrageous profits by either stockpiling drugs subject to shortages or by producing/providing counterfeit versions of drugs that are either in short supply or intended to be substituted for the brand name versions that are exceedingly expensive.
Price gouging hurts patients who cannot afford their necessary and life-extending medications. Counterfeit drugs either do not benefit patients or harm patients who do not receive their required medications. We believe that the price gougers and the counterfeiters should be required to pay civil fines and restitution in amounts greater than their profits from their wrongdoing and that they should also be subjected to criminal prosecution and sentenced to long prison terms.
If you or a loved one have been injured by a drug, the advice of a medical malpractice attorney is critical in determining your legal rights and whether you have a viable claim for compensation.
Click here to visit our website or telephone us toll free at 800-295-3959 to be connected with medical malpractice lawyers in your state who may be able to investigate your possible claim and file a claim on your behalf, if appropriate.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.
You can follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Google+, and LinkedIn as well!
Tags: bad drug, bad medication, cancer medication, counterfeit Avastin, counterfeit drug, counterfeit medication, drug death, drug injuries, drug injury, fake Avastin, fake drug, fake medication, harmful medication, Is My Cancer Drug Avastin A Fake?, medical malpractice, medical malpractice attorney, medical malpractice lawyer, medication mistake
Posted in Avastin, Client Updates, Is it Medical Malpractice?, Lawyer Updates, Medical Malpractice Facts, Medical News, Pharmaceutical Medical Malpracitce, Uncategorized | No Comments »
Saturday, February 18th, 2012
The Republican-led Florida Legislature is considering amendments to Florida’s medical malpractice law to make it more difficult for victims of medical malpractice to win their medical malpractice cases and would also allow medical malpractice defendants’ lawyers to speak with the victims’ doctors one-on-one and without their patients’ permission.
Proposed Stricter Burden Of Proof For Medical Malpractice Victims
A proposed change in the law would substantially raise the level of proof that medical malpractice victims must meet in order to recover damages for their injuries if due to the alleged failure to order supplemental diagnostic medical tests. The proposed change reads as follows: In an action for damages based on death or personal injury which alleges that such death or injury resulted from the failure of a health care provider to order, perform, or administer supplemental diagnostic tests, the claimant has the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the alleged actions of the health care provider represented a breach of the prevailing professional standard of care. Source
The Florida Supreme Court defines the proposed standard of proof known as “clear and convincing evidence” as “evidence that is precise, explicit, lacking in confusion, and of such weight that it produces a firm belief or conviction, without hesitation, about the issue.“ Florida Standard Jury Instructions — Civil Cases, Standard Instruction 405.4.
The existing standard of proof in Florida medical malpractice cases is known as “greater weight of the evidence” which the Florida Supreme Court has defined as evidence that has “the more persuasive and convincing force and effect of the entire evidence in the case.” Florida Standard Jury Instructions — Civil Cases, Standard Instruction 405.3.
Obviously, the proposed stricter requirement for proof by evidence that is “precise, explicit…that it produces a firm belief or conviction” is a much higher burden than evidence that is “more persuasive.” If the proposed change becomes the medical malpractice law in Florida, it will be much more difficult for Florida medical malpractice victims to recover for their injuries resulting from medical malpractice committed by Florida doctors when the basis of the medical malpractice claim is the negligent failure of the doctor to order and obtain supplemental diagnostic tests, such as mammograms in failure to diagnose breast cancer cases.
Proposed Change: No Patient-Doctor Confidentiality For Medical Malpractice Victims
The other significant, major proposed change to Florida’s medical malpractice law would allow the attorneys for medical malpractice defendants and the medical malpractice defendants themselves to meet alone in private with all of the treating doctors of medical malpractice victims, without any restrictions whatsoever.
The proposed change in the law reads as follows: “A prospective defendant or his or her legal representative may interview the claimant’s treating health care providers without the presence of the claimant or the claimant’s legal representative.” Source
The proposed change in the law does not limit the extent or the subject matter of the discussions between the medical malpractice defendants, their attorneys, and the medical malpractice victims’ doctors; the proposed change in the law does not limit the extent or the subject of the disclosures by the victims’ treating doctors; and, the proposed change in the law does not restrict the doctors who would be violating the previously sacrosanct patient-doctor confidentiality to only those who treated the medical malpractice victims for the injuries caused by the alleged negligent care.
As the proposed change to the law is written, what would limit the defendants’ attorneys from discussing the sexual history of a medical malpractice victim with the victim’s treating gynecologist in a medical malpractice claim involving the failure to diagnose breast cancer in a timely fashion, or from discussing the results of their findings with others such as health insurance companies, sexual partners or family members of the medical malpractice victims, the medical malpractice defendants themselves, or anyone and everyone in the defendants’ attorneys’ law firms?
The nation’s laws are supposed to protect victims, not victimize them further. As we see it, the proposed changes to Florida’s medical malpractice laws would unfairly, inequitably, and unjustly protect and benefit a special class of people (medical malpractice defendants) at the expense of the enormous harm and detriment to innocent victims of medical malpractice.
If you or a loved one were injured or suffered serious losses as a result of medical malpractice in Florida or in any other U.S. state, click here to visit our website to be connected with medical malpractice lawyers in your local area who may be able to assist you with your medical malpractice claim. You may also reach us at our toll free number 800-295-3959.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.
You can follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Google+, and LinkedIn as well!
Tags: changes to Florida medical malpractice law, clear and convincing evidence, Florida medical malpractice, Florida medical malpractice attorneys, Florida medical malpractice cases, Florida medical malpractice claims, Florida medical malpractice law, Florida medical malpractice lawyers, greater weight of the evidence, medical malpractice, medical malpractice attorneys, medical malpractice cases, medical malpractice claims, medical malpractice lawyers, medical malpractice tort reform, medical negligence, Proposed Changes To Florida's Medical Malpractice Law Harms Malpractice Victims, tort reform
Posted in Client Updates, Florida Medical Malpractice, Lawyer Updates, Medical Malpractice Facts, Medical Malpractice Lawyers, Medical Malpractice Reforms, Medical News, Uncategorized | No Comments »
Wednesday, December 28th, 2011
When states enact so-called “medical malpractice reforms” (also known as “tort reforms”) such as caps (limits) on non-economic damages (such as pain and suffering, mental anguish, and disfigurement) that victims of medical malpractice may recover despite a jury’s determination and verdict in excess of the cap, there may be questions as to when the reforms apply and/or how the reforms apply.
Florida recently grappled with this issue in a case involving a medical malpractice claim for the permanent damage to a man’s heart due to the alleged medical mistakes by his medical care providers who failed to give the man the anti-clotting drug Retavase during his heart attack in April, 2003 (three months before Florida’s cap on non-economic damages became effective). The medical malpractice case involving the man’s alleged negligent care was filed two years later, after the non-economic damages cap became effective.
In addressing the issue of the effective date of the Florida non-economic damages cap, the Florida Supreme Court determined that the date of the alleged medical malpractice injury was the relevant date in determining if the Florida cap on non-economic damages applied, not the date that the medical malpractice case was filed. The Florida Supreme Court reasoned that the Florida Legislature could not make the change in the law retroactive because making it retroactive would be unjust.
As a result, the verdict rendered by the jury in the Florida man’s case in the amount of $10.3 million would not be reduced to less than $1 million, which would be the amount allowable if the cap applied to his medical malpractice case. (Unfortunately for the man’s surviving wife, the defendant emergency room physician only had a $1 million medical malpractice policy limit.)
Source
Caps on non-economic damages awarded by medical malpractice juries in many states are a much debated topic. Doctors and their ilk argue that caps are necessary to keep medical costs down and to keep doctors from leaving their medical practices due to high medical malpractice insurance premiums. Victims of medical malpractice, their families, and their lawyers often argue that caps unfairly (and unconstitutionally) place artificial limits on jury awards that violate the sanctity of the jury’s verdict (juries are most often not told about caps or the amount of the caps — the caps (reductions), when applicable, are applied by a judge after the jury renders its verdict, and the medical care providers whose negligence has been found to have caused the plaintiff to be injured are not responsible to pay any amount for non-economic damages above the cap (it’s as if the jury never determined and awarded an amount above the cap as fair and adequate compensation for the non-economic damages suffered by the plaintiff)).
We, at MedicalMalpracticeLawyers.com, believe in the ageless value and constitutional right of having an unbiased and local jury selected by the parties to a medical malpractice lawsuit listen to all of the trial testimony, evaluate the trial evidence, and consider the arguments of the parties’ lawyers before retiring to deliberate the claims of the various parties and to come to a verdict that comports with the facts and evidence in the case and the applicable law. When state legislatures disrespect the constitutional right of the parties to have their jury render its opinion and decision and refuse to give the jury’s verdict full force and effect by imposing arbitrary caps on allowable damages, then we have lost an important constitutional right hewn from hundreds of years of worldly experience and near-universal agreement that a jury of one’s peers is the best and ultimate unbiased decider of our fate.
If you or a loved one have become the victim of medical malpractice, the timely advice of a medical malpractice attorney is critical to protecting and preserving your rights. Click here to visit our website to be connected with medical malpractice lawyers in your state who may be able to help you with your medical malpractice claim or telephone us toll free at 800-295-3959.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.
You can follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn as well!
Tags: Florida cap on damages, Florida medical malpractice, Florida medical malpractice attorneys, Florida medical malpractice lawyers, malpractice tort reform, medical malpractice, medical malpractice attorneys, medical malpractice case, medical malpractice claim, medical malpractice insurance, medical malpractice lawsuit, medical malpractice lawyers, medical malpractice tort reform, medical mistakes, medical negligence, tort reform
Posted in Client Updates, Florida Medical Malpractice, Lawyer Updates, Medical Malpractice Case, Medical Malpractice Claims, Medical Malpractice Facts, Medical Malpractice Lawyers, Medical Malpractice Reforms, Medical Malpractice Victim, Medical Negligence, Tort Reforms, Uncategorized | No Comments »
Tuesday, December 20th, 2011
A nursing home stay after surgery or major medical treatment is sometimes necessary for the patient to receive inpatient rehabilitation services such as physical therapy and/or occupational therapy before the patient is well enough to return home (many nursing homes also provide long-term care for those who may never be able to return to independent living or be able to reside in an assisted-living facility due to medical conditions or mental status, such as severe dementia).
Unfortunately, nursing home care can sometimes fall below the standard of care required of nursing homes by federal and state regulations. Many nursing homes are for-profit corporations that may seek to cut corners and spend less for necessary patient care because a penny saved in patient care expenses is a penny earned as profit for the nursing home’s parent corporation. Because nursing home residents are among the most vulnerable due to their medical condition and/or mental state, they may not be able or willing to complain about the lack of proper medical care and attention that they are receiving (this is especially true if the nursing home resident does not have family members or close friends who visit often enough to act as the nursing home resident’s advocate when care is lacking, or worse). Hence, the nursing home malpractice claims that are formally filed probably represent just a small portion of the medical negligence that occurs in the nursing home environment.
Medical malpractice injuries or death due to medical malpractice events involving nursing home care are some of the most egregious medical malpractice cases because the medical neglect is too often long-term and severe. Medical malpractice claims involving nursing home care often involve claims of improper or fraudulent medical record entries or the failure to document medical treatment ordered by the patients’ doctors.
Sometimes a patient is discharged from the hospital to a nursing home that is unable or otherwise fails to provide the necessary medical care despite assurances from the nursing home that it can and will provide the necessary care. This may have been the situation in a medical malpractice case involving a nursing home in Cook County, Illinois, when a 57-year-old woman was discharged from a local hospital to the nursing home following successful throat cancer treatment for an anticipated stay of two weeks for further medical care before returning home.
The nursing home needed to provide appropriate cleaning and suctioning of the woman’s breathing tube, which is care that the nursing home promised to provide. However, it was alleged that the nursing home failed to provide sufficient or properly trained staff and also failed to provide proper medication and necessary equipment for the woman’s care, which led to her death from suffocation. The medical malpractice case brought on behalf of her estate was tried before a Cook County jury during which testimony was heard over the course of three days (the nursing home admitted that it was liable for the woman’s death but challenged the amount that her estate should be awarded in damages), after which the jury awarded $2.9 million in damages against the negligent nursing home.
Source
If you or a loved one were injured (or worse) as a result of a nursing home’s failure to provide proper and timely medical care, you or your loved one may be entitled to compensation. Click here to visit our website to be connected with medical malpractice lawyers in your area who may be able to investigate your medical malpractice claim against the nursing home and bring a medical malpractice case against the nursing home on your behalf, if appropriate. Or you may call us toll free at 800-295-3959 to be connected with medical malpractice attorneys in your state.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.
You can follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn as well!
Tags: Chicago medical malpractice, Chicago medical malpractice lawyers, find Chicago medical malpractice lawyers, find Illinois malpractice lawyers, find Illinois medical malpractice lawyers, find medical malpractice lawyers, find nursing home lawyers, Illinois medical malpractice, Illinois medical malpractice claims, Illinois medical malpractice lawyers, Illinois Medical Malpractice Verdict For Nursing Home Suffocation Death, medical malpractice, medical malpractice attorneys, medical malpractice lawyers, medical negligence, nursing home abuse, nursing home death, nursing home injuries, nursing home malpractice, nursing home medical malpractice, nursing home neglect, nursing home negligence
Posted in Illinois Medical Malpractice, Medical Malpractice Case, Medical Malpractice Claims, Medical Malpractice Lawyers, Medical Malpractice Verdict, Medical Negligence, Nursing Home Medical Malpractice, Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
Sunday, December 18th, 2011
On November 7, 2011, a Texas medical malpractice jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs in the amount of $2.1 million for the blindness suffered by a premature baby as a result of the alleged medical negligence of her doctors and the hospital. The infant is now totally blind in her right eye and has limited sight in her left eye — she is legally blind in both eyes.
The infant was born premature on May 19, 2005 at a Texas hospital and was immediately admitted into the hospital’s neonatal unit due to her prematurity. At seven weeks, the infant was screened for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP), which is abnormal blood vessel development in the retina of a premature infant’s eye. She was not re-screened for ROP until 11 weeks after birth.
What Is Retinopathy Of Prematurity (ROP)?
The blood vessels in the retina begin to develop 3 months after conception and continue to develop until the normal time of birth. When a baby is delivered very early, the blood vessels may either stop growing or grow abnormally from the retina into the clear gel in the back of the eye. Because these blood vessels are very delicate, they may leak and cause bleeding into the eye, scar tissue may develop and cause the retina to pull loose, and/or blindness may occur in severe cases. Infants delivered at less than 30 weeks or less than 3 pounds are routinely screened for ROP.
Source
The Texas infant was diagnosed with ROP and had laser surgery for the condition, but the surgery was not successful. The plaintiffs’ medical malpractice attorneys filed medical malpractice claims against the doctors and the hospital alleging that the ROP screening was not timely or thorough enough to detect the condition in the infant and that re-screening should have been done every one or two weeks until the ROP was diagnosed or the infant was determined to be clear of the risk of ROP. The defendants’ medical malpractice attorneys alleged that the defendants were not negligent and that the infant did not suffer her blindness due to medical malpractice.
The jury found that two of the doctors were each 45% at fault and that the hospital was 10% at fault (the hospital settled with the plaintiffs before the medical malpractice trial).
Source
When the medical malpractice committed by negligent medical providers causes serious or permanent injuries, or death, it is important to seek the advice of medical malpractice lawyers to answer your medical malpractice questions and to investigate your medical malpractice claim, if appropriate.
Click here to visit our website to be connected with medical malpractice lawyers in your local area who may be able to assist you with your medical malpractice claim or call us toll free at 800-295-3959.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.
Tags: birth injuries, birth medical malpractice, birth mistakes, medical malpractice, medical malpractice advice, medical malpractice answers, medical malpractice attorneys, medical malpractice lawyers, medical malpractice questions, medical negligence, negligent medical care, retinopathy of prematurity, ROP, Texas medical malpractice, Texas medical malpractice attorneys, Texas medical malpractice case, Texas medical malpractice claim, Texas medical malpractice lawyers
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
Friday, November 11th, 2011
During the GOP presidential debate on November 9, 2011, current GOP presidential candidate (and current Texas Governor) Rick Perry had a “memory lapse” that has stirred discussion whether he is truly a viable presidential candidate. Governor Perry was unable to name the three federal agencies that he proposed to eliminate (“It’s three agencies of government when I get there that are gone — Commerce, Education, and the um, um what’s the third one there? Let’s see… Oh five, OK – so Commerce, Education, and the um,um,um.” When the moderator asked, “But you can’t name the third one?” Governor Perry responded, “The third agency of government I would do away with — the Education, uh, the uh, Commerce and let’s see — I can’t — the third one I can’t. Sorry. Oops.”) [For the record, Governor, you forgot the Department of Energy]
See and hear it here.
The many Texans who have been injured as the result of medical malpractice committed by Texas doctors and other negligent medical care providers such as hospitals since Governor Perry took the lead in pushing medical malpractice tort reforms in Texas in 2003 know that he has also forgotten (and has forsaken) them, too.
A couple of years ago, Governor Perry issued a formal statement in which he stated proudly that he “led the effort to pass sweeping lawsuit reforms so that innocent employers could put their money into job growth rather than damage awards.” Governor Perry proudly boasted that under his “leadership,” Texas “enacted several key legal reforms that are protecting the state’s economy and improving the availability of medical care. These reforms freed the doctors from excessive medical liability insurance premiums…”
Source
“Freed The Doctors?”
Nowhere in Governor Perry’s statement does he even mention the victims of medical malpractice or the effects that his “tort reforms” had on their lives and the financial burdens now shifted to them that they have to endure themselves due solely to the negligence or incompetence of Texas doctors or hospitals who were ”freed” from their financial responsibility to fully compensate the victims of their carelessness.
“Best Of All, You [The Hospitals In Texas] Get The Benefit Of The [Medical Malpractice] Tort Reforms…”
In a 2009 speech to the Texas Hospital Association, Governor Perry admitted the purely business-oriented purpose of his medical malpractice tort reform efforts that solely benefited health care providers at the sole expense of people (that is, Texans hurt by medical malpractice) when he stated to an appreciative crowd of hospital administrators and owners, ”Best of all, you get the benefit of the reforms we’ve made to our legal system….”
Source
Texas Governor Rick Perry’s medical malpractice tort reforms since 2003 have placed the profits of the few (doctors and hospitals) over the well-being of the many (Texas medical malpractice victims) — in short, Governor Perry chose to protect and represent the powerful and wealthy at the expense of the people who elected him to represent everyone’s interests equally.
To the people of Texas: even though your rights to compensation for your injuries and losses due to medical malpractice have been seriously limited by Governor Perry’s medical malpractice tort reform priorities, you are still entitled to some compensation from your negligent medical providers.
Visit our website or call us toll free (800-295-3959) to be connected with local medical malpractice lawyers who may be able to assist you with your medical malpractice claim.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.
You can follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn as well!
Tags: medical malpractice, medical malpractice attorney, medical malpractice claim, medical malpractice lawyers, medical malpractice reform, medical malpractice tort reform, medical negligence, Rick Perry, Texas medical malpractice lawyer, Texas medical malpractice reform, Texas medical malpractice tort reform, Texas tort reform, tort reform
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
Thursday, November 10th, 2011
Medical doctors (MDs), osteopathic physicians (DOs), physician assistants, surgical assistants, athletic trainers, and acupuncturists in Kentucky are licensed and regulated by the Kentucky Board of Medical Licensure. The Board is responsible not only for licensure but also for disciplinary actions for violations of the Kentucky Medical Practice Act.
Source
The Kentucky Board has fifteen members (ten are MDs, two are DOs, and the remaining three are public members). The Board meets monthly.
In 2010, the Board took a total of 88 actions of which 14 were loss of license or licensed privilege and 15 were restrictions placed on licenses or licensed privilege. That number represents a decline from 126 total actions in 2009. The total number of physicians subject to prejudicial actions in 2010 was 52 (down from 80 in 2009).
In 2010, there were 15,517 physicians licensed by the Board (the number has been increasing each year since at least 2006), which included 9,938 who were practicing in-state. In 2009, there were 15,175 total licensed physicians, of which 10,258 were in-state.
Source
The Board reported that in fiscal year 2011, there were 12 meetings of the Inquiry/Hearing Panels; there were 867 new medical doctor licenses issued; 89 osteopathic doctor licenses issued; and, 455 temporary permits issued. There were 926 physician assistant active licenses, 189 surgical assistant active licenses, and 53 acupuncturist active licenses during fiscal year 2011.
There were a total of 240 grievances received by the Board during fiscal year 2011, of which 178 were referred to an Inquiry/Hearing Panel. The largest sources of grievances were from the public (64%) and from state/federal agencies (14%). The types of grievances with the largest number of complaints involved standard of care (33%) and unprofessional conduct (30%).
A total of 112 cases that were investigated were referred to a Panel. There were 57 investigations pending, 45 medical malpractice cases reviewed, and 54 disciplinary actions authorized during fiscal year 2011. With regard to the disciplinary actions taken during fiscal year 2011, 12 complaints were issued. There were also 10 emergency orders of suspension, 1 order of suspension, 5 orders of revocation, 27 agreed orders, 9 agreed orders of indefinite restriction, 8 agreed orders of surrender, 1 agreed order of probation, 22 agreed orders of fine, 3 agreed orders of retirement, 21 interim agreed orders, 28 orders amended, 15 letters of agreement, 13 letters of admonishment, and 20 letters of concern.
Source
If you have been on the receiving end of medical negligence in Kentucky or in another state in the United States, you may be entitled to be compensated for your injuries and losses. Visit our website or call us toll free at 800-295-3959 to be connected with medical malpractice lawyers in your state who may be able to help you with your medical malpractice claim.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.
You can follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn as well!
Tags: Kentucky malpractice attorney, Kentucky malpractice complaint, Kentucky medical malpractice, Kentucky medical malpractice claim, Kentucky medical malpractice lawyer, malpractice, medical malpractice, medical malpractice claim, medical malpractice lawyer, medical negligence
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
Wednesday, November 9th, 2011
The Idaho State Board of Medicine has 10 members and meets quarterly. The Board’s stated responsibility and obligation is to protect the general public through the regulation of physicians and surgeons. The Board also regulates other health care professionals through advisory boards. Source
There were 4,946 physicians licensed by the Board in 2010 (up from 4,822 in 2009), of which 3,049 were practicing in-state. The Board took 18 total actions in 2010 (down from 19 in 2009), including 11 prejudicial actions. Five of those actions involved loss of license or licensed privilege and 2 involved restrictions of license or licensed privileges. The number of physicians with prejudicial actions in 2010 was 11. Source
A recent Board action involved a physician who had been licensed to practice medicine and surgery in Idaho since September 30, 1989. The physician had a “long history of alcohol and chemical abuse, addiction, and major depression” with “repeated relapses.” The physician’s problems could be traced back to his childhood and, professionally, to the mid-1980s, and included felony convictions. When the physician was granted an Idaho medical license, it was subject to conditions including the physician’s abstinence from all mind-altering chemicals and drugs, except as prescribed by another physician. In early 1994, the physician requested that the conditions on his medical license be terminated by the Board, which the Board agreed to do. Later that same year, the physician was charged with three felonies and pleaded guilty as to one drug-related felony. Shortly after the conviction, the physician entered inpatient treatment that noted the physician’s relapse in 1993 at which time drugs and alcohol use began again. The physician’s medical license was subjected to conditions by the Board in 1996. The physician relapsed again in 1999.
In 2007, the physician applied to the Board to terminate the conditions imposed in 1996, which the Board granted. The Board later discovered that the physician and a nurse practitioner had ordered “significant quantities of controlled substances” between February, 2007 and April, 2009, and that more than 1,000 of the pills were unaccounted for and either missing or diverted.
The physician admitted to altering 3 patient medical records to support prior Medicaid billings and “to deceive the Medicaid.” The physician was also found to have fraudulently billed Medicaid for services the physician did not perform for 11 patients.
Finally, on May 12, 2011, the Board revoked this physician’s license to practice medicine in Idaho.
Source
You be the judge: Did the Idaho State Board of Medicine fulfill its “responsibility and obligation” ”to protect the general public through the regulation of physicians and surgeons” in its actions (or lack of action) over many years involving this wayward physician?
When the negligent mistakes or careless errors of an Idaho physician or another health care provider in the United States has caused serious injuries or substantial losses to you or a loved one, visit our website to be connected with local medical malpractice lawyers who may be able to assist you with bringing a medical malpractice claim for the medical negligence causing the harm. You may also reach us toll free at 800-295-3959.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.
You can follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn as well!
Tags: Idaho malpractice attorney, Idaho medical malpractice, Idaho medical malpractice claim, Idaho medical malpractice complaint, Idaho medical malpractice lawyer, malpractice, malpractice lawyer, medical error, medical malpractice, medical malpractice lawyer, medical mistake, medical negligence, negligent medical care
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
