Author: Angela Leone

Don’t Let Them Fool You – Health Systems can be Held Liable for Incidents at their Hospitals

Here’s an interesting legal tactic for you: In a negligence case brought against the system, the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center is apparently asserting that it doesn’t run hospitals, despite describing itself as an “integrated global health enterprise” in its own press releases. – Anne Ziegler, FierceHealthCare.com

Central to what might be the most interesting negligence trial in quite some time is the untimely death of Rose Lee Diggs. Ms. Diggs, an 89 year-old woman was being treated at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. Without any hospital staff noticing, and without any proper means to prevent her from doing so, Ms. Diggs got out of her bed, wondered down the hall, up the stairs, and to the roof of the hospital, where she would later be found dead. The suit, which contends that hospital staff delayed in reporting Mrs. Diggs missing and tried to remove evidence from the scene, names both UPMC Health System, and UPMC Presbyterian Shadyside as defendants.

However, in what might be one of the most interesting defense tactics I have seen yet, attorneys for the University of Pittsburgh Health System have asserted that even if there was a wrongdoing in the case of Mrs. Diggs, that the system would not be responsible. Its attorneys have taken the position that each hospital and healthcare facility within its system are independent, not-for-profit corporations which are solely liable for the negligence that occurs at their facility.

Although clever, this argument does not hold under law. In any lawsuit in which the hospital is held liable for malpractice and/or negligence, the Health System which funds, organizes, and operates that facility is also held liable. Of course, the final decision in this case regarding whether or not University of Pittsburgh Health System can be held liable will be up to the Judge hearing the case. Lets just hope she sides with the legal precedent, and common sense.

Help Pass The Medical Safety Device Act

In February 2008, the Supreme Court of the United States ignored Congressional intent and disregarded 30 years of experience under the 1976 Medical Device Amendments (MDA), during which FDA regulation and state tort law worked together to protect consumers from dangerous devices. The court’s recent decision in Riegel v. Medtronic gave total immunity to device manufacturers who fail to adequately warn consumers about device risks. The court, failing to understand that FDA approval does not mean a device is entirely safe, sided with the corporate world over the rights of its citizens, preventing the public from suing when a medical device fails and causes serious harm.

When patients with devastating injuries are unable to hold the negligent manufacturer accountable, the patient and the taxpayers are left footing the bill. For a patient with private health insurance, the health insurance would most likely cover the additional surgery. However, true to the nature of the beast, the price of that patients coverage will most likely increase, leaving that patient stranded to find a way to pay for their increasingly unaffordable health insurance, with no compensation for the physical limitations caused by the device’s failure.

For Medicare or Medicaid-covered patients, the costs of the additional medical care are passed to, that’s right, you, the taxpayers. And for patients who can no longer work, they may need additional taxpayer supported programs, such as Social Security disability. All this cost shifting does nothing to help the injured patient, drains public funds, and does not encourage the manufacturer of the faulty device to fix the problem.

So what can be done? Write to your state and federal representatives and let them know you support the Medical Device Safety Act of 2008. What will it do? The bill simply does two things:

1) It restores Congressional intent by explicitly stating that actions for damages under state law are preserved.
2) It makes the amendment retroactive to the date of enactment of the Medical Devices Amendment of 1976.

The court took the decision-making process out of the hands of Congress and of the court system and put it completely in the hands of FDA bureaucrats. State legislators and attorneys general are joining the cause of rolling back the situation to before the Supreme Court’s decision and restoring the status quo in effect for decades. An American who thinks people should have some access to the courts – any access at all – should be for the act, because right now, in these situations, there is no access, and that’s not the American way.

For more information, please click here.

Contact an Attorney in New Jersey
Contact an Attorney in Pennsylvania

Chamber of Commerce: Business As Usual at a Theater Near You

In what seems to be an endless bombardment of spin campaigns, the chamber of commerce has now cracked into the movie business, by releasing a trailer to be shown in Washington, D.C. area theatres. Titled’ “The Faces of Lawsuit Abuse,” The Chamber has once again launched an attack against the world’s best legal system in an attempt to shield their exclusive members from lawsuits.

By shamelessly exaggerating isolated issues of what some would call questionable legal practices, the chamber is attempting to invalidate the entire civil legal system of the United States. Although they insist that their goal is to protect everyday citizens from greedy trial attorneys, the truth is that this campaign is just a new phase of their longstanding credo that negligent corporations should never be held accountable. Period.

The consequences of the chamber reaching their goal would be disastrous. Throughout American history, the legal system has combated against the corporate structure and won the right to protect its citizens from the profit driven manufacturers of today’s modern society. From the food we eat, to the toys our children play with, all products sold to consumers today would not be nearly as safe as they are if it were not for the modern legal system. If the Chamber had its way, parents would have never been able to sue when a defective crib killed their child, veterans of Vietnam would not have been compensated for their exposure to deadly toxic agents, and citizens would have never been properly warned of the dangers of tobacco.

The irony of it all is, that while the Chamber doesn’t want everyday Americans to use the legal system, they are actually one of the biggest lawsuit-filers in Washington. Except in their case, Chamber sues on behalf of Wall Street banks, oil companies, and lead paint manufacturers.

Let the government know how you feel about this immoral attack on the best legal system in the world. Write to your local and state representatives and let them know that you do not want the Chamber of Commerce walking on our constitution in order to protect the wallets of its contributors.

Medical Malpractice Attorney in NJ

Legal Side Effects or Legal Remedy?

In May’s issue, Kate Wilcox stated that a recent U.S. Supreme Court’s decision left drug companies “wide open for lawsuits” because it allowed juries to hold negligent drug companies accountable for harm they cause. The principles expressed by the Supreme Court in the Wyeth decision require federal regulations to improve transparency and public participation in the FDA regulatory process. Also, the decision recognized the state civil justice system provides an additional protection against billion dollar pharmeceutical companies when government regulations fail, and therefore agencies must limit their attempt to preempt state law, except in cases when Congress has explicitly stated its intent to do so. The decision upholds laws that are much needed, especially in light of the long standing practice of pharmaceutical companies to sponsor and pay for the, “research,” of the drugs they make. This practice allows the companies to market the drug’s positive effects while concealing the dangerous side effects that harm patients. The Court’s decision upholds important constitutional rights afforded to all citizens in this country and should be welcomed by a journal that promotes scientific study.

Contact an Attorney in PA
Contact an Attorney in NJ

How to Report Elder Abuse or Elder Neglect in NJ

Filing a report with the State of New Jersey in the event of nursing home neglect is the first step in pursuing a claim for elder abuse.  The process is very simple and extremely helpful if you have considered taking legal action against the facility.

How It Works

When you call the New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services,  a representative will discuss and document any problems or issues you are having with the particular nursing home facility.  Based on your information, an investigator will be sent to the facility within ten (10) days to investigate the claim.  The investigator will then review the patient’s chart, interview other patients in the facility and observe the general living conditions.  Based on their findings, the investigator will issue a letter stating the nursing home was either deficient or not deficient in their care according to state/federal laws.

How Does Filing a Report Help My Legal Case?

A report from the state detailing the neglect or abuse experienced by your loved one is a credible piece of evidence in proving your case.  The report may also uncover abuse or neglect that the family was not aware of at the time they made the claim.

Contact the NJ Department of Health And Senior Services:

To file a report, call 1(800) 792-9770.

Follow the prompts and press one (1) to file a complaint against a nursing home, hospital or assisted living facility.

 

Related Information:

New Jersey Nursing Home Abuse Lawyers

New Jersey Bedsores Lawyers

How to File a Hospital or Nursing Home Discharge Appeal With Medicare

If you believe that a Medicare patient is being inappropriately discharged from a hospital or nursing home facility, you must file the following procedure from the Department of Health and Human Services to appeal the decision:

Steps to Appeal Your Discharge:

Step 1:  You must contact the Quality Improvement Organization (QIO) no later than your planned discharge date and before you leave the hospital.  If you do this, you will not have to pay for the services you receive during the appeal (except for charges like co-pays and deductibles).

  • Here is the contact information for the QIO: (800) 624-4557 or tty 1-(877) 486-2048
  • You can file a request for an appeal any day of the week.  Once you speak to someone or leave a message, your appeal has begun.
  • Ask the hospital if you need help contacting the QIO.

Step 2: You will receive a detailed notice from the hospital or your Medicare Advantage or other Medicare managed care plan (if you belong to one) that explains the reasons they think  you are ready to be discharged.

Step 3: The QIO will ask for your opinion.  You or your representative need to be available to speak with the QIO if requested.  You or your representative may give the QIO a written statement, but you are not required to do so.

Step 4: The QIO will review your medical records and other important information about your case.

Step 5: The QIO will notify you of its decision within 1 day after it receives all necessary information.

  • if the QIO finds that you are not ready to be discharged, Medicare will continue to cover your hospital services
  • If the QIO finds that you are ready to be discharged, Medicare will continue to cover your services until noon of the day after the QIO notifies you of it’s decision.

IF YOU MISS THE DEADLINE TO APPEAL, YOU HAVE OTHER APPEAL RIGHTS:

  • You can still ask the QIO or your plan (if you belong to one) for a review of your case:
    o If you have Original Medicare: Call the QIO listed above
    o If you belong to a Medicare Advantage Plan or other Medicare managed care plan: Call your plan.
  • If you plan to stay in the hospital, the hospital may charge you for any services you receive after your planned discharge date.

For additional information, call 1-800-Medicare (663-4227) or TTY: 1-877-486-2048

Related Information:

Contact a nursing home abuse attorney

Supreme Court Decision Allows for Compensation

A March 4th Supreme Court decision has allowed juries to award damages for the harmful side effects of drugs, even if the drug had the proper FDA approved warning labels. This ruling comes in the wake of recent discovery that many drugs widely used on the market over the past decade were the result of falsified medical research.Thousands of cases against the makers of drugs like Vioxx, will now have a higher probabilty of settling, after the drug has been shown to cause serious heart related problems, as well as hinder bone growth.

If you or a loved one has had their quality of life decline due to the harmful side effects of a prescription medicine, then they may be entitled to compensation. Please contact an attorney immediately.

Contact an Attorney in PA
Contact an Attorney in NJ

New Jersey Senator Lends an Ear to the Victims of Insurance Company Tactics

“As far as Kia Moore is concerned, the health insurance system miserably failed her and her 20-month-old son. Xavier Hylton was born at Our Lady of Lourdes Medical Center in Camden with two malfunctioning kidneys and requires daily dialysis treatments as he awaits a transplant. He had grown enough to medically qualify for that transplant by March, but Moore said the procedure was delayed at least six months by a struggle over insurance coverage. Today, she said, her son should already have a functioning kidney and be on his way to living a near-normal life.” (Maryann Spoto, The Star-Ledger)

Last week, citizens of New Jersey who have fallen victim to the ruthless tactics of insurance companies were given time to fume their anger to US Senator Bob Menendez. The stories Senator Menendez would hear would appall him, and only add to his arsenal to bring to Washington with the hopes of sparking health care reform. Although invited, no representatives from the insurance agencies were present for the meeting.

“It’s no secret to anyone that our health care system is badly in need of reform,” Menendez said. “There are few things more important to the families in this state than fixing it, making sure in this great nation of ours that no one goes to sleep without health coverage, that no one has to choose between paying for heat in the winter and paying for medication that keeps them alive.”

Senator Menendez called the meeting in light of a new health care system proposal authored by Senator Max Baucus of Montana. Central to the Baucus proposal is the creation of a Health Care Exchange composed of a nationwide group of private insurance companies that would be prohibited from discriminating against pre-existing conditions.

Currently, under the existing set up, patients who visit emergency rooms due to lack of coverage end up being burdens of the tax payer. In Camden alone, more tha $460 million has been spent over the past five years on charity cases. Because the proposal would require every resident to obtain health insurance, it also provides for federal subsidies for families and small businesses unable to afford coverage through the exchange.

This new proposal has received the plaudits of Jeffery Brenner, a local Camden physician. Brenner advocates a system that brings those emergency room patients into the system for follow-ups so they can receive the appropriate care and are less of a financial drain on the system.

“Somehow we lost sight of the fact that the purpose of the home-care delivery system is to heal the sick, care for wounded and prevent illness,” he said. “It’s not to make physicians wealthy or pharmaceutical representatives wealthy or stockholders or insurance companies wealthy. The patient should be at the center of the system and indeed should be our top priority.”

Until serious reform has occurred however, the best ally a patient can have when dealing with their insurance carrier is an experienced attorney.

Contact an attorney in NJ
Contact an attorney in PA

THE RESEARCH RECESSION: 12 years of Anesthesiology progress in question

Over the past 12 years, anesthesiologist Scott Reuben revolutionized the way physicians provide pain relief to patients undergoing orthopedic surgery for everything from torn ligaments to worn-out hips. (Brendan Borrell, Scientific American)

Rueben’s drug studies were responsible for convincing orthopedic surgeons to move away from the first generation of non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs to a new method, known as COX2 inhibitors. He claimed that these new drugs, made popular under the names Vioxx, Celebrex, and Bextra, in combination with anticonvulsants could be effective in decreasing postoperative pain and reduce the use of addictive pain killers, such as morphine, after surgery. What seemed to be a break through, Reuben’s findings were hailed as a great step forward in redesigning anesthesiology.

12 years later however, the profession is in a state of crisis after an investigation by the Baystate Medical Center revealed that at least 21 of Reuben’s papers were entirely made up, faking the beneficial results and in some cases, masking possible dangers. The investigation found that the data in these 21 studies had been partially doctored, and in some cases, entirely fabricated by Dr. Rueben.

Although this most recent investigation has brought the wall tumbling down for Dr. Rueben, signs of cracks had leaks had begun to rear their ugly head over the past five years. In the early part of the decade, orthopedic surgeons began to distrust Rueben’s COX2 inhibitors, when animal testing found that the drugs might actually hinder bone healing. Soon there after, in 2004, Vioxx and Bextra, and Celebrex were pulled from the market because of their link to an increased risk of heart attacks and strokes. All the mean time, Dr. Rueben continued to present positive “findings” for the use of these COX2 inhibitors in his research.

So, even with the public at risk, what motivated Dr. Rueben continue his campaign for these drugs? Simple. Money. It was discovered during the course of the Baystate investigation that Dr. Rueben’s research was entirely funded by Pfizer; the maker of both Celebrex, and the anticonvulsants lauded by Dr. Rueben’s study to be used in conjunction with the COX2 inhibitors. Baystate however could not find any records of the payments, suggesting that the payments were made not to Dr. Rueben’s research group, but instead directly to Dr. Rueben.

Although we may think of doctor’s as always having the best intentions, one must always remember the power of money. Pharmaceutical corporations are some of the richest and most powerful companies in the world, and they need doctors on their side. It is much easier today for these drug companies to pay off a doctor to get the results they need rather than go back to the drawing table and leave behind an unsuccessful product. Because of this, remember to always remain informed when consulting with your doctor about possible medication options. An informed patient is always the safest patient.

Contact an Attorney in NJ
Contact an Attorney in PA

CONSUMER ALERT – State Farm Recalls “Good Neigh Bears” Due to Choking Hazard

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission and Health Canada announced a voluntary recall by State Farm concerning a children’s toy bear. The bear figures, manufactured in China, were handed out by State Farm agents and given away at State Farm sponsored events over from 2005 on to the present.

The eyes on the toy bear can be removed, posing a possible choking hazard to children.

The US Consumer Product Safety Commission suggests that consumers should immediately take these toys away from children and discard them.

For additional information, contact State Farm toll free at (877) 226-8079.

Contact an Attorney in PA
Contact an Attorney in NJ