Lansing Personal Injury Lawyer

Tractor-Trailer Accidents are Serious Highway Safety Concerns

David Mittleman — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 16:57:16 GMT

Any discussion of traffic safety has to take into account Tractor-Trailer Accidents. One in eight fatalities on our nation's highways involves a large truck or "semi" truck. Half a million accidents each year involve tractor-trailers in the United States. 5,000 people die a year from these accidents. 140,000 people survive but suffer from injuries, ranging from serious brain injury to loss of limbs.

One of the major factors which can compromise tractor trailer safety is truck driver fatigue. The nature of truck transportation often requires covering long distances over long periods of time. Tractor trailer safety studies have indicated that fatigue is responsible for tractor trailer accidents thirty to forty percent of the time.

Tractor-trailer companies are required to carry a minimum level of insurance. They are also required to properly maintain all tractor trailers and equipment to sustain tractor trailer safety. Trucks are required to stop at weight stations to ensure that they are in compliance with weight limitations. Hours of Service logs are often checked at this time as well. Local and state law enforcement also plays an integral role in tractor trailer safety and will conduct random stops and inspections.

Despite tractor trailer safety measures, accidents still can and do occur and violations of tractor trailer safety laws are also made. A 1997 study found that in a random given week of inspections at least 9000 tractor trailer safety violations were committed. When tractor trailer safety is breeched, serious accidents can result.

Our firm has successfully handled cases involving injuries sustained during a tractor-trailer accident. If you have injured in such an accident, do not hesitate to contact our office, ChurchWyble, at (888) 227-4770.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

Healthy 25-Year-Old Suffers Rare Neurological Condition After Receiving Flu Shot

David Mittleman — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 12:15:14 GMT

Desiree Jennings, a healthy 25-year-old with an active lifestyle, went to get her seasonal flu shot in August 2009. Some believed it was a hoax when Desiree reported some severe, yet strange, side effects from the shot. In fact, Desiree couldn’t walk forward, but could run forward and walk backwards.

However, Desiree has a legitimate condition: according to doctors she is suffering from acute, viral post immunization encephalopathy and mercury toxicity with secondary respiratory and neurological deficits. Desiree strongly believes that these problems are a direct result of the flu shot she received at her local grocery store chain.

At first, Desiree’s doctor diagnosed her with dystonia, a neurological disorder that causes involuntary muscle contractions. However, the doctor now believes she has the viral post immunization encephalopathy. Unfortunately, the illness can alter brain function or structure and can also cause memory loss and personality changes. In a recent interview, Desiree described her diagnosis and how her life has dramatically changed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ja7lCIp04YY

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

CDC Links Two Antibiotics Taken During Pregnancy to Subsequent Birth Defects

David Mittleman — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 10:00:00 GMT

Researchers at the Centers for Disease Control who studied the effect of antibiotics during pregnancy have discovered a link between birth defects and several types of antibiotics, specifically those to treat urinary tract infections, which are referred to as sulfa drugs and nitrofurantoins. However, the most common antibiotic given during pregnancy, penicillin, appears to be the safest.

The new study is the first large-scale research effort to study the effects of antibiotics on pregnancy. Furthermore, it was the first time that researchers were able to find an association between urinary tract treatments and birth defects. The study, which will be published in the November Archive of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, looked at 13,000 mothers whose infants had birth defects as well as 5,000 women with healthy babies who lived in the same regions. The women were interviewed by phone for six weeks to two years after their pregnancies and any that reported having taken antibiotics during the month before conception through the first three months of pregnancy, were identified as exposed to antibiotics.

While the study is revealing and could help doctors decide which antibiotics to avoid giving to pregnant women, the researchers cited a weakness in the study: the women’s memories of which antibiotics they took could be faulty. Furthermore, the underlying condition, rather than the antibiotics, could have also contributed to birth defects. Nevertheless, the researchers concluded that sulfa drugs caused birth defects such as rare brain and heart problems and shortened limbs. Similarly, nitrofurantoins contributed to heart problems and cleft palate. Overall, the drugs seemed to double or triple the risk of these specific types of birth defects.

For further information and links, please visit Jane Akre’s blog on antibiotics and pregnancy at the National Injury Board News Desk.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

AAJ Debunks Myths About Medical Negligence

David Mittleman — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 12:46:56 GMT

President Obama promised a floor debate on health care reform in the House, and now that promise is coming to fruition. The debate is sure to include the classic opponents of healthcare reform, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, as well as other tort reform proponents such as the asbestos, insurance, and pharmaceutical companies. However, one of the most problematic arguments used by these groups is that medical malpractice lawsuits are the basis for the rising cost of healthcare and that the answer is not healthcare reform. Instead, they argue that limiting “frivolous lawsuits” is the panacea to our country’s healthcare cost woes.

The American Association for Justice (AAJ), a trial lawyers group based Washington, D.C, recently released a 30-page report (pdf) outlining the pertinent arguments of the debate. Specifically, the five myths the AAJ outlines are:

Myth #1: There are too many frivolous lawsuits, and curbing the number of lawsuits would cut down the cost of healthcare.

The actual number of lawsuits filed per year is questionable. What most people don’t understand is that trial lawyers don’t have near the financial power that an insurance company does. Specifically, insurance companies can spend enormous, and seemingly endless, amounts of money to win a case. Plaintiffs’ attorneys, on the other hand, are on very tight budgets and must question the validity of every case that might come their way. Wasting money attempting to prove a case that doesn’t have merit is nonsensical, so plaintiffs’ attorneys aren’t scooping up every case possible, contrary to popular belief.

While the number of frivolous lawsuits is questionable, the number of medical negligence cases aren’t: in fact, according to the Institute of Medicine’s 1999 “To Err is Human” report, 98,000 people are killed in hospitals each year from preventable medical errors.

Furthermore, a Hearts Newspaper Group “Dead by Mistake” investigation into medical malpractice found that the number of patients affected was closer to 200,000, when hospital-acquired infections were taken into consideration.

Are all of these individuals affected by medical negligence flocking to file lawsuits? Apparently not: according to a Harvard study, only 1 in 8 people injured by medical negligence filed a malpractice claim.

Other myths included in the AAJ report include:

Myth #2:

Malpractice claims drive up the cost of healthcare

Myth #3:

Doctors are fleeing

Myth #4:

Malpractice Claims Drive up Doctors’ Premiums

Myth #5:

Tort reform will lower insurance rates

For additional information on the myths surrounding healthcare reform and the costs of healthcare, see AAJ's "Debunking the Myths".

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

2 Dead, 28 Seriously Ill After Consuming E. Coli Contaminated Ground Beef

David Mittleman — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 10:00:00 GMT

A few weeks ago, I wrote about the heartbreaking case of Stephanie Smith, a 22-year-old dance instructor in NYC who ended up paralyzed after eating a hamburger patty contaminated with E. Coli. Now fears are mounting to even higher levels, after 2 people died and 24 are seriously ill after consuming ground beef contaminated with E. coli.

The suspect beef was produced by a company in NY State, Fairbank Farms, which issued a recall last Saturday for 545,699 pounds of ground beef products. The products were sold in eight states including Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. The stores that received the meat included Trader Joe’s, Giant, Price Chopper, Wild Harvest, and Shaw’s.

While the recall was voluntary, Agnes Schafer, the spokeswoman for Fairbank Farms, argues that no tests have yet proven that the company’s beef products were the source of the bacterial outbreak or the cause of the deaths and illnesses. Furthermore, Ms. Schafer also states that all of the beef products were 23 to 32 days past their sell-by dates and shouldn’t have been on store shelves anyway. Nevertheless, health officials are concerned that people may still have the meat in their freezers, waiting to be eaten.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

Michigan Medical Malpractice Claims Fraught With Obstacles

David Mittleman — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:58:00 GMT

Most of us know little or nothing about the practice of medicine. When we go to our doctors, for everything from a routine checkup to a serious emergency, we trust in them to conduct a proper and thorough examination and to formulate an adequate plan of care. Sometimes, as a result of the carelessness or inattention of the physician or other medical provider, a patient is harmed rather than healed.

Doctors and other medical providers have a legal duty to provide patients with treatment that meets the "standard of care." In layman's terms, the standard of care is what an ordinary and prudent doctor should do in a given situation. If a doctor breaches the standard of care, and the patient is injured as a result, the doctor has committed medical malpractice.

Medical malpractice is more than just a breach of duty, it is a betrayal of trust. However, Michigan law can make it very difficult and expensive for victims to hold the at-fault doctors accountable. There are numerous procedural requirements demanded by law that must be strictly followed. Failure to follow these rules precisely could (and often does) result in the dismissal of an otherwise valid medical malpractice claim. Injured victims have only two years to bring a claim for malpractice, while victims of other types of negligence have three years. Moreover, the victim is required to procure the testimony of other doctors in order to prove his or her case. This is an expensive requirement, and the injured person's doctors must have exactly the same credentials as the at-fault doctor or the claim may be dismissed.

In Michigan, even if a victim of medical malpractice can satisfy all the procedural requirements and prevail in court, their level of compensation may be limited. Medical malpractice damage caps operate to prevent severely hurt patients from fully recovering for their injuries.

Our office handles medical malpractice claims regularly, and our attorneys have extensive experience navigating Michigan's legal obstacle course. If you suspect that you or a loved one is a victim of medical malpractice, contact our office to see if we can put our expertise to work for you.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

RI Hospital Fined for Fifth Wrong-Site Surgery, Ordered to Install Cameras in Operating Rooms

David Mittleman — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 10:26:54 GMT

Recently, I wrote about Rhode Island Hospital’s fifth wrong site surgery since January 2007, where doctors operated on the wrong finger of a patient. After conducting an investigation, the Rhode Island Health Department has levied a fine of $150,000 against the Hospital, citing that the surgical team violated safety policies when it performed the incorrect operation on October 22^nd.

According to investigation reports, the surgical team failed to mark the correct fingers and also failed to follow the rules for a “time out”, which is a pause before beginning a surgery to verify the patient, and ensure the correct procedure and operating site. Furthermore, the Hospital also failed to follow new error-prevention protocols instituted in Rhode Island on July 1.

Along with the fine, Rhode Island Hospital will also be required to install video cameras and audio equipment in all its operating rooms within 45 days. All surgeons will be taped at least twice a year. However, the Hospital can decide if it will inform the doctors in advance that they will be monitored during a particular surgery. Moreover, the Health Department will also require the Hospital to assign a clinical employee who is not part of the surgical team to observe all surgeries at the hospital for at least one year to ensure that doctors are marking sites to be operated on and taking a time out prior to starting a surgery.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

Motorcycle Accidents Can Cause Serious Injuries

David Mittleman — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:54:31 GMT

Motorcycle accidents can be fatal. But just as likely, motorcycle accidents lead to serious, permanent, and debilitating injuries. The leading type of injury sustained in a motorcycle accident is a head injury.

Some important information that could help limit your exposure to serious injury while riding a motorcycle includes: wearing a helmet, reducing your speed around curves, avoiding alcohol consumption before riding the motorcycle, riding during the daytime, and avoiding speeding.

Statistics fluctuate with motorcycle accidents over periods of years. Ultimately, what doesn't change is the fact that an injury sustained while riding a motorcycle can be devastating. In 1998 alone, a study conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration concluded that 500 lives were saved by the use of a helmet, and another 307 could have been saved by riders killed in motorcylce accidents had they worn a helmet.

If you or a loved one has been injured in a motorcycle accident, feel free to contact our office, ChurchWyble, P.C. at (888) 227-4770 to discuss your situation.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

Radiologists Reluctant to Admit Mammography Errors to Patients

David Mittleman — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:54:31 GMT

According to a new study released this month, radiologists may not be so honest when it comes to admitting their mistakes. Specifically, radiologists may not disclose mammography errors to patients, resulting in delayed treatment for progressive cancers.

The study, conducted by the departments of medicine and bioethics & humanities at the University of Washington, surveyed 364 radiologists at seven different Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium sites located in separate geographical areas. The radiologists were given a hypothetical situation in which comparison screening mammograms were placed in an incorrect order, so that it appeared as if breast calcifications were decreasing in number in a patient when they had actually increased. The doctors were then told that there was an error, which resulted in a delay in treating the cancer. The radiologists were then asked to respond to three questions: 1) how likely they were to disclose the mistake, 2) what information they would share, and 3) what were their actual experiences and attitudes with malpractice.

The results of the study indicated that:

24% responded that they would “not say anything further to the patient”
31% responded that they would tell the patient that “the calcifications are larger now and are suspicious for cancer”
30% responded that they would tell the patient “the calcifications may have increased on your last mammogram, but their appearance was not as worrisome as they are now”
15% responded that they would tell the patient that “an error had occurred during the interpretation of your last mammogram, and the calcifications had actually increased in number, not decreased”

74% of the radiologists claimed that they were more reluctant to tell patients of mistakes because of fears over medical malpractice. Apparently, failure to report errors to patients was not an uncommon practice for many of the radiologists surveyed. In fact, 49% admitted that they had been sued for medical negligence. However, other factors also had an effect in the radiologists’ degree of honesty. For example, physicians have expressed concerns over increasing stress in patients after admitting a medical error. Furthermore, the study author also hypothesized that some physicians feel uncomfortable with their communication skills, and struggle to admit to a patient that they had mad a mistake. Despite these other factors, 15% is not a comforting amount of radiologists who say they would be completely honest about their mistakes. Hopefully, continued studies like this will help to improve doctor and patient communication.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman

Kansas Supreme Court Called to Protect Patients From Tort Reform

David Mittleman — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:35:06 GMT

Kansas, like Georgia, will be visiting the problem of tort reform this year as it decides whether or not caps on damages in medical malpractice cases violates a patient's rights after he or she has been injured by a doctor's negligence.

The legal battle surrounds a wrongly removed ovary. Amy Miller of Eudora, Kansas, went to have her right ovary removed. Dr. Carolyn Johnson unfortunately removed the left ovary instead. Ms. Miller filed a lawsuit and a Kansas jury comprised of her peers returned a verdict for $759,680.

However, because of laws in Kansas that place limits on damages for pain and suffering (noneconomic damages) in medical malpractice, the Judge in the case stripped $150,000 of the verdict that had to do with future noneconomic loss.

Attorneys for Ms. Miller argue that Kansas's law on medical malpractice caps violates Kansas's constitutional guarantees to a jury trial.

In addition to the Constitutional violation, her attorney argues that it violates the seperation fo powers by allowing the Legislature to unnecessarily take away a power vested to the judiciary and juries.

Most important, however, is the fact that caps on noneconomic damages do nothing but place the greatest limitations on the people who have been injured the most. Follow us as we let you know how these pivotal cases are decided across the country.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by David Mittleman