Orlando Personal Injury Lawyer - Medical Malpractice

Protect Yourself From Bad Doctors

Ed Normand — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 17:03:00 GMT

Did you know...

While the new health care bill is being debated in Washington, there is something individuals can do right now to ensure that they are receiving the best possible care. Most of the doctor malpractice in the country is committed repeatedly by just a small percentage of physicians. The Florida Department of Health publishes public profiles for every licensed medical doctor, osteopathic doctor, chiropractor, podiatrist, and advanced registered nurse practitioner practicing in the state. Each profile contains self-reported information about the medical practitioner that may help in selecting a doctor, or finding out more about the health professional that is currently treating you. The website also lists whether the practitioner carries medical malpractice insurance, and whether they have been involved in any medical malpractice litigation. For the website, go to: Medical Malpractice .

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Unemployed and Uninsured

Ed Normand — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 12:41:17 GMT

So far in 2009, almost 300,000 Floridians have lost their health insurance, along with their jobs. The link between health coverage and the rise in unemployment is important, because nearly two-thirds of people under the age of 65 get health coverage through their employment, or the employment of a spouse. Florida ranks third in the nation, among working age-adults, in the number of people who have lost their health insurance since January 2009, behind only California and Texas.

Several options are available to those who become unemployed, including COBRA, where you pay to extend current health coverage, but oftentimes individuals do not have the necessary financial means. However, the current trend of citing tort reform as a means to reduce health insurance costs are misplaced. During a time when more and more individuals are needing to purchase insurance on their own, it might be easy for some to point the finger at the alleged “evil” of medical malpractice lawsuits. Much has been proposed about the potential reduction in insurance costs if awards in medical malpractice cases were capped, or eliminated altogether. What individuals don’t realize is that in actuality, little to no savings in premiums have resulted from current attempts at tort reform. In fact, insurance companies in Florida like Aetna, have stated that tort reform has produced little or no savings in insurance rates in Florida, due in part to lawsuits only making up a tiny fraction of the overall healthcare spending in the United States each year. Reducing costs needs to come from within the system, starting with reducing the myriad of preventable medical errors committed by the small percentage of bad apple physicians each year.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Making Your Hospital Visit Safer

Sandy Grinnell — Thu, 15 Oct 2009 10:55:04 GMT

Sometimes the first step to recovery is protecting yourself during your hospital visit. Medical and human error during standard daily care and medical procedures are very real dangers and patients sometimes must serve as their own advocate during their stay in the hospital. Many times, patients are faced with challenges and needs that the hospital staff is either not responding to, or simply not noticing, and find themselves too weak to gather up the energy to request assistance. The Institute of Medicine reported that hospitalized patients should expect at least one medical error a day. In any given year up to ninety thousand patients may die from medical errors. There are certain key steps that you should take before and during your stay in a hospital to ensure that you do not encounter these errors.

First, before your surgery or procedure, research the operation and the hospital’s history on performing such operations. Some hospitals perform certain operations more frequently than others, and patient outcomes are more favorable in hospitals that are more experienced in these procedures.

Second, never remain alone for your stay. Having a trusted friend or family member to watch over you and to keep track of what the doctors and nurses are doing may help in catching a possibly deadly mistake. Also, many patients in hospitals are too weak or unable to request certain services so having someone to help you request attention or care may ensure safety during your stay.

Next, always request that your doctor or nurse washes their hands before coming into contact with you or your belongings. Washing hands is critical for stopping the spread of diseases and infections, and asking your doctor or nurse to wash their hands will limit your contact with outside bacteria and viruses.

Finally, whenever you are administered medication or given any treatment, make sure it is noted on your chart and your caregiver checks your hospital wristband and medical records to double check on the safety of the treatment. Patient mix ups in hospitals are more common than one would imagine.

Although hospitals should be a place of healing and treatment, mistakes do occur. Human error is a problem that every industry faces, and when you are dealing with human lives, taking every possible precaution is vital for the health and safety of not only yourself, but those you love. If anyone you know has been hurt or injured due to hospital error, please seek representation immediately. Be in control of your own health.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Sandy Grinnell

Medical Malpractice and Money

Ed Normand — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 09:00:00 GMT

The public perception that medical malpractice cases regularly result in large awards of money is an unrealistic one. Even if a plaintiff prevails at trial, there is no guarantee that any money will be forthcoming. A study from the Department of Justice, based on data from 43,000 cases, reveals that for seven states between 2000 and 2004 (Florida, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Missouri, Nevada, and Texas), most medical malpractice cases that were decided for the plaintiff ended with no money going to the plaintiff.

For cases in which a plaintiff prevails and is awarded compensation, many states are now capping recovery at a maximum of $250,000. The amount an attorney can recover from that statutory maximum is now also restricted. In Florida, attorneys’ fees in such medical malpractice cases, unless agreed to otherwise, are limited to 30% of the first $250,000 (exclusive of reasonable and customary costs), and 10% of all damages in excess of $250,000 (exclusive of reasonable and customary costs). If an attorney seeks more than the statutory limit for fees, the attorney is regulated by the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar. The rules limit attorneys’ fees to 33 1/3% to 40% for any recovery up to $1 million; 30% for any recovery between $1 million and 2 million; or 20% of any portion of the recovery exceeding $2 million.

Average costs of preparing for a medical malpractice case can now average $50,000 to well over $100,000 and require years to prevail at trial. Plaintiffs are often left permanently disabled as a result of the incompetence or negligence of doctors and/or hospitals, and deserve to be adequately compensated for their suffering. By capping recovery in medical malpractice cases, states are not only affecting the compensation that plaintiffs receive, but also the opportunity for plaintiffs to get their day in court. Because preparation costs for medical malpractice cases are getting so high, bringing a case to trial presents a serious financial risk, as attorneys might not be able to recover their costs even with a monetary judgment. Statutory caps on medical malpractice verdicts for pain and suffering hurt those most deserving - mothers, children, and the elderly. Big wigs still get 100% compensation for the loss of earnings, so the corporate executive hurt by malpractice will still be compensated for all his lost earnings but the child and the mother won’t. Are children less worthy?

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

A Recent Case with Ed Normand (names have been changed)

Ed Normand — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 09:00:00 GMT

I recently resolved a medical malpractice case that raises serious concerns surrounding the granting of privileges to doctors by hospitals. Mary Smith went to a local hospital because she broke her right hip. She was operated on by Dr. Jones. When Mary woke up from surgery, her right leg below her knee was cold and discolored. The hip was dislocated and fractured during surgery, and it turns out that Dr. Jones damaged an artery in her leg during the surgery. Tests were ordered by the hospital to find out why Mary’s leg was cold and discolored, but those tests were never completed. In fact, the hospital did the wrong test! Dr. Jones operated again two more times, and another doctor tried to repair the damaged artery in Mary’s right leg. But by that point, it was too late - the lack of blood to Mary’s right leg lasted too long - her leg had to be amputated.

What Mary didn’t know before going into surgery the first time was that her surgeon, Dr. Jones, had suffered a debilitating stroke several years prior. Dr. Jones was left with permanent impairments both physically and psychologically. It turns out that there were severe restrictions on Dr. Jones’ medical license, but these restrictions were ignored by both Dr. Jones and the hospital where Mary went. According to the restrictions, Dr. Jones was permitted to practice medicine, but he wasn’t permitted to operate past 12 noon, wasn’t permitted to be the doctor on call in the emergency room and had other restrictions. All of these restrictions were violated by Dr. Jones, and the hospital knew of these restrictions and still permitted Dr. Jones to practice medicine in their facility. Dr. Jones also had psychological problems from the stroke, notably negative personality changes. After having her leg amputated, Dr. Jones went into Mary’s hospital room right after the surgery for a post-operative visit. During that first post-operative visit, Dr. Jones decided to tell her a joke: "Do you know what they call a woman with one leg in Ireland? Eileen. Do you know what they call a woman with one leg in Japan? Irene." I kid you not!

Because of Mary’s age, she is unable to get a prosthetic leg, and is now bound to a wheelchair for the rest of her life. How a surgeon who suffered a stroke and had numerous restrictions on his medical license could still be permitted by a hospital to operate unsupervised is troubling. What is also troubling is that no one at the hospital told Mary about her doctor’s condition. One of the principles of the American healthcare system is that we have choice. We can chose what hospital we go to, what doctor to see, and what treatment to get done. Unfortunately for Mary, the hospital granted Dr. Jones surgical privileges, and failed to inform her about Dr. Jones’ condition, or properly supervise a surgeon with such restrictions on his license. Mary was unable to make an informed decision, much to her detriment. If Mary knew that Dr. Jones had suffered a stroke and had limitations on his medical license that restricted when and how often he performed surgery, she would have chosen someone else to perform her surgery. Because Mary was kept in the dark about Dr. Jones’ medical past, what would have been a routine operation resulted in a permanent disability and the loss of her right leg. Hospitals need to be more rigorous in the granting of privileges to doctors, and thoroughly investigate those healthcare professionals permitted to work in its facilities.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Medical Malpractice Reform: The True Numbers?

Ed Normand — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 09:00:00 GMT

A recent article in TIME magazine about malpractice reform, available at: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1924501,00.html, caught my eye for several reasons. First, the article compares the varying levels of malpractice insurance costs for doctors throughout the nation. However, the article also contains incorrect facts about awards for noneconomic damages - money awarded for pain and suffering. Of note, the article, a Spotlight into Malpractice Reform, references that an obstetrician in Florida could pay five times as much as a colleague in Texas pays in malpractice insurance premiums. The reason behind this discrepancy? The author of the article blames it on the fact that "awards [for pain and suffering] are unlimited[]" in Florida, unlike Texas, where such damages are capped.

What the author of the article fails to realize is that this is wrong - awards in Florida for pain and suffering are capped. Beginning in 1988, the Florida legislature enacted NICA - the Neurological Injury Compensation Act, which was enacted as a way to compensate children who fit certain criteria. However, what the Act essentially did was limit the amount a child could recover from a doctor for a birth related neurological injury (most Ob/Gyn cases fall into this category), even if the doctor committed medical malpractice in the treatment of the child. Under NICA, a child gets $100,000 for a lifetime of pain and suffering. If the child dies, the death benefit is limited to $10,000, but if there is clear and convincing evidence of bad faith or malicious disregard of human rights, safety, or property, then a parent would not be prevented from suing the doctor. This is an almost impossible standard!

Florida has also placed a cap on medical malpractice awards in general, limiting noneconomic damages such as pain and suffering to $500,000 against medical practitioners such as doctors and nurses. For medical negligence that results in a permanent vegetative state or death, Florida has capped awards at $1,000,000. There are also separate caps related to hospitals and nonpractitioners. With respect to the medical negligence of nonpractitioners, Florida has capped noneconomic damages at $750,000 per patient, and where such negligence results in a permanent vegetative state or death, the maximum is set at $1,500,000. There are also separate caps in place for emergency services and care. For such services, recovery against medical practitioners are capped at $150,000 per patient, up to $300,000 recoverable by all patients from all such practitioners. Awards against nonpractitioner defendants providing emergency services is capped at $750,000 per claimant, up to $1,500,000 recoverable by all patients from all such practitioners. Florida statutes state these figures as the maximum amount a patient can receive, even if there are multiple negligent practitioners or nonpractitioners. For public health care providers, like the local county hospitals, there is also a more restrictive cap of $100,000 for all damages.

What needs to be the focus of health care in the United States is the reduction of costs. Part of the argument for capping malpractice awards has been the reduction of malpractice insurance premiums for doctors. Damages caps have been in place in Florida for quite some time, and malpractice insurance premiums have not been significantly reduced. Perhaps more attention should be focused on what else can be done to reduce costs, as the capping of malpractice awards is still not reducing health care costs in Florida and around the country. The real culprit is that there are bad doctors that commit multiple acts of malpractice but continue to practice. If the Department of Health and the doctors would police their own, rates would go down.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Insurance Companies Cancelling Health Insurance of Sick Patients

Ed Normand — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 09:30:00 GMT

With President Obama’s speech to Congress last night outlining the details of his overhaul of healthcare in the United States, one interesting point popped up - the fact that Obama would guarantee that insurers could not reject people because of preexisting conditions. Health insurance companies are increasingly citing the failure to disclose preexisting conditions as a means to cancel policies and deny benefits to people in need of care. The term for this is "Post Claims Underwriting". What this means is that the insurance companies will not investigate someone for verification of entitlement to coverage until after they are sick and need the insurance. Of course, if they then determine the person is sick but not qualified they cancel the coverage and the sick consumer is left with no insurance.

Insurance companies are using the term "rescission" to refer to the cancellation of insurance coverage due to a company being misled. Rather than trying to mislead companies, omissions of preexisting conditions seem to be honest mistakes by people filing out increasingly complex forms. There have been countless stories about how people have signed up for health insurance, only to have their policies later cancelled when they need care. No one knows how often policies are cancelled because of a variety of different state laws and policies in place, however, the practice has become rampant enough to result in numerous lawsuits and new regulations put in by states throughout the country.

In the past year and a half, California has fined the five largest insurers in its state almost $19 million for cancelling the policies of individuals who became sick. One insurance company even admitted offering bonuses to employees who were able to find reasons to cancel policies. President Obama has been trying to gain support for his healthcare overhaul in part tapping into consumer dissatisfaction with the insurance industry, an industry that has never been popular among the American people. His plan for healthcare overhaul includes restricting insurance companies from screening for preexisting conditions, however, this still might not save people from having their policies cancelled. With new regulations, insurance companies might not necessarily cancel the policies of those individuals with undisclosed preexisting conditions, however, a company might institute further preauthorization requirements on services for certain patients, which might discourage such patients from renewing their policies. Lawsuits continue to be instituted against insurance companies who have cancelled policies. Rather than fight fraud, rescission has devolved into a backdoor route for insurance companies to stop paying the medical bills of people in their time of greatest need.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Verdict Against Florida Amputee Thrown Out

Sandy Grinnell — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 16:08:47 GMT

A Broward County Circuit Judge has done something extremely rare - he has reversed a jury verdict and ordered a new trial. The victim in this case lost of four of her limbs due to medical negligence. Judge Charles M. Greene tossed a jury's verdict against the victim because it was "contrary to the law and the manifest weight of the evidence."

Judge Greene determined there was an overwhelming amount of evidence against the defendants (significant errors in communication and diagnoses) and therefore a new trial was warranted. The defendants blamed each other and there many, many errors, both of which may have contibuted to the jury not being able to determine who was actually at fault.

The victim had gone to the hospital in extreme pain and told the attending nurse she had a history kidney stones and that it must be a kidney stone. The ER physician and the attending physician pointed fingers at each other - one saying that he was not informed of the patient's dire condition, the other indicating she expected the attending to come in to examine the patient, not just make a decision over the phone.

As a result of the lack of communication and treatment, the victim ended up in septic shock due to an extreme infection that cut off the blood flow to her limbs. Unfortunately, her legs were amputated just below her knees and then a few days later, her arms were removed just below the elbow.

According to the National Center for State Courts, in 2005 judges set aside less than .5 percent of jury verdicts. This victim is one of the very few that will have a second day in court. One can only hope that aother jury will view the evidence the way Judge Greene did and help this amputee get what she is surely due - a fair settlement in the face of all the many errors that resulted in her being a quadruple amputee.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Sandy Grinnell

Doctors Force Patients To Sign Gag Orders

Ed Normand — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:18:54 GMT

A new and disturbing trend has been happening in physician offices in Florida. Doctors force patients to sign paperwork preventing the patients from commenting about the physicians on the internet. Now for all those anti malpractice lawsuit fanatics, this is not about that and you can't blame it on the lawyers. What it is is that certain doctors don't want the public to know what their patients think about them. So in order to get perhaps life saving medical care you must shut up no matter what happens. This is crazy. Suppose the physician sexually abuse a patient. The patient could be liable for breach of contract if the details of the abuse are posted on the internet. If the physician has terrilble bedside manners or a filthy office the details should be public information so the patient can decide with all of the information.

The lack of information and inability to compare the level of medical services is what is the problem with the medical profession today. The

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand

Local Surgeon Fined for Operating in Wrong Place

Ed Normand — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 13:13:00 GMT

According to the Orlando Sentinel Business Section - 1/2/08, Dr. Lawrence S. Halperin of Orlando a surgeon with Orlando Orthopaedic Associates committed medical malpractice and was fined $15,000 by the Florida State Medical regulatory agency overseeing surgeons for cutting incisions on the wrong fingers during two unrelated hand operations in 2007 and 2008. The physician claimed that he eventually operated on the correct fingers.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Ed Normand