N. Texas Man Calls For Medical Help, Gets Tasered

CBS 11 News) WAXAHACHIE A Waxahachie man says a call for help turned out be his worst nightmare.

According to Allen Nelms a 911 call for paramedics ended with him being tasered by police. Nelms says excessive force was used for no reason.

Nelms called 911 to get medical attention for a diabetic seizure, but says at least three Waxahachie police officers kicked in his front door and asked him to get on the floor.

"He said I launched at him, but I turned this way. I didn't go at him, otherwise I would have got hit in the face with the tasers," Nelms said.

Nelms says he still has no answer as to why police broke down his door with their guns drawn before shooting him multiple times with a taser as he lay in bed.

Nelms attorney, Rodney Ramsey, says the story just doesn't add up. "Police officers don't normally respond to a 911 call, talk to the homeowner outside in the driveway, and then kick the door in and rush in, unless there's some sort of criminal action."

Chuck Edge, the new Waxahachie police chief, agrees with Ramsey and says police usually don't show up to medical calls.

After Nelms filed a written complaint he says he received a one-paragraph statement from police that indicated the department had concluded an investigation into his allegation of excessive force. He says the investigation took less than five days and the department found that officers operated within policy guidelines.

Nelms plans to file a lawsuit against the City of Waxahachie, the police officer's involved n the incident, and the police department.

Nelms attorney says he believes the incident probably wouldn’t have occurred had the 911 call come from a different location. "The residents of the east side of Waxahachie do not get treated the same as the residents of the other parts of the town. That's a fact," Ramsey said.
source : www.cbs11tv.com

Dealing with medical malpractice in court

By SARAH STARR
Register Citizen Staff
The serious illness, injury or death of a loved one - or of oneself - is one of the most draining experiences that most people ever face. These feelings are only made worse when you begin to suspect that the doctor or hospital may not have done all they could to help the situation, or that something done by a health care provider may have actually caused the injury or death.
About 80,000 people die in the United States each year due partly to medical malpractice, according to an study entitled "Patients, Doctors and Lawyers: Medical Injury, Malpractice Litigation, and Patient Compensation in New York," published by the Harvard Medical Practice Study in 1990 and cited by the Consumer Action and Information Center of Hawaii.
Only about 2 percent of those injured by physicians' negligence seek compensation through a lawsuit, according to a 1991 article in the New England Journal of Medicine also cited by the group.
The first thing you should do if you think you have experienced medical malpractice, according to attorney Andrew Groher of the Hartford, Conn.-based law firm Riscassi and Davis, is retain a lawyer to help you sort through the complexities of the case, and to determine if you have a case worth pursuing in court.
"It's even hard for us [to determine what is and isn't malpractice]," Groher said. "That's why we use consultants from the health care field concerned."
Groher stresses that you do not have to come to the lawyer's office armed with sheafs of damning evidence in order to have a successful case.
"People come to us sometimes with nothing more than benefit statements," he said. "Or they just come in and tell us their story, or their loved one's story."
He warns, though, that you do not have an unlimited timeframe to file suit if you think you have been injured by medical negligence, stating that the statute of limitations is usually two years from the time you reasonably should have discovered the malpractice, and no more than three years from the date of the actual alleged negligence.
Another concern is how long a case takes to bring to fruition, from the time you go to a lawyer until the case has come to a conclusion in court. According to Groher, a case can take anywhere from one year in an area with less crowded court dockets, up to two to three years in a large city or other area with very busy courts.
"A year is optimistic," Groher said.
Medical malpractice also has another side, however. A February 2006 study, prepared by PricewaterhouseCoopers for America's Health Insurance Plans and cited by the Insurance Information Institute, found that medical liability costs and defensive medicine account for 10 percent of medical care costs. Defensive medicine is when doctors order tests and medicine, or make referrals to specialists, that they do not really feel are necessary, in order to protect themselves from being accused of negligence.
An obstetrician in Florida, one of the states with the highest premiums, may pay up to $260,000 per year on malpractice insurance, according to William G. Plested, President of the American Medical Association.
According to Plested, high premiums regularly drive doctors who have never been accused of malpractice out of business, because they cannot afford to swallow the cost anymore. It compels other physicians to go without any malpractice insurance, which is not actually required to practice.
If you are injured through negligence by a doctor who has no malpractice insurance, you can go after their assets, but doctors who are doing so will typically be employing a number of dodges, such as having all their accounts in their wife's name or putting assets overseas, Plested said.
However, Plested stresses that this is not the main problem.
"The whole system is upside down," Plested said. "It goes after the most qualified people we have."
source : www.registercitizen.com

Pocono Medical Center settles overtime suit with workers

EAST STROUDSBURG — Pocono Medical Center will pay up to $280,000 to settle a class-action overtime dispute involving perhaps hundreds of workers.

The East Stroudsburg hospital's parent company — Pocono Health System — and plaintiff attorney Peter Winebrake of Dresher announced the out-of-court settlement of a federal lawsuit in a joint press release.
The May 4 agreement, filed with the Middle District Court of Pennsylvania, stipulates that neither party comment on the terms beyond the wording of their joint news release.

The suit, initially filed on behalf of two kitchen workers, contends the hospital consistently shorted some employees out of legally entitled overtime payments through an "8 and 80" work schedule.

This consists of a four-day work week (then three days off), followed by a six-day work week (then one day off).

Former dietary worker Traci Otto of Stroudsburg and former chef John Junker of Bushkill filed suit objecting to the medical center's failure to pay eight hours of overtime — at time and a half — for each of the six-day, 48-hour weeks.

They claimed this violated federal law.

Hospital management, which admits no wrongdoing in the settlement, contends another provision of federal law allowed them to use the "8 and 80" work schedule for health workers without paying overtime. They said overtime payments are mandated only when the two-week pay period exceeds 80 hours, or if an employee works more than 8 hours in a single day.

"While we firmly believe that our actions were in compliance with the Fair Labor Standards Act, we wanted to resolve the matter in an equitable, timely manner given the significant expense associated with ongoing litigation," Pocono Health System CEO and President Richard J. Henley said in the joint news release.

Winebrake, an attorney specializing in representing workers in wage and hour disputes, said the agreement is fair to past and present employees.

"I'm pleased with the settlement, which allows the hospital's dedicated workforce to receive timely payments and avoid the delays and uncertainties of further litigation," Winebrake said in the press release.

The statement doesn't say The statement doesn't say how many employees are entitled to share in the payments, but that the hospital will pay $280,000 if at least 90 percent of eligible workers opt into the settlement. If 70 percent opt-in, the settlement fund will total $265,000. If 60 percent opt-in, the fund will be $250,000.

Junker — employed at PMC from June 2004 through September 2005 — reached a separate agreement in March for a $10,000 settlement of his claim. The hospital had argued, in part, that Junker was a management employee not entitled to overtime. Junker said he was paid an hourly wage and was treated as a regular wage employee.

Otto — employed from April 2004 through May 2005 — will receive $5,000, in addition to a share from the settlement fund. The agreement says the $5,000 is for her service on behalf of other workers who will share in the settlement, and for "off-the-clock" claims when she says she worked during breaks and meals without compensation.

Winebrake and other plaintiff attorneys will apply to the court for 30 percent of the settlement fund proceeds, plus up to $5,000 for out-of-pocket costs.

Service Employees International Union 1199P, which wasn't a party to the class action lawsuit, won the right last December to represent 525 service and skilled and maintenance workers in collective bargaining. The union and management are in the process of negotiating their first contract.

Neal Bisno, the union's secretary-treasurer, said his organization will work with the plaintiff's attorney to make sure every employee entitled to a share of the settlement gets it. He said the overtime dispute points to the need for the union.

"We'll be working in the contract negotiations so that everyone is paid fairly so that they don't have to go through the courts," Bisno said.

Bisno said he isn't sure how many PMC employees worked the "8 and 80" schedule and might be entitled to compensation under the agreement.
source : www.poconorecord.com

Lawyer: Couple robbed Colchester bank to pay medical bills

NORWICH -- Charles Orbann is a retired former teacher of the year, a grandfather, husband and, now, in what his attorney said is a "bizarre situation," a suspected bank robber.

Charles Orbann, 58, and his wife of 38 years, Dianne Orbann, 56, were arraigned Monday in Norwich Superior Court on charges connected to a midday robbery Friday at the Colchester branch of People's Bank.
The East Hampton couple, who have no prior criminal record, were pulled over and arrested 16 minutes after Charles Orbann allegedly left the bank at 139 S. Main St. with a bag of cash. His wife allegedly drove the waiting getaway car. Police said they found two loaded pistols along with the stolen cash -- an undisclosed amount up to $10,000 -- in the vehicle.

Mounting medical bills, compounded by psychiatric issues, may have motivated the alleged robbery by the couple, said attorney Ron Murphy of New Britain-based Advocates Law Firm.

"It's a sad, sad situation, your honor," Murphy said. "He freaked out over his financial situation."

Charles Orbann was diagnosed with bipolar disorder in 1998, the year he retired from teaching after 25 years at a school outside Philadelphia, Murphy said. At the school, he was twice voted teacher of the year and coached three different sports teams. He was also recently diagnosed with skin cancer and underwent cataract surgery, Murphy said.

Shackled at the ankles and wrists, Charles Orbann patted his hand to his heart and broke into tears as he entered the courtroom.

Two men, identified by Murphy as the son and brother of Charles Orbann, stood as he approached the judge.

"They're here to lend support for Mr. Orbann," Murphy said.

Murphy and attorney Hope C. Steely of the Hartford Firm Santos & Seeley, who represented Dianne Orbann, said the couple had moved from Pennsylvania to follow their son, first to Chicago and three years ago to Connecticut. They are taking care of two grandchildren and collecting Social Security disability, she said.

Dianne Orbann takes medication and is suffering from panic disorder, anxiety, depression and migraines, Seeley said.

"This is one of the most bizarre situations I've ever seen," Murphy told Judge Jack Fischer in arguing for a lower bond.

Fischer, under the recommendation of state prosecutor Thomas Griffin, ordered Dianne Orbann held on $150,000 bond and Charles Orbann on $350,000 bond. Dianne Orbann was later released after posting the money.
source : www.norwichbulletin.com

Hollywood hospital adopts new policy for homeless

LOS ANGELES -- Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center, whose discharge of a paraplegic man onto skid row earlier this year was widely publicized, says it will adopt new guidelines meant to end the dumping of homeless patients.

The hospital said Friday that it would create new protocols and provide more staff training for discharging homeless patients. The country's largest health maintenance organization, Kaiser Permanente, announced similar reforms on Tuesday.

In February, a 54-year-old paraplegic homeless man discharged from the hospital was found crawling on a street wearing a soiled hospital gown with a colostomy bag still attached.

Chief executive Kaylor Shemberger said Hollywood Presbyterian wanted to become "one of the first hospitals in Los Angeles to respond to the city attorney's request to get on board with the protocols."

City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo is investigating the February dumping.

"This announcement by itself doesn't impact our investigation," Delgadillo said.

Delgadillo had filed criminal charges against Kaiser Permanente over a dumped patient in November, and said he wanted to send a message to hospitals countrywide engaged in patient dumping.

Los Angeles authorities are investigating allegations that a dozen area hospitals have dumped more than 50 homeless patients downtown.
source : www.ctv.ca

Emilio's short life likely to be long remembered

Monday, May 21, 2007

Emilio Gonzales didn't even live 19 months, but his struggle probably will be remembered for years to come.

The poignant case of the toddler who died Saturday evening after spending his last five months on life support at Children's Hospital of Austin will continue to be debated by medical professionals, lawmakers, medical ethicists, theologians and others concerned with end-of-life care, lawyers familiar with the case said.
"Where do we draw the line between the patient's autonomy, on the one hand, and respecting the rights, interests and wishes of the family and the medical and ethical judgments of the health care providers?" asked Michael Regier, general counsel for the Seton Family of Hospitals, which operates Children's Hospital. "His life and death and his experience will serve to illuminate that discussion."

At issue in the case was a basic question that struck a nerve with people around the world: Should doctors have the right to stop treating a patient against a family's wishes?

Under Texas' 1999 Advance Directives Act, doctors have that authority. But many Texans might not have known that until they heard about Emilio, said Jerri Ward, the lead lawyer for Emilio's mother, Catarina Gonzales of Lockhart.

Gonzales wanted every effort made to keep Emilio alive, but doctors urged that the terminally ill child be allowed to die in dignity and peace.

Born blind, deaf and developmentally delayed on Nov. 3, 2005, he was eventually diagnosed with Leigh's disease, a fatal neurometabolic disorder that causes the central nervous system to collapse.

As right-to-life organizations, which oppose abortion and euthanasia, and disability rights groups got involved, Emilio became a cause célèbre.

The organizations' members sent hundreds of e-mails to Gov. Rick Perry and petitioned him to "save Emilio."

"I think his story has educated thousands of Texans about this law, which is pretty much about a stealth law," Ward said. "Most people were unaware that their choices could be overridden in a way that could hasten their death."

The law allows doctors to stop treating a patient whose ongoing care they deem to be medically futile and gives families 10 days to find another doctor or facility willing to treat their loved one.

Gonzales couldn't find a hospital to take her son, whose care was being paid for by two governmental programs, Medicare and Medicaid.

She went to court to stop doctors from unplugging his respirator and planned to challenge the law on constitutional and other grounds at a hearing in Travis County Probate Court on May 30.

Gonzales, who is 23, cried frequently Sunday. She said that although she was interested in pursuing the court case, she wasn't sure what she will do now.

"My son's gone," she said. "Right now, I can't do anything."

Because of complications during her pregnancy, she said, she cannot have more children. She believed that her Catholic faith compelled her to keep Emilio alive, regardless of doctors' beliefs that he could not recover and that continued treatment was prolonging his suffering.

Greg Hooser, chairman of the Advance Directives Act Coalition, helped write the state law. Hooser said Emilio's death could lend greater urgency to passage of proposed changes in the law as the legislative session draws to a close.

"Emilio helped to educate the Legislature with a real-life example, with all the agonies, pain and real-life conflicts that cases such as these bring to bear on all of the parties involved," he said.

Senate Bill 439, authored by Sen. Bob Deuell, R-Greenville, and amended by Rep. Dianne White Delisi, R-Temple, gives families more time to prepare to move their loved ones when doctors want to stop treating patients.

Under current law, families have two days to prepare for an ethics committee review of the doctor's decision to stop treatment. The proposed law would change that to seven days. And the time allotted for a transfer would be extended from 10 days to 21.

Other states are watching how Texas resolves this issue, and Emilio's case could indirectly affect what other legislatures do, Hooser said.

He said that legal scholars are preparing to cite the case in new articles and that Emilio's name has already been invoked by those arguing both sides of the issue.

"This is going to be a case that is going to be talked about for some time to come in a lot of different ways," Regier said. "We're going to see legal experts talk about it in the legal sphere; you're going to see medical experts talk about it, moral theologians talk about it; and legislators and legislative bodies will struggle with what is the right balance."

Regier said Seton supports the changes in SB 439.

Ward said that although the measure improves the law, "that doesn't mean I'm not going to sue."

Ward said she will wait for Gonzales to decide whether to proceed with a legal challenge to the Advance Directives Act. Their case contends that the law is unconstitutional and discriminates against people who are disabled.

Although Emilio's story is about those legal and ethical issues, Ward said, first and foremost, it is about a mother's love for her son. And now, that mother is grieving.

Gonzales knew that doctors had diagnosed Emilio with a terminal illness, but she hoped that she might take him home to die even as doctors said he could not be weaned from a respirator, which required him to be in the intensive care unit.

By Thursday, Emilio had taken a turn for the worse, with a high fever. Gonzales said she knew his time was short, so she stayed with him.

The next day, he worsened. By Saturday, his heart was racing, and Gonzales said she knew he was dying.

"They said he had an infection," she said, adding that he did not receive antibiotics until 6 p.m. Saturday.

An hour later, she called Ward. Her family, including four sisters, a brother and her parents, had already gathered at the bedside. They all held Emilio, she said.

"I told him it was OK to go," she said.

She did not request an autopsy. Regier said an official cause of death was not available Sunday.

Despite her grief, Gonzales said she knew that Emilio was "in a better place."

"I have a lot of peace, but it hurts so much," she said.

She wants her son's funeral to be open to the public.

"I don't know what to do about the funeral expenses," said Gonzales, who quit her cashier job to be with her son last year.

De Leon Funeral Home in Lockhart is in charge of arrangements, which were pending Sunday night.
source : www.statesman.com

Medical Ethics Cannot Control Chinese Military System's Organ Harvest

The communist China State Council announced its first Human Organ Transplant Regulation on April 6, 2007. The regulation indicated that no organization or individual is allowed to sell or buy organs for profit.

Dr. Huang Shih-Wei, an urologist from Chiayi, Taiwan, has been following organ transplant development in China and Taiwan for several years. Dr. Huang pointed out that the most conspicuous problem for China's organ transplant system is that the sources of the organ are unclear.

Sources show that most organ transplants in China take place in military hospitals, which are not under the jurisdiction of the Chinese State Council and Health Ministry.

Dr. Huang said the most ethically questionable fact about the Chinese Communist Party's (CCP) organ transplant system is that the sources of the organs are unclear. A report by two Canadian independent investigators reported that between 2000 and 2005, there were 45,000 organ transplants from undisclosed sources, while another 15,000 organs were thought to be from executed prisoners. The Medical Ethics Commission does not have jurisdiction over organs from unidentified sources.

In the past, there were very few cases of organ donations from living and brain-dead donors in China. The Medical Ethics Commission does not need to give approval since there are no such cases.

The new regulation requires organ donation authorization form, but such an authorization is just a piece of paper, since the regulation is unable to control the authorization and under what circumstances it is obtained. Many say that the CCP forced, induced or forged such authorizations in the past. A regulation will not resolve public suspicion over past practices by the CCP.

The World Medical Association officially disallows organ transplants from executed prisoners, because prisoners are generally granted very few if any rights in prison. In China's prison system, prisoners often suffer inhumane tortures.

The China State Council regulation states that hospitals performing transplants must meet certain criteria. For example, clauses 11 and 14 detail the qualification approval process. From the provision, one can infer that the Chinese government may want to reduce the number of hospitals that are qualified to perform organ transplants.

However, considering the severe and pervasive corruption in China, it is questionable whether such provisions would truly improve the quality of organ transplants, or it may become another way for officials to embezzle while hospitals fight for the qualification.

Dr. Huang said the revised report by the two Canadian independent investigators clearly indicated that the main sources for China's organ transplant are from the military medical system. The two investigators found compelling evidence that the Chinese military hospitals were involved in organ harvesting from living Falun Gong practitioners.

China's communist political system is different from that of other countries. In China, the army is controlled by the Central Military Commission of the CCP, not by the State Council. Similarly, military hospitals are managed by the People's Liberation Army General Logistics Department.

Last November in a speech during the National Organ Transplant Management Summit in Guangzhou, Deputy Minister of Health Huang Jiefu admitted that his Health Ministry had no control over military hospitals.

If the largest source of organ transplants are military hospitals, and the new regulation has no jurisdiction over military hospitals, then the regulation is just an empty shell. Dr. Huang heard from many Taiwanese people who went to China for organ transplants. These patients said that they went to the military hospitals for organ transplants or the operations were performed by military doctors in civilian hospitals.

Many organ transplant agents unequivocally claimed that one must look to the military hospital system for organs, and that civilian hospitals do not have the infrastructure to obtain organs. The statements of these agents agree with the findings in the Canadian investigators's report.

To resolve the crucial issues related to organ transplants in China, the following must goals must be set:

1. Resolve the unclear source for organ transplant problem;
2. Set up a system to register and assign organs for transplant;
3. All organ transplant documents must be available for inspection.

The focus on the unclear source of the organ harvesting is because they suspect that the military system harvests organs from Falun Gong practitioners and executed prisoners. The military medical system is independent from the Health Ministry. The two Canadian investigators provided some insights on how to resolve this problem:

1. The military in China should get out of the organ transplant business.
2. Organ harvesting in China from prisoners should cease.
3. The repression, imprisonment, and mistreatment of Falun Gong practitioners should stop.

However, all these problems are not under the control of Health Ministry or State Council.

In Taiwan or other countries, it is very important to set up a system to register and assign organs for transplant. It is clearly required by Taiwan's Organ Transplant Regulation. This is necessary to maintain ethical accountability and transparency of organ transplants. However, in China organ transplants are used as a tool for profit-making by medical institutions. There is even competition among hospitals to obtain organs.

If China's government truly wants to eliminate such a phenomenon, they should set up a system to register and assign organs for transplant. Even if it does not measure up to acceptable standards for organ transplantation, at least it must require all medical institutions to register the organ transplant cases. Nevertheless, it is important to set up such a system because many Chinese officials and medical professionals are not willing to give up the considerable profits they are making.

There is only one clause in the newly published Organ Transplant Regulation—clause 22 that requires a waiting list for patients in need of organ transplant and provides that Ministry of Health will make rules for fair and open organ assessment on the basis of medical needs.

If such rules are only a principle for hospitals to follow on a voluntary basis, then the rules are useless. A system to register and assign organs for transplant should be required, whether at national or local levels.

For the records about organ transplant, it is most important to preserve the information about the organ donor and recipient. There is no record keeping clause in the regulation at all, which means forced donors's remains are very likely to be destroyed.

There are several common phenomena among Taiwanese patients who went to China for organ transplant. First, many patients used fake names and addresses. Second, patients who did not survive the organ transplant would be cremated immediately and all the documents including death certificates and medical records would not mention organ transplant at all. Last, all the patients were required to pay cash and there were no official receipts.

Based on these, we suspect that all the organ transplant records in China's hospitals are destroyed; this is not good for either the patient's rights protection or investigation.

There are laws in China in many other fields but the CCP chose not to follow them. For example, the Chinese Constitution clearly states that its people enjoy freedom of religions and democracy, yet the Tiananmen Square Student Movement in 1989 was suppressed with tanks and guns. In addition, Falun Gong practitioners, members of underground Christian churches, Catholics and human rights advocates all have suffered tortures and persecution in China.

Mr. Huang said, "In summary, I don't expect such a regulation could resolve the problems related to organ transplants in China."
source : www.en.epochtimes.com