Philadelphia Personal Injury Attorney Blog - Pomerantz Perlberger & Lewis LLP

Governor Ed Rendell made his position clear. If the state legislature could not work out a deal to provide medical insurance to poor Pennsylvanians, he would allow the lapse of a $1 billion subsidy to help physicians pay for medical malpractice insurance. The earlier program, known as an abatement, was given to doctors in 2003 when medical malpractice insurance rates surged. The most recent program, including subsidies for working Pennsylvanians earning up to 200 percent the federal poverty level and grants to small business owners who already offer health insurance to their low-income workers. It also included a phase-out of the medical malpractice insurance abatement, which saves doctors from between $1500- 15,000 a year depending on their risk level. Although the program faces funding problems, Governor Rendell stuck to his guns, and the program lapsed over the angry complaints of physicians.

Some doctors claim that this turn of events will have a devastating effect on medical care in the state, as doctors will either retire or leave the state. However, a recent study published in the March 2008 Journal of Empirical Legal Studies shows that there is no significant correlation between the medical malpractice insurance rates and the population of doctors in a state or in the US population as a whole, exposing the threat of doctors to leave the state as just that, a threat intended to blackmail the population into backing down from forcing doctors to accept responsibility for their actions.

If you have suffered as a result of medical malpractice, do not be cowed. The only doctors that will be forced to leave the state or stop practicing as a result of medical malpractice suits are those doctors who should never have practiced in the first place. You have a legal right and an ethical responsibility to pursue action against negligent or incompetent doctors. Contact the experienced medical malpractice attorneys at Pomerantz, Perlberger, and Lewis, LLP today for a free case evaluation.

Recently, a couple of events have cast light on the dangers of cosmetic surgery, hopefully giving pause to those who are considering becoming one of the nearly 12 million people who have cosmetic procedures performed in this country every year. The more public of the two, the death of a popular Florida teen during breast augmentation surgery as a result of complications during surgery. The teen, who had been looking forward to senior prom, could have suffered malignant hyperthermia during surgery, in which the body temperature spikes to 110 degrees and the heart rate increases. Sometimes this condition can be reversed if properly diagnosed quickly after onset, but in this case the doctors failed to act, bringing up the possibility of medical malpractice.

A more widespread danger is shown by the results of a recent study, which showed that methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections can follow facelift procedures. These infections can lead to hospitalization for intravenous antibiotic therapy. The study encourages doctors to prescreen candidates vulnerable to infection before agreeing to perform facelift surgeries or other soft-tissue procedures.

As suggested in an earlier entry, perhaps the best way to avoid the danger of medical malpractice is to avoid optional surgeries. If you or someone you love has already suffered the negative consequences of medical malpractice, however, your next step should be to contact the experienced medical malpractice lawyers at Pomerantz, Perlberger, and Lewis, LLP today for a free initial consultation.

The family of Carol Gotbaum, the woman who died in police custody in the Phoenix, Arizona airport on September 28, has filed an $8 million wrongful death claim against the police department. Gotbaum was traveling from Tuscon to New York to enter an alcohol rehabilitation center when she missed her flight, was unable to be seated on a following flight, and became enraged. When police attempted to escort her from the airport, she grew angry, and the police restrained and arrested her. According to witnesses, the police did this without attempting to calm her, and, according to the suit, used “excessive and unreasonable force” in doing so. When they arrested her, police put her in a holding cell, where they checked on her shortly after she stopped screaming. She was unconscious, having asphyxiated herself while trying to escape from her restraints. Despite the efforts of responders, Gotbaum could not be revived.

The family does not dispute that police should have been involved, only that the police followed to follow both their own procedures and common guidelines of judgment and compassion that could have prevented Gotbaum’s death. The claim states Gotbaum was treated “as if she was a dangerous criminal, rather than as a sick, intoxicated and vulnerable person.”

Police are granted the right to use force at all levels--including deadly force--with the understanding that they will practice superior judgment in deciding when to exercise that right. If you have lost someone you love as a result of the tragic over-response of government officials, including police or other state apparatchiki, contact the experienced wrongful death attorneys at Pomerantz, Perlberger, and Lewis, LLP today for a free initial consultation.

The family of John Graziano, who was injured in an auto accident while a passenger in the car driven by Nick Hogan, filed suit against parents Hulk and Linda Hogan, who loaned him the car. Graziano has been in the hospital for nearly a year since the accident, in which he suffered traumatic brain injuries and may be on total life support for the rest of his life. Listed in the suit are a number of charges, including that the parents knew about their son’s history of dangerous driving, including modifications to his car, that Hulk purchased alcohol and watched his son drinking it on the day of the accident before allowing their son to go out for a drive.

If you have a loved one who was injured in an auto accident as a result of the careless behavior of someone else, whether a driver or someone who loaned a car to the driver, contact the experienced auto accident lawyers at Pomerantz, Perlberger, and Lewis, LLP today for a free initial consultation.

It is sad to note that the death of a 6-year-old girl whose intestines were pulled out by a pool drain means that the people responsible for her injury will have to pay less, but that is unfortunately the case. Although alternatives exist for designing pool drains that are not a danger to swimmers, many manufacturers continue to use older designs, and many pool owners have not upgraded to more recent designs. Although a new law signed in December bans the further sale of endangering drains, this cannot help her family. The danger from pool drains has been known for decades, but it was not until the death of the granddaughter of former Secreteary of State James Baker—who drowned when the suction from a pool drain pinned her under the water—that any action was taken.

But too late to help this little girl or her family. Nonetheless, people have been aware of this danger at least since 1998 when protective legislation was introduced in Florida to protect children from being sucked under by the pool drain, and they should be held fully responsible. However, since the case has changed from a severe injury case to a wrongful death suit, the manufacturers and owners of the pool will probably have to pay less for their reckless endangerment of children.

If you have lost someone as a result of a tragic argument, you need a wrongful death lawyer who will fight to achieve the full measure of compensation for your loss, regardless of its circumstances. Contact the experienced wrongful death attorneys at Pomerantz, Perlberger, and Lewis, LLP today for a free initial consultation.

The criminal charges against the operator of a small California nursing home show not only the level of neglect that elders sometimes suffer and how it can make their lives painful to the end, but also that neglect can occur at any nursing care facility. The home, Chateau Sabelle, located in San Mateo County, California, was a small six-bed facility, with a live-in caretaker, ostensibly provides personal round-the-clock care to nonambulatory patients.

However, one of its residents was brought to an area hospital with advanced bed sores and a fist-sized ulcer on his lower back. A week later, the man died as a result of cardiac disease at the age of 86.

The primary caretaker was named personally on criminal charges of causing pain to an elderly person and causing great bodily injury to an elderly person or dependent person over the age of 70. She was arrested and is being held in custody in lieu of $150,000 bail. She faces 11 years in prison if found guilty of the charges, but these years cannot abate the pain her patient faced through the end of his life.

The common assumption about nursing homes is that smaller is better, that patients receive better care in more intimate settings, but this case shows that is not always true. Unfortunately, elders can suffer painful neglect or abuse in any setting. If you have a loved one who has suffered as a result of nursing home neglect or abuse, contact the experienced nursing home abuse lawyers at Pomerantz, Perlberger, and Lewis, LLP today to set up a free initial consultation.

Yesterday, I wrote about a man whose heart was cooked while he was undergoing “routine” bypass surgery following a minor heart attack, following which he needed a heart transplant and significant medication. The jury decided that medical malpractice was only 0.01 % responsible for the man’s injury, but perhaps it was really much higher.

The question is: was the surgery even necessary? Charles Inlander, president of the consumer group, People’s Medical society, points out, “If coronary bypass surgery cost $500, you can bet doctors wouldn’t be doing so many of them.” However, since bypasses cost between $39,000 and $123,000, with the doctor earning $5,000 to $20,000, they have become a very common procedure. But are they really as necessary as some doctors say?

Although cases vary, for many people, there are far less invasive options available that can sometimes yield equally good results. In the case of a heart bypass, some people can achieve excellent results by making simple lifestyle changes, such as changing to a low-fat diet, increasing exercise, managing stress, and taking beta-blockers.

The argument is not that you should never have surgery, but you should always make sure you understand your options.

First, get a second opinion from a relevant specialist with different training, one not associated with the same hospital or practice as the first opinion. Then, make sure you ask these questions to both doctors:

· What are the risks of declining or postponing the surgery?

· Are there nonsurgical or less aggressive surgical options? How do the risks compare?

· How likely is it that this surgery will fail, the condition will recur, or that I will suffer complications of the surgery?

If you do this, hopefully you can avoid unnecessary surgeries and reduce your risk of suffering as a result of a surgical error. But if it’s too late, and you or a loved one has already suffered because of the negligence of a doctor or surgeon, contact the experienced medical malpractice lawyers at Pomerantz, Perlberger, and Lewis, LLP today for a free initial consultation.

On March 10, a Washington State jury awarded $ 40 million to a man whose heart was destroyed during a routine operation. The man went to one of the top cardiac care hospitals in the Pacific Northwest for bypass surgery following a small heart attack. However, doctors at the hospital used a faulty cable to attach the catheter, and, even worse, a faulty line of computer code caused the catheter to overheat, reaching almost 500 degrees Fahrenheit before it melted. In the process, the man’s heart was cooked from the inside, and died. He was kept on a machine that circulated his blood until he could receive a heart transplant. As a result of the transplant, he now must take numerous drugs, which cause cancer and kidney failure.

The manufacturer had agreed to pay “reasonable” damages to the man, but not as much as the $38 million his lawyer requested, so the dispute went to court, where the jury awarded $2 million more than the requested amount. The damages were divided between the catheter manufacturer, who is responsible for 99.99 % for its defective product, and the hospital, responsible for 0.01 % or $4000 for its medical malpractice.

If you or a loved one has suffered grave injury as a result of the careless practices of a doctor or faulty medical equipment, contact the experienced medical malpractice lawyers at Pomerantz, Perlberger, and Lewis, LLP for a free initial consultation.

A doctor has developed a brand-new treatment to combat phantom pains experienced by people who lost their limbs as a result of auto accidents, military action, construction accidents or other causes: mirror therapy. For these patients, a mirror is used to give patients the visual impression that their absent limbs are still present.

In mirror therapy, the patient is asked seated on a flat surface and move the remaining leg in front of a mirror, creating the impression that two legs are moving together. In a study, all patients utilizing mirror therapy saw significant decreases in the occurrence of their phantom pain, whereas patients asked to visualize their phantom limbs usually experienced an increase in pain. But when patients moved to mirror therapy, 90 % of them saw improvement.

Unfortunately, although the treatment can remove phantom pain, it cannot return the lost limb, or the attendant cost of living without your limb. But a serious injury lawyer from Pomerantz, Perlberger, and Lewis, LLP, can help you receive payment for damages. Contact us today for a free initial consultation.

On Sunday, a semi truck carrying as many as 16 million bees flipped over as it was heading up the on ramp to highway 99 in Sacramento, California. When the truck flipped, the hives broke open and bees swarmed out, attacking emergency response crews and passing motorists. The truck, which carried 440 hives, flipped most likely due to a speed inappropriate to the load distribution of its cargo. The truck accident closed the on ramp for five hours.

The bees were being transported from Sacramento’s Central Valley, where they had been pollinating almond trees, to Yakima, Washington, where they would pollinate other food crops. The bee hives were valued at $80,000 before, and it is unknown how many of them died in the crash. However, local apiculturists (beekeepers) were able to corral most of the survivors back into their hives.

Dennis and Kimberly Quaid have long been silent about the medical malpractice that nearly killed their twin children. The Quaids, who tried for many years to have children, suffering through five miscarriages before turning to medical science and utilizing a surrogate to bear their children. But they learned that what medicine gives, it can so easily take away, and years of hard work can be undone as a result of simple human error.

In the case of the Quaids, their newborns, who returned to Cedars-Sinai Hospital in Los Angeles shortly after delivery because they showed signs of a hospital-acquired staph infection, it was a result of a prescription error. The children were supposed to be given a pediatric anti-clotting medication, Hep-lock, to help keep their antibiotic IV lines clear, but instead they were given an adult dose of the medication, Heparin, 1000 times stronger. As a result, their blood thinned perilously, and any prick of the needle, such as those done for blood samples, bled ceaselessly.

When doctors discovered the mistake, which happened twice, not once, over the eight-hour period the twins were in the hospital, they administered an antidote to Heparin and worked to control the bleeding. Although the children managed to survive the incident, many others have not been so lucky, including three of six children given the same wrong dosage just a month before.

The Quaids have not filed a medical malpractice suit against the hospital, but they have filed a defective pharmaceutical suit against Baxter International. Why? According to the Quaids, the hospital acknowledged its mistake and immediately put new protocols into effect to prevent its reoccurrence. On the other hand, Baxter International has refused to acknowledge that its product, commonly mistaken by doctors and nurses, according to US Pharmacopeia, a non-profit public health group that compiles information on medical errors, was poorly labeled.

The Quaids’ action is exemplary, showing us the need and purpose of medical malpractice suits. The goal is not only to ensure that victims do not suffer excessively or needlessly, but to force doctors, nurses, hospitals, and drug companies to acknowledge and rectify their mistakes. If you or someone you love has suffered as a result of medical malpractice, you have not only the right, but the responsibility to pursue legal action to protect others from suffering. Please contact the experienced medical malpractice lawyers at Pomerantz, Perlberger, and Lewis, LLP today to set up a free initial consultation.

One aspect of lawsuits many people do not understand is the concept of contributory vs. comparative negligence. Pennsylvania is a state that follows a modified comparative negligence system, following a 51 % rule. This means that if you are 50 % or less at fault for your injury, you can still recover damages. In contrast, in a state following a contributory negligence rule, you cannot recover damages if you are even 1 % at fault for your injury.

Consider a scenario in which you are driving on the road, perhaps following a bit too close to the car in front of you. Traffic stops suddenly, and you hit the brakes. Even though you were following closer than recommended, slamming your foot on the brakes would normally stop you in plenty of time, but today the road is covered with gravel spilled by the road crew working on the shoulder of the highway, and your car slams into the car in front of you, injuring you and damaging your car. Although you were following too close, and therefore the auto accident is partially your fault, you can still file a suit against the company whose crew spilled the gravel to recover part of your damages.

Remember, that just because a circumstance is partially your fault, there is no reason why you should bear all the consequences. In Pennsylvania, it’s the law that everyone pays for their share of responsibility. If you or someone you love has been injured in an accident, contact the experienced auto accident lawyers at Pommerantz, Perlberger, and Lewis, LLP today for a free initial consultation.

In a wrongful death suit filed in Florida against Chiquita Brands International, Inc, in Florida, relatives of five missionaries slain by the FARC faction in Columbia in the 1990s. Chiquita has admitted that it paid protection money to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia, so the families of the five missionaries who were kidnapped, held for ransom, and eventually allegedly murdered, say that Chiquita should pay because it “substantially aided FARC’s acts of terrorism.”

In defense, Chiquita said its “actions were always motivated to protect the lives of [its] employees and their families,” according to a spokesman. The spokesman added, “We are contensting the suits vigorously and believe we have a strong defense.” Chiquita has acknowledged that the payments were illegal because FARC is on the government’s list of terrorist organizations, and has agreed to pay a $25 million fine to the Justice Department as a result of criminal charges.

If you have lost a loved one as a result of what you consider to be the negligence or deliberate misconduct of another, contact the experienced wrongful death lawyers at Pomerantz, Perlberger, and Lewis, LLP for a free initial consultation.

A girl whose mother believed was being killed by the medical treatment she received for lupus, died on Tuesday. Lupus is a disease in which the immune system mistakenly attacks the body’s organs, from the skin to the joints to the organs. The 15-year-old girl had been diagnosed with the disease in 2001 and immediately began a course of treatment recommended by doctors at the Connecticut Children’s Medical Center. However, the girl’s attacks grew more frequent and unpredictable, and she was transferred to Yale-New Haven Children’s Hospital, where doctors determined her kidneys had failed. The doctors blamed the disease, but the mother blamed the medication. Although the girl was put on a different medication, her condition continued to worsen, and when the mother requested that another treatment be tried, doctors contacted the Connecticut Department of Children and Families to have the mother charged with medical neglect. Although the mother was not charged, the girl was moved to Children’s Hospital Boston for treatment. When the mother disputed treatment again, the girl was put in her grandfather’s custody and treatment was continued.

The girl died Tuesday morning, most likely of cardiac arrest caused by sepsis, although an autopsy has not yet been performed. It is impossible to say yet in this case whether the mother’s fears were accurate, and this is an extreme case of medical malpractice, or whether the deadly disease simply took its course, the case shows the extreme power doctors can wield over life and death, sometimes for good, and sometimes for ill.

If you believe you or a loved one has suffered as a result of a doctor’s negligent application of this power, contact the experienced medical malpractice lawyers at the law firm of Pomerantz, Perlberger, and Lews, LLP today for a free initial consultation.

Of the 24 municipalities whose drinking water contained traces of pharmaceuticals, Philadelphia contains by far the most-- 56 different pharmaceuticals, including: amoxicilin(antibiotic), azithromycin (antibiotic), carbamazepine (anticonvulsant and mood stabilizer), diclofenac (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAID)), prednisone (steroid), and tetracycline (antibiotic). These drugs exist in the level of parts per billion, very small trace amounts, but no one knows what the long-term consequences of exposure to this level of drugs will be over time. But some of these drugs have potentially very serious side effects. Tetracycline can lead to a deep discoloration of the teeth and poor skeletal development when given to children or pregnant women. It can also lead to a number of complications in people with impaired kidney function. Diclofenac is an NSAID like the troubled Vioxx, and may have similar effects, including heart failure and iscemic stroke. Carbamazepine can cause skin necrolysis (death), and Stevens-Johnsons syndrome, a body-wide allergic reaction, especially among people of chinese ancestry, who are more likely to have a gene making them more susceptible to the side effects.

What is the cause of the presence of drugs in the water? The main pathway suspected for the drugs to enter the water system is through the urine of people taking the drug. When drugs are injested, only part of the medicine is absorbed by the body, the rest being passed through in urine and feces. Since there is no standard for the level of these chemicals that can be present in water, they are generally not tested for, nor are they removed.

There are two groups of people responsible for the contamination of our water with these pharmaceutical drugs. One is the pharmaceutical industry, which uses their drugs as a blunt instrument, not paying attention to the actual dosage absorbed by the patient, but designing defective pills that contain more than enough medication to create the desired effect. The other group responsible is doctors, whose most common form of medical malpractice is overmedication. This is so common, in fact, it is rarely labeled as such, but, like the use of antipsychotics in nursing homes, continues to grow as doctors become the pushers for the pharmaceutical industry.

If you believe you have been exposed to a dangerous level of undesired prescription medication as a result of this situation, contact the experienced lawyers at Pomerantz, Perlberger, and Lewis, LLP today for a free initial consultation.

As nursing home administrators have sought ways to care for more patients with less staff, they have increasingly turned to antipsychotic drugs as a cost-effective solution. The industry has moved toward larger institutions with more residents, trying to increase efficiency by increasing the number of residents without increasing the number of staff members. Nursing home administrators have found that using antipsychotic drugs to calm and quiet "unruly" patients not only works, but is profitable, and therefore the practice has spread. Around 30% of all nursing home residents have been placed on antipsychotic drugs, which includes about 21% of non-psychotic patients.

This is not only due to the desires of nursing-home administrators to increase profits. They cannot do this alone. Their allies in this strategy include doctors, who commonly prescribe antipsychotics Risperdal and Seroquel for off-lable uses. Although not approved for these uses, doctors prescribe the drugs for: confusion, memory loss, depression, and feelings of isolation, many of which are common among nursing home residents.

In addition, Medicaid and other federal programs will reimburse nursing home for drugs, often without questioning the need for the prescription. This is a result of the combined pressure of doctors' organizations and pharmaceutical manufacturers who want to ensure that drug revenues continue to increase.

If you have loved ones in a nursing home, make sure to carefully scrutinize their medications. Talk to the prescribing doctor to find out why the drug is necessary. If you suspect that your loved one is being placed on medication just to keep them quiet, remove them from the home and contact the experienced nursing home abuse attorneys at Pomerantz, Perlberger, and Lewis, LLP today for a free initial consultation.

As the largest state remaining in the hotly-contested Democratic Primary race, the nation's eyes have turned to Pennsylvania, considered by many to be as much a bellwether state as its neighbor Ohio. Whether you are a Democrat still considering which candidate to back, a Republican gearing up for the general election, or an independent observing the party fracas from afar, the results of the election are too important to not be informed. It seems appropriate, then, to focus on a few issues related to our practice as presented by the candidates. Since I have been writing about medical malpractice, it seems as good a place to start as any. This is intended to be merely informative, not an endorsement of any candidate, so provided is the language on medical malpractice from each candidate's statement the issue of health care.

• Clinton, Hillary: No language on medical malpractice or tort reform.
• McCain, John: "Pass tort reform to eliminate frivolous lawsuits and excessive damage awards. Provide a safe harbor for doctors that follow clinical guidelines and adhere to patient safety protocols."
• Obama, Barack: "Reforming medical malpractice while preserving patient rights. Increasing medical malpractice insurance rates are making it harder for doctors to practice medicine and raising the costs of health care for everyone. Barack Obama will strengthen antitrust laws to prevent insurers from overcharging physicians for their malpractice insurance. Obama will also promote new models for addressing physician errors that improveme patient safety, strengthen the doctor-patient relationship, and reduce the need for malpractice suits."

If you or someone you love has been hurt by the negligence of a doctor, you know how important the issue of medical malpractice is to ensuring quality care for you and your family. It is important to let politicians at every level know how much this issue means to you, and it is important to make sure that appropriate actions are taken following a doctor's mistake. Please contact the experienced medical malpractice lawyers at Pomerantz, Perlberger, and Lewis, LLP today for a free initial consultation.

In Montgomery County, PA, northeast of Philadelphia, doctors and lawyers are working together to streamline the process for resolving medical malpractice claims. Members of the Montgomery County bar association along with the Abington Memorial Hospital have launched a new program to avoid taking the disputes to court. Following a pattern being implemented by a number of suburban and rural counties across the country, the goal is to prevent what is sometimes termed the culture of blame surrounding medical malpractice cases. The goal is to resolve the problems with negotiation, without mutual recrimination and bitterness.

Proponents of the program also say that the current process is exhausting of physical, emotional, and financial resources. Instead of necessitating trials, which often include putting emotionally traumatized victims on the witness stand, the new system proposes a two-step approach to resolving problems.

First, doctors will explain to patients exactly what happened to them. Since many people file medical malpractice claims to get straight and truthful answers from an often close-mouthed doctor, this step may prevent many claims from ever being filed. However, if necessary, patients who feel they have been wronged, the process moves to a mediation step. In this step, attorneys from both sides will sit down and determine an outcome of the situation that is acceptable to both patient and doctor. If mediation fails to reach a mutually agreeable solution, a claim can still be filed with the court.

To the extent that this process may work to reduce the stress for people who have already undergone the trauma of a failed surgery, this seems a good thing, and, if successful, we might all look forward to its spread.

The process, however, still requires a lawyer to act as advocate for the injured party. If you have suffered as a result of the negligence of a doctor, contact the experienced medical malpractice lawyers at Pomerantz, Perlberger, and Lewis, LLP today for a free initial consultation.

A nursing home is supposed to be a safe place, where residents are cared for and given a high level of preventive care and treatment for their conditions. The US Department of Health and Human Services inspects each nursing home to make sure that residents have the care and supervision they need to stay healthy and avoid dangerous accidents or acute medical conditions. However, these inspections are often toothless, and ineffective in protecting the elderly and infirm who rely on nursing homes for their lives.

Consider, for example, the case of a northern New York nursing home, Eden Park, in Glens Falls. An inspection showed that the facility was not equipped and maintained to safely care for its residents. However, it continued to operate with conditions that subsequent inspections showed had, if anything, grown worse. With only six aides to staff a floor of 40 residents, many of the residents were neglected for hours, their complaints dismissed. Patients with bronchitis sit alone in rooms huddled under blankets, shivering, the thermostat set to 69 degrees while the cold winter wind blows outside.

Now it turns out that the supposed operator of the nursing home was never a legal entity licensed by the state. How is a company allowed to operate a health care facility without being a legal entity? If it is not a legal entity, what is it? Why would anyone try to operate a nursing home under such a title?

The answer is that the supposed corporation is a sham and a shadow-box, designed to deflect liability of the parent company to whom the profits are being channeled. The parent company for this particular nursing home, under the vague name National Health Care Associates, Inc, has been revealed to own 17 nursing homes across the states of New York and Connecticut.

However, this company is not alone. Companies of this type operate in every state in the union, even Pennsylvania. With the inefficiency of state and federal agencies that are supposed to be checking up on these facilities, the only way to protect our elderly against nursing home abuse and neglect is by maintaining a culture of vigilance, selecting a nursing home carefully, and punishing those who endanger people for profit.

If you know someone who has suffered as a result of abuse or neglect at a nursing care facility, contact the lawyers at Pomerantz, Perlberger, and Lewis, LLP, today for a free initial consultation.

In implementing the 2005 Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005, which was supported by the American Medical Association (AMA), the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality has proposed rules that would allow doctors to report mistakes and near-mistakes in medical procedures to what are known as Patient Safety Organization (PSOs). The goal of the PSOs would be to reduce medical malpractice by collecting errors and allowing the medical community to look at them to determine whatever trends might be evident from the data.

The hope of the AMA is that this legislation will "transform the current culture of blame and punishment into one of open communication and prevention." Although this legislation may do much in terms of preventing common procedural errors and preventing the sharing of common mistakes, the law is still far short of what is necessary to protect patients from doctors with a personal record of dangerous errors or sloppy practices. In order to do this, doctors who have settled or received a verdict against them in a medical malpractice trial should be forced to report their records in a way that would allow patients to pick their doctors armed with knowledge. This is, in fact, the only way a patient might be said to have given "informed consent" in any real sense of the term.

This sort of openness, one that has been fought by the AMA for years, is actually being practiced in Canada. Beginning June 1, 2009, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario will post malpractice judgments and settlements by all doctors under its purview. The doctors will have to report the judgments or settlements as a condition of renewing their license.

Until the AMA is prepared to show this level of openness, it is hard to believe that they truly have the patient's best interests at heart.

If you or a loved one has suffered as a result of the negligence or errors of a doctor, contact the medical malpractice attorneys at Pomerantz, Perlberger, & Lewis, LLP today for a free initial consultation.

Due to the unsafe practices of a Las Vegas clinic, as many as 40,000 people may have been exposed to hepatitis C and/or HIV. The clinic was re-using single-use vials of anesthesia, leading to a spread of the disease from patient to patient. In January and February, six people who had treatment at the clinic have contracted the disease, leading officials to investigate the practices of the doctors and nurses, finding that the practice of re-using single-dose vials was common. Although the clinic has now been shut down by the city, it is too late for the 40,000 individuals, as well as their families who have also been exposed as a result of this grievous instance of medical malpractice.

Once a person contracts Hepatitis C, they are infected for life, and for some people this can lead to cirrhosis of the liver and ultimately liver failure. With the rise of anti-biotic resistant bacteria, hospital infections are likely to become more common, and we certainly do not need the poor practices of doctors and nurses to spread viral infections as well. If you or someone you love has suffered a dangerous infection as the result of a doctor's negligence, contact the experienced medical malpractice lawyers at Pomerantz, Perlberger, and Lewis, LLP today for a free initial consultation.