Ezra Klein at the Washington Post just wrote an interesting piece on rising health care costs which is posted here.  A couple highlights are:

On Sunday, I reported on new data from the International Federation of Health Plans showing that health-care prices are far higher in the United States than anywhere else. An MRI, for instance, costs $1,080 here, but only $280 in France. The main reason, I reported, was that in other countries, the government sets the price and providers take it or leave it.

But some readers thought I missed the boat with that explanation. So let’s go through some of the objections

One common complaint was that I omitted any mention of the medical malpractice system and administrative   costs. As one reader wrote, ”you fail to address that more bureaucracy, more paperwork and persistent unchecked liability are at the root of price hikes.”

Let’s start with medical malpractice. Its direct costs — premiums, payouts, legal fees, etc. — amount to about one-half of 1 percent of total U.S. health-care spending. It’s barely a rounding error.

In October 2009, in response to a request from Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), the Congressional Budget Office took a careful look at the evidence on defensive medicine and concluded that aggressive reforms to the medical malpractice system “would reduce total national health care spending by about 0.5 percent.”

*                                                             *                                                             *

Absent in this conversation, however, is the fact that many medical malpractice lawsuits aren’t frivolous, and the United States actually has a higher rate of medical errors than other countries. One of the most common medical errors occurs when surgeons leave a “foreign body” — a sponge, for instance — inside a patient. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, such errors are more frequent in the United States than in any other developed country, except Switzerland and New Zealand.

Overall this is an interesting article on an important topic particularly with the Affordable Health Care Act headed to the Supreme Court this spring.  What are your thoughts on the reasons behind rising health care costs?

Last summer I wrote about the dangers of judicial activism (which is normally an insult lobbed at any jurist who finds in favor of an individual over a corporation) and how the conservative judges who use it undermine the founding principles of our country.  It’s a big deal.  Today the Ohio Supreme Court came to the defense of the insurance industry and, in the process, disregarded the law as it was and had been for a long time. 

The case is called Havel v. Villa St. Joseph it’s about a provision in a tort reform statute (thanks, General Assembly) which requires compensatory and punitive damages to be bifurcated (divided) for purposes of a trial.  I know that does not sound like much, but it is; here is how.   When an innocent person is injured by the negligence of another person (think: driver runs stop light) the innocent person is of course entitled to money for medical bills, lost wages, and pain and suffering.  Those are compensatory damages and insurance companies pay those verdicts.  When an innocent person is injured by the careless and wanton actions of another person (think: drunk driver) then that innocent person is permitted to ask a jury for punitive damages in addition to compensatory damages.  Punitive damages exist as punishment–as a means to deter whatever bad behavior caused the problem.  Also, insurance companies do not have to pay for punitive damages 

Under the law as it has been (forever), the judge got to decide whether a jury could hear both the compensatory and punitive damage claims together or whether they should be bifurcated.  Lots of times the judge would let the jury hear both at the same time.  Insurance companies did not like because juries tend to award more money for compensatory damages to people who are injured through wanton and careless actions that so the General Assembly re-wrote the law requiring that there be separate trials.  Now, the innocent person has to pay for two trials and, in the one where the insurance company has to pay the verdict, the jury does not get to hear about what a bad actor the defendant was in causing the injuries. 

In the end, this was a big win for the insurance companies who are experts at taking and investing your premiums and not quite so good (understatement) at paying the claims they are required to pay and another loss for the individuals and consumers of this state.

The Louisville Courier-Journal reported on Monday that a Jefferson County, Kentucky, Circuit Court jury awarded $8 million in damages to the estate of a nursing home resident. The case was based on allegations that the resident, a retired surgeon in his mid-eighties, was found with broken legs while living at the facility, and died two months later.

The estate of the former patient argued that he was improperly transferred from a chair to his bed by the staff, resulting in the fractures, and that the facility attempted to cover up the injuries. The facility, the estate argued, put the resident back into bed following the incident, like it never it happened.

The estate alleged that the facility ordered the staff to change the medical record, in order to provide a cover up. The resident, who could not talk because of a previous stroke, was unable to tell his family about the fractures.

The nursing home denied that they tried to cover anything up and claim that they were not aware of the cause of the fractures. They noted that the resident suffered from osteoporosis.

Following a two week trial, the jury found the defendant facility liable and awarded $2 million for pain and suffering, $1 million for violating the state nursing home statute and $5 million in punitive damages.

Unfortunately, instances of nursing home abuse and neglect occur far too often, all over the country. Oftentimes residents are injured because the corporations that own the nursing facilities do not provide appropriate levels of staffing and/or training.

If you have been injured in a nursing home or would like to discuss a loved one’s nursing home injuries, please contact our personal injury professionals for a free consultation.

“Do whatever you want to me! Just don’t take away my cell phone!!”

 Doesn’t this sentence describe our collective attachment and sentiment today toward these devices?  It’s hard to deny that The Cell Phone has become so weaved into our daily—even hourly or “by the minute”–existence that an increasingly overwhelming majority of us have difficulty remembering how we functioned without it.

And it’s hard to deny that increasing numbers of us are using this device while we’re driving.

And up to now, different states, regions and municipalities have adopted different regulations ranging from restrictions on cell phone texting to outright bans on hand-held cell phone use.

But now, a federal agency is calling for the game to change nationwide. The Associated Press reports in a recent article that The National Transportation Safety Board has recently recommended that all states impose total bans on all cell phone use while driving, including the use of hands-free cell phones. This recommendation is prompted by recent deadly crashes attributable in whole or part to cell phone use, and increasingly alarming statistics from surveys about such use in cars nationwide.

A recent survey conducted by The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration shows that at any given moment last year on America’s streets and highways, nearly one in every 100 car drivers was texting, emailing, surfing the Web or otherwise using a hand-held electronic device—and those activities were up 50 percent over the previous year.

 This survey also shows that about two out of 10 American drivers overall – and half of drivers between 21 and 24 – say they’ve texted messages or emailed from the driver’s seat.

However, the survey found that many drivers don’t think it’s dangerous when they do it – only when others do.

Does the game need changing? Is the increased convenience and productivity that cell phone use gives us behind the wheel worth the increased risk of potential calamity we could cause? Should all cell phone use while driving be against the law? Should just hand-held cell phone use be illegal? Or should the law only prohibit cell-phone texting by drivers? What are your thoughts? It may very well be that either you or your elected representatives will be asked to vote on these questions in the not too distant future.

The holiday season is meant to be full of cheer and merriment.  However, there are several unique safety concerns presented by the holiday season.  Previously, this blog has made its readers aware of the dangers of  “drowsy drivers” during the holidays.  There is however another danger that hits a little closer to home.  According to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission more than 141 serious fires and hot-oil burns have been reported in the United States from turkey fryer use over the last decade.  In fact, Thanksgiving is the leading day for cooking fires, with three times as many as on an average day, according to the National Fire Protection Association.  The burns associated with hot oil can be very severe, and in some cases be life threatening.

What can cooks do to reduce the risks associated with deep frying a turkey?  The Loyola University Medical Center in Maywood gave the following tips.

• Use new sealed fryers placed in open areas.
• Wear protective clothing and eyewear.
• Avoid overfilling fryers with oil.
• Replace and remove food items from the oil slowly.
• Be mindful of marinades and turkey preparations that introduces water into the hot oil, a dangerous combination,
• Make sure to fully thaw the turkey before placing into the frying oil.

As you prepare for the upcoming holidays, please keep these safety tips in mind so that you may have a happy and enjoyable season.

Election Day is upon us and I urge you to vote on November 8th or early vote and to vote NO on Issue 2. If you would like to vote early you may do so this week at your local Board of Elections: We Are Ohio – Action.

Issue 2 is the referendum on Senate Bill 5 passed by the Ohio General Assembly. The referendum resulted from a huge grass roots effort to have the Bill passed on by the voters of Ohio before becoming law. On its face, Senate Bill 5 drastically reduced the rights of public employees including firefighters, police and teachers to bargain about the terms and conditions of their employment. Even the right to bargain over non-economic issues such as classroom size for teachers and protection equipment for firefighters was gutted by the bill.

It is critical that we vote on Election Day. While the most recent polling shows we are gaining momentum ( 25-point lead for Issue 2 opponents is huge, but off-year referendums can be unpredictable, says elections expert | cleveland.com) the key will be turnout. Every vote will be important!

Let’s send a clear message to the legislature and the governor. Please join me in supporting working class families and the middle class in Ohio and vote No on Issue Two.

The U.S. FDA has announced that use of the popular anti-diabetic drug Actos (pioglitazone HCI) for greater than one year may be associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer. The announcement was based on an investigation of the safety of the drug in a study of more than 190,000 people. A study from France has also indicated the link, causing France and Germany to pull the drug from market. While the U.S. FDA has issued warnings regarding the drugs risks, it remains in use in the United States.

Studies indicate that there is a 40% increased risk of bladder cancer in people who took the drug for more than one year, as compared with those who never took it. Actos, used to manage people with Type 2 diabetes, is made by Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America Inc.

Possible symptoms of bladder cancer can include:
• Abdominal pain
• Blood in the urine
• Painful urination
• Urinary frequency
• Urinary urgency
• Urine leakage (incontinence)

If you have taken Actos and are concerned of the risks, contact your physician for an evaluation of your diabetes and appropriate medical management. If you have developed bladder cancer following the use of Actos, or have questions about the risks of this drug, contact our office for an evaluation of your legal rights.

Our law firm is committed to providing you information regarding defective products, including pharmaceuticals. Our person injury attorneys are available for a free initial consultation to explain your legal rights.

Lawsuit lottery.  Jackpot Justice.  Runaway juries who award astronomical verdicts to the clients of ambulance chasing lawyers who have unfairly (and frivolously) sued a good doctor over a bad (and unavoidable) result.  This is the narrative that the American Medical Association, in conjunction with conservative political messaging, has convinced the American public to be true.  Particularly in a struggling economy, malpractice lawyer and their clients are demonized as primary drivers behind the rising cost of health care.  The facts, though, undermine what sounds like a good story.

The cost of the entire medical liability system–which means payments, awards, litigation costs, attorney fees, expert witnesses, etc.–is less than six tenths of one percentof the overall cost of health care in this county.  So much for medical malpractice as a driver of escalating health care costs.

The Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit citizens™ advocacy group Public Citizen published an extensive review of the National Practitioner Data Bank data.  Among the organization™s findings was that health care spending rose 90 percent between 2000 and 2010 while medical malpractice payments decreased almost 12 percent.  So actual payments to victims of malpractice are seeing less and less compensation.

In spite of this data that malpractice costs are historically low while actual instances of malpractice continue to increase, doctors are winning more than half of cases that independent experts conclude they should lose and nearly one hundred percent of cases where the independents experts believe there is no liability. 

The net effect is that doctors are shielded from responsibility for their ever-increasing rate of negligence by a pool of potential jurors seek to punish the innocent victim.  So who are the real winners of the so-called “lawsuit lottery”?

At Gallon, Takacs, Boissoneault & Schaffer, Co., LPA, our mission dedicates us to providing legal assistance to working men and women, individuals with disabilities, and labor organizations. We are very proud of that tradition.

Now, I’m happy to announce that the firm is providing legal representation to veterans of our military who have physical or emotional impairments as a result of their service to our country.

I have received accreditation by the Veterans Administration General Counsel to represent veterans and their families before the agency and we are now privileged extend our tradition of quality legal representation to the proud and deserving men and women of our military who have had the misfortune of encountering physical or emotional injuries as a result of their service to and/or defense of our nation.

If you are a veteran who needs help receiving the compensation to which you are rightfully entitled as a consequence of your service, please feel free to contact us. We look forward to the opportunity for us to be of “service” to you.

Remember the old saw of defensive driving “watch out for the other guy”? Presumably it was meant to refer to the potential errant/unpredictable driving of others giving rise to the need for us to be all that more attentive. But it also should call to our attention the financial wherewithal–or lack thereof–of other people out on the road with us.

A recent article in USA Today points to statistics indicating that one in seven drivers is now uninsured, and that number is growing. And the ratio of uninsured drivers  is frighteningly higher in a number of states.  For example, it is estimated in Mississippi that the percentage of uninsured drivers in the state has already reached 28%!

This page has in past posts referenced the growing problem of uninsured drivers, as well as the tremendous benefit, particularly relative to the low additional cost, of uninsured/underinsured motorists coverage. If you have any doubt in your mind as to whether you are carrying this coverage, or any questions about the coverage  and amounts you do have, today might be a good time to contact your insurance agent–it appears that tomorrow the need for this coverage will be even greater.