United States v. Arizona

The Supreme Court heard argument on Arizona's controversial law that is intended to target illegal aliens.  The United States sued Arizona claiming that the US Government was the sole authority regarding immigration law and enforcement.

Apparently Chief Justice Roberts aggressively questioned the government's lawyer.  Roberts characterized the law as merely information gathering by the state.

However, because the law requires a person suspected of being illegal to prove his or her citizenship status prior to the police releasing them, a US citizen who walks their dog at night without the necessary identification could spend the night in jail.  Balancing the rights of those legally in the country with those who are not consumed much of the argument.  Justice Scalia expressed his view that we should simply deport "these people."

For more:  http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/26/opinion/arizona-v-united-states.html?_r=1

by Michael Quinn, Esq.

Unlimited Spending By Corporations and Unions - Bad For Democracy

In 2010 the United States Supreme Court concluded that the Congressional ban on unlimited spending by special interest groups was unconstitutional.  Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 08-205 (2010), 558 U.S. ––––, 130 S.Ct. 876 (January 21, 2010.  


We have seen some of the effects of this in the Republican primaries where a single rich individual or corporation can effectively continue to prop up a candidate when the public has lost interest in that candidate.  It allows for vicious attack ads that no candidate has to take responsibility for and it effectively allows one candidate to spend disproportionately to other candidates.


The real danger from this decision comes in local, state and judicial elections.  In these smaller elections a candidate who angers a large corporation or union in his or her district may find a well financed attack machine that is spending out of proportion to the candidates themselves.  The effect is likely to result in the district having representatives who rubber stamp anything the corporation or union wants.  This is not good for democracy because it gives a disproportionate voice to the person, union or corporation that has the money to drown out other voices.  


You will hear discussions of this during the 2012 Presidential race.  The place to look for its real effect is at the local and state level.


by Michael Quinn, Esq,

Some Hospitals Using Collection Agencies to Register Patients

Accretive Health, a collection and management company has contracts with struggling hospitals around the country to assist with the collection of hospital bills.  In some cases the registration and billing departments of some hospitals have been turned over to collection agencies.  In an investigation in Minnesota, for example, it is claimed some patients have been required to pay prior to receiving medical services.

 Accretive reported net income of $29.2 million dollars last year up 130%.

There have been complaints by the medical  staff at hospitals where these techniques are being employed, that patients are failing to seek life saving procedures because of these collection techniques.

This raises more questions about what will happen if the new health care law is struck down.  Many of the people who are prey to these collection agencies lack health insurance.  Without a health care plan the numbers of people subjected to these strong-are tactics will only increase.   For more go the Bloomberg News.

awayne3@bloomberg.net

by Michael Quinn, Esq.

Antibiotics in Animals: The Human Impact

The FDA has proposed a rule change regarding the use of antibiotics in animal feed and water.  For 35 years the FDA has been working with farmers who raise chickens, pork and beef to limit the use of antibiotics in otherwise healthy animals.  Currently 80% of all antibiotics sold in the United States is used in animal feed and water, almost all for healthy animals.  The rule change would simply require a prescription for the use of antibiotics in animals.

The concern with the excessive use of antibiotics is the development of resistant strains of bacteria that cause disease in humans.  Each year 99,000 humans die from hospital-acquired infections.  In an earlier post I  discussed MRSA one of the most wide spread of the super-bugs.   For more information go to www.fda.gov and  fda.gov/downloads/AnimalVeterinary/SafetyHealth/AntimicrobialResistance

by Michael Quinn, Esq.

For-Profit Hospitals

The Westerly Hospital has announced that a company out of New Jersey that turns financially troubled hospitals into for-profit hospitals is interested in purchasing Westerly Hospital.  Westerly Hospital which ended the 2011 financial year $5.7 million dollars in the red certainly meets that criteria.  The hospital is still being run as an independent hospital under receivership. For-profit hospitals generally do not have emergency rooms and will not accept medicaid, insurance for the poor.  That means L&M hospital in New London will be the only hospital in miles that will see poor patients.  Bad news for L&M, which like most city hospitals, already struggles.

Although those deciding the fate of Westerly Hospital say they hope to keep the hospital independent, the reality may be that its only viable suitor is a for-profit corporation.

Michael Quinn, Esq.

Are Civil Lawsuits Good For Society?

There is almost no one who would answer yes to that question. That is, no one who has ever been injured by a defective product or through medical negligence. The decision to bring a claim is always a difficult one. Our clients always tell us how hard a decision it was to just consider bringing a claim. Ultimately, the conclusion reached is that a claim is the only way to gain a degree of compensation for their loss.

Civil claims have a broader social value as well. Consider the Ford Pinto. Ford knew that there was a design defect in the placement of a bolt adjacent to the gas tank. The cost to remedy $3. It elected to produce the vehicle without the protection. Ford entered into a cost/benefit analysis of payments they would have to make from injury claims compared to the fix. In the 1972 case involving death of a 13 year old child who was killed when the family Pinto was rear ended and burst into flames. The jury took into account the company's cost benefit analysis in making its award. Awarding the entire amount Ford thought it would pay for all such claims.

Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co., 1 19 Cal.App.3d 757, 174 Cal. Rptr. 348 (1981).

Civil lawsuits have the potential to have companies and individuals act more responsibility at the front end, making ours a safer society and ultimately reducing the number of claims.

Michael Quinn, Esq.

Local Orthopedic Surgeon Promotes Health History Credit Card

Dr. Frank Maletz, an accomplished orthopedic surgeon in New London, CT, is promoting what he calls "Healthspital." This is an idea long overdue in the US.

What it is: A patient's health history including chronic conditions, surgeries, medications and medication allergies would all be stored on a magnetic tape or card similar to your credit card. For someone like myself it would include a DNR order as well as my health care proxy.

As the population ages, the number of people taking anywhere from 4 to 10 prescriptions a day is growing exponentially. It is not unusual for a person to be unable to tell what medications he is taking much less the dosage. Add to this the problem faced with an unconscious patient in the Emergency Room and no one to call.

As Dr. Maletz notes, it is not unusual for an emergency room to conduct tests that are completely unnecessary because there is no accurate medical history. Why suspect an acute appendicitis if the patient had their appendix removed at 10.

These cards have been the standard in Europe for years. They save money and, more importantly, they save lives. Americans have and aversion to anything that smacks of collecting personal data, yet it is happening every day on the Internet.

The difference here is that the data on these cards saves lives and avoids unnecessary procedures and testing.

Dr. Frank Maletz is a founding partner of Crossroads Orthopedics in Waterford CT, he performs orthopedic surgery at L & M Hospital in New London, CT.

Michael Quinn, Esq.

Lawrence & Memorial Seeks a Relationship With Westerly Hospital: Good for Patients?

Following a national trend of hospitals consolidating under one umbrella, L & M Hospital in New London, Connecticut, has been attempting to form a relationship with Westerly Hospital. Westerly Hospital is located in Westerly Rhode Island. According to the New London Day, Westerly hospital and its satellite North Stonington Health Center have faced financial challenges of late.

Similar consolidation is being seen in New Haven, Connecticut, where Yale New Haven Hospital has purchased other health care facilities and is bringing doctors who were previously in private practice under the Yale/New Haven Hospital umbrella.

The question no one seems to be asking is: Is this trend toward consolidated medical care good for the patient? Clearly it is good for the hospitals and doctors, or they would not be doing it. As a general rule, we favor competition. Having two hospitals within blocks or miles of each other gives the patient some choice and a motivation for each hospital to give better care. Once there is only one hospital, regardless of the name, will the quality of care improve?

For more information on the L & M/ Westerly Hospital merger see: www.theday.com

Michael Quinn, Esq.

Highway Fatalities In New London

The NTSB, National Transportation Safety Board, has just announced that the number of highway fatalities is down again for 2011. They attribute the decline to the use of seat belts and the requirement that cars have air bags. As personal injury lawyers working in New London County, we at Polito & Quinn have seen a dramatic reduction in serious injuries from serious car accidents. The requirement that operators and passengers wear seat belts along with improvements in the technology built into seat belts is largely responsible for the improvements in the statics here in New London. For more information consult the NTSB at www.ntsb.gov

Michael Quinn, Esq.

Medical Malpractice Certificate, An Artificial Obstacle to Victims of Medical Negligence

In its April 11,2012 Op/Ed piece New London Day argues that the current law relating to the Certificate of Good Faith should remain as is. The Day of New London posits that the certificate from a “similar” health care provider, rather than a “qualified” health care provider is essential because the certificate is not subject to cross-examination. This artificial distinction only serves to bar the court house door to injured patients.

Consider a patient who develops a bed sore while in a nursing home through medical negligence. The patient is cared for by LPNs, RNs, an APRN (wound care certified) and a MD. The MD supervises each of the nursing specialties, knows the standard of care that applies to each and is “qualified” to testify as to each at trial. Nevertheless, the patient must obtain opinion letters from each nursing specialty in order to institute the claim.

It should be sufficient that the Certificate say why the opinion writer is qualified to offer an opinion relating to the specific specialty. Neurosurgeons and orthopedic surgeons who do the exact same surgery and are qualified to testify at trial should be able to provide the certificate. The current law only serves to bar legitimate claims. See Day http://theday.com/article/20120417/OP02/304179998

Michael Quinn, Esq.

Emergency Room Malpractice Immunity

Doctors are asking the Connecticut legislature to pass a bill that would allow them to commit malpractice in the Emergency Room and deny the patient the right to be compensated for the patient’s injury.

Most of us like our doctors. Most of us have generally had good experiences with the medical profession. No one believes that a doctor ever intends to harm a patient. But doctors, like all humans, make mistakes. Unlike the car mechanic or the carpenter, medical errors are often life-altering or fatal. The effect of this Connecticut law, if passed, would allow Emergency Room doctors, in Connecticut, to avoid a claim by their patients no matter the seriousness the harm.

Consider this: A person is in a car accident. They are taken to the emergency room with neck complaints. An x-ray is taken and read as normal. In fact, the x-ray shows a broken vertebrae. The patient is released and sent home. On the way, the patient turns his head and severs his spinal cord and dies.

Under the proposed law an Emergency Room doctor who fails to meet the standard of care would be immune from a claim by the patient. There would be no compensation for an act of medical negligence. Remember, under the current law the patient still has to prove the case. Medical negligence claims are not intended to harm the doctor. The purpose is to compensate the patient, who, through no fault of his own has suffered an injury. All patients are asking for is a fair system. Not a system that excludes them.

Michael Quinn, Esq.

Colonoscopy: Risks Your Doctor Isn't Telling You

We have all been told: You need to have a colonoscopy at 50 and every 5 years thereafter. This, we are told, is to guard against developing cancerous polyps in our colon. We are also told that there is a very low risk associated with the procedure.

The procedure is usually preformed in a free standing center under a mild anesthesia, often Propofol. That is the drug that Michael Jackson died using.
The proper way to perform the procedure is to only use so much of the drug that the patient is in a kind of twilight sleep. Most people, me included, tell the doctor "knock me out," I don't want to remember anything. The doctors tend to oblige. The problem, however, is that the patient does not register pain. Thus when the doctor is applying too much force, the patient does not register the pain. Too much force in the area of the spleen can result in irreparable damage and the need to have the spleen removed.

The spleen is an important organ for fighting infection. Without it the patient will have a lifetime of taking precautions including yearly immunization against a variety of illnesses.

Although the literature claims it is a rare complication of the procedure, this writer believes that the number of injuries are being underreported by the health care facilities.

This office has reviewed two such injuries in the last month. Both resulted in removal of the spleen, both resulted from routine colonoscopies, both occurred in New London County, each occurred in a different free standing center in New London County. Michael Quinn, Esq.

For more information: Singla, S, Journal Gastrointest Surg, 2012 March 27.

MRSA The Hospital Superbug

MRSA: How To Avoid This Hospital Based Superbug

MRSA or methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus is an infection caused by a strain of strep that is resistant to antibiotics. It is sometimes referred to as a superbug because it is so hard to treat.

Although MRSA can be developed among healthy non-hospital people, it is most often spread among people in the hospital.

MRSA often enters the body through a wound, like a surgical site or through an opening like a bed sore. Persons on dialysis are at special risk because their immune systems are vulnerable and the wound created by the IV.

A carrier, that is someone who is colonized with the bacteria, may not showing any signs of infection or ill health. In fact, a health care worker, doctor, nurse or nurse’s aide may be a carrier and totally unaware of it.

MRSA can be spread by clothing, jewelry or a stethoscope. It can be carried from one patient to the next in this way. Direct contact with a carrier or infected person is a principal source of the spread.

If you have ever been diagnosed with MRSA it is critical that you tell your doctors before any procedure that requires surgical interventions. Recurrences of the disease can sometimes be fatal.

Prevention: If you require hospitalization for any reason: find out what the hospital’s rate of infection is. Find out what precautions the hospital has instituted to prevent the spread of MRSA.

For example, in England, doctors visiting hospitals are prohibited from wearing neck ties, lab coats, jewelry, long sleeves nor are they allowed carrying a stethoscope.

You are the best advocate for your own health. If you see something ask. Find out and do not be shy as infection with MRSA is a serious and often life-threatening illness that can be prevented.

For more information contact the Centers for Disease Control, www.cdc.gov

Michael Quinn, Esq.