Posted on 05/22/2010 7:45:33 AM PDT by KeyLargo
« Dr. WhiteCoat Goes to Washington
Florida Verdict May Threaten EMS Availability
Ambulance service held liable for failing to “do what was necessary” before accepting emergency transport of pregnant patient.
I mentioned this case in a previous Healthcare Update.
A child was born at 25 weeks gestation – 15 weeks premature – and was not breathing. Babies born at this age have a viability of 50-70%. In other words, up to half of children born at this age of gestation die. The family called 911. The paramedics arrived, performed CPR on the child, and brought the child back to life. I know a lot of physicians who would have difficulty resuscitating such a premature infant.
These paramedics should have been commended as heroes for saving this child’s life.
Instead, they were sued and found liable for $10 million.
The plaintiff attorney stated that “the paramedic should have evaluated her before they transported her.”
In its verdict, the jury found that the ambulance company “was negligent by accepting the transport task” and the company showed “reckless disregard” in rendering its services.
So instead of getting to the mother as soon as possible, getting the baby out, performing CPR, and saving his life, the attorney apparently believes that the paramedics were supposed to diddle around arguing about whether or not to transport the mother to a hospital. Good idea. Let’s write that requirement into all future Florida EMS protocols. We can call it the “Kelley Amendment” – named after Bob Kelley, the plaintiff’s attorney in the case.
After the verdict, the ambulance company may soon have to determine whether it can stay in business.
A past-president of the American Ambulance Association is quoted as saying “EMTs and paramedics will go on the call until lawsuits like this break the bank and they can’t go anymore. That is $10 million that comes out of the ability to provide care, and the community will suffer because of that cost.”
As I’ve asked in the past … which is more important – perfect care or available care?
Jurors in Florida’s Volusia County seem to have made their decision.
It will be interesting to see whether the jurors’ decision to award an additional $10 million to someone who had the benefit of excellent care yet who experienced a bad outcome will affect the future availability of emergency transport in Volusia County and other Florida counties.
My guess is that few EMTs will want to work in Volusia County any more.
Regardless of the verdict, you EMTs are still heroes in my book.
Trial lawyers are scum.
Can someone explain what this lawsuit is about? Did the baby ultimately die? Did the mother suffer complications?
Poor writing... it mentions that they brought the child back to life... then, they were sued. What, exactly, were they sued for if that is the end of the story?
There is no such thing as "perfect care". Medicin is not an exact science and sometimes people do die regardless of any effort any doctor can offer. But lawyers sure do get rich playing along with the notion that doctors can decide over life and death like the almighty himself.
“The basic facts are these: In 2003 a woman who was only about six months pregnant went to a hospital in New Smyrna Beach with labor pains. Doctors called for an EVAC ambulance. Paramedics were told to take the woman to Arnold Palmer Hospital for Children in Orlando, which is better equipped to handle premature births. On the way, the woman gave birth to a boy who wasn’t breathing. Paramedics saved the newborn’s life, but he has brain damage and cerebral palsy.”
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/os-ed-quick-hits-052210-20100521,0,6649963.story
In most cases yes...but not in all. Paramedics played a big role as did ER doctors in my father’s very early stroke and death at 37 and 45 respectively.
Trial lawyers are the balls of sh*t excreted by the filthy lice that infest the diseased fleas that suck the blood of the red-eyed demon hogs that wallow in the latrines of Hell.
>> Trial lawyers are the balls of sh*t excreted by the filthy lice &etc
You should have seen what I wrote before I backspaced over it and went with “scum”.
I’ll put it this way: if I ever make it all the way up the ladder to “dictator for life”, you ain’t gonna wanna be a trial lawyer in my fiefdom.
So were they suing because the baby lived and wasn’t perfect?
I see. A “wrongful life” type of lawsuit. These “parent” should be absolutely ashamed of themselves. Money grubbing scum. And a hearty “FU” to the jury, who were the ones with the real brain damage.
It certainly sounds like that's the case. (Of course, had the baby not been revived, the lawyer would have sued for wrongful death.)
The details were still a little sketchy.
“On the way, the woman gave birth to a boy who wasn’t breathing. Paramedics saved the newborn’s life, but he has brain damage and cerebral palsy.”
It appears that if the paramedics were following protocol, there should not be any negligence. The paramedics can’t realistically be expected to stop a pregnancy during transport. They can’t perform a C-Section in the ambulance.
FL has very poor tort law. Many physicians “go bare” or have very low insurance policy coverage limits. Instead, they put their money in their house (which cannot be confiscated) and hide assets in physical gold, protected accounts in other states and offshore. It the larger institutions such as the hospitals that take the big malpractice hit. This ambulance company seems to be an unfortunate victim. If they are small, it could spell their doom.
This is why socialized programs such as 0bamacare pose an even greater threat to health care access in the US than in the other socialized countries. We have a much more litigious society. Physicians and other providers (ambulance companies) will continue to fail or become extremely risk adverse. Fewer neurosurgeons will be willing to provide ER coverage, OB/GYN will increasingly drop the OB part of their practices. Some hospitals have even reduced their ER exposure to avoid high risk and low pay patients by transitioning to elective 3 day hospitals or transforming into surgery centers.
The predominate idea with medicine as is in all businesses that contend with significant risk is to minimize risk and maximize profits. Yes, this goes for non-profits because they must remain solvent.
The trial lawyers may think they will have a field day with 0bamacare, but they will find that this bubble will burst and risk avoidance and asset sheltering will rein supreme.
“Trial lawyers are scum.”
I always shake my head when I read this type of statement here in Freeper land.
Sure, some trial lawyers are scum. But ever been shafted by a sleezebag in a business deal? Falsely arrested? Had your stuff taken improperly taken by the government? Beat up by a jack-booted wanna-be cop security guard who should be in a psych ward? Gone through a divorce with a lying psycho spouse?
I have friends who have gone through all of the above and more. They sure didn’t think their trial lawyers were scum.
As I always say, it’s the 90% who give the rest a bad name. /jk
Seriously, though, some are scum. The profession might attract a higher percentage of scum than others. But mose trial lawyers aren’t. They are just trying to eek out a living helping their clients. And most I know are a wreck because of the stress of the job. Divorced (many multiple times), alcoholic or worse, bad health, etc. In fact, few of them would recommend their career choice to others...
Does Florida have any version or “tort reform” (actually “tort sanity” or at least “semi-sanity”) ala Texas? If not, they need it PRONTO. If so, it needs FIXED.
PS Any word on the chance this will be overturned/reduced on appeal?
2008 State Rankings: Sinners and Saints Among Tort Systems
March 14, 2008
Florida ranks the worst in terms of tort costs and litigation risks, while North Dakota ranks the best. In a separate ranking, Colorado has the best tort laws on its books, while Rhode Island has the worst.
Sinners: States that have relatively high tort costs and/or high litigation risks and relatively weak tort rules on the books. The sinners are likely to face high and rising tort liability costs in the future if lawsuit abuse continues unchecked. These states include Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Washington, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.
Read more: http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2008/03/14/88215.htm#ixzz0ofov2mld
40% of a 10million claim is really ekeing out a living in my book too.
National Review: Charlie Crist’s Party Of One
April 30, 2010
The proximate question is what effect his decision will have on the Senate race. The answer, from the Republican perspective, is nothing good. Charlie Crist has assembled over the past few years an odd coalition, including, as principal building blocks, the party base, tort lawyers, and gun owners. The party base is now gone. They liked Rubio better from the jump, and they are now in a white-hot rage at the lover who left them. (One of Crist’s campaign tropes is to startle casual supporters by telling them he “loves” them.)
The tort lawyers seem to be sticking. Crist made a devil’s deal with the tort bar back when he was attorney general, and he reconsummated the relationship as recently as this week by signing a “tort-reform bill” that will have the intended consequence of raising awards to tort lawyers. Crist already has $7.6 million (as of March 31) in his campaign account — more than Rubio and Meek put together, and not required by law to be returned — and the tort lawyers will provide whatever else Crist needs. Money should not be a problem. Then there are the gun owners, a critical constituency in this huntin’ and home-protectin’ state. The NRA and other gun groups have been solid for Crist for several cycles and, while they are now under intense pressure to back away, they have an otherwise admirable record of sticking with their friends when the going gets tough. Well, the going just got tough. Watch that space.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126411312
And a hearty “FU” to the jury...
Precisely. Even vile trail lawyers could not get away with this ‘John Edwards’ crap without juries made up of emotion-driven half wits playing with other peoples money. Awarding people money based on sob stories has become part of our culture. What do people who pay no income taxes care when tax rates go up? What do incompetent wards of the state care if they drive service providers out of business? The figure the government will step in and take care of them.
Now where would they get that idea?
The men and women on the jury that actually went for this bear just as much of the scumitude factor.
And the third option is that they could have refused to transport the woman, she could have given birth in a hospital unequipped to handle premature infants, the child could have had a bad outcome, and they would have sued the ambulance company for refusing to take her.
Funny how all the options seem to end in “they would have sued”.
Which he almost certainly would have had anyway, even if he'd born at the hospital he was being transported to.
I suspect this will be overturned on appeal. It sounds as if the paramedics were simply following a physician's directions to transport the patient. Paramedics are not expected to overrule a physician's evaluation of a patient's condition and ability to withstand transport. Just imagine the lawsuit if the paramedics had refused to transport the woman, in spite of the physician telling them the woman should be transported -- then the baby would have been born at the hospital that didn't have the proper facilities to handle an extreme premie, and the baby would have ended up with brain damage and cerebral palsy anyway, and the paramedics would be blamed for causing this by refusing teh physician's request to transport the mother.
Thank you.
Not common. Sheesh.
They were successfully sued for properly doing their jobs and saving lives. This is the future folks! Perhaps it would be better to be dead than to live in this madhouse.
>> But mose trial lawyers aren’t [scum]
Get real. The trial lawyer industry is raping America more and more every day.
The operative word here is “industry”. By and large, they are no longer lawyers hanging out a shingle to serve those who walk in the door as the need arises. They are now an INDUSTRY unto themselves. Like piranhas, they band together and go forth in search of an unfortunate carcass to strip clean. When they’re done defiling and ruining one class of victim, they move on to the next.
There are MAYBE 1% that have integrity. The other NINETY-NINE percent are SCUM.
I’m happy to hear from you that a lot of the poor widdle dearhearts are stressed out. I’d love to see a lot more suicide among these vermin. Even better would be if we can get them to kill each other over their turf, like drug-dealing gang bangers do. Drug dealers and lawyers are similar purveyors of evil.
Harsh statements indeed, targeted at a harsh class of subhumans — trial lawyers. One of the three classes of subhumans who cause the most misery for the rest of us: lawyers, union activists, and pseudojournalists. Even the ‘Rat politician class pales in infamy beside these three. And must I point out that without trial lawyers to fund them, the ‘Rats would have CONSIDERABLY less traction?
I meant to add to my previous post:
I am guilty of using fuzzy terminology when I refer to “trial lawyers” as the evil class; I should be more clear.
I really mean “tort lawyers” or “plaintiff’s bar lawyers” as the class I’d like to see vanish. You know — ambulance chasers. Those who specialize in contingency fee lawsuits against businesses and professionals.
I’m not referring to criminal defense trial lawyers. As you point out, they have a definite place in a free society. Some of them are shady, but most are not.
I am also not inferring evil onto the “general practitioner” type of lawywer that one finds in small towns (and occasionally in the big city too). These folks take pretty much whatever comes in the door: real estate, contract litigation, family law, product liability, etc. They may handle the occasional tort law case on behalf of a client that specifically asks them to, but they don’t specialize in tort law, nor do they go forth and seek tort law cases.
The above types of lawyers are just working folks, doing a job that needs doing. They are NOT the evil incarnate I referred to earlier.
Clear as mud? :-)
OK, there’s not a lot I disagree with in your two posts taken together. Maybe one nit: I think 1% is a bit low for the estimation of ethical lawyers of the type you are discussing.
I think it might be almost, but not quite, 1.1%...
>> 1.1%...
heh.
FRegards
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.