Syracuse Personal Injury Law Blog

10 questions to help determine if a birth injury occurred

Published on: April 10, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Parents in Syracuse start protecting their children from the moment they learn of a pregnancy. Many books are published on the subject of “keeping your child safe,” but these books cannot answer every question parents have or help them handle labor on their own. They simply have to rely on medical professionals.

Physicians study for years before they can properly instruct patients, diagnose potential issues and deliver a child. Even after all of this training, some will make mistakes that lead to birth injuries. Some injuries are obvious. Some of them are also easy to overlook, but they could still cause serious developmental disabilities and complications in the future.

How is a new parent, without years of training, supposed to know if a birth injury occurred? Birth Injury Guide is an organization that helps parents answer questions about birth injuries, and this group has enumerated a few things to watch out for in the first 12 months that could be an indication of a birth injury.

Survey shows that doctors order unnecessary tests

Published on: April 9, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

In our last post, we highlighted the potential for better patient care if safe harbor provisions were followed and allowed to be incorporated into useful legislation. One of the notions behind safe harbors was that doctors commonly ordered tests that were not necessary or were created out of fear of future medical malpractice lawsuits.

A recent medicalnewstoday.com report supported this notion. According to researchers who surveyed emergency room physicians, a majority of doctors in this area do indeed order unnecessary tests. One physician interviewed explained that doctors feel as if they have a tremendous pressure not to be wrong when making diagnoses; thus leading to non-medical reasons for diagnostic tests.

In fact, more than 80 percent of doctors surveyed believe that their departments require too many tests, and nearly all doctors indicated that “medically unnecessary” radiology tests ordered would not be performed but for department regulations. Moreover, the tests are not based on doctors not being able to discover the cause of an ailment. Rather, it is the fear of medical malpractice suits that drives the culture of over-testing.

Family of four sickened while on vacation

Published on: April 8, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

When you go on vacation, you expect the best with your room. It should be immaculate, have a great view and be free of any harmful or threatening elements. For a family of four from the greater Philadelphia area, this should have been the case as they traveled to a resort in the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Unfortunately, after spending one night in the condo that they had rented, each member in the family had been seriously sickened. In fact, both boys experienced seizures. According to an ABC News.com report, the condo below them had been sprayed with a toxic pesticide(methyl bromide) the day they arrived. Apparently the residue emanating from the pesticide seeped into the second-floor condo and poisoned them.

Paramedics responded and airlifted the boys to a hospital in Philadelphia, while the parents were taken to a Delaware hospital. Pest abatement company Termanix was responsible for spraying the condo below the family.

Could safe harbor provisions improve patient care?

Published on: April 7, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

After decades of changes and law changes in a majority of states, it appears that medical malpractice reform is still a controversial topic. Indeed, physicians (and insurers) are afraid of multi-million dollar malpractice awards, and the way medicine is practiced (with defensive medicine) is indicative of this. With that said, wouldn’t it be worth taking a chance on another form of reform?

In a prior post we discussed the prospect of safe harbors, which essentially are ways for physicians to correct potential wrongs, or give additional recommendations to correct them, without the fear of admitting to facts that would give rise to a medical malpractice suit. The prospect is important because it may improve patient care. After all, the goal of such rules would be to protect doctors from frivolous lawsuits. With this fear effectively abated, doctors are likely to focus on real health issues, instead of testing to rule out things out of fear of a lawsuit down the road based on a missed diagnosis.

Ironically, according to a study conducted in Oregon where researchers reviewed cases to determine if safe harbor rules would help doctors, it turns out that they probably would work against them. Only a handful of cases would have been decided differently, according to a recent Forbes article. However, the researchers found that patient care would have been improved since the safe harbor rules would protect doctors who follow specific care guidelines.

Minimum trucking insurance requirements could be raised

Published on: April 4, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

In a number of our posts, we have highlighted the danger that semi-truck pose to motorists on the road. Since trucks are considerably larger than passenger vehicles, the chances of people in passenger cars being injured is quite high. Meanwhile, truckers are commonly not injured in these crashes.

Because of the high degree of liability, commercial truckers are required to carry at least $750,000 in liability insurance. With the rash of trucking accidents being seen over the last few years, it appears that legislators are poised to raise the minimum insurance requirement to $1 million. This has truckers up in arms.

According to insurer Prime Property & Casualty Insurance, the change is not necessary given that so few accident claims exceed $1 million. The company reports that of the 87,000 trucking accidents reported between January 2006 and March 2012 only 166 claims eclipsed the million dollar mark.

Can medical malpractice be based on faulty equipment?

Published on: April 1, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

In a number of our posts on medical malpractice matters, we focus on how a physician fails to act as doctor with comparable experience and skills would in treating a patient. Indeed, we bemoan physicians who miss on basic diagnoses or conduct operations on the wrong side of the body. We also criticize medical assistants who do not communicate or miscount equipment before or after a surgical procedure. However, not all medical malpractice instances are based on human error.

Yes, some malpractice (or negligence) cases can be based on faulty equipment. According to a medicaldaily.com article, a large number of surgical errors can be traced back to equipment malfunctions. This is an important element to consider when human error is believed to be the main culprit in a malpractice matter.

An element in the notion of reasonable care in surgical settings is to make sure that all equipment is ready, available and functioning properly. This is why a majority of hospitals follow strict protocols in preparing for procedures. However, if the equipment being used is not up to standard, the hospital could still be held liable if assistants do not perform reasonable checks are not performed.

Can driverless cars be safely integrated into mainstream society?

Published on: March 28, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Driverless cars are coming. They are eventually going to be a mainstream part of our streets, highways and express ways. How soon they come is up for debate. But what is also not decided is how driverless cars will co-exist with cars that are driven by human beings.

Indeed, the whole notion about driverless cars being safer than cars driven by humans does have some truth to it. After all, autonomous cars don’t get intoxicated and have their judgment impaired by alcohol. They don’t succumb to road rage and drive aggressively in order to show who’s boss. They also don’t make mistakes regarding the interpretation of the rules of the road. So with these in mind, riding in a driverless car should be exceptionally safe.

But there are two things that may debunk this notion. First, the market may not fully embrace the ability to have fully autonomous cars. Remember how it was expected that the Segway was supposed to eliminate pedestrian traffic? Now the only people who use them are mall cops and people on dedicated tours. It may be that people enjoy the individual freedoms of driving at their own speeds and on their own terms. This is what the American auto industry is built on. So people may not embrace fully automated cars.

Understanding product liability claims

Published on: March 28, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Product safety should be a top priority in every industry. Unfortunately, dangerous and defective products still surface regularly across the country. Last week, for example, a prominent U.S.-based manufacturer of children’s car seats settled a lawsuit involving defective safety buckles. The manufacturer agreed to pay $3 million in fines and invest $7 million toward enhanced safety programs.

Defects in manufacturing are not the only type of product liability claim. Dangerous products can also involve an unsafe design or inadequate warnings.

In any type of product defect claim, experienced legal representation can hold the keys to success. These claims are extremely complex. They may involve multiple defendants – perhaps not just the manufacturer, but also the product designer, supplier or distributor. The claim may involve theories of negligence, breach of warranty or both. Proving liability often requires obtaining expert testimony regarding structural aspects, manufacturing processes or engineering issues that contributed to the defect.

Brain bleeds in fetuses and newborns can be discovered

Published on: March 27, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Caring for fetuses and newborns is very important for obstetricians and neonatal nurses. Part of this care includes monitoring the birthing process to ensure that major issues are not missed. One of the hidden dangers of childbirth is internal bleeding within the child’s brain. This is a serious condition that can result in substantial neurological impairment and even death.

This is why when babies are born, their blood is tested to measure platelet levels to ensure that internal bleeding has not occurred, and so that the child has the ability to stop bleeding. Newborns with low platelet counts are given transfusions to improve those levels.

It was conventionally believed that only low platelet levels were responsible for brain bleeds, but new research shows that attacks on a newborn’s immune system could lead to such issues. Research highlighted in a medicalnewstoday.com report suggested that the difference in antigens between the birth mother and the child could lead the mother’s immune system to attack the fetus’ system. In these instances, close monitoring during and after the birth is necessary.

Phones and other distractions lead teens to accidents

Published on: March 26, 2015 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

It’s been a number of years since distracted driving became a national safety issue; specifically, talking on cell phones and texting while driving. Since then, more than 30 states have enacted laws limiting cell phone use while behind the wheel, and they have enacted rules detailing how teen drivers may drive.

Essentially, young drivers may not use cell phones at all when behind the wheel, and they may only drive at certain times of the day. Despite these rules, teen drivers still use their cell phones while driving; but it was always difficult to track how many young drivers actually do so. After all, police reports (created after an accident) may not always detail whether a driver was distracted by using a phone (or any other reason).

However, a recent study conducted by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety found that distracted driving was more of a problem among teen drivers than originally thought. Researchers reviewed nearly 1,700 dashboard camera videos that chronicled the moments before a teen driver was involved in a crash, and they found that these drivers were commonly distracted.