Chicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog

"A birth control patch has triggered a major legal migraine for Johnson & Johnson, which has been hit with a slew of lawsuits over its patented contraceptive device. As many as 500 suits have been filed over the Ortho Evra patch in the last two years, claiming it has caused clots, strokes and in several cases, death, according to court records and plaintiffs' lawyers."

Tresa Baldas, National Law Journal, 12/18/06
http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1166177119102

Federal health officials yesterday proposed sterner warning labels for acetaminophen, aspirin and ibuprofen, again cautioning millions of Americans who take the nonprescription pain relievers regularly of potentially serious side effects."

Andrew Bridges, Associated Press, Washington Post, 12/19/06
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/19/AR2006121901327.html

The Illinois Appellate Court has reversed a trial court ruling in a medical malpractice case involving apparent agency. Even though the patient and his wife signed consent forms stating that the doctors were not employees of the hospital the court held that summary judgment was not properly granted on the issue of apparent agency.

The plaintiff also argued that the evidence established a genuine issue of material fact that the defendant physicians were the apparent agents of the hospital. She argued that the consent form which she and the decedent signed was ''extremely confusing'' and ambiguous because it did not state clearly that the doctors who would be caring for the decedent were not hospital employees or agents and it could have been reasonably interpreted to mean that his personal physicians were employed by Northwest but the other unidentified physicians were not.

As a Chicago medical malpractice lawyer I estimate that 40% of my cases are related to care given by hospital residents. Most of us know from experience and common sense that people that are tired make more mistakes. The aviation industry has long had rules in place to limit the amount of flying a pilot can do without sufficient sleep. By law truck drivers must get off the road after a certain number of hours driving. But for some reason hospitals continue to make residents work as much as 30 hours without a break. A new study sheds light on the deadly consequences of this practice:

"Medical residents are routinely scheduled to work shifts that last 24 hours or more, yet a study out today suggests that these sleep-deprived doctors are at high risk of making medical mistakes that can harm or even kill patients. 'Working for more than 24 hours is hazardous,' says sleep researcher Charles Czeisler at the Harvard Medical School. Scores of studies show that people who stay awake for 18 hours straight can have trouble thinking clearly and can zone out or nod off suddenly. In July 2003, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, a Chicago group that accredits medical residency programs, limited work schedules to no more than 80 hours in a week. But the rules still allow marathon shifts that last up to 30 hours."

Kathleen Fackelmann, USA Today, 12/11/06
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2006-12-11-sleep-study_x.htm

Medical malpractice lawyers in Chicago and across the country have been fighting special interest groups in Illinois and throughout the United States that want to replace our jury system with a panel of supposed experts to decide medical malpractice cases. Now after 63 years the Japanese are realizing the importance of the system which has made this the greatest democracy the world has ever known. Robert E. Precht of the New York Times writes:

"Japan is about to embark on a democratic experiment with important consequences for the rest of Asia. After a lapse of 60 years, the country is planning to bring back a jury system - but a huge effort will be required to convince ordinary Japanese about its advantages. Americans can help by sharing their jury experiences with the Japanese. Beginning in 2009, Japan will institute a jury system called saiban-in. Juries consisting of three law-trained judges and six citizens chosen by lottery will decide criminal cases by majority vote. Japan had an American-style jury system for 15 years, but it was abolished by Japan's military government in 1943. Since then, verdicts have been decided by three-judge panels, leaving citizens with no voice in a system in which virtually all criminal trials end in a conviction. The return to citizen participation represents a bold commitment to have ordinary Japanese take greater responsibility in running the country. If a jury is sufficiently unhappy with the government's case or the government's conduct, it can simply refuse to convict. This possibility puts powerful pressure on the state to behave properly and ultimately leads to better governance. For this reason, a jury is one of the most important protections of a democracy."

Robert E. Precht, New York Times, 12/1/06
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/01/opinion/01precht.html

As a medical malpractice lawyer I have unfortunately seen my share of cases where health care providers failed to adequately intervene on behalf of a suicidal patient. Now there is evidence that medications may be playing a role in the suicides of young adults on antidepressant medications. Benedict Carey of the New York Times reports:

"In a long-awaited analysis, health officials reported yesterday that antidepressant medications appeared to increase significantly the risk of suicide attempts and related behaviors in adults under 25, while reducing such risks in older people. The analysis, the most comprehensive and rigorous to date, found that suicidal behavior of any kind was rare, and that people taking the medications were no more likely to kill themselves than those taking placebo pills. But adults under 25 taking the drugs were more than twice as likely as those on placebos to report a suicide attempt, or to prepare for one by, say, writing a suicide note. The report, which included more than a dozen medications, was compiled by the Food and Drug Administration and posted on its Web site."

Benedict Carey, New York Times, 12/6/06
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/06/health/06drug.html?_r=1&oref=s

When larger numbers of people in a clinical trial died on a drug for high colesteral than people not in the trial Pfizer stopped the trial.

"The news came to Pfizer's chief scientist, Dr. John L. LaMattina, as he was showering at 7 a.m. Saturday: the company's most promising experimental drug, intended to treat heart disease, actually caused an increase in deaths and heart problems. Eighty-two people had died so far in a clinical trial, versus 51 people in the same trial who had not taken it. Within hours, Pfizer, the world's largest drug maker, told more than 100 trial investigators to stop giving patients the drug, called torcetrapib. Shortly after 9 p.m. Saturday, Pfizer announced that it had pulled the plug on the medicine entirely, turning the company's nearly $1 billion investment in it into a total loss. The abrupt decision to discontinue torcetrapib was a shocking disappointment for Pfizer and for people who suffer from heart disease. The drug, which has been in development since the early 1990s, raises so-called good cholesterol, and cardiologists had hoped it would reduce the buildup of plaques in blood vessels that can cause heart attacks. Just last Thursday, Pfizer's chief executive, Jeffrey B. Kindler, said publicly that the drug could be among the most important new developments for heart disease in decades and that the company hoped to get Food and Drug Administration approval for it in 2007."

Alex Berenson, New York Times, 12/4/06
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/04/health/04pfizer.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper&oref=slogin

As a medical malpractice lawyer I have handled a large number of suits involving defective medications and medical devices. A recent jury verdict in Pennsylvania highlights the tragic consequences of poorly labeled drugs.

"When Dunson, 1, developed cold symptoms, his parents gave him Infants' Tylenol over a three-day period. During that time, he began vomiting and grew listless. When his parents took him to the family physician on the third day, he was lethargic, dehydrated, and in acute distress. He died shortly thereafter. An autopsy concluded the cause was liver damage due to acetaminophen toxicity. Dunson is survived by his parents and four minor siblings. Dunson's parents, on behalf of their son's estate, sued the manufacturer of the drug in strict liability, alleging the drug was defective in that its label failed to warn of the risks of liver damage and death from acetaminophen and failed to warn that the product is three times more concentrated than Children's Tylenol."

Dunson v. McNeil-PPC, Inc., Pa., Phila. Co. Com. Pleas, No. 040302907, July 24, 2006.
ATLA Products Liability Reporter, December 2006
http://www.atla.org/Publications/PLlawreporter/2006_12/0612dru_inad.aspx