Email Us Today
We Can Help
Practice Areas
Jay Trucks & Associates, PC
600 Pine St. Clare, MI 48617
1.800.762.8623
Previous Posts
- Michigan Workers’ Compensation Law
- Wrongful Death as a Result of Medical Malpractice
- National Medical Malpractice Statistics
- Drug Lawsuits Protect Public
- Medical Malpractice and Surgical Errors
- What is a Class Action Law Suit?
- Teens and Car Accidents
- Seat belts and Car Accidents
- Criteria to be eligible for a claim
- Causes of Car Accidents
Archives
- 9/28/08 - 10/5/08
- 10/5/08 - 10/12/08
- 10/12/08 - 10/19/08
- 10/19/08 - 10/26/08
- 10/26/08 - 11/2/08
- 11/2/08 - 11/9/08
- 11/9/08 - 11/16/08
- 11/16/08 - 11/23/08
- 11/23/08 - 11/30/08
- 12/14/08 - 12/21/08
- 12/21/08 - 12/28/08
- 12/28/08 - 1/4/09
- 1/4/09 - 1/11/09
- 1/11/09 - 1/18/09
- 1/25/09 - 2/1/09
Jay Trucks and Associates Legal Blog
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Drug Lawsuits Protect Public
I was surprised by a Jan. 29 opinion piece by Sally Pipes proposing federal preemption of state laws protecting citizens from negligent pharmaceutical companies ("Don't let trial lawyers overdose on drug suits"). Pipes' proposal gives irresponsible companies a competitive edge over responsible companies at the expense of patient safety.
Federal preemption, as Pipes explains, would leave patients without the protection of state laws when FDA regulations are followed. The FDA has an imperfect record on ensuring consumer safety, and the tort system protects consumers when the FDA errs. Vioxx, which caused approximately 100,000 heart attacks, followed FDA regulations. The manufacturer voluntarily withdrew the drug for fear of increased legal liability. Under Pipes' proposal, the manufacturer would have no financial incentive to withdraw unsafe drugs. More people would have died. Those who had heart attacks would have no recourse.
Cut medical costs, but not by compromising safety. Pharmaceutical companies are in the best position to decrease their liability by promptly removing unsafe drugs from the market, ensuring that marketing claims are factual and taking greater measures to ensure product safety. FDA regulations are meant to increase drug safety by ensuring minimum safety standards. To treat them as unquestionably sufficient in all cases would, perversely, decrease drug safety.
Written by: Daniel Bahls
Ann Arbor
Federal preemption, as Pipes explains, would leave patients without the protection of state laws when FDA regulations are followed. The FDA has an imperfect record on ensuring consumer safety, and the tort system protects consumers when the FDA errs. Vioxx, which caused approximately 100,000 heart attacks, followed FDA regulations. The manufacturer voluntarily withdrew the drug for fear of increased legal liability. Under Pipes' proposal, the manufacturer would have no financial incentive to withdraw unsafe drugs. More people would have died. Those who had heart attacks would have no recourse.
Cut medical costs, but not by compromising safety. Pharmaceutical companies are in the best position to decrease their liability by promptly removing unsafe drugs from the market, ensuring that marketing claims are factual and taking greater measures to ensure product safety. FDA regulations are meant to increase drug safety by ensuring minimum safety standards. To treat them as unquestionably sufficient in all cases would, perversely, decrease drug safety.
Written by: Daniel Bahls
Ann Arbor
posted by
Erika
at
9:03 AM
Monday, January 5, 2009
Medical Malpractice and Surgical Errors
Unfortunately, the potential for injury and even wrongful death during surgical procedures is high. A surgeon can perform "wrong site surgery” – actually operating on the wrong body part. A nurse can leave a surgical sponge in the wound, bringing about serious infection. An anesthesiologist can cause life-threatening allergic reactions in an allergic patient, or give the patient too much anesthesia. Other not uncommon errors include:
The joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations states that 64 wrong site surgery cases were reported last year--they believe that the actual number of incidents is probably a larger number. Settlements in surgery error cases are estimated to typically be around $600,000.
If you or a loved one has experienced medical malpractice, be sure you are well informed of your rights in the state of Michigan. Please contact the law firm of Jay Trucks & Associates, PC at 1-800-762-8623 to schedule a free consultation today.
- Tears and holes made in internal organs
- Surgical instruments left in the patient's body following surgery
- Laparoscopic surgical mistakes
- Damage to the nerves
- Infection following surgery
- Oxygen starved brain from general anesthesia complications
- Caesarian section complications and errors
The joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations states that 64 wrong site surgery cases were reported last year--they believe that the actual number of incidents is probably a larger number. Settlements in surgery error cases are estimated to typically be around $600,000.
If you or a loved one has experienced medical malpractice, be sure you are well informed of your rights in the state of Michigan. Please contact the law firm of Jay Trucks & Associates, PC at 1-800-762-8623 to schedule a free consultation today.
posted by
PaulaB
at
9:00 AM
