Friday, August 14, 2009

Do Damages Caps Make Sense?

In Colorado, total damages in medical malpractice cases may not exceed one million dollars. Within that total cap, state law also places a $300,000 cap on non-economic damages, such as pain and suffering. About half the states in the nation have placed a cap on non-economic damages in civil litigation, with the caps ranging from $250,000 to $750,000. Most of these caps apply specifically to instances of medical malpractice.

The argument for capping damages is mainly an economic one; doctors argue that the potential for larger malpractice damage awards causes them to have to pay higher rates for malpractice insurance. Higher rates, in turn, will either cut into doctors' profits or be passed on to patients in the form of higher bills for office visits and procedures.

While capping damages may seem to make economic sense in the abstract, how do they stack up in individual cases where the cost inflicted by malpractice exceeds the statutory cap? Take, for instance, the recent case where around 21 patients at Rose Medical Center in Denver were exposed to hepatitis C at the hands of a surgical technician employed by the facility, who knew about her condition.

Hepatitis C is an incurable disease that can lead to cirrhosis of the liver or liver cancer. Certain drug therapies are effective at removing large quantities of the disease from the blood stream… at a cost of around $10,000 per treatment. While cost containment is a laudable objective for government policy, is it right for the state to set the price tag for being infected with a life-long, debilitating and potentially fatal condition? Does $300,000 sound like a fair exchange for the emotional pain and suffering these patients must endure, due to actions over which they had no control? Should the state enact a blanket cap without regard to individual circumstances, or should it be up to the judicial system to determine what is appropriate in a given instance?

Recent attempts to increase the $300,000 cap to $460,000 merely to adjust for inflation have been defeated in the legislature. The $300,000 non-economic and $1 million total damages caps still stand, although a judge does have discretion to exceed the total cap when it is shown that future medical expenses and lost wages will exceed the million dollar limit. For an individual infected with hepatitis C in the prime of life, it is more than conceivable that a million dollars will be inadequate to compensate for the loss.

Thank you for reading our blog. If you or someone you know has been injured due to medical malpractice, or someone you love has unfortunately died due to another's medical negligence, please contact us for assistance.

Wednesday, August 12, 2009

Colorado Patients Exposed to Hepatitis C from Former Hospital Employee

Approximately 21 patients of Rose Medical Center in Denver, Colorado and Audubon Surgery Center in Colorado Springs have tested positive for hepatitis C. Preliminary investigations and tests link the patients' hepatitis C to Kristen Diane Parker's hepatitis C. Parker is a former surgical technician at both Rose and Audubon.

On July 23, 2009, Parker was indicted on 21 counts of tampering with a consumer product and 21 counts of obtaining a controlled substance by deceit or attempt by a federal grand jury. According to the criminal complaint, Parker, who is a former heroin addict and has hepatitis C, allegedly swapped her own dirty syringes that were filled with saline for syringes that were filled with Fentanyl, a narcotic that is 80 to 100 times stronger than morphine, and is often used to help patients after surgery manage pain.

Allegedly, Parker injected herself with Fentanyl, while patients unknowingly were infected with Parker's dirty needles. Out of the 4,700 Rose patients and 1,000 Audobon patients who were potentially exposed to Parker's hepatitis C, there are presently 21 hepatitis-infected patients who are preliminarily linked to Parker's hepatitis C. Authorities have advised all patients, who may have been exposed, to be tested.

Even though Parker is not a nurse, nor holds a medical degree, she received surgical technician training. Additionally, before she was hired at Rose, Parker's pre-employment blood test showed that she had hepatitis C. Despite her condition, Rose Medical Center allowed her to work in its operating rooms after it counseled her about her condition and exposure risks.

Hepatitis C
"Hepatitis" means inflammation of the liver. Hepatitis C is a contagious liver disease that arises after a person has been infected with the hepatitis C virus. Symptoms can range from mild illness lasting a few weeks to serious illness that attacks the liver. However, some individuals who are infected never develop any symptoms.

About 75 to 85 percent of people infected with hepatitis C develop chronic hepatitis C, which is a long-term illness, leading to major liver problems, such as cirrhosis--scarring of the liver--or liver cancer. Often, most people who have acute hepatitis, which is a short-term illness arising within the first six months of exposure to hepatitis C, will lead to chronic hepatitis C.

Hepatitis C is generally spread when blood from a person infected with hepatitis C enters the body of a person who is not infected. Common ways of transmission of hepatitis C include:

  • Sharing needles or syringes
  • Needlestick injuries in healthcare environments
  • Children who are born to mothers with hepatitis C

Some individuals, who have tested positive for hepatitis C, have sued Rose Medical Center for medical malpractice. Medical malpractice is an area of law where if a medical practitioner or medical facility fails to exercise adequate care or skill in treating the patient, doctors or hospitals may be liable for any injuries that are caused to the patient.

If you have suffered a medical malpractice injury due to the negligence of a doctor, hospital, or health care provider, you should contact us immediately for legal assistance. If you would like to discuss your matter with us, please contact our office for a confidential consultation.