AHLA's monthly podcast featuring health lawyer and blogger Norm Tabler's informative and entertaining take on recent health law and other legal developments. Sponsored by Coker Group.
To learn more about AHLA and the educational resources available to the health law community, visit americanhealthlaw.org.
AHLA's monthly podcast featuring health lawyer and blogger Norm Tabler's informative and entertaining take on recent health law and other legal developments. Sponsored by Coker Group.
To learn more about AHLA and the educational resources available to the health law community, visit americanhealthlaw.org.
Support for A H L A and the following message comes from KR Group, a national healthcare advisory firm working with hospitals and physician groups. KR group assists healthcare providers in their pursuit for a sound of business model and an enhanced patient experience. For more information, visit KR group.com.
Speaker 2:Hi, I'm Norm Taber with this one edition Ofside of Health Law. The inpatient, inpatient, you have to sympathize with John King, but only up to a point. John was an inpatient at Advent Health in New Smyrna Beach, Florida. He politely asked that his clothes be brought to him so he could get dressed and leave. Then he waited and waited and waited. He pressed the call button and no one responded. He pressed it again and again and again. Still no response. Then John thought of a way to light a fire under the staff. He set his bed on fire. That's right. John set his$4,000 hospital bed on fire just to get the staff's attention. But first, it got the attention of the patient who shared the room with John and his now flaming bed. That patient pressed an emergency button and a nurse came running with a fire extinguisher, which raises the question, why didn't John press the emergency button when the call button got no response? John won't need those street clothes for a while. He's in jail on a felony charge of arson. You can't make this stuff up in the opinion of the robot. Like a lot of other states, Connecticut has a statute requiring the plaintiff in a medical malpractice suit to submit an opinion from an expert in the same specialty. As the defendant certifying that there is evidence of negligence. After Wendy Young was injured during surgery, she sued the hospital. The hospital moved to dismiss because Wendy had not submitted the required expert opinion. The trial court agreed and dismissed Wendy's suit sounds cut and dry, doesn't it? Whether was a wrinkle. The surgery was performed by a robot. Part of the robot fell off and landed on Wendy injuring her. So what was she supposed to do? Get an opinion from another robot. The appellate court agreed with Wendy that her complaint could properly be read as alleging ordinary negligence rather than medical negligence and should be allowed to go forward. Dismissal reversed. The case is Young versus Hartford Hospital, Connecticut. Appell Court, the Procrustean Hospital bed. Remember Procrustes, the villainous son of Poseidon. In Greek mythology, he forced prisoners to fit into his punishment bed, even if it meant cutting off their legs to make them fit. Hence the term Procrustean bed. Well, out west of podiatry Practice Group has filed a federal lawsuit against a hospital and its orthopedic surgeons that in effect accuses them of using a procrustean approach to foot, an ankle treatment. Although the term procrustean never comes up in the complaint, the plaintiff podiatry group alleges that the, the hospital and its orthopedic surgeons conspire to make foot and ankle treatment fit their financial business model. Even if that means unnecessary amputations, they allege that the surgeons amputate even though it would be better to call in a podiatrist and avoid amputation. Why would they do that? Well, the plaintiff podiatry group says it's because surgery is quicker and more profitable, even when pediatric treatment without amputation would be more appropriate. The case is Oasis foot and ankle versus Scottsdale Healthcare Federal District of Arizona dodging the bullet. Congratulations, you've dodged the bullet. According to a study published the other day in current biology, the risk of a fatal auto accident went up about 6% in the week following the switch to daylight saving time. But you're listening to this, so you dodge the bullet and for those glasses have empty listeners. The answer is no. There's no comparable spike in the fall when we switch back to standard time. So you've dodged the bullet for a full 12 months. The C-suite defense. Here's a novel defense. Federal authorities charged a former pharmaceutical executive with drug trafficking for his role in the opioid crisis. The indictment says that his company sold oxycodone and fentanyl to pharmacies that he knew were selling the drugs to patients who did not need them. The charges are conspiracy to distribute narcotics and to defraud the dea, but the executive's defense is not that it didn't do what he he's charged with. His defense is that when he did it, he was an executive and the government can't charge an executive in a case like this. Why? Because they never have before and since executives have never been charged for these crimes before, he didn't have, quote, a fair warning that he would be charged like some street level trafficker. After all. The coroner where he did his drug trafficking was a corner off. It's not a street corner. The government responded aptly. I think that under that defense theory, there could never be a first time for any charge. After all, there was a time when charging a doctor for drug trafficking was a novelty. The court hasn't yet ruled on the C-suite defense, so we'll have to wait to find out if the defendant will have to swap his pin stripes for prison stripes. The case is US versus Dowd Southern District of New York. Hurry up, get the lead out. When Shana Jefferson was hit in the back of the head by a straight bullet, she rushed to the hospital naturally. She wanted the hospital to act as quickly as possible. She may even have yelled, hurry up guys, get the lead out. And in fairness to the hospital, they did get the lead out in the figurative sense of acting quickly. Unfortunately, they did not get the let out in the literal sense. That's right. Shana was sent home without an x-ray, but with a bullet still lodged in her head. After several days of headaches, Shaina's spouse took her to a different hospital, which X-rayed her, found the bullet and removed it. No word on how fast the hospital acted. Revenge of the geezers. Last month, I reported that clinicians age 70 and above applying for credentials at Yale New Haven Hospital were required to undergo cognitive ability testing, which showed that about 13% of them had cognitive deficits that could impair their ability to practice. Meanwhile, not a single applicant below age 70 was found to have any cognitive deficits, whatever that may have been because nobody under 70 had to undergo the test. That seemed unfair to me. Maybe because I'm in the over 70 age group, but it turns out that it's not just me that doesn't like the policy. The E E O C doesn't like it either. They filed a complaint against Yale New Haven alleging age discrimination. I'm rooting for the E E O C, but frankly I'm concerned the case has been assigned to a team of rookie lawyers. One of them is only in his fifties. Well, that's it for this month's edition of the Lighter Side of Health Law. I hope you enjoyed it. Check your A H L Weekly Connections Magazine for the next edition.