DC Child Accident & Safety Blog

New York state has created a new fund to pay medical expenses for infants who are neurologically damaged as a result of malpractice and other medical mistakes, but opponents say it means families will have to fight with state authorities to obtain treatments as their children age.

The fund, which is due to go into effect on Oct. 1, 2011, allows medical costs to be provided on an annual basis to injured parties. Parents or guardians can still pursue medical malpractice actions on the basis of emotional distress and other losses.

Between 150 and 200 babies are expected to qualify annually for the new fund, according to Jason Helgerson, Gov. Andrew Cuomo's chief Medicaid reform adviser. Participation in the fund is mandatory for those seeking either Medicaid recompensation or filing medical malpractice suits.

Helgerson says the fund will offer a more accurate means of providing care for injured infants because it isn’t subject to inaccurate estimates made by judges and juries trying to arrive at an accurate figure for health-care costs under the current malpractice award system.

But opponents of the fund maintain that the system was championed by health-care providers and will subject the families of neurologically damaged infants to on-going battles with the state for treatments as their children age.

Under the new statute, the fund describes "birth-related neurological injuries" as "an injury to the brain or spinal cord of a live infant caused by the deprivation of oxygen or mechanical injury occurring in the course of labor, delivery or resuscitation or by other medical services provided or not provided during delivery admission that rendered the infant with a permanent and substantial motor impairment or with a developmental disability."

Medical care will be decided on a case-by-case basis. In the event the fund is reduced to 20 percent or less of its annual size, the law contains a default stipulation allowing suits to be brought for medical expenses.

The establishment of the fund was included in a host of recommendations by a Medicaid Redesign Team (MRT) appointed by Gov. Cuomo to halt escalating Medicaid costs. Another recommendation from the task force called for capping noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases at $250,000. That proposal was fiercely opposed and eventually scrapped.

Source: New York Law Journal

The family of a severely brain-damaged child in Bayonne, New Jersey will be paid $8.5 million to settle a medical malpractice lawsuit brought against the former owners of the Bayonne Medical Center and three medical workers. Attorneys representing the former owners of the hospital and the family settled the multimillion-dollar lawsuit after five days of testimony.

According to court records and trial testimony, Emily Ordonez, then 32, went to the hospital at 1:30 a.m. on Aug. 14, 2005 with labor pangs. All prenatal tests pointed to a normal healthy baby. But at 9:32 a.m., the heart monitor attached to her abdomen showed the baby's heart suddenly plunged from 140 beats per minute to the dangerously low level of 60 beats per minute.

Phone records show that the labor and delivery room nurse waited almost half an hour before calling the attending obstetrician and when he arrived from Staten Island 22 minutes later, he waited until 10:55 a.m. to start an emergency C-section.

The reason for the baby's low heart rate was that his umbilical chord was compressed and the fetus was starved for oxygen. The delays, therefore, left Jose Ordonez, now 5, with permanent brain damage and needing full-time care. The boy is prone to seizures, cannot see, walk, or hold his head up by himself, and he must be fed through a straw.

Besides the hospital, the parents sued the obstetrician, the delivery room nurse, and her supervisor.

Source: The Jersey Journal

Virtually all pregnant women in the U.S. are exposed to multiple and varied chemicals – some long banned, others currently used – that may harm the fetus during sensitive periods of development, according to a new study by researchers at the University of California San Francisco.

The study found that the bodies of virtually all pregnant women in the U.S. carry multiple chemicals, including some banned since the 1970s and others used in common products such as non-stick cookware, processed foods and personal care products.

The researchers used data from the National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey (NHANES) to determine whether 163 chemicals were in the blood or urine of 268 U.S. pregnant women sampled between 2003 and 2004.

According to the study - the first to look at a broad range of chemicals specifically in pregnant women - 99% to 100% of pregnant women carried polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), organochlorine pesticides, perfluorinated compounds (PFCs), phenols, polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), phthalates, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and perchlorate.

The health risks for mother and child associated with exposure to this many chemicals at detectable levels is not known. Low-level exposures to some of these chemicals during the prenatal period can cause long-term health effects, including birth defects, reproductive problems and cancer.

Surprisingly, DDE – a breakdown product of the long-banned DDT pesticide – was found in every woman and at some of the highest levels measured for any of the chemicals. Other chemicals found at high levels include perfluoroctane sulfonic acid (PFOS), which is found in food packaging and non-stick cookware; triclosan, found in antibacterial soap and products; and mono-ethyl phthalate (MEP), found in cosmetics and fragrances. Animal or human studies show all of these chemicals can interfere with the endocrine system.

In addition, many of the pollutants measured in the study can pass through the placenta from the mother to the developing fetus and have been measured in cord blood, fetal blood and amniotic fluid.

Source: Environmental health News

You can view the original report here.

In vitro fertilization has generally been considered safe since the first IVF baby was born more than 30 years ago. But recent studies unveil a number of risks that couples considering the procedure should be aware of, reports Gina Kolata of the New York Times.

These IVF-related risks may include increased risk of low birth weight and premature birth, as well as severe birth defects like “a hole between the two chambers of the heart, a cleft lip or palate, an improperly developed esophagus, and a malformed rectum.” Studies indicate that IVF possibly give rise to abnormal genetic expression patterns that are responsible for these genetic disorders.

In addition to the more common birth defects, children born by IVF are also suspected to be at greater risk for other genetic disorders that are much rarer: Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome (children with this syndrome are much more predisposed to childhood cancers of kidney, liver or muscle) and Angelman syndrome (severe mental retardation, motor defects and inability to speak).

Although certain risks of in vitro fertilization are beginning to surface, no finding is conclusive yet – these are preliminary studies that show “comparative risks,” but no “absolute risks” are known yet. Researchers are still in the process of discovering exactly what the risks are and what can be done to minimize them. More research reports will be available as scientists track the development and growth of babies born by IVF, and couples interested in fertility treatment should educate themselves about the risks in order to make informed decisions.

A recent Canadian study shows that pregnant women who live near highways are more likely to give birth to premature or low-birth-weight infants--but only among wealthy mothers. Pollution from the highways is what causes these effects, researchers say. The reason why these results are not found among poorer mothers is, says lead researcher Dr. Melissa Generoux, because poorer mothers have so many more risk factors that this particular single factor has less of an obvious effect. Wealthier mothers, safe from other risks, are more likely to be noticeably affected by this one factor.

Expecting mothers are bombarded with advice and even lectures on the minutest details of what they consume during pregnancy, and are often overcome with anxiety over these matters. Yet they and their children are still powerfully affected by factors outside their personal control, such as the level of pollution near residential areas.

The migrant worker parents of a 3-year-old Florida boy have won a significant settlement from Ag-Mart Produce, arguing that their child's birth defects were caused by exposure to pesticides in Ag-Mart's fields. This is enough to provide for the boy's expenses for the rest of his life, as the plaintiff's lawyer says. From the article:

Terms of the settlement have been kept private, but the family's attorney, Andrew Yaffa, said the money is "significant." Carlitos will not have to worry about medical care the rest of his life.

"Hopefully, someday, some way through medical research, they will be able to equip him with a wheelchair so he can gain some independence," Yaffa said.

Carlitos' parents said the boy is representative of many more children affected by pesticides, but their families are afraid to come forward. Yaffa credited the family for exposing deplorable conditions in farm work and creating changes that will benefit others for years to come.
blockquote>

Posted by Patrick A. Malone | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Birth Injury and Birth Defects