Mom Sues Hospital and Nurse After Child's Finger Was Cut Off

A Florida mother is suing the Heart of Florida Regional Medical hospital in central Florida after a nurse cut off her 3-month-old child’s finger last October. According to the Associated Press, an intravenous tube had been attached to the child’s hand and when the nurse attempted to remove it with scissors she accidentally severed one of the child’s finger. Doctors have been unsuccessful with reattaching the child’s digit. The young mother has filed a Florida medical negligence suit against the hospital and the nurse, and is demanding unspecified damages, but at least $15,000.

Our lawyers are currently assisting individuals who have been injured in a Fort Lauderdale medical malpractice case. These particular cases occur when a physician, nurse, or other medical professional commits an act that is deviated from the standard of care associated with the circumstances. There is a statue in Florida that defines the standard of care as that level of care, skill and treatment in light of all the surrounding circumstances which is recognized as the acceptable and appropriate by reasonable prudent similar health care providers under similar circumstances. Whether or not a health care provider deviated from the standard of care will be determined by a jury if there is a trial. 

It is critical to hire a Fort Lauderdale medical negligence lawyer when you or your loved one has been injured as a result of a medical provider’s negligence. Furthermore, to prove that a medical professional has breached a professional standard of care can be very difficult and could require that an expert witness that is a licensed health care provider who is to provide testimony regarding this standard. Our clients can feel at ease in knowing that our lawyers hire only the most qualified medical experts who will provide the testimony to support your claim and that are experienced in conveying this information in a clear and concise manner in order for jurors to understand medical terminology. However, effective October 2011, out-of-state physicians and dentists are required to obtain a Florida Department of Health certification in order to serve as an expert witness. 

Moreover, the loss of an extremity, such as a hand, finger, toe, arm or leg is a severe loss. These kinds of losses frequently result from a car or workplace accident and it can be extremely frustrating when you have lost the permanent use of one of your limbs through no fault of your own. But these types of injuries are compensable and you should consult with one of our Fort Lauderdale personal injury lawyers immediately if you or a loved one has recently suffered this kind of injury. 

There are several incredibly skilled health care providers in Florida. However, there are also numerous of incidents in which a medical error or medical negligence has transpired. Patients are entitled to receive the utmost standard of care when they are receiving medical treatment. And when the treatment falls below the accepted professional standard of care according, patients have the legal right to sue the medical provider. Our Florida medical malpractice attorneys are here to answer your questions about your legal rights and can file a lawsuit on your behalf to recover monetary compensation for the injuries or harm you or a family member has suffered due the negligence of a medical professional.   

See Our Related Blog Posts:

 

Personal Injury to Florida Woman During Surgical Procedure

 Out-of-State Expert Witnesses Must Be Certified in Florida

Florida Prescription Drug Abuse Remains A Problem

Two Florida CVS pharmacies were raided on Saturday by agents of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). According to Reuters, although the details of the raids have not been released from the DEA agency, a news conference has been scheduled to take place on Monday, February 13, 2012 at 3:00 p.m. Florida time. Given the fact that approximately seven people living in the state of Florida die each day as a result of prescription overdose, our Fort Lauderdale personal injury attorneys have a strong interest in stopping prescription drug abuse in the state of Florida.

News of this recent raid comes just a couple months after other reports surfaced in mid-November that the CVS pharmacy sent letters to physicians in Florida that the pharmacy would no longer fill Schedule II prescriptions. Schedule II drug such as oxycodone, morphine, and cocaine are known to have a high risk for drug abuse which can cause the death of a person. Moreover, many of the deaths caused from the over dosage of these dangerous drugs have been linked to medical facilities which illegally prescribe or administer drugs, or as most commonly known as pill mills.

Disappointingly, it appears to be relatively easy for abusers to purchase from these pill mills. All they have to do is visit one of these facilities, receive little to no medical evaluation, and pay cash for their visit. More frustrating is the report from the Orlando Sentinel that reveals that during the year 2010, 90 of the top 100 oxycodone-purchasing doctors were from the state of Florida. Drug abuse is a serious problem which destroys families and communities, and it is sad to see that our citizens have fallen into drug abuse from the negligence of unscrupulous doctors.

If your loved one has died as a result of painkillers you should consult with an attorney to obtain advice about filing a Fort Lauderdale painkiller lawsuit. The physicians and medical facilities which prescribe or administer these deadly painkillers owe a duty to their patients and breach this duty when they fail to adequately caution their patients to becoming addicted to these powerful mediations. And when death has occurred, eligible family members could be entitled to recover monetary damages for their harm.

Hopefully, the Florida prescription-drug-monitoring database will curtail this type of activity. Effective September 1, 2011 providers who dispense controlled substances are required to report to the Electronic-Florida Online Reporting of Controlled Substances Evaluation program (E-FORCSE) by electronic means, any controlled substance dispenses within seven (7) days. The purpose of the database is to collect, store and monitor controlled substances which are classified as Schedules II, III, and IV drugs. Also, its goal is to assist health care providers with information about the dispensing of these medications as well as guide them in their decision to prescribe the drugs to their patients.

Our Fort Lauderdale medical malpractice attorneys are here to answer any questions which you may have as a result of you or your loved one being seriously injured, or when death has occurred in your family as a result of dangerous painkillers. If you know of someone who is addicted to these medications encourage them to seek treatment immediately.  

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Spinal Cord Injuries

 Out-of-State Expert Witnesses Must Be Certified in Florida

Out-of-State Expert Witnesses Must Be Certified in Florida

Effective October 1, 2011, certain out-of-state physicians and dentists will have to obtain a Florida Department of Health certification in order to serve as expert witnesses in Florida. This new law is designed to prevent expert witness giving fraudulent statements and hold them accountable for the opinions they provide. An expert witness is a professional by virtue or his or her education, skills or experience that provides expertise in a particular subject which can legally be relied upon. Many of you who watched recent high-profile criminal trials, such as the Dr. Conrad Murray trial, observed expert witness testimony in which the prosecution relied upon to establish how the defendant doctor acts deviated from the standard of care which would be exercised by those in his profession under the circumstances. Similarly, in Fort Lauderdale personal injury lawsuits, expert witnesses are often hired to testify on issues involving causation.

In Florida, a plaintiff in a medical malpractice lawsuit is required to prove that the defendant was the cause of his or her injuries. Proving causation can be quite complex so the need for expert testimony becomes vital and can be the deciding factor of whether or not a jury will award a verdict in favor of the plaintiff.

Fort Lauderdale medical malpractice attorneys often hire expert witnesses who are qualified to explain standard of care deviations and how an incorrect medical procedure or incorrect use of medical equipment was the cause of the plaintiff’s injuries. Also, in
 Florida, it is a requirement that the plaintiff prove that the defendant’s negligent act “probably caused” the plaintiff’s injuries. That is, when expert testimony is introduced, the opinion must be more than mere speculation. The Supreme Court in Wales v. Barnes [278, So. 2d 601, 603 (Fla. 19730], reversed the district court’s decision and ruled that the plaintiff’s expert witness testimony was legally sufficient to establish that the defendant caused the plaintiff’s injuries. In Wales, the expert physician opined that it was “within reasonable medical probability” that the defendant’s use of a specific type of forceps during the delivery of an infant were not of the standard under the circumstances. In Wales, the plaintiff sued two doctors in a medical malpractice lawsuit, claiming that they were negligent when they used a certain type of forceps during the delivery of their child which caused the child to suffer serious injuries. The infant was later treated for bilateral subdural hematomas. During trial, conflicting evidence was presented which demonstrated that the child may have sustained injuries due to a nonnegligent act, such as becoming injured while traveling through the birth canal. The district court held that the defendant was entitled to a directed verdict because the plaintiff failed to eliminate any other nonnegligent causes of the child’s injuries and nor did the plaintiff offer direct proof that the injury resulted for a definite act of negligence. However, the Supreme Court reversed and held that the plaintiff’s expert witness testimony was legally sufficient to establish causation. Further, the court held that the issue of causation was the particular issue in this case was one for the jury.

However, in contrast, the court in Gooding v. University Hospital Building, Inc., [445 So. 2d 1015, 1017 (Fla. 1984)], ruled that the defendant was entitled to a directed verdict because plaintiff's expert witness failed to testify that immediate diagnosis and surgery would have more likely than not enabled the plaintiff to survive. In short, the Court ruled that the district court was correct when by recognizing that the Florida follows a more likely than not standard in proving causation.

Therefore, Fort Lauderdale medical malpractice lawyers recognize that expert testimony may become vital in your personal injury lawsuit. Because understanding causation can be quite complex for jurors, and juries are not allow to infer negligence from a bad act alone, it will be vital that expert testimony is presented in order to assist the jury in comprehending confusing medical terms, procedures and technology. If you believe that you were hurt or injured as a result of medical malpractice, you should contact an attorney today to discuss your unique situation.  

See Our Related Blog Posts:
Birth Related Neurological Injuries and the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan

Personal Injury to Florida Woman During Surgical Procedure

Birth Related Neurological Injuries and the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan

In 1988, the Florida Legislature enacted the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Act. Under the Act, the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Compensation Association was established. The association is the state administrative agency which administers the Florida Birth Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan. Often, the program is referred to as the NICA fund, or NICA program. Under NICA funding, a limited class of birth-related neurological injuries qualify for compensation. Essentially, when an infant sustains a birth-related neurological injury, parents may file a claim with the agency for NICA funding, instead of commencing a medical malpractice lawsuit against the physician, hospital or other healthcare provider. By doing so, a parent will be deemed to have given up their common law rights and remedies, and the participating physician, hospital, or other healthcare provider is considered immune from liability. This system, which is designed upon a no-fault basis, was created by the legislature as an effort to reduce the costs of medical malpractice insurance for obstetricians. However, in order for parents to receive compensation for their child’s injuries, the physician, hospital or other healthcare provider must be a NICA program participant.

Filing a claim can be complex matter and whether or not a child is covered will be determined by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). The ALJ is required to consider whether the injury claimed is a birth-related neurological injury, if the physician was a participating physician under NICA and was delivering obstetric services in the course of labor, delivery, or resuscitation in the immediate post delivery period in the hospital; and the amount of the award which is compensable. Our Fort Lauderdale medical malpractice attorneys handle these types of cases and are here to guide parents through this intricate procedure.

Recently, the Supreme Court of Florida held in Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Association v. St. Vincent’s Medical Center, Inc., et.al. , that in order for a birth-related neurological injury to occur, the injury must be caused by a deprivation of oxygen which renders the infant permanently and substantially impaired, must occur during labor, delivery or resuscitation in the immediate post delivery period. Since Plaintiff Bennetts and the NICA fund petitioned the court for discretionary review, the Court granted review.

Plaintiffs Robert and Tammy Bennett claimed that their daughter, Tristan Bennett, sustained permanent and substantial brain damage as a result of the alleged medical malpractice of William H. Long, M.D., and St. Vincent’s Medical Center, Inc., in addition to other medical care providers. On September 21, 2001, Tammy Bennett was involved in a car accident and was transported to a nearby hospital where fetal testing was conducted. After the results of the testing, Tammy Bennett was transported by helicopter to the St. Vincent’s Medical Center where she declined into kidney failure. Subsequently, Dr. Long, her obstetrician, performed a cesarean section. According to the hospital records, after being born, Tristan “did not cry, had minimal respiratory effort, and required resuscitation with bulb, free flow oxygen, mechanical suction, and bag and mask ambu.”

Thereafter, Tristan was transferred to the special care nursery for medical treatment due to “moderate respiratory distress and metabolic acidosis.” Further, the hospital records indicated that the infant responded well to treatment, resuscitation efforts ceased, became stabilized and was sent to the hospital’s regular infant nursery. However, on October 3, she began to demonstrate signs of seizure activity, neurological decline and “suffered from prolonged and severe acidosis”. On October 5, testing conducted concluded Tristan had suffered permanent and substantial neurological damage. Her parents filed a civil suit against Dr. Long, St. Vincent’s Medical Center, and other defendants. NICA intervened and took the position that the infant’s injuries were not a birth-related neurological injury under the scope of the NICA statue. The circuit court abated the civil suit so that the administrative agency could determine whether or not Tristan injuries qualified for NICA funding. The ALJ ruled that Tristan injuries did not qualify for NICA funding.

At issue during the administrative hearing was the timing of Tristan’s birth. The ALJ ruled that Tristan’s injuries did not qualify under NICA funding because there was a second incident of oxygen depravation which occurred on October 3, 2001 and was not caused during labor, delivery or resuscitation in the immediate post delivery period. The First District reversed the ALJ’s decision and held that under the NICA statutory scheme, the phrase, “immediate post delivery period in a hospital” was to be construed to extend to the time an infant spends time in a hospital for medical treatment for a life threatening condition that requires close supervision. Therefore, according to the court, from the time of Tristan’s delivery until October 3, Tristan suffered oxygen depravation which required her to spend time in a special care nursery at the St. Vincent’s Medical Center. From the court’s perspective, Tristan’s special care nursery time constituted the time for resuscitation in the immediate post delivery period in the hospital for purposes under the NICA plan.

In reviewing this case de novo, the Court stated that NICA statutory interpretation is to be interpreted by its clear and unambiguous meaning, and strictly be construed to involve only those incidents which occurred during the statutory mandated period. The Court held that the First District erred by expanding the statutory meaning to include the time from Tristan’s birth by cesarean section all the way through the events on October 3. The Court reasoned that under NICA statutory scheme, birth-related neurological injuries caused by oxygen depravation, which renders an infant permanent and substantially impaired, must occur during labor, delivery and resuscitation in the immediate post delivery period which does not include any additional expanded period of time unless the resuscitation effort is one which is a continuous and ongoing effort. Additionally, the First District’s statutory interpretation would extend to those situations in which an infant is transferred from a delivery room and the obstetrician relinquishes his or her responsibility of the infant to other healthcare providers. Further, since the healthcare providers ceased resuscitation efforts on Tristan prior to October 3, the Court affirmed the ALJ’s decision and remanded the case to the First District. Also in this case, the Court ruled on the issue of benefit entitlement to the NICA statutory rebuttable presumption of compensation.

If you are a parent and your child was born with a birth-related neurological injury, since every case is different, you should consult with a Fort Lauderdale birth injury attorney who can provide you with legal advice regarding your circumstances.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Personal Injury to Florida Woman During Surgical Procedure

Dog Attack Shootings - Who Can You Blame