Entries Tagged 'VA Hospitals' ↓
November 5th, 2011 — Military Medical Malpractice, Military Negligence, VA Hospitals
In Levin v. United States of America, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the dismissal of a claim for battery arising from the alleged performance of ocular surgery without the patient’s consent. The court held that “the Gonzalez Act makes the [Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA)] the exclusive remedy for tort actions against military medical personnel.” Furthermore, the court stated that the FTCA preserves the government’s “sovereign immunity against ‘[a]ny claim arising out of . . . battery.’ 28 U.S.C. § 2680(h).” Thus, the plaintiff lacked a basis for recovery against either the United States or the individual physician.
The Ninth Circuit specifically rejected the plaintiff’s contention that the Gonzalez Act waives the United States’s sovereign immunity for battery claims arising from medical care. 10 U.S.C. § 1089 (e) provides that “[f]or purposes of [the Gonzalez Act], the [FTCA’s preservation of immunity against battery claims] shall not apply to any cause of action arising out of a negligent or wrongful act or omission in the performance of medical, dental, or related health care functions.” The court concluded that subsection (e) is “not . . . a waiver of sovereign immunity for battery claims brought against the United States, but . . . an expression of personal immunity from battery claims brought against military medical personnel.”
In so holding, the Ninth Circuit joins a minority of courts immunizing the government and its physicians for the most extreme and indefensible cases of medical malpractice
The Ninth Circuit’s opinion and the details of the case can be read here: http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?page=2&xmldoc=In%20FCO%2020111123144.xml&docbase=CSLWAR3-2007-CURR&SizeDisp=7
September 27th, 2011 — Military Medical Malpractice, VA Hospitals
A big problem with military medical malpractice is that, strictly speaking, military servicemen can’t file a claim against the United States government. This rule stems from a court case in 1950, Feres v. United States. This court case was actually a combination of three different court cases where active duty servicemen, or their families, were filing suit against the government for personal injury or wrongful death.
The court decided that the US government was protected against Tort Liability claims from active duty servicemen, but did leave in some allowances, specifically, that their families could file claim if they were the injured party, and that the servicemen could file a claim on behalf of a family member that could not file themselves.
That being said, the Feres Doctrine is the main case cited when looking at why a claim from an active duty servicemen was denied. Claims that have to do with medical malpractice are handled by the Veteran’s Affairs office, but again, no claim can be filed.
September 21st, 2011 — Military Medical Malpractice, Military Negligence, VA Hospitals, Wrongful Death
The Tennessee Veteran’s Home is a nursing home for retired veterans of the military which five years ago was under investigation by the Department of Justice for failing to properly care for their patients, some of which they were found to have contributed in their deaths. Now it’s happening all over again.
In March of last year Thomas Grelen, an Army Air Force veteran, recently fell, breaking his leg in several places which ended up requiring that the leg be amputated. Several days after the surgery to remove his leg, the retired Staff Sargent died.
Despite notations in his medical chart that he was prone to falling, at the time of his injury he was being attended to by only one female technician, who didn’t assist him enough in his attempt to sit down on his bed. He slipped off and his leg severely broke, being pinned underneath him. He was left in this position until the paramedics arrived 20 minutes later.
Thomas’ family sued the Veteran’s Home for negligence, medical malpractice, and breach of standards of care, which opted to settle out of court for $245,000 (the family sought the maximum of $300,000 when they first sued) rather than go to trial.
July 28th, 2011 — VA Hospitals
After caring for injured military personnel for more than a century, Walter Reed Army Hospital is closing.
“After 102 years, the famous Walter Reed Hospital is no longer.
After caring for generations of wounded troups, generals and even presidents, the storied facility is closing. Some of the buildings of historical significance will remain, but the rest will be torn down and the land will become property of the State Department and the District of Columbia. The DC portion is expected to be developed into a retail center.
The hospital was famous for the care it gave, despite an expose in 2007 that showed soldiers living with rodent droppings and black mold. President Lincoln was nearly shot by a sharpshooter on the ground of the facility. President Eisenhower died there after months of treatment, as did General Douglas MacArthur. President Nixon was treated for a staph infection and visited troops during his inpatient stay.
Hundreds of thousands of soldiers have been treated at the facility, in one year 775,000 outpatient visits were completed along with a capacity to treat 150 as inpatients. In addition to soldiers being treated at the facility, their families were also treated, resulting in many military brats being born at the facility.”
A new medical center is being built and will be known as the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center.
July 21st, 2009 — Federal Tort Claims Act, Military Medical Malpractice, VA Hospitals
From CBS 11 in Arlington (http://cbs11tv.com/local/medical.mistake.military.2.1091010.html)
Jessica Read is still stunned about what happened to her husband. “It’s very hard for us to understand.”
Last week, 20-year-old Colton Read, who grew up in Arlington and who’s now in the U. S. Air Force, went to have laparoscopic surgery to remove his gall-bladder at David Grant Medical Center at Travis Air Force Base near Sacramento.
His mother, Shelly Read-Miller says he wasn’t worried. “He said ‘Mom, this is routine, it’s no big deal.’”
But what happened during surgery turned out to be a very big deal.
Jessica Read says around 10 a.m., about an hour into the procedure, “A nurse runs out, ‘We need blood now,’ and she rounds the corner and my gut feelings is, ‘Oh my God, is that my husband?’”
She says his Air Force general surgeon mistakenly cut her husband’s aortic artery, but waited hours to transport him to a state hospital which has a vascular surgeon. “It took them until 5:30 to get him to UC Davis. I don’t understand.”
Because Read lost so much blood during that time, doctors had to amputate both legs. His mother sobbed, “I watched him take his first steps, and now his legs are gone.”
Read is still in intensive care, and doctors can’t remove his gall bladder for fear of infection.
Read the rest of the story at http://cbs11tv.com/local/medical.mistake.military.2.1091010.html.
January 25th, 2008 — Military Medical Malpractice, Military Negligence, VA Hospitals
Anyone who receives care at a military or VA hospital can’t avoid noticing that there are plenty of folks working in those facilities who are not government employees. Of course, that is easier to detect in a military hospital where active duty personnel usually wear military uniforms. However, even in VA hospitals where most everyone is a civilian, there are a large number of health care providers who are not government employees. Why is this important? Because if you are injured as a result of the negligence of an independent contractor, the United States is not responsible for any damages you may incur. In such a case you must sue the independent contractor and/or his employer to obtain compensation. This will usually complicate things significantly. Let me give you an example. Our firm recently represented the family of an active duty sailor whose wife received her care at a Navy primary care clinic in California. That clinic was operated by the Navy but staffed by civilian doctors and nurses provided by by a private company. Over the course of two years the patient was seen by numerous doctors and nurses for various primary care needs. No one, however, ever obtained a family history from the patient which would have notified them that the patient, who was 42, was at high risk for colon cancer because her father had died of the disease when he was 48. In fact, the patient on several occasions requested a colonoscopy because of her high risk, but her requests were always ignored. Her husband was eventually reassigned to Arizona where she presented to an Air Force hospital with abdominal problems. Tests demonstrated that the patient was suffering from Stage IV colon cancer. Despite treatment, the patient died about one year after being diagnosed.
Our firm filed a claim against the Navy under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Upon receipt of the medical records we determined that civilian doctors had treated this lady at the Navy clinic. We therefore filed a law suit against the doctors and the civilian company that employed them. When the six month FTCA administrative claims period had run, we joined the United States to our suit. This was all very tricky since California law provides a one year statute of limitation to bring a medical malpractice suit while the FTCA allows two years. Had we missed the California statute of limitations, the sailor and his family would have been barred from suing the civilian doctors.
As things turned out, the Navy blamed the civilians for not properly treating this patient and the civilians blamed the Navy. Both of them, of course, blamed the patient who was dead. After over a year of discovery, both the United States and the civilian company settled with the family.
This case demonstrates how important it is to pursue a claim in a timely manner and to secure the services of a firm which has the experience and resources to take on both the government and a large corporation simultaneously.
