The Injury Lawyer Blog

Unfortunately, one common form of medical malpractice is what is known as wrong-site surgery. When this occurs, a surgeon operates on the wrong location of the body, and can be as tragic as a fatal removal of a functioning kidney while leaving a non-functioning one in, or the amputation of the wrong limb. According to the journal Archives of Surgery, this occurs in as many as 2700 cases every year in the United States.

There are some simple suggestions for minimizing the risk that you will be a victim of wrong-site surgery:

• Talk to your surgeon just prior to the surgery, before you are prepped or given anesthesia. Make sure he or she knows the specifics of the operation.
• Don't let nurses or other staff mark the surgical site. Your surgeon should do this so that you know he or she knows where the cutting will be.
• Talk to everyone involved—radiologists, anesthesiologists, nurses--to make sure they know the specifics. The more people know, the more likely it is that someone will speak up if the wrong procedure is about to be performed.
• Make sure the hospital has procedures in place to prevent wrong-site surgery.

If you do these things, hopefully you will be able to avoid becoming a victim of wrong-site surgery.

If you or a loved one has been unfortunate enough to suffer from such a gross medical negligence as wrong-site surgery in the Chicago area, contact the experienced personal injury lawyers at The Law Offices of Barry G. Doyle, P.C. today to get compensation.

Labels: medical malpractice, surgical malpractice

A federal court has ordered a Kuwait-based contractor to pay nearly $5 million in damages to the family of a U.S. military officer killed in Iraq -- a rare court decision holding a contracting company accountable for its actions in the war. Lt. Col. Dominic Baragona was the highest-ranking soldier to die in Iraq when he was killed May 19, 2003.

Army Lt. Col. Dominic "Rocky" Baragona was just an hour away from a U.S. base in Kuwait -- ultimately headed home to the United States -- when a tractor-trailer operated by Kuwait and Gulf Link Transport Company slammed into his Humvee on May 19, 2003, killing him instantly. Baragona, a West Point graduate, was 42 years old and the highest-ranking soldier to have died in the war at the time.

His family filed a wrongful death suit against KGL. Earlier this month, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia sided with the family, holding the Kuwait company negligent in Baragona's death for failing to provide safe passage on the three-lane road where the accident occurred.

A key issue in the judge's decision was whether a U.S. court had jurisdiction over a foreign contractor and whether there was a legal basis to find it negligent. Ultimately, Judge William Duffey found that there was.

"The court enters judgment in the amount of $4,907,048 to be paid by KGL in a single lump payment," the judge wrote in his 12-page decision issued on November 5.

Baragona's father, Dominic Baragona, a former U.S. Marine, told CNN he is embarrassed his family was forced into a lawsuit to learn details surrounding his son's death. He also said the court decision is bittersweet: No amount of money will ever bring his son back, but it feels good that a court of law sided with his family. "You feel good for the Rock," he said of his boy. "We're going to make KGL sweat it a little bit. I mean they're going to remember Rocky's name."

If you or a loved one has been injured or killed in a truck accident in Philadelphia or anywhere in Pennsylvania, please contact the truck accident attorneys at Pomerantz Perlberger & Lewis today.

Boston Scientific Corp. announced that it has agreed to increase the amount it will pay to settle thousands of heart patients' legal claims involving potentially faulty defibrillators by $45 million.

The increase means the medical device maker will pay as much as $240 million, instead of the $195 million from a settlement announced July 13, 2007 that didn't cover additional litigation included under the new total.

The previous settlement involved a least 4,000 patients' claims involving Guidant Corp. defbrillators that were subject to recalls and safety warnings in 2005 and 2006 before Boston Scientific Corp. acquired Guidant in April 2006 for $27 billion. The expanded settlement covers 8,500 claims, including claims that had been consolidated into a case in U.S. District Court in Minnesota, and other claims nationwide.

Natick, Mass.-based Boston Scientific said it believes the expanded agreement covers "substantially all" U.S. cases arising from the recalls and warnings. Charles Zimmerman, an attorney or a steering committee representing plaintiffs, called the amended agreement "great news" that will provide plaintiffs "with substantial relief."

The plaintiffs claimed Guidant knowingly sold defibrillators with potentially life-threatening defects over a three-year period. Some of the problems involved wiring flaws that could prevent a defibrillator from delivering a shock to jump-start a suddenly failing heart and restore a healthy rhythm.

The company was criticized for dragging its feet in notifying doctors, patients and regulators about the problems. Many of the plaintiffs' devices never malfunctioned, but they sought compensation for medical monitoring and anxiety.

In a March 31, 2007 regulatory filing, Boston Scientific said it had set aside $732 million to cover expenses in the cases - about three times the amended settlement amount.

The new settlement total is in addition to $16.75 million that Boston Scientific said in August it would pay to settle investigations into the defibrillator problems by attorneys general in 35 states and Washington D.C.

If you or a loved one has been injured or killed due to a defective product in Houston or anywhere in Texas, please contact a Houston product liability attorney at Marc Whitehead & Associates today to schedule your initial consultation.

An Ohio man who was legally blind has died after crashing his all-terrain vehicle in Columbiana County. Thirty-four-year-old Charles Hoyle was with friends when he decided that he wanted to drive an ATV even though he was considered legally blind and had not had a valid driver's license since 2000.

Hoyle' friends helped him onto the ATV and warned him to drive slowly, but when he got on, he accelerated very fast, struck a small tree, and then hit a larger tree head-on. He was thrown from the ATV and died of a head injury at the scene. All the men had been drinking prior to the crash.

If you or a loved one has been injured or killed in an ATV accident in Denver, Boulder, or anywhere in Colorado, please contact the experienced personal injury attorneys at Zakehm Atherton, LLC today to schedule your initial consultation.

Motorcycle helmet laws are highly political and hot topics of debate throughout the United States. The federal government is unable to set a national helmet policy because constitutionally-speaking, helmet law is under the jurisdiction of individual states. However, the federal government has attempted to influence state policy in the past by creating the Highway Safety Act of 1966, which authorized the Department of Transportation to withhold portions of federal highway road construction funds from any states that did not enact motorcycle helmet laws for all riders. This Act prompted 38 states to enact a helmet law by the end of the following year, and by 1995, 47 of 50 states had a law requiring all riders to wear helmets.

However, that same year, Congress withdrew the federal requirement, and three years later, half of the states with helmet laws repealed those statutes. And, since that time, many states have modified the law to only requiring minors to wear helmets while on motorcycles. Currently, 20 states and the District of Columbia require all riders to wear helmets; 27 states have limited helmet laws; and only 3 states have absolutely no regulation on helmet use.

Though there are passionate activists on both sides of the helmet issue, most people can clearly see that helmets contribute to the surprisingly low numbers of motorcycle injuries and fatalities along our nation's highways.

If you or a loved one was injured or killed in a motorcycle accident in Florida, please visit the website of the experienced motorcycle accident attorneys at Ellis, Ged & Bodden, P.A., serving clients in West Palm Beach and surrounding areas of Florida.

A suicidal driver rammed a big rig head-on in Arizona on November 18, 2007 in what a Department of Public Safety spokesman called "the most tragic event I've seen in recent months." The driver of the truck made it out of his rig just moments before the truck exploded into flames. Luckily and amazingly, the truck driver suffered no injuries. The driver of the van, who wanted to die, did. Authorities are still working on identifying this man. Police and rescue workers at the scene found a suicide note in the man’s wallet indicating this was a planned collision.

"To deal with the fact that someone willfully took his life and in order to do so, tried to take someone else's. That is hard to swallow. You see the charred remains of a semi-truck, an 18-wheeler, which is now no taller than my knees. That's hard," Sgt. Tim Mason of the Phoenix police, said.

If you or a loved one has been injured or killed in a truck accident in Houston or anywhere in Texas, please visit the website of Kennedy Hodges, L.L.P., Trial Attorneys serving the Houston and surrounding areas of Texas.

Truck accidents (semi-trucks, vans, dump trucks, fire trucks, and tractor trailers) account for over 20 billion dollars a year in damages, according to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. With so much money on the line, it's easy to see why trucking and insurance company personnel arrive on the scene of a trucking accident so quickly. These industry representatives are collecting statements, pictures and information to protect the legal and monetary interests of their clients.

If you have ever been in an auto accident, you may think you know what to do in the even of a truck accident. What you might not know is that trucking accidents are different than automobile accidents because of federal laws governing the trucking industry. For example, federal trucking regulations require that evidence must be maintained but only for a limited amount of time. This means evidence pertaining to your accident can legally be destroyed after six months if an attorney doesn't obtain a court order and take immediate action.

If you are involved in a truck accident, it is imperative to understand the steps you should take to protect yourself.

Obtain the following information:

A copy of the police report
License plate number of the truck
Any names or identification on the cab and trailer
Driver information including name, license number, and all contact and insurance information
Insurance information for truck owner
Length of skid marks (if possible)
Condition of truck
Names and info about any witnesses

In addition to gathering the above information, you should:

Take photographs if possible
See a medical doctor for examination as soon as possible
Obtain a copy of your medical report
Contact a truck accident attorney

Do not give any statements without first talking to your experienced truck accident attorney, and do not sign anything without first talking to your attorney. If you or a loved one has been injured or killed in a truck accident in Texas, please contact Jim Adler & Associates, Texas Injury Lawyers, today to schedule your initial consultation.

In Mesa, Arizona, the Banner Baywood Medical Center is seeking to become the first nationally certified stroke center in East Valley, Arizona. The center, which focuses on a combination of therapies to help people recover from the catastrophic brain injury suffered as a result of strokes, which are defined oxygen deprivation to the brain, often caused by blood clots or other circulatory irregularities.

Strokes are the country's third leading killer, and the number one cause of disability in the United States. However, most people, including those in the medical community, have difficulty recognizing the symptoms and knowing how to respond to a stroke, leading to a high probability of medical malpractice among uncertified doctors.

The new center will serve a previously unserviced area, since the closest stroke center is at Scottsdale Health Care Osborn. The Scottsdale clinic is good, but only the Mayo Clinic Hospital and St. Joseph's Medical Center have the certification sought by the Banner Baywood Medical Center.

The most common form of stroke, ischemic stroke, is caused by a blood clot in the brain. The risk of this stroke was increased in users of the dangerous drug Vioxx, but already caused over 2100 deaths annually in Arizona. In response to this high mortality rate, central Arizona hospitals came together to form the Phoenix Stroke Initiative in 2000, but the East Valley had no similarly-equipped medical centers.

If you or a loved one has suffered from a stroke, and misdiagnosis or Emergency Room errors led the brain injury to be far more catastrophic than it should have been, contact the Phoenix area medical malpractice attorneys at Snyder & Wenner, P.C, to get redress for their injuries.

The independent consumer advocacy group World Against Toys Causing Harm (WATCH) recently released its annual list of the 10 worst toys, and, despite all the recalls issued this year, over 60 affecting millions of toys, all but one of the toys are still for sale. The list was met with criticism from both the US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) and the Toy Industry Association (TIA), an industry advocacy group.

Referring to the recently-recalled Aquadots, WATCH's attorney said, "Why are toys being made with known toxins? . . . . The best interest of toy children need to be put before the best interests of toy companies."

In response, a spokeswoman for the CPSC said, "Toys that are for sale right now have gone through more investigation and more scrutiny than any year past."

There certainly is some truth to this, since one of the ten toys, a rubber-band gun, is a toy that would have caused no alarm whatsoever, but the question is whether this investigation and scrutiny is leading to safer products for our children.

A spokeswoman for TIA said, "In general, the products are safe as intended to be used."

Clearly, this standard is insufficient, since we cannot make sure that kids only use toys as intended. However, hopefully we can make sure that the toys are given proper and adequate warnings that clarify what would constitute its intended use. While toy manufacturers cannot possibly anticipate every circumstance, they must strive to make toys as safe as possible.

If your child has been injured by an unsafe toy or other defective product, contact the product liability lawyers at Pomerantz, Perlberger, & Lewis, L.L.P to give toy companies more incentive to make sure their products are safe and adequately labeled.

Now that the lawyers are beginning to decide whether their clients will participate in a settlement offered by Merck for patients who took Vioxx and suffered myocardial infarction (MI), commonly known as a "heart attack," it is a good time to look at the details of the settlement offer. These details are as follows:

• Most importantly, the settlement will be considered void unless at least 85% of those with pending cases against Merck sign on, including
• MI cases
• Ischemic stroke cases, i.e. cases of strokes caused by blockage of arteries in the brain
• Death cases
• Cases of use for 12 or more months
• The agreement is offered only to US residents, and those who claim their MI occurred in the US.
• All claimants that will be party to the case must meet three standards or "gates":
• The injury gate-they must have objective, medical proof of an MI or ischemic stroke
• The duration gate-they must have documented receipt of at least 30 Vioxx pills
• The proximity gate-the pills must have been received close enough to the injury to support a presumption of Vioxx ingestion within 14 days of the injury
• Strokes that are hemorrhagic or transitory in nature will not be considered for the purposes of this settlement
• Law firms on the Plaintiffs' Steering Committees must recommend enrollment in the program to 100% of their clients that qualify
• Each individual case will be examined to determine qualification based on objective, documented facts, including records of independent risk factors
• The parties will seek to get judges to order plaintiffs' attorneys to promptly register all Vioxx claims
• $4 billion have been allocated for MI claims, $850 million for ischemic stroke claims
• The settlement will be allocated according to the independent qualification of each claim
• Payments could begin in August 2008, and will be paid in installments
• Merck reserves the right to not pay any settlement if any of the terms of the settlement are not met
• Merck does not admit fault

The settlement shows the complexity of dealing with a major piece of litigation over a defective pharmaceutical. If you or a loved one has been injured by a pharmaceutical with dangerous side effects, you cannot go it alone. Contact the experienced prescription drug attorneys at Snyder & Wenner, P.C, protecting the rights of victims in the Pheonix, Arizona, area.

A mother who worked in an Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) clean room for 14 years and gave birth to a son with an extreme birth defect is suing the company for damages. During her 14 years of employment, she was exposed to many chemicals, including ethylene glycol monoethyl ether acetate and 2-ethoxyethyl acetate, both known to cause birth defects. The mother had to get doctor's attention twice for inhalation of toxic fumes. Unlike inorganic compounds like asbestos and silica dust, these organic compounds are chemically active in the body, capable of causing genetic damage as well as damage to lungs, mucous membranes, and skin.

When the woman became pregnant, she was concerned about her chemical exposure, and inquired at a local clinic, but was told not to worry about it. She informed AMD about her pregnancy, but they did not inform her of the possible risks, and she continued to work in the clean room for almost the entire course of her pregnancy. When her son was born, he was missing part of his arm and had serious brain damage.

Now she is filing a suit against her former employer, alleging that the company recklessly endangered her and her unborn son by not informing her of the risks she faced. This is not a workers' compensation claim, but a claim for damages. She has also filed a medical malpractice suit against the clinic employees who told her to go back to work, even though she had already been toxically exposed to organic chemicals.

If you or someone you love has been hurt by a negligent employer who makes your safety a low priority after profits, contact the experienced personal injury lawyers at the Law Offices of Barry G. Doyle, P.C. to get redress of your wrongs.

On November 12, a tractor-trailer carrying a load of phone books overturned on I-25 in Denver when the cargo shifted. The truck accident caused no catastrophic injuries, but led to a three-hour long traffic jam in mid-day as several lanes of the highway were closed in both directions. Police and emergency response crews were forced to spend their time in a chain handing phone books from one truck to the other across the median. Failure to properly secure the cargo is a common cause of truck accidents.

If you or someone you love has been injured in a truck accident, contact the experienced truck injury lawyers at Snyder & Wenner, P.C, serving the Phoenix, Arizona area.

Although Merck had set a policy of fighting every Vioxx suit brought against it, on Friday morning it announced a dramatic turnaround. The company has agreed to a settlement for $4.85 billion dollars, but only if at least 85 % of those filing suit against the company agree to the settlement. This amount is considerably below what was thought to be Merck's potential liability in the pharmaceutical injury case, as much as $50 billion.

When Merck announced a recall for the defective drug Vioxx in 2004, forecasts for the company were dismal. With over two million people taking the drug, and 38,000 fatal heart attacks attributed to the taking of the anti-arthritic, it seemed that the company could not possibly salvage either its profits or its reputation as a leading manufacturer and marketer of life-saving prescription medications. Then, when it came out that Merck had begun to be aware of the risks of the drug in 1999, and when congress issued a report stating that the company had deliberately mislead doctors, who might otherwise be charged with medical malpractice, and patients to increase the marketability of the drug, it seemed Merck was doomed.

However, Merck, like the frog in the butter churn, too stupid to know its situation was hopeless, responded by fighting every single Vioxx suit and refusing to acknowledge fault. This strategy seems to have churned up an island of butter. Winning over a third of the most dramatic cases brought against it, Merck seems to have cowed its opponents somewhat, cowed them to the point that they might think of accepting a settlement less than 1/10 of Merck's original estimated liability, less, in fact, than its sales in Vioxx for two of the five years between when it came to know of the drug's dangers and when it pulled the drug from the market.

If you or someone you love has been injured taking a prescription medication, you have a responsibility to seek redress from those who have wronged you. Early litigation can help force the drug-makers hand, causing them to pull the drug from the market before the company can make too much in ill-gotten gains. Contact the Law Firm of Barry G. Doyle to get help from an experienced defective pharmaceutical lawyer and stop drug profiteering.

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, author of the blog: The Conscience of a Liberal, attacks the excuses put forward by apologists for the current health care system, putting the lie to arguments used to resist health care reform in this country. The top four excuses he cites are:

1) No insurance, no problem--in using this excuse, apologists, like George Bush, claim that everyone has access to health care, just by going to the emergency room. But we all know that people who only have emergency room access for health care are one of the reasons why we spend more on health care than any other nation, yet have one of the lowest life expectancies among industrialized nations. People who go to the emergency room as their standard care burden emergency room doctors, leading to exhaustion-related medical malpractice.

2) Bad habits lead to bad health--According to apologists the low life expectancy is due to obesity rates in this country, but most definitive studies show that obesity and other lifestyle-related problems are actually a small fraction of our expenses. Furthermore, many other industrialized nations are suffering from obesity issues as well.

3) It's better than it was--Simply because health insurance has improved doesn't mean we should just grin and bear it. Nor does it make any sense to make this argument when all the other countries we are comparing to have shown similar (actually better) improvement in their health care systems.

4) Socialized medicine!--(Well-paid) advocates for the US health system are full of horror stories about the evils of socialized medicine. Did you hear the one about the doctor who failed to diagnose a 32-pound cyst in a woman complaining of abdominal pain? What about the one where the 22-year-old died of pain medication overdose after knee surgery? Or the one where the woman went in to have her tubes tied and ended up losing her hands and feet? Oh, no, wait, those are all horror stories related to our medical system!

In the end, the most damning evidence in this whole affair is that we spend 6 times as much on administrative costs for health care than other advanced countries, but get little in return. More doctors and less administrators could lead to a huge decrease in malpractice lawsuits in this country.

If you or someone you love has been the victim of our poorly-run health care system, contact the Law Firm of Barry G. Doyle to seek relief.

Another sign of how truckers and trucking companies value their schedules over the health and well being of other drivers: a truck driver in Mississippi fled the scene of a nine-vehicle accident on highway I-10 in Mississippi. The accident occurred around 9:30 pm on November 4, as overnight fog combined with smoke from a nearby controlled burn to make very low visibility. In the fog, one private truck hauling a boat hit a van, then pulled to the side of the road. Other vehicles slowed to avoid the truck and probably to rubberneck, as drivers will do, which led to a second accident in which a charter bus struck an 18-wheeler and another vehicle.

The trucker fled the scene so quickly that no one was able to get a description of the driver or see the name of the employer, typically emblazoned on the side of trailers. The driver is still at large.

If you or a loved one has been injured in a trucking accident, make sure that trucking companies understand the damage they have done to you. Contact an experienced trucking accident attorney at the Law Firm of Barry G. Doyle today for your free initial consultation.

On November 2, a Chicago area jury decided in favor of the families of three teens killed in a commercial truck accident on July 6, 2002. The trucker, who had a history of falsifying his log books, and had already exceeded the number of hours he was allowed to drive that week under Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) Hours of Service regulations, didn't hit his brakes until a full three seconds after striking the teens' Pontiac Grand Am. The jury believed that this action showed the commercial trucker was not paying attention, either due to fatigue or general carelessness. No alcohol or drugs were involved in the accident.

The accident occurred on a rural Indiana highway, where two carloads of teens crossed the highway. Because the first car successfully crossed the highway, it means the trucker had even more notice to slow down or be prepared to stop in case the second car attempted the crossing. The jury awarded $8 million to the families of the two teens who were passengers in the car, and only $4 million to the family of the driver, since it was determined that she was 40% responsible for the accident.

The trucking company has vowed to appeal the decision.

If someone you love has suffered a wrongful death due to the negligence of a trucker, do not let them blame the dead. When companies let drivers get away with or even encourage them to forge their log books and violate FMCSA regulations, the company must pay. Contact Chicago area truck accident lawyer Barry G. Doyle today to bring those responsible to justice.

On November 1, a Yellowstone County, Montana, jury awarded $1.7 million in damages to a railway worker who was injured, but fortunately not killed, when five coal cars crashed into a locomotive where he was working. He filed his claim under the Federal Employers' Liability (FELA), which, unlike normal Workers' Compensation, requires that an employee prove fault before he or she can receive compensation.

The jury found that the railroad's negligence was at fault for the failure of the cars' brakes that caused them to roll down a side track on January 19, 2005, at a rail yard near Gillette, Wyoming. When the cars collided with the engine where the employee was working, the employee suffered career-ending back and neck injuries. The jury denied claims that the employee was also due compensation for a lesser accident he'd suffered in 2003, or for repetitive motion-related injuries.

This is the largest amount awarded by a Montana Jury in a personal injury suit against a railroad under FELA, exceeding a 2005 $1.5 million award.

If you or someone you love has been injured working on the railroad, don't just pass the time away, get in touch with an experienced railroad injury lawyer who can win your case. In the Chicago area, contact the Law Firm of Barry G. Doyle for your free initial consultation.

A Palm Beach County jury recently awarded $3.6 million to a couple whose daughter was killed while driving a friend's ATV. The jury ruled that the wrongful death of the 13-year-old girl was due to the ATV owners' failure to heed the warning stickers on the ATV, which stated that the ATV should not be driven by anyone under the age of 16. The hope of the parents is that this suit, like other personal injury lawsuits, will protect other children in the future, but it is unlikely. Instead, this case is a perfect example of lawsuits that do little but generate business for lawyers and create unnecessary clutter in our courts.

The parents who allowed the girl who was killed to ride the ATV had also already allowed their son, also 13, to ride the vehicle, even though they knew the risk of traumatic brain injury and death existed. If they were willing to risk their son, it is unlikely that the threat of any amount of punitive damage would have stopped them from allowing the girl to ride the vehicle. Why? Because people assume that the accident will not happen to them, and they will continue to make that assumption no matter how many lawsuits we file. And most of the time they are right. For one family with one ATV the risks of an injury are low. And this ruling is also inappropriate because the family being sued is now bankrupt for no good cause.

So when is a personal injury lawsuit with multi-million dollar damages appropriate? It is appropriate only when the defendant knowingly engaged in behavior that had a significant likelihood of causing injury, when they did so for profit, and when they are likely to commit such actions again unless given sufficient fiduciary damage to force them to correct their behavior.

If you have been injured by a company who has balanced the risk of your injury against their profit, contact the Law Firm of Barry G. Doyle, an experienced personal injury lawyer practicing in the Chicago area.

Since the 1990s, the doctor-patient relationship has been eroding, according to a recent article in the Boston Globe. In response to the increasingly assembly-line approach to health care and a wave of high-profile medical malpractice cases in the late 1980s and early 1990s, patients began to get more involved in their health care. Since the 1990s, patients have also had increased access to medical information via the internet and have started coming to doctor's appointments prepared with questions. Whereas people used to trust their doctor out of a combination of necessity, long-term relationships, and a general deference to authority, that trust was eroded by evidence that doctors didn't necessarily know as much as they let on, and, beyond that, often made grievous errors.

Emergency room errors and surgical errors (such as amputating the wrong limb, or, in the case of mastectomies, the wrong breast) in particular made people wary of their healthcare providers. Also, attention to the tendency of doctors to over-prescribe medication or prescribe untested or defective medications because of their ties to pharmaceutical companies, made people skeptical of their doctors. In addition, patients now found themselves with a new resource for obtaining and sharing information, the internet, which has become crowded with all manner of medical advice. Now patients demand to know exactly how they are being treated and why, and doctors, already harried and harassed, are responding with hostility.

In some cases, doctors respond with the worst form of negligence, by simply dropping the patient with a 30-day notice to find a new doctor.

Although some patients go too far, by verbally abusing or physically threatening staff, this behavior on the part of physicians is reprehensible, especially since doctors themselves are largely to blame for the current situation.

If your doctor refuses to answer your questions, listen to your concerns, or drops you in the middle of treatment, causing you to suffer personal injury, you may have legal recourse. Contact the medical malpractice attorneys at the Law Offices of Barry G. Doyle, P.C. today for a free initial consultation.

Although it is routine for kids playing football, soccer, or even basketball to suffer concussions, many of them go unreported, putting kids in danger.

A concussion is a mild traumatic brain injury, and it is usually recoverable with rest within two weeks. However, if an athlete plays on with a concussion, and they receive three or more before taking the time to heal, they can suffer substantial permanent brain injury. The problem is that student athletes are often reluctant to report their injuries. Socialization into the sporting culture has already begun, and they are afraid of showing weakness for fear that they'll be benched.

This is equally true for girls as well as boys. Studies indicate that girls suffer a 68 percent higher rate of concussion than boys in soccer and a 300 percent higher rate in basketball, but girls are almost as likely to conceal their injury as boys.

If we look at professional sports, it is not hard to see where students might be getting their reluctance to speak. The recent controversy over Trent Green being forced to play despite his concussions shows just how deeply-ingrained the "just shake it off" culture is in sports, and how much it will take to change it. It also shows the level of technology that is available, such as the CereTom, the portable, cordless brain scanner that can transmit its data to radiologists worldwide.

There is also the Head Impact Telemetry (HIT) System developed by Symbex corporation, which allows coaches to simultaneously monitor dozens of players as they suffer helmet impacts and send a warning if any impact is likely to cause a concussion.

Although neither of these technologies is affordable for high-school athletics programs, one practice they have instituted can help diagnose concussions in student athletes: baseline testing. This is a simple procedure where all athletes take a series of memory-related tests before the season, then take them again if a concussion is suspected. The concussion will typically show up as a decrease in short-term memory. Once diagnosed, the concussion can be treated and athletes can typically be back to practicing and playing within weeks.

Unfortunately, all brain injuries carry with them the potential of permanent memory and cognitive loss. If you or someone you love has suffered a brain injury, your expenses and damage could be much more serious than you initially realize and you should consult a lawyer, such as the Law Offices of Barry G. Doyle, P.C, serving Chicago, Rockford, and Aurora.