16. In response to: In response to: Frederick A. Goldstein's Reform Baker Act opinion article cached below I can only agree with Frederick A. Goldstein's Reform Baker Act opinion and thank him for his article. In fact, I even go so far to question the Act's constitutionality. In the recent Terri Schiavo case, we had a court upholding the husband's right to in effect murder his wife , to commit suicide for her, in the name of "privacy." Yet the Baker Act allows a healthy person to be locked up for wishing to end his own life. The other provision of being a danger to others, I can go along with. We can't have people harming others in the name of privacy. Of course, in general, no elder person can really be a danger to anyone if he has no weapon, so it does end up to be "Eldernapping." "Facilities, in cahoots with some medical professionals" is not an isolated event and extends to everyday hospitalizations, unfortunately. That is why "greater oversight is needed when people are brought to psychiatric hospitals voluntarily" as well as greater attention must be paid to every consumer complaint about healthcare providers. Unfortunately, it all hinges on enforcement. And good laws, which are not enforced are worthless. Many of our enforcement agencies are headed by officials directly from the industry, which gains through fraud and abuse. When the fox guards the hen house, it's bad for the chickens. The consumer must assume more responsibility and demand sensible enforcement of just laws and remove the crooks, who support special interests and not the people. Carol Stronstorff, VP SPCP UNPUBLISHED ---- Thank you! Our server has received your message, and the information you submitted will be processed by a member of of our staff. Thank you for visiting Sun-Sentinel.com. http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/opinion/sfl-services_thanks,0,6490802.htmlstory ------------ cached article/opinion Reform Baker Act By Frederick A. Goldstein Posted April 4 2005 Eldernapping: Every senior in Florida continues to be at risk of being swooped up, confined to a mental institution and treated like a dog. In the nine years since the South Florida Sun-Sentinel published my first exposé of the situation, things have not gotten any better. Here's the way I described the scandal on Jan. 24, 1996: "There is a lot of money to be made from committing seniors to psychiatric facilities. It is a profitable fraud on the Medicare system by clever health care professionals who line their own pockets by ripping off taxpayers and abusing often defenseless seniors." Since then, the state's Baker Act has been fiddled with, but not fixed. The law permits temporary, involuntary commitment of people who have mental problems and who are in danger of harming themselves and/or others. The law states that a court, police officer or certain professionals -- including psychiatrists -- may initiate a certificate authorizing the police to transport a person to the "nearest" facility. People are supposed to be "Baker-acted" only in emergency situations for brief periods of time, pending psychiatric review. Instead, the law has allowed for fraud and abuse. Some receiving facilities, in cahoots with some medical professionals, have seen dollar signs where vulnerable seniors are concerned. Patients have been taken to hospitals far from home, have been kept for extended periods of time (in violation of the Baker Act), and have been treated for conditions they do not have. The Legislature reacted minimally to the situation nine years ago. The causes of the major problems were not addressed: Psychiatrists continued to have too much power and no oversight was put in place to curb abuses. This community has seen two major breakdowns of the system regarding how citizens are taken to psychiatric facilities -- first in 1996 and again in 2005, when state officials prohibited a private psychiatric unit from accepting involuntary patients for the same kind of abuses uncovered in 1996. It goes without saying that the Legislature must protect the vulnerable elderly. First, psychiatrists should not be allowed to commit anyone. There is no other situation in which a private citizen is authorized to incarcerate another private citizen for financial gain and without oversight. The only way people should be taken against their will to a psychiatric hospital is by a court order, the police or by a certificate initiated by a professional who is affiliated with a community mental health center with no financial incentive to lock a person up. Second, greater oversight is needed when people are brought to psychiatric hospitals voluntarily. There must be a mechanism to determine whether the person is in fact voluntarily in the facility, and for good reason. Finally, there needs to be a psychiatric patient's bill of rights Until and unless these measures are put in place and seriously followed, I guarantee that history will continue to repeat itself. The author is a Fort Lauderdale attorney and an expert in mental health law. |
8. Letter to Orlando Business Journal - published shortened 8/1/03 on medical expert proposal 9. Medicine's unsung heroes - prevention by Australian Fiona Stanley 12/30/03 10. "Learn from Dr. Gousse" by Stephen L. Goldstein 01/07/04 excellent article on cap discrepancies 12. SICKENING MEDICINE - A MUST READ review of Dr. Mendelsohn by Robert Silverman 13. CAT-KILLER , SENATOR BILL FRIST -old letter to the editor on danger to our health 14. PHARMACEUTICAL RACKET by Rabiu R. Ramalan - get the facts on disease cause 15. Politics 16. Letter to Sun Sentinel on Baker Act Reform -"Eldernapping" 04/05/05 |
The following article appeared in a very shortened version in the Orlando Business Journal http://orlando.bizjournals.com/orlando/stories/2003/08/04/editorial4.html House Bill 971 allows only Florida doctors to be expert witnesses in Florida. It is no surprise, that this bill is the endorsed by the Florida Medical Association, which has the financial interests of Florida doctors at heart. [I call attention to the Sarah Grim case, which shows top level physicians in Missouri have profit interests at heart and not patient choice]. There are, of course, malpractice expert witnesses who are medically dishonest. However, there are many doctors, who are not "medical expert." They, too, lie regularly and encourage everyone else around them to lie or get amnesia [see Sarah Grim's story]. This is done to save their colleagues from a malpractice suit. SPCP has been collecting such cases since 1999. AHCA [Florida's agency for health care administration] is extremely lax to regulate and appears to accept fraudulent medical records willingly. Every single person over age 25 and having no dependents under age 25 is endangered by Florida's Wrongful Death Clause, which is a zero cap on malpractice damages. What this cap means is that if their is a possibility of a malpractice suit, all the healthcare provider has to do, is let the patient die and they are off the hook = no more malpractice case. Tremendous malpractice and abuse occurs under this unknown loophole, which only benefits a substandard and corrupt healthcare industry. There appears to be no area so full of fraud and corruption as in the healthcare industry - the corporations of unregulated insurance drug industry, hospital and other facilities, ambulances and home health and then some plain ordinary doctors - are all in it to make a buck {honest or not}. Many Florida doctors are not honest outside the courtroom. They falsify facts and reports to assure that their errant colleagues will never be held accountable. [Florida ranks 44th in discipline]. Through this fraud in the patient's medical records, the case often never makes it to court. Does anyone really expect such doctors to be good witnesses for anyone but their lousy physician colleagues? Another disaster is Dudley's proposal to take the ADULT PROTECTIVE SERVICES chapter and put it under 766 (medical malpractice statute). This would probably totally end recourse for much elder abuse by profit-motivated by healthcare providers. These political decisions are for moneyed stakeholders. The patient public is at the bottom of the stake! Carol Stronstorff 7/28/03 e-mail ________________________ WILL THE REAL BILL FRIST PLEASE STAND UP The new Senate majority leader has attracted a lot of media attention with his recent good Samaritan action on the Florida Highway near Miami. Helping someone is always laudable. It is doubtful, however, that a normal doctor would have attracted the same attention as the new Senate leader. Who is the real Dr. Frist? Floridians, who voted for the pig amendment, are you aware of the "heinous and dishonest" intern Frist, who went around to animal shelters and collected cats under false premises? He promised to provide a good home for the cats and then murdered them in the name of medical research. Are you aware that Frist belongs to the Columbia HCA hospital/healthcare dynasty. He owns over 25 million dollars worth of HCA shares? [Columbia HCA recently agreed to pay a total of more than $1.7 billion in penalties, which makes them one of America's biggest corporate criminals]. For those pro lifers, HCA was one of only six companies excluded by Catholic Financial Services Corporation on the abortion issue. 89% of Frist's holdings are reported in this father and brother founded company. Across the board, Frist is a hard-line right-winger, voting against labor rights, civil rights, women's rights and the environment at almost every opportunity. Frist in 2000 was a top recipient among Senators of money related to the healthcare industry. Frist pushed heavily for money to fight AIDS and then back down in deference to GW. He killed ongoing litigation of parents with autistic children, who received Eli Lilly inoculations, by tacking it on the back of the Homeland Security vote. Since 1928 there has been no practicing physician in the Senate giving Frist unprecedented status on medical issues and making him one of the most powerful men in Washington. Jamie Court of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights: "[Frist] is going to be the poster boy for how close the Republican Party is with corporate criminals." One must remember, not all doctors are good. Mengele was also a doctor. Dr./Sen.Frist's background and past history indicate that the hospital, health care, and pharmaceutical industries will always come first, patients who need affordable quality health care will always come last. Frist, himself, sees no conflict of interest in regard to providing quality health care in the interests of patients and non stockholding citizens. Yet, his ongoing efforts in stomping on patient's rights cannot be overlooked. We, the public must stop Frist and the lobbying industry behind him or the of power of the drug companies, HMOs and hospital/ nursing home chains will be expanded at the expense of patients. The US ranks 37th in health quality results, yet has the most expensive healthcare in the world. The money is winding up in the hands of a few corporations at the expense of our nation's health. Frist as senate majority leader is dangerous for our public health! The above letter written by Carol Stronstorff was published by the Bradenton Herald in the Letters to the Editors section with a few changes. All references to "Stronstorff" have been removed in the newspapers' archive and the Bradenton Herald has published no comments or news about Stronstorff and her patients'rights organization - nor anyting about her ethics complaint about the Bradenton Mayor. See Alexander Cockburn's 1/2/03 article http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?ItemID=14308 Learn from Dr. Gousse by Stephen L. Goldstein -Published January 7, 2004 This column takes so many twists and turns, if it was a piece of dough, it would be a pretzel. As it happens, it's serious food-for-thought -- the story of an innocent man brutalized by people sworn to protect him, a tale of multiple ironies, something that could happen to you. Irony 1: A pillar of the community who always "played by the rules" gets treated worse than the lowest criminal. Miami urologist Dr. Angelo Gousse, in Los Angeles for a medical conference, is returning to his hotel in his rental car, when cops pull him over and swarm his vehicle. As a helicopter whirs overhead, police with guns drawn order him to hit the ground; one cop jams his leg into the doctor's back and handcuffs him. Then the fun begins -- for the police. A black man of Haitian descent, associate professor at the University of Miami School of Medicine, Phi Beta Kappa and valedictorian from the City University of New York, graduate of Yale University School of Medicine with highest honors -- Dr. Gousse is told, "Hey, boy, you're in Los Angeles now," the first of many verbal attacks on him. Then, without being read his rights or told why he's being arrested, he's snapped up from the ground by his arms and put into a squad car. He complains that the too-tight handcuffs hurt his wrists, but cops ignore him. At the station, he's thrown into a cell. By then, the surgeon's hands have gone numb. Then the trouble begins -- for the police and Budget-Rent-a-Car. Cops learn that Dr. Gousse is not driving a stolen vehicle, as they had insisted. Budget caused the mix-up, because the plates on the doctor's car had been switched with those on one of its cars that had been stolen. Irony 2: Dr. Gousse sues the Los Angeles Police Department and Budget, getting attorneys to represent him who are famous for suing doctors -- on the advice of another doctor, who said, "Go in with the bulldogs." (Among other things, he sustains permanent injuries caused by police tactics.) He believes that, in the eyes of the cops, he "was guilty of `driving while black.' Police officers are trained to be prejudiced. They seemed to disbelieve I was a doctor." His Florida attorney, Sheldon Schlesinger, says, "I see him as an individual who has suffered an egregious wrong," adding that, even though he is known for suing doctors, he represents them, "but they may not come in through the front door of our offices." Irony 3: A California jury gives Dr. Gousse the justice police denied him. As part of an overall judgment including economic damages, he receives almost $23 million for his pain and suffering. Irony 4: A jury gives Dr. Gousse compensation other doctors would have denied him. If, instead of the police injuring Dr. Gousse, another surgeon had botched an operation on him, he could have gotten no more than $250,000 for his pain and suffering in California, no more than $500,000 in Florida. (Today, 26 states limit awards for pain and suffering in medical malpractice cases, including four that cap them generally in civil cases.) Proponents of "tort reform," doctors among them, allege that too many lawsuits are frivolous and juries overcompensate victims. They ignore how many judgments are reduced on appeal or how few cases get to court. Schlesinger's colleague on the Gousse lawsuit, Robert Kelley says, "We probably take 1 case in a 100 that come to us." Irony 5: If you have watched all the ironies in this story unfold but refuse to see the injustice of capping judgments for pain and suffering, this last, potentially tragic irony may be on you. Should you, a relative, or friend be horribly victimized, you may discover that, in the eyes of the state, your lifetime of pain and suffering may be worth a few crumbs -- not even a pretzel. Too late, you'll realize that a case like Dr. Gousse's proves that the only way to protect average people from being abused with impunity -- no matter why they're suing -- is to give them their day in court, before a jury, with no prior restraints. In America, Justice is personified as a woman blindfolded, so she can be fair -- not with her hands tied. So, if your time comes, don't say I didn't warn you or that Dr. Gousse couldn't have told you so -- and call in the bulldogs. Stephen L. Goldstein's commentaries appear on alternate Wednesdays. E-mail him at trendsman@aol.com. Copyright © 2004, South Florida Sun-Sentinel -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
7. Article submitted to various newspapers 7/28/03 sarah Grim - corruption in Healthcare USA |
Dear Bradenton Herald Editor[s] and Florida Senators: I am submitting the material below for publication. I believe, the senate is properly performing in the interest of the consumer. Your one-sided position is distorting the issue and is not proper in light of all facts. Athough you attack and publish letters personally attacking our local Senator Bennett, you publish none in his support. I also call attention to my latest July 9th fax to the president of the Senate, the honorable James E. King, jr., which discusses his July 2nd letter to the Governor. These letters - his and mine- explain, why there is no easy solution and that an arbitrary cap is not the solution! Link to SPCP letter to Senator King - http://www.spcpi.homestead.com/communications.html then press LINK to Latest Communication This goes into detail of some of the excellent proposals originating from the senate. You are not reporting the whole picture, but appear to be irresponsibly whipping up undeserved criticism of some conscientous polititians - maybe a new breed, which puts real concerns above politics and parties. This is long overdue in our democracy and should be welcomed in times of crisis!! Very sincerely, Carol Stronstorff, VP, SPCP SPCP - The Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Patients is a non-profit patient's rights organization. SPCP , Bradenton, FL 34207 Tel: 941 -751 -1069 Fax:775-257-6489 -------------------------------- Letter to the Editor------------------------ The July 9th editorial of the Bradenton Herald [as several others previously] on the malpractice liability insurance issue is disheartening. Why must the legislator find a compromise on medical malpractice? Why not the governor? The portrayal of the newspaper is extremely one-sided by citing the issue as a "power" play. Anyone who listens to what these senators are saying, realizes that they are very concerned with the welfare of the citizens of this state. As to our governor, one has definite reservations. The Senate has tried to see all sides of the issue despite the tremendous political pressure of such wealthy groups as physician and hospital associations and insurance corporations. Gov. Bush has consistently refused to see any malpractice victim [There are many.] in holding onto his goal of an arbitrary cap of $250,000 on malpractice settlements and his bias to insurance concerns. How can one be credible if one ignores the results (victims) and major cause (malpractice) of the issue of malpractice liability insurance? Eliminating malpractice would eliminate malpractice settlements totally! In Florida - an elderly state - there is already a zero cap on malpractice settlements for victims over the age of 25 and without dependents under the age of 25: Florida's Wrongful Death Clause. This Draconian cap, as we see, has done nothing to bring down premiums for doctors. However, the state ranks only 44th in physician discipline by it's medical board. Our physicians are not eliminating poor physicians and are allowing malpractice to continuously occur. Only a few percent cause most of the malpractice settlements. Do we condemn our senators, who are honestly trying to find a real solution, which works for everyone? Do we praise our governor, who yells that the senators are lackeys of trial lawyers, while he blindly supports the interests of health care providers and insurance companies? There are other solutions besides arbitrary caps and the Senate should be praised for trying to find the best solution for all citizens and visitors of the state. Your newspaper should possibly attempt objectivity in its reporting so as to allow the voters of this area an accurate picture to make their voting decisions. Your reporting appears superficial and one-sided. It is our governor who is wasting our taxpayer funds in trying to force an irresponsible decision for a $250,000 cap, when this is not in the public interest. Whereas, not everyone is a physician or owns stocks in hospital/nursing home corporations, pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies, everyone - including physicians [fn1] - can become a patient and a victim of malpractice. Let us praise our senators for trying to find and make the right decision. ------------------------------- [fn1] Of course, physicians have a good salary, which will allow a huge ECONOMIC settlement as opposed to the children, students, housewives, elderly, retired, unemployed, low-salried, true charity workers, and poor. When these physicians' wives and children and retired parents become victims, their position on caps is very different and they seek trial lawyers for help. |
5. Article submitted to Bradenton Herald on 7/11/03 on the Senate handling of the malpractice cap issue |
An alternative medicine cure has been reported to SPCP. SARS is a viral infection and consequently is prone to mutations. It's danger to the public has been disputed as a scam to scare an already stressed out public into more fear. This would allow even more restriction of our personal freedoms. This "cure" has been reported to SPCP by Dr. Horowitz. He does have an interest in selling the product. Important is to remember that SARS is a viral infection like the common cold, for which there is still no cure. Healthy bodies usually survive. High doses of vitamin C have also been shown to stop viral infections. SPCP is not endorsing any product but is providing this for your information to make your own informed decisions. ---------------------------- 06 May 2003 World Natural Health Organization founding member, Dr. Joseph Puleo, leading naturopathic physician, spearheads research finding natural treatment for SARS. DOCTORS MAKE NATURAL TREATMENT FOR SARS AVAILABLE WORLDWIDE SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA - A team of Doctors well-known for their research in alternative medicine and emerging diseases has developed an effective treatment for SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) utilizing a little-known antidote to coronavirus. According to the Doctors, coronavirus can be successfully treated with methanolic extracts of two berry bushes common to British Columbia and the northwestern states - Amelanchier alnifolia and Rosa nutkana both members of the Rosaceae family of plants. http://www.wnho.net/ |
Honesty will improve Medical Care The Feb. 26 issue of The Journal of the American Medical Association investigated medical errors and patient - doctor expectations. The study found that patients wanted complete information about all harmful errors - how and why it happened, how to improve the outcome, and how to prevent a reoccurrence. The physicians were more guarded -fearing a malpractice suit, afraid for their professional reputation, and feeling awkward or uncomfortable. Patients wanted an apology and other emotional support from their physicians following errors, yet physicians feared that an apology might create legal liability. Surprising was that physicians also needed emotional support. The conclusion was that "Physicians should strive to meet patients' desire for an apology and for information on the nature, cause, and prevention of errors. Institutions should also address the emotional needs of practitioners who are involved in medical errors." When one listens to the Physicians in their current campaign to cap malpractice damages, one has the impression that no medical errors occur and only damaged patients, who receive settlements over $250,000 are responsible for the medical malpractice liability insurance crisis. Let's not mix apples and eggs. Medical errors are one of the leading causes of death in the U.S.- 98,000 deaths per year. Every day 15 Floridians die due to medical error. It is time that the medical profession start being honest with the public and put the blame for the crisis were it belongs - 1) on the insurance companies who arbitrarily determine premiums without any antitrust control and 2) doctors, who err and their colleagues, who cover for them. The public wants apologies when they are due, but it also wants repeat offenders removed. With six percent of Florida doctors responsible for over half of all malpractice settlements and less than 2% of suits ever making it to trial, it should be clear that the crisis is not caused by patients or lawyers, but physicians and insurance companies. If physicians were more honest, there might be less emotional distress for everyone. Sometime even doctors are in the wrong profession and should be as accountable as all other people. Any special group benefits are harmful to the public as a whole. |
Obesity Increases Risk of Cancer Mortality Laurie Barclay, MD Medscape Medical News 2003. © 2003 Medscape April 23, 2003 Increased body weight is associated with increased death rate from cancer, according to the results of a prospective study published in the April 24 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine. "The proportion of all deaths from cancer that is attributable to overweight and obesity in U.S. adults 50 years of age or older may be as high as 14% in men and 20% in women," write Eugenia E. Calle, PhD, and colleagues from the American Cancer Society in Atlanta, Georgia. "More than 90,000 deaths per year from cancer might be avoided if everyone in the adult population could maintain a body mass index (BMI) under 25.0 throughout life." Of more than 900,000 U.S. adults who were free of cancer at study enrollment in 1982, 57,145 died from cancer during 16 years of follow-up. Compared with those of normal weight, those with a BMI of at least 40 had a combined death rate from all cancers that was 52% higher for men and 62% higher for women (relative risk [RR] of death, 1.52 for men; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13 - 2.05; RR, 1.62 for women; 95% CI, 1.40 - 1.87). In both sexes, higher BMI was also associated with higher rates of death due to cancer of the esophagus, colon and rectum, liver, gallbladder, pancreas, and kidney, as well as non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and multiple myeloma. Deaths from cancers at other sites also showed significant trends of increasing risk with higher BMI. |
ARTICLES ABOUT HEALTH ISSUES |
An alternative medicine cure has been reported to SPCP. SARS is a viral infection and consequently is prone to mutations. It's danger to the public has been disputed as a scam to scare an already stressed out public into more fear. This would allow even more restriction of our personal freedoms. This "cure" has been reported to SPCP by Dr. Horowitz. He does have an interest in selling the product. Important is to remember that SARS is a viral infection like the common cold, for which there is still no cure. Healthy bodies usually survive. High doses of vitamin C have also been shown to stop viral infections. SPCP is not endorsing any product but is providing this for your information to make your own informed decisions. ---------------------------- 06 May 2003 World Natural Health Organization founding member, Dr. Joseph Puleo, leading naturopathic physician, spearheads research finding natural treatment for SARS. DOCTORS MAKE NATURAL TREATMENT FOR SARS AVAILABLE WORLDWIDE SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA - A team of Doctors well-known for their research in alternative medicine and emerging diseases has developed an effective treatment for SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) utilizing a little-known antidote to coronavirus. According to the Doctors, coronavirus can be successfully treated with methanolic extracts of two berry bushes common to British Columbia and the northwestern states - Amelanchier alnifolia and Rosa nutkana both members of the Rosaceae family of plants. http://www.wnho.net/ |
New session: Protect patients . . . This week, the Legislature is meeting in a special session regarding the medical malpractice crisis. Health care providers and insurance companies have been promoting an arbitrary $250,000 cap on noneconomic damages in malpractice cases. Public Citizen and many other consumer and legal groups have pointed out the unfairness and danger of such a proposal. Physicians have lobbied extensively to call attention to their insurance premium plight by attacking the most unfortunate of all - the victims of malpractice, who have either been awarded or sought compensation. Physicians staged rallies and even closed their practices to patients to instill a fear among the public that if they did not get malpractice caps, there will be no more doctors in Florida. These tactics do not match up with the facts, which show the number of physicians increasing in Florida, not diminishing. The facts also show that malpractice settlements have not increased when inflation is taken into consideration. The doctors' bullying tactics of threatening to stop practicing if they do not get their cap is a type of blackmail, which appears to indicate that they are hard-hearted businessmen and not compassionate healers. Only 5 percent of the doctors are responsible for more than half of the malpractice awards. Many are repeat offenders and have never been disciplined. The very fact that the doctors themselves are not disciplining their errant colleagues is a major factor in poor medical results and the resulting malpractice suits. Who profits from caps on malpractice awards? Bad doctors, health care facilities and insurance companies. Health care providers have special laws of questionable constitutionality. These laws make malpractice suits extremely expensive. Almost 98 percent of initiated lawsuits are abandoned because of the difficulty and frustration, not due to their lack of merit. Additionally, under Florida law (the Wrongful Death Clause), there are no noneconomic damages for dead patients older than 25 and without a spouse or dependents younger than 25. In effect, this means that malpractice for most Medicare patients and singles without children is never addressed. This appears to be an incentive to bury medical mistakes rather than to risk a lawsuit with a living liability. No cap on medical malpractice lawsuits will improve the quality of care. A limit will only make it more difficult for unfortunate victims to find needed help to address their medically induced misfortune. Doctors are not gods. There are good ones and bad ones. They are practicing in Florida and should have the same legal rights and obligations as every other citizen. If the damage they do is greater than $250,000, they should be held as accountable as every other person. Many of the injuries caused are because of a lack of informed consent and in some cases pure greed. Medical tests (some dangerous) are suggested without any real medical necessity. Suggested "cures" are often more damaging than the disease itself. Insurance payment rules are often carefully circumvented by falsely creating preconditions to allow approval. Many of the drugs prescribed are the cause of the illnesses themselves. These physician errors cause hundreds of thousands of unnecessary deaths in the United States each year. Some physicians and health care facilities file fraudulent claims on a regular basis. These are supposed to be controlled by insurance companies, but more often are not. This fraud often is just considered an administrative error and no action is taken. These white-collar crimes go unpunished and appear to be perpetrated regularly. The laws punishing you for making false statements on your insurance applications are much stricter than for the health care branch. Can anyone explain logically just how a cap on malpractice settlements will stop fraud and physician errors? Gov. Bush and President Bush are pushing for caps, which may benefit large corporations and special interest groups such as physicians and hospital/nursing home corporations and insurance companies. These cap proposals are not addressing the true issue of exorbitant insurance premiums, runaway medical errors, fraud and lax enforcement of health law. You should be aware that you are affected by these proposed laws, because at any time you might wind up in a hospital and need a doctor's care. I urge you to get on the phone today and ask all your representatives to not arbitrarily limit claims by medical malpractice victims. Let us address the issues of physician errors and outright fraud in any legislation. Let us address issues of universal health care before legislating further limitations on our constitutional right to redress personal injuries caused by the healthcare professions. Let us not have new laws restricting our constitutional rights and giving others special rules placing them above the laws for everyone else. ___________________ Commentary by Carol Stronstorff of Bradenton is vice president of the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Patients, a nonprofit patient's rights organization, and is a patients' rights activist. Posted on Mon, Jun. 16, 2003 Bradenton Herald http://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradentonherald/news/opinion/6097638.htm |
5. Article submitted to Bradenton Herald on 7/11/03 on the Senate handling of the malpractice cap issue |
Dear Bradenton Herald Editor[s] and Florida Senators: I am submitting the material below for publication. I believe, the senate is properly performing in the interest of the consumer. Your one-sided position is distorting the issue and is not proper in light of all facts. Athough you attack and publish letters personally attacking our local Senator Bennett, you publish none in his support. I also call attention to my latest July 9th fax to the president of the Senate, the honorable James E. King, jr., which discusses his July 2nd letter to the Governor. These letters - his and mine- explain, why there is no easy solution and that an arbitrary cap is not the solution! Link to SPCP letter to Senator King - http://www.spcpi.homestead.com/communications.html then press LINK to Latest Communication This goes into detail of some of the excellent proposals originating from the senate. You are not reporting the whole picture, but appear to be irresponsibly whipping up undeserved criticism of some conscientous polititians - maybe a new breed, which puts real concerns above politics and parties. This is long overdue in our democracy and should be welcomed in times of crisis!! Very sincerely, Carol Stronstorff, VP, SPCP SPCP - The Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Patients is a non-profit patient's rights organization. SPCP , Bradenton, FL 34207 Tel: 941 -751 -1069 Fax:775-257-6489 -------------------------------- Letter to the Editor------------------------ The July 9th editorial of the Bradenton Herald [as several others previously] on the malpractice liability insurance issue is disheartening. Why must the legislator find a compromise on medical malpractice? Why not the governor? The portrayal of the newspaper is extremely one-sided by citing the issue as a "power" play. Anyone who listens to what these senators are saying, realizes that they are very concerned with the welfare of the citizens of this state. As to our governor, one has definite reservations. The Senate has tried to see all sides of the issue despite the tremendous political pressure of such wealthy groups as physician and hospital associations and insurance corporations. Gov. Bush has consistently refused to see any malpractice victim [There are many.] in holding onto his goal of an arbitrary cap of $250,000 on malpractice settlements and his bias to insurance concerns. How can one be credible if one ignores the results (victims) and major cause (malpractice) of the issue of malpractice liability insurance? Eliminating malpractice would eliminate malpractice settlements totally! In Florida - an elderly state - there is already a zero cap on malpractice settlements for victims over the age of 25 and without dependents under the age of 25: Florida's Wrongful Death Clause. This Draconian cap, as we see, has done nothing to bring down premiums for doctors. However, the state ranks only 44th in physician discipline by it's medical board. Our physicians are not eliminating poor physicians and are allowing malpractice to continuously occur. Only a few percent cause most of the malpractice settlements. Do we condemn our senators, who are honestly trying to find a real solution, which works for everyone? Do we praise our governor, who yells that the senators are lackeys of trial lawyers, while he blindly supports the interests of health care providers and insurance companies? There are other solutions besides arbitrary caps and the Senate should be praised for trying to find the best solution for all citizens and visitors of the state. Your newspaper should possibly attempt objectivity in its reporting so as to allow the voters of this area an accurate picture to make their voting decisions. Your reporting appears superficial and one-sided. It is our governor who is wasting our taxpayer funds in trying to force an irresponsible decision for a $250,000 cap, when this is not in the public interest. Whereas, not everyone is a physician or owns stocks in hospital/nursing home corporations, pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies, everyone - including physicians [fn1] - can become a patient and a victim of malpractice. Let us praise our senators for trying to find and make the right decision. ------------------------------- [fn1] Of course, physicians have a good salary, which will allow a huge ECONOMIC settlement as opposed to the children, students, housewives, elderly, retired, unemployed, low-salried, true charity workers, and poor. When these physicians' wives and children and retired parents become victims, their position on caps is very different and they seek trial lawyers for help. |
7. Article submitted to various newspapers 7/28/03 sarah Grim - corruption in Healthcare USA |
The following article appeared in a very shortened version in the Orlando Business Journal http://orlando.bizjournals.com/orlando/stories/2003/08/04/editorial4.html House Bill 971 allows only Florida doctors to be expert witnesses in Florida. It is no surprise, that this bill is the endorsed by the Florida Medical Association, which has the financial interests of Florida doctors at heart. [I call attention to the Sarah Grim case, which shows top level physicians in Missouri have profit interests at heart and not patient choice]. There are, of course, malpractice expert witnesses who are medically dishonest. However, there are many doctors, who are not "medical expert." They, too, lie regularly and encourage everyone else around them to lie or get amnesia [see Sarah Grim's story]. This is done to save their colleagues from a malpractice suit. SPCP has been collecting such cases since 1999. AHCA [Florida's agency for health care administration] is extremely lax to regulate and appears to accept fraudulent medical records willingly. Every single person over age 25 and having no dependents under age 25 is endangered by Florida's Wrongful Death Clause, which is a zero cap on malpractice damages. What this cap means is that if their is a possibility of a malpractice suit, all the healthcare provider has to do, is let the patient die and they are off the hook = no more malpractice case. Tremendous malpractice and abuse occurs under this unknown loophole, which only benefits a substandard and corrupt healthcare industry. There appears to be no area so full of fraud and corruption as in the healthcare industry - the corporations of unregulated insurance drug industry, hospital and other facilities, ambulances and home health and then some plain ordinary doctors - are all in it to make a buck {honest or not}. Many Florida doctors are not honest outside the courtroom. They falsify facts and reports to assure that their errant colleagues will never be held accountable. [Florida ranks 44th in discipline]. Through this fraud in the patient's medical records, the case often never makes it to court. Does anyone really expect such doctors to be good witnesses for anyone but their lousy physician colleagues? Another disaster is Dudley's proposal to take the ADULT PROTECTIVE SERVICES chapter and put it under 766 (medical malpractice statute). This would probably totally end recourse for much elder abuse by profit-motivated by healthcare providers. These political decisions are for moneyed stakeholders. The patient public is at the bottom of the stake! Carol Stronstorff 7/28/03 e-mail ________________________ WILL THE REAL BILL FRIST PLEASE STAND UP The new Senate majority leader has attracted a lot of media attention with his recent good Samaritan action on the Florida Highway near Miami. Helping someone is always laudable. It is doubtful, however, that a normal doctor would have attracted the same attention as the new Senate leader. Who is the real Dr. Frist? Floridians, who voted for the pig amendment, are you aware of the "heinous and dishonest" intern Frist, who went around to animal shelters and collected cats under false premises? He promised to provide a good home for the cats and then murdered them in the name of medical research. Are you aware that Frist belongs to the Columbia HCA hospital/healthcare dynasty. He owns over 25 million dollars worth of HCA shares? [Columbia HCA recently agreed to pay a total of more than $1.7 billion in penalties, which makes them one of America's biggest corporate criminals]. For those pro lifers, HCA was one of only six companies excluded by Catholic Financial Services Corporation on the abortion issue. 89% of Frist's holdings are reported in this father and brother founded company. Across the board, Frist is a hard-line right-winger, voting against labor rights, civil rights, women's rights and the environment at almost every opportunity. Frist in 2000 was a top recipient among Senators of money related to the healthcare industry. Frist pushed heavily for money to fight AIDS and then back down in deference to GW. He killed ongoing litigation of parents with autistic children, who received Eli Lilly inoculations, by tacking it on the back of the Homeland Security vote. Since 1928 there has been no practicing physician in the Senate giving Frist unprecedented status on medical issues and making him one of the most powerful men in Washington. Jamie Court of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights: "[Frist] is going to be the poster boy for how close the Republican Party is with corporate criminals." One must remember, not all doctors are good. Mengele was also a doctor. Dr./Sen.Frist's background and past history indicate that the hospital, health care, and pharmaceutical industries will always come first, patients who need affordable quality health care will always come last. Frist, himself, sees no conflict of interest in regard to providing quality health care in the interests of patients and non stockholding citizens. Yet, his ongoing efforts in stomping on patient's rights cannot be overlooked. We, the public must stop Frist and the lobbying industry behind him or the of power of the drug companies, HMOs and hospital/ nursing home chains will be expanded at the expense of patients. The US ranks 37th in health quality results, yet has the most expensive healthcare in the world. The money is winding up in the hands of a few corporations at the expense of our nation's health. Frist as senate majority leader is dangerous for our public health! The above letter written by Carol Stronstorff was published by the Bradenton Herald in the Letters to the Editors section with a few changes. All references to "Stronstorff" have been removed in the newspapers' archive and the Bradenton Herald has published no comments or news about Stronstorff and her patients'rights organization - nor anyting about her ethics complaint about the Bradenton Mayor. See Alexander Cockburn's 1/2/03 article http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?ItemID=14308 Learn from Dr. Gousse by Stephen L. Goldstein -Published January 7, 2004 This column takes so many twists and turns, if it was a piece of dough, it would be a pretzel. As it happens, it's serious food-for-thought -- the story of an innocent man brutalized by people sworn to protect him, a tale of multiple ironies, something that could happen to you. Irony 1: A pillar of the community who always "played by the rules" gets treated worse than the lowest criminal. Miami urologist Dr. Angelo Gousse, in Los Angeles for a medical conference, is returning to his hotel in his rental car, when cops pull him over and swarm his vehicle. As a helicopter whirs overhead, police with guns drawn order him to hit the ground; one cop jams his leg into the doctor's back and handcuffs him. Then the fun begins -- for the police. A black man of Haitian descent, associate professor at the University of Miami School of Medicine, Phi Beta Kappa and valedictorian from the City University of New York, graduate of Yale University School of Medicine with highest honors -- Dr. Gousse is told, "Hey, boy, you're in Los Angeles now," the first of many verbal attacks on him. Then, without being read his rights or told why he's being arrested, he's snapped up from the ground by his arms and put into a squad car. He complains that the too-tight handcuffs hurt his wrists, but cops ignore him. At the station, he's thrown into a cell. By then, the surgeon's hands have gone numb. Then the trouble begins -- for the police and Budget-Rent-a-Car. Cops learn that Dr. Gousse is not driving a stolen vehicle, as they had insisted. Budget caused the mix-up, because the plates on the doctor's car had been switched with those on one of its cars that had been stolen. Irony 2: Dr. Gousse sues the Los Angeles Police Department and Budget, getting attorneys to represent him who are famous for suing doctors -- on the advice of another doctor, who said, "Go in with the bulldogs." (Among other things, he sustains permanent injuries caused by police tactics.) He believes that, in the eyes of the cops, he "was guilty of `driving while black.' Police officers are trained to be prejudiced. They seemed to disbelieve I was a doctor." His Florida attorney, Sheldon Schlesinger, says, "I see him as an individual who has suffered an egregious wrong," adding that, even though he is known for suing doctors, he represents them, "but they may not come in through the front door of our offices." Irony 3: A California jury gives Dr. Gousse the justice police denied him. As part of an overall judgment including economic damages, he receives almost $23 million for his pain and suffering. Irony 4: A jury gives Dr. Gousse compensation other doctors would have denied him. If, instead of the police injuring Dr. Gousse, another surgeon had botched an operation on him, he could have gotten no more than $250,000 for his pain and suffering in California, no more than $500,000 in Florida. (Today, 26 states limit awards for pain and suffering in medical malpractice cases, including four that cap them generally in civil cases.) Proponents of "tort reform," doctors among them, allege that too many lawsuits are frivolous and juries overcompensate victims. They ignore how many judgments are reduced on appeal or how few cases get to court. Schlesinger's colleague on the Gousse lawsuit, Robert Kelley says, "We probably take 1 case in a 100 that come to us." Irony 5: If you have watched all the ironies in this story unfold but refuse to see the injustice of capping judgments for pain and suffering, this last, potentially tragic irony may be on you. Should you, a relative, or friend be horribly victimized, you may discover that, in the eyes of the state, your lifetime of pain and suffering may be worth a few crumbs -- not even a pretzel. Too late, you'll realize that a case like Dr. Gousse's proves that the only way to protect average people from being abused with impunity -- no matter why they're suing -- is to give them their day in court, before a jury, with no prio |