You are here

health law

Lawyers Among Those Facing Increased Obamacare Health Care Costs

One of the criticisms of the Obamacare rollout is some consumers' health care insurance policies are being canceled because they don't comply with minimum requirements. Replacement policies are more expensive. Self-employed lawyers are among those whose costs are increasing, The Washington Post reports: "If the poor, sick and uninsured are the winners under the Affordable Care Act, the losers appear to include some relatively healthy middle-income small-business owners, consultants, lawyers and other self-employed workers who buy their own insurance. Many make too much to qualify for new federal subsidies provided by the law but not enough to absorb the rising costs without hardship." The costs are going up due to increased benefits and increased coverage for sicker people, The Post also reported.

Obamacare Could Divert Defendants Away From Jail

Due to Obamacare's expansion under the Medicaid program in the states that have opted for it, more people facing criminal charges might have access to health care and might get diverted away from the justice system. According to The Crime Report, "for law enforcement and courts, that could mean a greater ability to quickly identify alternatives to incarceration for those with mental illness and substance abuse issues. Tim Murray, executive director of the Pretrial Justice Institute, said that healthcare and substance abuse counseling is more effective at mitigating risk than jail."

Bill Would Better Define 'American Indian' in Obamacare Law

Five Democratic senators have introduced legislation to better define who as American Indians are eligible under Obamacare to not face IRS tax penalties for not carrying coverage. Prince William Sound's Cordova Times' also reported the legislation would rectify "the several definitions of 'Indian'  which led to conflicting interpretations of eligibility for benefits and requirements for coverage."

Why the Federal Insurance Exchange Is Failing

The New York Times reports on why the health-insurance exchanges have been so buggy: one factor was that the biggest contractor wasn't given specifications right away and only started writing software code this spring. Another factor was not rolling out a piece of the portal instead of the whole shebang at once. A third factor was that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services "assumed the role of project quarterback, responsible for making sure each separately designed database and piece of software worked with the others, instead of assigning that task to a lead contractor." Sources told the NYT that CMS did not have the capacity to take on that role.

The result: "Many users of the federal exchange were stuck at square one. A New York Times researcher, for instance, managed to register at 6 a.m. on Oct. 1. But despite more than 40 attempts over the next 11 days, she was never able to log in. Her last attempts led her to a blank screen."

Study: Electronic Health Records Affect Physician Professional Satisfaction

The RAND Corporation, which was commissioned by the American Medical Association to identify the factors that influence physicians' professional satisfaction, found that those physicians surveyed do not want to go back to paper charting. But they are reporting several issues with the deployment of electronic health records: "Among the key findings of the study was how electronic health records have affected physician professional satisfaction. Those surveyed expressed concern that current electronic health record technology interferes with face-to-face discussions with patients, requires physicians to spend too much time performing clerical work and degrades the accuracy of medical records by encouraging template-generated notes. In addition, doctors worry that the technology has been more costly than expected and different types of electronic health records are unable to 'talk' to each other, preventing the transmission of patient medical information when it is needed."

More and More Mentally Ill Held in Emergency Rooms

The Seattle Times reports on the practice of locking people in the middle of mental-illness crises at emergency rooms because there are not enough beds available in the psychiatric system. The crux of this ground-breaking report: "'Psychiatric boarding,' as it is officially called, or 'warehousing,' as it is known to mental-health advocates, has long taken place on occasion in Washington, which ranks at the bottom of the country for psychiatric-treatment beds per capita. But now this once-rare, controversial practice has rapidly become routine here — traumatizing thousands of mentally ill residents, wreaking havoc on hospitals, and wasting millions of taxpayer dollars."

Why Obamacare Exchanges Are Buggy

The Washington Post has a great explainer on why the exchanges for American consumers to buy health insurance policies are buggy and having problems since they opened. One issue: "the site needs to interact with a large number of databases operated by various federal and state agencies. If these back-end systems are poorly designed, it could take months or even years to straighten out the mess," The Post reports.

Reuters: One in Three Older Adults Reports Discrimination

A British study found 1/3 of "British people in their 50s and above said they had experienced age discrimination, researchers reported in the journal Age and Ageing. That included being treated with less courtesy or getting poorer service at restaurants and hospitals," Reuters Health reported. The impact? One researcher said "frequent perceived discrimination may be a chronic source of stress and build up over time, leading to social withdrawal and reluctance to go to the doctor," Reuters Health also reported.

Those Left Behind By Obamacare Health Reform

After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled states could not be forced to expand their Medicaid programs for the poor as part of the Obamacare health reform law, that is leaving many of the most impoverished Americans still without health care, The New York Times reports after a detailed analysis of census data. Among its findings: "The 26 states that have rejected the Medicaid expansion are home to about half of the country’s population, but about 68 percent of poor, uninsured blacks and single mothers. About 60 percent of the country’s uninsured working poor are in those states. Among those excluded are about 435,000 cashiers, 341,000 cooks and 253,000 nurses’ aides."

On a personal note, I still have hope the states that resisted expanding Medicaid will do so in the future. I attended a health law conference last winter, and a Pennsylvania lobbyist for health care pointed out that all the states eventually adopted programs like Medicaid and Medicare, when first created, even if they resisted for several years. He also arged that healthcare providers will lobby to get the expansions in order to control their costs. This is no consolation for any one person who can't get coverage today, but it's systemic hope for the success of correcting the healthcare marketplace.

 

Pennsylvania Superior Court Upholds Punitive Damages In Nursing Home Case

Submitted by Amaris Elliott-Engel on Tue, 10/01/2013 - 20:47

The Pennsylvania Superior Court has upheld a jury's decision to award punitive damages over the death of a nursing-home and hospital patient whose bed sores led to an infection that went septic in his body, the failure of one of his kidneys and his eventual death.

According to the opinion, the jury found nursing home Hillcrest Center and Jeanes Hospital each 50 percent liable for the April 18, 2008, death of Joe Blango. The jury awarded $1 million in compensatory damages against both defendants, $1.5 million in punitive damages against Jeanes Hospital and $3.5 million in punitive damages against Hillcrest Center. Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge George W. Overton reduced Jeanes' punitive damages award to $500,000 and Hillcrest's punitive damages award to $1 million.

The court split on upholding the trial judge's decision to diminish the punitive damages. The majority instructed the trial judge to increase punitive damages by another $500,000 against the hospital. But one dissenting judge on the three-judge panel would have restored the jury's award entirely.

One of the plaintiff's experts testified the development of a bedsore at the top Blango's buttocks was the source of the infection that went septic throughout his body, Judge Kate Ford Elliott said in her unpublished opinion today.

The wound tested positive for both e-coli and MRSA bacteria, according to the opinion. Blango's kidney was infected as a result, and his kidney had to be removed, Ford Elliott said.

There was testimony Blango was not frequently repositioned and did not have his diapers changed habitually during 18 days of treatment by the two healthcare facilities, Ford Elliott said. There also was testimony that Blango was not eating his food, but was not fed by staff nor offered liquid food.

According to the majority opinion, Blango was first admitted to the hospital for a five-day stay after being found, after a stroke, in a state of not moving or speaking. Then he was transferred to the nursing facility for 10 days, and then he was transferred back to the hospital for another three days. After those 18 days, Blango was transferred to another Philadelphia-area hospital where his family first learned of the bedsore in the area at the top of his buttocks. The bedsore never healed.

There was sufficient evidence for the jury to find that the hospital acted with reckless indifference, Ford Elliott said on behalf of all of the panel, including not communicating the condition of Blango's skin when he was transferred the first time from the hospital to the nursing home.

In another example of reckless indifference, during Blango's readmission to the hospital “there was evidence that the hospital failed to turn and reposition Mr. Blango every two hours as required,” Ford Elliott said. A Jeanes Hospital nurse “testified that the hospital was chronically understaffed. Mrs. Blango testified that nursing staff at the hospital repeatedly ignored her requests to change her husband's diaper, and he was always left on his back. There was no attempt to help Mr. Blango use the bathroom or a bedpan instead of adult diapers.”

Hillcrest settled the case during appellate mediation, Ford Elliott said in a footnote. The court did not undertaken any analysis of Hillcrest's liability.

Plaintiff's trial counsel Churchill H. Huston, of the Maher Law Firm in Philadelphia, said in an interview that the case is a hybrid one because it involved a verdict against a hospital and a nursing home. “It speaks to [that] this kind of neglect--whether it's a nursing home or a hospital--the way you prevent a bedsore doesn't change,” Huston said.

The fact that an injury occurs in a medical setting does not mean that all liability stems from medical decision-making and thus requires expert testimony about the standard of care, Huston said.

Bed sores are an issue of simple neglect, Huston said, while the failure to order the right course of treatment would require expert testimony.

“If it's an issue of professional negligence, then you would need expert testimony to support your claim,” Huston said. “If it's an issue of simple negligence, then the testimony of a lay witness is sufficient to support that claim.”

Huston said his firm may seek to have the opinion published as citable case law.

A two-judge majority, including Ford Elliott and Senior Judge James F. Fitzgerald III, decided that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in remitting the punitive damages, including because of the testimony of Jeanes Hospital's chief financial officer that the facility is not-for-profit and losing money.

While the trial judge said he reduced the ratio of damages to be 2:1 for Jeanes Hospital, the judge's remittitur actually resulted in a 1:1 ratio, Ford Elliott said, but “it seems clear that the trial court intended to reduce punitive damages to a 2:1 ratio, i.e., from $1.5 million to $1 million. Furthermore, as the trial court stated in its opinion, a 2:1 ratio is a reasonable relationship between punitive and compensatory damages in this case and satisfied due process,” Ford Elliott said.

The majority ordered a punitive damages award of $1 million, instead of $500,000, be entered on remand against Jeanes Hospital.

In dissent, Judge Sallie Updyke Mundy said that she disagreed with the trial court's reduction of the punitive damages award because she discerned “no abuse of discretion or constitutional infirmity in the initial $1.5 million punitive damage award,” she said.

A private lien from Blango's union health insurance was asserted and then resolved out of the settlement with the nursing home, Huston said.

The settlement amount with nursing home is confidential, Huston said.

Stephen Trzcinski, of Wilkes McHugh, was appellate counsel on the briefs, Huston said.

Appellate defense counsel for Jeanes Hospital included Post & Schell and Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell & Hippel, according to the Superior Court docket.

A spokeswoman for Jeanes Hospital did not respond to a request for comment.

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - health law