Antonio Romanucci is proud to announce he has been nominated to a 3 year term to Public Justice Foundation, America's largest public interest law firm dedicated to civil rights, consumer rights, the environment, and access to justice.
Should there be a cap on medical malpractice awards? No, said two-thirds of the respondents to a Chicago Tribune on-line survey published in the paper’s June 23, 2009 edition. There were 2,010 “yes” responses and 1,045 “no” responses, the Tribune reported. Romanucci & Blandin, LLC, has long opposed caps on damages.
Among reader comments printed in Wednesday’s Tribune:
“There should not be caps. The numbers are arbitrary. Why should someone be compensated less because a negligent doctor hurt him than if a negligent driver did?”
“Medical malpractice caps sound like a good idea – until you are a victim of a medical error. Let’s not forget that the rest of us are responsible for our negligence and our liability is not capped.”
“Most people want caps until it’s their relative. Then it’s different. How can you cap someone who may need care the rest of his or her life?”
Romanucci & Blandin would like to update you on the progress of health care reform and how it may effect you as a patient.
Medical malpractice reform was the subject of a dozen amendments last week during the Senate Health Education Labor and Pension (HELP) Committee Mark-up. The committee voted down the Hatch Amendment dealing with Comparative Effectiveness Research, but merely tabled the Enzi Amendment that could establish health courts. That means this could come back up at any time. Additionally, House Republicans have released an outline of their health bill that includes limits on medical malpractice. Following the 4th of July recess, the Senate Finance Committee will begin their mark-up process, and we are sure to face more amendments seeking to curb medical malpractice awards and restrict your clients’ access to the courts. The Public Affairs team is doing a tremendous job of staying on top of this issue and working to defeat these amendments.
Continue reading "AAJ continues to work for the rights of consumers and patients" »
President Obama showed the courage of his convictions on Monday when he addressed the American Medical Association’s annual meeting in Chicago and said that limiting the amount juries can award against doctors would be unfair to malpractice victims.
When the President first broached the topic (the doctors’ demand for a cap on malpractice suits), his audience believed he may be supporting the caps. “Don’t get too excited yet,” he said. “Now just hold onto your horses here, guys…I’m not advocating caps on malpractice awards.”
However, the President went on to explain that he is looking at evidence-based guidelines for treatment. He stated it would protect doctors who follow agreed-upon guidelines from costly lawsuits, yet let people who have legitimate medical malpractice claims could still file them in a court of law. In reality, an an evidence based guideline for treatment would be a pre-emptive attempt at unduly limiting lawsuits against wrong doers. At Romanucci & Blandin, we believe there never ever should be a placement of limits or standards against injured victims or in any way limit a plaintiffs right of recovery at the courthouse.
Romanucci & Blandin, in Chicago, applauds recommendations made by the American Academy of Pediatrics to rename the diagnostic term “shaken baby syndrome” to “abusive head trauma,” which it calls a more comprehensive diagnosis for brain, skull and other injuries inflicted on infants. The new term, which should be used in medical records, may provide more clarity in the courtroom, they say.
This serious and clearly definable form of child abuse results from extreme rotational cranial acceleration induced by violent shaking or shaking/impact. Greater attention and resources should be devoted to prevention of abusive injuries, according to the Academy, which noted that head injuries are the leading cause of traumatic death and the leading cause of child abuse fatalities.
