No Vote On Kansas Medical Malpractice Bill

Matthew Bergmann — Tue, 17 Apr 2007 12:37:05 GMT

A Kansas Senate Judiciary Committee passed up the chance to vote on a House drafted bill that would have excluded Kansas physicians and other health professionals from the state's consumer protection laws. The legislation was in response to the recent Kansas Supreme Court ruling which found that medical professionals fell within the bounds of the Kansas Consumer Protection Act for deceptive acts and practices.

Physicians, nurses, veterinarians, anesthesiologists, pharmacists and radiologists voiced strong opposition to the recent high court ruling. Medical professionals fear that if action is not taken by the Legislature numerous plaintiffs will file consumer protection claims, in addition to medical malpractice lawsuits. The Kansas Trial Lawyers Association, Attorney General Paul Morrison and AARP of Kansas were in favor of the precedent set by Kansas Supreme Court and have said that the ruling will provide better medical care within the state.

There are few chances left, during this legislative session, for the bill to become law. An exemption that exists for health industry legislation could be used to amend this specific bill into other bills before adjournement in the middle of April 2007. Another option would be to refer the issue to an interim legislative committe for review and then revisit it during the 2008 session.

The basis for the Supreme Court ruling came from the case of a woman who was advised by her surgeon that two back procedures would be highly successful, when in fact the operations had not worked in a majority of cases. Her medical condition severly deteriorated after she underwent the procedures. The Supreme Court held that the woman could bring a claims against the surgeon under the Kansas Consumer Protection Act for decpetive acts and practices.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Matthew Bergmann

Should Video Be Allowed in the Delivery Room?

Staff Writer — Mon, 03 Jul 2006 15:09:35 GMT

A recent article in The Kansas City Star highlights the issues associated with having cameras in the delivery room during childbirth. Some hospitals have started banning this practice, fearing that footage and photographs of the actual birth could be used against them in a medical malpractice case. Others say cameras could cause distractions that hinder patient care. However, some doctors and hospitals say it's fine, arguing that it could also be used to their benefit in a lawsuit.

Why should doctors fear video cameras in the delivery room if they are doing their jobs properly? Shouldn't it be the patients' rights to film their child's birth if they so choose?

As one physician quoted in the article puts it:

'It's something very momentous in a family's life,' Estrin said. 'If they want to record that, they should be able to.'
And Estrin isn't worried about legal problems, arguing that video proof could exonerate a doctor just as readily as it could indict one.
'If anything,' she said, 'I'm going to be more careful when video is running.'

Maybe hospitals and physicians should consider the possibility of losing business if patients are not allowed to record their births on film.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Staff Writer

Topeka Personal Injury Lawyer - Medical Malpractice

No Vote On Kansas Medical Malpractice Bill

Should Video Be Allowed in the Delivery Room?