Driving under the influence (DUI) in Washington State has been a massive concern for victim’s advocates for a long time now. With widely publicized reports of wrongful death due to DUI such as the death of Washington State Parks Ranger Ed Johanson, who’s funeral was attended by hundreds of people last Saturday, calls for stiffer sentences that had been previously ignored by legislators have now been made even more urgent than they have in the past.

Ranger Johanson’s death was not the only one that helped demonstrate the importance and need for this legislation. The deaths of two teens a week before graduation on Interstate 5 in 2010 by a habitual DUI offender raised a massive cry for change. Then, the death of local game developer after a gaming conference where a drunk girl was actually driving from the passenger side of the car while the driver changed her clothing last year. And not long after that, a Google employee was killed by a driver that was three times over the legal limit of .08 and was so drunk that he beat his chest like gorilla at the scene and threatened to kill more people if he was incarcerated for the crime.

During that last example, exasperated King County Prosecutor Dan Satterberg went to the media to air out some concerns he had about the current state of sentencing limits currently on the books in Washington State.

“You would think that with that degree of carnage we would take a pretty tough line on this,” Satterberg told KOMO in a interview in August. “But under the state sentencing guidelines, a person who kills another person while they are drunk driving faces a standard sentencing range of 31 to 41 months.”

The carnage he speaks of refers to the roughly 250 people killed annually by drunken drivers in Washington State. However, the multiple requests by the prosecutor, families of victims, and advocates like Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) and Phillips Law Firm have come to fruition with the passage of House Bill 2216.

HB 2216 and DUI Sentencing

The bill, which will become law 90 days from the end of the legislative session, increases the prison sentence for a first time offenders from 31- 41 months to 6 to 8 years in prison, the same sentence an individual faces for committing first-degree manslaughter.

Most states with the exception of Alaska, Montana, and Arizona have vehicular homicide laws on the books that define vehicles as potentially deadly weapons if used improperly or irresponsibly. However, with this legislation, Washington has some of the strictest laws against someone drinking, getting into their car and killing an innocent person.

The strictness of the law piggy-backs on previous legislation that makes a person with multiple DUI offenses who kills someone with their car a federal offense. The legislation specifically states that an additional 2 years will be tacked on for every prior offense.

On Friday, Satterberg praised legislators for responding to the pleas victims’ families who were re-victimized by shockingly low sentences. He credited work of Representatives Chris Hurst and Roger Goodman in the House and David Frockt, Adam Kline and Mike Padden in the Senate.

“We have given the families of loved ones lost to drunk drivers some sense of justice,” Satterberg said in a statement. “The increased sentences will not bring back their family members but will send a strong message to drunk drivers that their actions have consequences.”

HB 2216

When it comes to killing someone with your car after you’ve been drinking, the state now recognizes it as tantamount to manslaughter one or child rape, in terms of sentencing. Not the prettiest category to be in when it comes to being viewed in the eyes of the law. However, the way the statute reads it’s pretty explicit.

(1) When the death of any person ensues within three years as a proximate result of injury proximately caused by the driving of any vehicle by any person, the driver is guilty of vehicular homicide if the driver was operating a motor vehicle:

• (a) While under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug, as defined by RCW 46.61.502; or
• (b) In a reckless manner; or
• (c) With disregard for the safety of others.

(2) Vehicular homicide is a class A felony punishable under chapter 9A.20 RCW, except that, for a conviction under subsection (1)(a) of this section, an additional two years shall be added to the sentence for each prior offense as defined in RCW 46.61.5055.

As you can see this law doesn’t stop at just DUI. Reckless driving is may be included, which is defined in RCW 46.61.500 as:

(1) Any person who drives any vehicle in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property is guilty of reckless driving.

So, this could be extended to drivers who are driving with the intent to injure or harass another driver such as in a road rage scenario or racing down the freeway with another car down a crowded freeway.

Will Stiffer Sentences for DUI Lower Wrongful Death in Washington State?

This is the operative question. Washington State has been enjoying an unprecedented era of safety. Not since the 40’s has the state had so few deaths as in 2011. Does this directly correlate to DUI laws? Well, not specifically. Many experts attribute this to the fact that car are so much safer than cars even 20 years ago, that it is no wonder highway deaths are down even in the states with the lightest traffic laws.

You see, not ALL deaths are caused by DUI, only about a third of them are. However, that is an incredible impact. Governor Gregoire instituted the Target Zero program, which is intended to reach zero vehicular deaths of all kinds by 2030. A tall order, but if this law and the proper campaign showing the consequences has as impact as many hope, then this will go a long way to ending DUI deaths in Washington State.

Phillips Law Firm can help you with your Personal Injury claim.

At Phillips Law Firm our lawyers are dedicated to getting you justice and compensation you deserve. Call Phillips Law Firm at 1-800-708-6000, we are waiting to assist you 24/7, offering a free case evaluation. Remember our no fee promise. If we do not recover anything for you, you do not owe us an attorney fee

It is important to act immediately. Do not let the window of opportunity for your case close as all cases have statues of limitations. You deserve justice and we are here to help.

Visit our Personal Injury main page for more information.

When a patient is effected by medical malpractice through, for example, a botched surgery, misguided prescription, or a tragic birth experience, it is their right to seek just compensation. Unfortunately, there have been parties solely with monetary interests trying to not only influence policy, but also social perception of the issue. You can see this in the recent past with legislation that limits medical malpractice awards and even giving more strength to the defense (the doctors and insurance companies that represent them) to seek ways to vilify the victim. Award limits happened in our home state of Washington, just to be overturned in 2006. Fortunately, it seems that, though they still exist in other parts of the country, these types of practices and policies are slowly, but surely coming to a welcome end. Two examples are below.

Apologies Go A Long Way

This week, celebrity actor James Woods (who ironically won an Emmy for his depiction of a disillusioned lawyer on the show Shark) is supporting a bill in Rhode Island that is based on studies out of Michigan regarding the hospital’s policy on apologies to patients touched by medical malpractice. The reason shy James Woods is involved is that he had a very publicized medical malpractice lawsuit against a Rhode Island Hospital. Woods’ brother, Michael, died of a heart attack at Kent Hospital in 2006. Woods sued the hospital, accusing emergency room staff of not doing enough to save his brother. He settled the lawsuit after the hospital’s CEO apologized and agreed to start an institute in Michael Woods’ name. The bill is intended to allow the hospital to apologize to the victim without the fear of reprisal. It is essentially saying that an apology is not necessarily a clear admittance of guilt. Here’s how medical malpractice policy has generally worked in the past:

• A patient is effected by medical malpractice.
• They inform the hospital.
• The hospital speaks to their lawyers.
• Communication breaks down.
• The long drawn out process of settlement or court begins.

What the Michigan study showed was that physicians and institutions that sit down with the victims in an open and compassionate environment. Certainly, there are attorneys present representing their interests, however, the study found that when the defendant and plaintiff talked and the plaintiff was offered an apology, the settlement time and award were nearly 60% less than that of previous medical malpractice proceedings. Not only was this demonstrated in the James Woods case, but also here locally in Seattle last year. Seattle Children’s Hospital had a rash of accidental child poisonings that would have caused any institution to go into silent mode. Yet, Children’s Hospital reacted immediately with opening their doors to the media, state and local investigations, and gave a very candid and public apology. This not only went a long way to cementing their local and national image, but also protected them from what could have been some very expensive and drawn out lawsuits. Instead, settlement proceedings have been quiet. However, this could have been very different, where the institution uses their resources to vilify the victims, a route that has worked in the past, but is considered unsavory by most. HIPAA and Medical Malpractice Medical malpractice lawyers around the country have been keeping their left eye on New York for the past few years as a serious legal issue has been wiggling its way through the judiciary system. It’s surrounding the 2007 ruling, Arons v. Jutkowitz, in which the Court of Appeals held that defendants have a right to interview plaintiffs’ doctors without the consent of the plaintiff if they comply with procedural requirements in the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). HIPAA is specifically in place to protect workers and their families from losing health insurance after losing a job and to give some privacy to their medical information and who can obtain that information. The Arons v. Jutkowitz is counterproductive to the intent of the bill, since the bill has very specific privacy and protections in place. Under HIPAA, defendants must obtain authorization from the plaintiff before conducting interviews with non-party doctors. The reason why this is so important is that it allows defendants to farm for preexisting conditions or medical instances in the patient’s past that they can use against the plaintiff to insinuate that the victim is misleading in some way. This is already done through subpoena of medical records, but testimony is a whole different deal and could include a myriad of questions that veer away from the hard facts within the case. “You can’t have a fair adversarial system if one side has a proprietary interest in a witness,” said Joshua Cohen, president of the New York State Medical Defense Bar Association. The bill’s sponsor, Sen. John DeFrancisco, a Republican from Syracuse, defended the measure, noting that his proposal retains the ability of the defense to question doctors at depositions. In a memo opposing the bill, the Greater New York Hospital Association said the measure would increase malpractice insurance premiums by 6 percent, or $96 million, if enacted. DeFrancisco on Thursday called the estimate “nonsense,” and said no one could predict the fiscal impact.

Medical Malpractice Attorneys

But what this all comes down to is the patient. There are approximately an estimated 250,000 instances of medical malpractice every year in the United States resulting in injury or death. In the face of this, Harvard University determined that less than 2% of the total cost of healthcare in the US was caused by medical malpractice awards and settlements. In fact, they determined that non-required procedures to avoid lawsuits were double the cost to the overall U.S. healthcare system than the lawsuits that they were actually trying to prevent! It is in the best interest of the patient that they find a lawyer that not only understands them, but also the system and how it can turn out great for everyone if there is just some common sense injected into the system that protects the rights of the patient and not the insurance companies and the institutions. If you or a loved one have been severely injured or killed by suspected medical malpractice then it is important that you find experienced council that can clearly explain your rights and represent you in your fight to protect those rights. Call Phillips Law Firm for a consultation on your legal options.

Phillips Law Firm can help you with your Medical Malpractice claim.

At Phillips Law Firm our lawyers are dedicated to getting you justice and compensation you deserve. Call Phillips Law Firm at 1-800-708-6000, we are waiting to assist you 24/7, offering a free case evaluation. Remember our no fee promise. If we do not recover anything for you, you do not owe us an attorney fee It is important to act immediately. Do not let the window of opportunity for your case close as all cases have statues of limitations. You deserve justice and we are here to help.

Visit our Medical Malpractice main page for more information.

Spinal Cord Injuries (SCI) are one of the biggest concerns in car accidents. When an emergency medical technician (EMT) arrives at the scene of an accident they immediately check for SCI. The reason for this is that they know the importance of identifying these injuries right away.

Healthcare professionals recommend that people involved in a car accident don’t move if they suspect a back injury. The first responders, both fire and EMT, carry back boards specifically for these injuries. They prioritize these injuries in the emergency room, but often times the surgeries are left for days until swelling goes down. A new study now shows that this may not be the best policy.

“The differences that we are seeing with early decompression surgery are very significant and the results have a major impact on a person’s life,” Toronto neurosurgeon, Dr. Michael Fehlings said.

Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) Study

In a study published last week in the journal PLoS ONE, researchers found that of 313 patients with cervical-spinal-cord injury involved in the study, nearly 20% of those who had decompression surgery on their spine within 24 hours showed marked improvement in function compared to fewer than 9% of those who had surgery later.

The joint Canadian-U.S. study said that getting upper-spinal-cord injury victims into the operating room for decompression surgery sooner can reduce the likelihood of permanent paralysis for some patients.

“These are patients who have a very severe injury of the spinal cord,” said Dr. Fehlings, medical director of the Krembil Neuroscience Centre at Toronto Western Hospital, who led the study.

Researchers focused cervical spine, the area that accounts for 30% of all spinal-cord injuries and can lead to a person becoming a quadriplegic. The cervical spinal cord is encased in seven bony vertebrae that begin at the nape of the neck. Immediately below are the thoracic vertebrae, followed by those in the lumbar region that end in the tailbone.

“Traumas that cause upper-spinal- cord injury often occur from falls, sports injuries or motor vehicle accidents,” said Fehlings. “In most cases, there is a fracture of the cervical spine that results in either a dislocation of the vertebrae or a crush of one of the vertebra. In some cases, patients who have pre-existing narrowing of the spinal canal due to degenerative disc disease or arthritis can have blunt-trauma injury to the cord without an actual fracture.”

These types of surgeries often require a specialist and a lot of careful preparation such as x-rays and other expensive but essential scans. The operation involves releasing the pressure on the injured spinal cord and then stabilizing it. Without the careful hands of a specialist, this can result in tragedy.

In rare cases, and depending on the severity of the injury, a patient who otherwise would likely have been paralyzed was able to walk.

“The timing for a spinal-cord injury matters. In other words, it’s like a stroke or a heart attack. Both stroke and heart attack (are) medical emergencies… The same is true for spinal-cord injury,” said Fehlings.

Spinal Cord Injuries and Personal Injury Lawsuits

There are approximately 8000 spinal cord injuries every year in the US and almost 40% of them are caused by car accidents. When victims suffer a spinal cord injury in a car accident they can often spend long periods in the hospital, but they can potentially spend the rest of their lives rehabilitating. Not only that, studies have shown that there’s a risk that SCI can shorten your life.

However, it is hard to focus on the long-term consequences when the short-term consequences involve astronomical hospital bills of up to a half a million dollars. Long-term care can range in the millions involving:

• Surgeries
• Hospice Care
• Physical Therapy
• Psychological Therapy
• Wheelchair Transition Services and Maintenance
• Home Renovation
• In-Home Care
• Professional Retraining

These expenses can mount over a lifetime and it is the responsibility of the negligent party that caused the injury to accommodate and compensate the victim. That why it is important to get an experienced attorney to seek justice for the victim so that they can at least lead a life of dignity and regain some of their former life despite their injuries.

Some of the compensation an attorney will seek for the victim is:

• Quality of Life
• Pain and Suffering
• Lost Wages

Washington Spinal Cord Injury Attorney

Phillips Law Firm is a full service law firm with a substantial track record of success Personal Injury Litigation. We take the time to fully assess the injured party’s case in order to assure that the victim receives the compensation they deserve. Call our Personal Injury Attorneys today for a free consultation.

You may have heard the term “work-life” balance floating around everywhere today, but this might be the first time you’ve heard the term associated a safer workplace. It’s not a new concept, but it has become a growing concern as employers demand more from their employees translating into the employee spending less time with their family and on their health.

Studies have shown that being over worked, out of shape and alienated from your loved-ones can lead to burnout, expensive healthcare costs, and an early death. Previous studies performed by the Department of Labor Statistics, found Caucasians are more prone to injury in the workplace than African Americans, however, Hispanics seemed to display the highest rate of on-the-job injury. Now a new study has shown that worker satisfaction at home has a real effect on how safe they are at work.

This, along with strong management support and a “safety culture” in the workplace, the study says, has a huge effect on how often a worker gets injured in the workplace. This directly translates to the overall cost of workers compensation insurance for both Washington State and around the country.

Workplace Safety

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, around 6000 workers are killed each year in the United States. This is attributed to a myriad of reasons, however, researchers at the University of Georgia study suggest that one of the major contributing factors to this statistic is the “culture of the workplace” in reducing or increasing risk of injury.

Led by study author Dave DeJoy, Ph.D., the research team used data from the quality of work life module to assess the occupational injury risk for 1,525 respondents in terms of socio-demographic factors, employment characteristics and organizational factors. And published the results in the March issue of theJournal of Safety Research.

The authors pointed out that most prior research on organizational factors has focused on single occupations or single organizations. They feel that there has been a clear need to examine these factors across a diverse array of occupations and employment circumstances to see how generalizable or pervasive these factors are.

The nine factors they examined were:

• Participation
• Work-family interference
• Management-employee relations
• Organizational effectiveness
• Safety climate
• Job content
• Advancement potential
• Resource adequacy
• Supervisor support

They focused a keen eye on the mutual interference between job and family demands. In situations where work interferes with family life or family demands affect job performance, they found that the risk for injury increased a whopping 37%.

“We’ve known for some time that certain occupations are more dangerous than others due to a variety of physical and other hazards,” said DeJoy. “But in the last 20 years, there has been growing evidence that management and organizational factors also play a critical role. That is, actions taken or not taken at the organizational level can either set the stage for injuries or help prevent them.”

They then examined the respondent’s perceptions U.S. safety climate. The participants in the study had very diverse work environment backgrounds and occupations from offices to factories in order to highlight the factors linked to injury. Investigators discovered that well-managed companies can decrease injuries by 38% as worker opinions improve.

“We can design the best safety controls, but they must be maintained, and that falls on management,” the authors said.

The researchers asked the respondents questions pertaining to the workers’ perceptions of the safety climate and the importance of their safety held by the management and the organization as a whole. They found that when a worker’s perception of their workplace was positive, their chances of injury decrease by 32%.

“We used to think work was one thing and family was another, but now there is a realization that work-life balance affects performance and productivity,” DeJoy said.

Safety Culture

We have written about the safety culture when pertaining to a Traffic Safety Culture, however, that concept has stretched into the workplace. These are essentially organizational policies and procedures that establish a daily awareness of safety issues. They aren’t formalized ones, but an attitude by managers and the organization to create a climate of safety. Researchers found that the work culture including policies and procedures that applied to day-to-day operations were factors that define a safe environment.

“Injury is a failure of management,” DeJoy believes. “Organizations who blame individuals for injuries do not create a positive safety climate.” In addition to factors identified by the study to decrease injuries, work-family interference was established as a significant risk for occupational injury. “These results provide guidance for targeting interventions and protective measures to curtail occupational injury in the U.S.,” said co-author Todd Smith, a recent graduate of the Health Promotion and Behavior doctoral program at UGA.“The data suggests effects are pronounced and generalized across all occupations.”

Workers Compensation Attorney

Phillips Law Firmr has a team of legal professionals dedicated to seeking just compensation for workers injured on the job. Our workers compensation attorneys will look at your case for free and give you options on what you need to do to move forward. Call Phillips Law Firm now for a free consultation.

Do you remember the fen-phen debacle in the late 90’s? The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) found that the popular weight loss drug caused serious hear problems and pulled it from the market. Later, the weight loss drug Meridia (sibutrimine) was found to also cause heart problems and could be to be potentially fatal.

These two highly publicized events in weight loss drug history has made the FDA gun shy about the approval of weight loss drugs. Even though there are tons of herbal weight loss remedies that are barely regulated by the already over worked and under funded federal agency, only a couple on the market have actually been given the FDA’s seal of approval. One of these drugs is called Qnexa, produced by pharmaceutical Vivus, one of the smaller drug developers in the scheme of things.

Qnexa and the Heart

The FDA generally approves a drug, any drug, based on review of trials and studies paid for by the developing drug company. The FDA doesn’t have the funding to full test each drug on their own and independent studies are generally not conducted until after the drug has hit the market. Independent studies are mounted unless healthcare professionals or FDA officials have received complaints from patients prescribed the the drug.

Well, the complaint came in and learning from the past about dragging their feet on past obesity drugs, the FDA said that Qnexa was effective at helping people lose weight, but the raised concerns about possible long-term side effects such as birth defects and an unknown impact on the heart.

Now the FDA has opened up a review for the drug for a second time after previously being rejected by the agency in 2010. The agency posted a review of Qnexa on its website today in advance of an advisory panel meeting on Wednesday. The review of the drug includes two-year clinical data rather than one year’s worth of data that was reviewed in 2010.

In the review the FDA compares the drug to defunct Meridia by saying, “A previous example of an obesity therapy, sibutramine, which increased heart rate and blood pressure, was found to be associated with a small but statistically significant increase in the incidence of major cardiac events. In contrast, the small heart rate increases associated with QNEXA occurred in conjunction with significant decreases in systolic and diastolic blood pressure.”

Vivus will face the agency’s endocrinologic and metabolic drugs advisory committee. This panel is comprised of non-FDA medical experts who are supposed to have little to no financial or experiential stake in the drug or its manufacturer. They are being asked to mull over a series of questions including whether the “overall benefit-risk assessment” supports approval of Qnexa.

The FDA posted a notice today that there will be a Qnexa public web event on February 22^nd, 2012. The submission date for the public to post questions is February 7^th. “But, the date for submission is already passed!” you might say…we did too. The FDA does these unscrupulous things sometimes.

The FDA gives a series of recommendations in their 166 page assessment of the drug and they recommend that the drug stay on the market. The panel votes independently of the recommendations, but since FDA officials often choose to stack panels with experts who are rife with conflicts of interest, more times than not, they get their way.

Qnexa and Birth Defects

To understand the birth defect danger of Qnexa, you need to understand that it is a controlled-release formulation that combines low doses of two older drugs. It combines the stimulant phentermine (the “phen” in fen-phen), topiramate (aka Topamax), which is intended to treat seizures, but has also been found to increase the sense of feeling full.

In 2010 the FDA rejected Qnexa and asked Vivus for an assessment of the drug’s potential to cause birth defects and for evidence that the product doesn’t increase the risk for major adverse cardiovascular events. Studies of topiramate have given a clear connection to an increased birth-defect risk.

The FDA said exposure to topiramate in pregnancy “is likely to be associated with a two- to fivefold increased prevalence of oral clefts.” Otherwise known as “cleft palate.”

Vivus initially proposed limiting use of the drug to men, as well as women of nonchild-bearing age. But Vivus said the FDA asked the company to develop a plan to limit use by pregnant women.

Vivus predicts that, “QNEXA will be available with a risk mitigation program designed to inform prescribers, pharmacists, and patients about the potential serious risks of fetal exposure to QNEXA during pregnancy.”

Defective Drug Attorneys

If you or a loved one has taken Qnexa to lose weight and found that you have run into unexpected heart complications or your newborn child was born with a birth defect as a result of taking the drug, you need council of a good attorney. Phillips Law Firm is a team of experienced defective drug attorneys with a proven track record of successful defective drug litigation. If you or a loved one have experienced serious injuries or death due to the side effects of a generic drug call us today for a free consultation and to find out your legal rights.