Illinois Deserves the Truth

Elder Abuse Awareness Month

Most people understand that elder abuse is a huge problem in Illinois.  Still, you can't help but feel stunned when you learn tragic stories like that of 77-year-old Ivory Jackson, who was beaten to death at his nursing home.  Events like this constantly remind us that we need to do more to protect nursing home residents from harm.  That's why Gov. Blagojevich's proclamation of July as "Elder Abuse Awareness Month"--just a few days after Mr. Jackson died--felt especially relevant to the times.

“Our seniors have the right to be treated with dignity, respect, and to feel safe and secure.  Unfortunately, many seniors find themselves victims of abuse and neglect which is unacceptable,” said Gov. Blagojevich.  “The sooner we know about a case of abuse, the sooner we can put a stop to it.  But in order to keep up the fight against abuse and neglect, we need everyone to do their part.  If you suspect a case of elder abuse report it.  Elder Abuse prevention will help keep thousands of seniors safe each year.”

Click here to learn more about the proclamation, which is part of the state's "Break the Silence" campaign.

Awareness efforts like this are crucial, but reporting abuse isn’t the only way to keep residents safe.  We need to make sure our loved ones and their families can have their day in court and hold abusers accountable for wrongdoing.  Our lawmakers can take a big step forward on this front by passing The Fairness in Nursing Home Arbitration Act in the House (H.R. 6126) and Senate (S. 2838).  Nursing homes increasingly rely on binding, mandatory arbitration hearings to take away the legal rights of abuse victims. This legislation would give victims back their rights and would hold abusers accountable to their victims.

Federal Agencies letting manufacturers off the hook

With special interest and big business spending millions of dollars lobbying to take away the courts from consumers - you would think that federal agencies should do their part to protect consumers and hold wrongdoers accountable.  But if you thought this... you would be WRONG.  Unfortunately, as this Chicago Tribune article points out, federal agencies, under the Bush Administration, are being criticized for doing their fair share of screwing over consumers and protecting their Fat Cat friends.  These agencies are "rule making" people out of the right to hold wrongdoers accountable in the civil justice system, by making it tougher (or in some cases impossible) to bring suit against a manufacturer if the product was approved by a federal agency.

As Joan Claybrook, a former head of National Highway Traffic Safety Administration who now runs Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy group, put it:

"Liability puts a burden [on companies] to be very careful ... and not cut corners,"... "Without that, manufacturers will literally get away with murder."

When she ran NHTSA, Claybrook said, the agency did not try to regulate for every situation. Instead, she said, it assumed companies also did their own testing to ensure the safety of their products. If they didn't, they could pay the price in court.

"Federal standards are not all-encompassing," she said. "Liability fills the gaps."

Even though these rules are bad, Congress has the power to step in and pass laws preventing these agencies from cutting off consumers from the courts. It is unlikely that this administration would sign them, since they were the ones prodding these agencies to make these awful rules in the first place.  Let's hope that Congress and the new administration (whomever it will be) acts to prevent manufacturers from getting away with murder. 

To read more about this issue click here.

What Is Up With The FDA? A Few Highlights

Cross posted from The Pop Tort by Amanda.

Several months ago the New York Times opined, "The F.D.A. in Crisis: It Needs More Money and Talent,"

That had come shortly after Congress was told that the FDA wasn't able to guarantee the safety of the drugs manufactured abroad (um, almost all of them) because overseas manufacturing facilities have less rigorous safety standards.

Gregory Curfman, the Executive Editor of the New England Journal of Medicine during his recent congressional testimony in front of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform said:

We have learned over the years that approval of a new drug by the FDA by no means guarantees its safety. It is not uncommon for drugs to be approved by the FDA without long-term studies of their safety. Indeed, FDA approval of a drug is just one milestone along a path to the assessment of long-term safety. It is essential that a drug's safety continue to be carefully monitored during the post-marketing period, because we know that serious safety issues may come to light only after a drug has entered the market. 

Just yesterday, MSNBC reported that the FDA has been experiencing a "brain drain" as many of the most experienced scientists are being wooed into the private sector – leaving the federal agency inexperienced and understaffed.  Included in the article were anecdotal reports of scientists leaving in part because of concerns over safety issues:

FDA's outside advisers say frustration with FDA culture is a major reason its turnover rate is twice that of other agencies.

Staffers who disagree with management are reportedly discouraged from speaking up, according to an Institutes of Medicine report on FDA's drug safety system.

Staffers say strict deadlines for the review of drugs also contribute to stress.

"People are under enormous pressure to meet those review dates and they get burned out," said David Ross, a former FDA drug reviewer who now teaches at George Washington University's medical school.

Ross left FDA in 2006 after a dispute with agency management over the safety of an antibiotic.

Then of course there was Dr. David Graham, who had spent his entire career at the FDA's Office of Drug Safety and garnered national attention when he was highly critical of the federal agency in the way it handled Vioxx.  In 2004, Dr. Graham testified in front of Congress saying:

In my opinion, the FDA has let the American people down, and sadly, betrayed a public trust…. It is important that this Committee and the American people understand that what has happened with Vioxx is really a symptom of something far more dangerous to the safety of the American people.  Simply put, FDA and its Center for Drug Evaluation and Research [CDER] are broken… the scientific standards CDER applies to drug safety guarantee that unsafe and deadly drugs will remain on the US market.

What perhaps makes matters worse is the chilling drive by drug companies to allow them complete immunity when their drugs or medical devices harm or kill people.  In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that if the FDA has approved a medical device, then the manufacturer can't be sued.  Luckily, Congress has decided to get into the act. 

House Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee Chairman Frank Pallone, (D-NJ), and House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) will introduce legislation before the Independence Day recess that would explicitly state that FDA regulation does not trump medical device patients' ability to seek damages under state law.

House passes toy warning labels

Yesterday Illinois took a step toward better protections for children (and adults who like toys).  The house passed HB 5789, which now moves on to the Senate.  This bill would require warning labels on toys and other children’s products with lead levels exceeding pediatrician’s recommended levels of 40 parts per million.

Sponsoring Rep. Naomi Jakobsson (D-Urbana) said labeling requirements can let parents decide whether to buy a product that contains lead, a substance that has been shown to cause anemia and kidney damage at high levels.

The toy industry is fighting this legislation tooth and nail, but considering last year's run of product recalls and accidental deaths, how could you be against it?  As the Springfield editorial board noted earlier this week, this is definitely a “better safe than sorry” issue.  Hopefully the Senate agrees and passes this important legislation.

Making Arbitration a Choice for Nursing Home Residents

Last week Representative Linda Sanchez (D-CA) introduced the Fairness in Nursing Home Arbitration Act of 2008 in the HOuse.  This important legislation would make "binding mandatory arbitration" not binding anymore in nursing home contracts.  This came about a month after United States Senators Mel Martinez (R-FL) and Herb Kohl (D-WI) presented the same legislation in the US Senate. 

This legislation is intended to protect the rights of residents of nursing homes in how they choice to dispute an issue.  Binding mandatory arbitration has been getting more and more attention as companies continue to put these unfair conditions in everything from credit card agreements to car insurance policies to employment applications.  Binding mandatory arbitration requires that consumers forgo their rights to address their grievances in front of a judge and jury. 

We need to make sure that our elderly and frail are able to get their day in court.  Hopefully this legislation will get passed and start getting back some of the rights that corporate America has been successful at stripping away from us. 

To find out more about the dangers of binding mandatory arbitration check out the Public Citizen website.

Nursing homes escaping liability

Chicago's ABC affiliate ABC 7 aired a story on how Illinois nursing homes are not required to carry liability insurance.  We’ve talked about this for a while, but it looks like the mainstream press is finally catching on to the severity of this issue.  Estimates of how many nursing homes go without liability insurance are as high as 20%, and that’s not even counting nursing homes that are considered underinsured, or homes that carry policies from overseas insurers that don’t have to follow U.S. court orders.  All of this means that when your loved one is mistreated or abused in a nursing home, chances are it will be very difficult to hold the facility accountable and seek compensation.

Last year, fines for nursing home violations in Illinois totaled over $3.5 million.  Less than $1 million of that total has been collected.  These fines aren’t just for petty infractions.  According to the IDPH, there were 177 Type A violations in Illinois in 2007.  These are situations in which there is a “substantial probability that death or serious mental or physical harm will result.”  To give you a better picture, here are a few examples of A violations from recent IDPH reports:

•    "Failure to prevent sexual abuse of a resident, and not reporting the incident to the proper authorities."
•    “Using restraints for staff convenience, resulting in possible mental abuse.  A resident was locked in a linen closet and two residents were tied to their beds with sheets."
•    “Failure to prevent a medication error when staff gave a resident ten times the amount of the ordered dose. Staff also failed to notify the resident’s doctor about the overdose.  The resident died two days later."

ABC also highlighted a few of the many tragic stories of loved ones dying from nursing home abuse.

"I didn't know that nursing homes were not required to carry insurance," said Jill Szczekocki, granddaughter.

In another case at Rosewood in 2006, Szczekocki's grandmother was left alone in a washroom; according to state records, by a new employee who hadn't finished orientation or been told of the 93-year old's mandatory care needs. Mae Blake fell and hit her head.

"Six weeks later, she was put on hospice and she passed away," said Szczekocki.

It is long past time we hold nursing homes responsible for such incidents.  We can do this with house bill 5213 (we blogged about it here).  HB 5213 would make it mandatory for nursing homes to carry a minimum amount of liability insurance.  It would also make information on home’s coverage plans available to the public, so people like Ms. Szczekocki will know what to expect in the case of an accident.  Nursing home residents deserve a guarantee that if they are victimized, they or their families will be fairly compensated.  All Illinoisans should get behind this bill.

Click here to watch the ABC story.

New Bill Seeks to Hold Foreign Manufacturers Accountable for Unsafe Products

Cross posted from The Pop Tort by John Guyette

There are good ideas and there are great ideas.  For example...cheese - good idea.  Cheese in a can - great idea!  Well perhaps not everyone agrees with me on this.  But most would agree that corporations should not get off scott-free when their products maim, injure or kill consumers.  Corporate accountability - good idea.  Actually introducing and enacting legislation that holds corporations accountable for faulty products that hurt consumers - great idea!

Thankfully, Congress moved one step closer to better protecting American consumers hurt by products from foreign manufacturers.  Like the toys that contain excessive amounts of lead paint or the bad batches of the drug thinning drug, heparin.  Today, U.S. House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers and Commercial and Administrative Law Subcommittee Chair Linda Sánchez put the cheese in a can so to speak by introducing the "Protecting Americans from Unsafe Foreign Products Act." In addition to Conyers and Sánchez, the bill has three other original co-sponsors.  Sounds like a great idea to me.

I only hope the rest of Congress and the President realize the merit of this legislation.  Corporations whether at home or abroad just like everyone else should be held accountable for the damage they cause.  It just makes sense!

Legislative Update: SB 2784

Senate bill 2784 passed the senate yesterday and heads to the house.  This important bill would allow people who have been wronged to still be able to seek compensation if their wrongdoer dies (we blogged about it here).

Let’s hope our reps show as much respect for victims' rights as the senate did yesterday.

New Hope for Construction Safety: HB 2094

For 88 years, Illinois had in place a law to protect the safety of construction trade workers and the public and to minimize the scope of the dangers accompanying such work. On February 14, 1995, the Illinois General Assembly repealed this law, the Structural Work Act. The repeal eliminated essential safety standards, legal protections for injured workers, and effective incentives for construction owners and contractors to ensure safe working conditions.

Now, we have a chance to correct that mistake with HB2094.

Construction work is a dangerous job. Each year in Illinois significantly more construction workers die or get injured than policemen, firemen and other public safety employees combined. Between 2005 and 2006 there were 66 construction workers deaths in Illinois compared to nine deaths of police and fire department personnel.

Construction worker safety is further exacerbated by the lack of oversight by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Notoriously understaffed and without enough resources, OSHA is utterly unable to stop even egregious violations. If OSHA were to inspect all of the Illinois construction sites at current inspection levels it would take them 121 years to complete. This statistic has not improved under the current administration as funding continues to be cut in areas like worker safety and health training and education programs.

Moreover, the Illinois public is at risk. In 2002, there was a horrible tragedy where scaffolding fell from the 42nd floor of the John Hancock building killing three women pedestrians and injuring another seven.

Many of the dangers can be reduced and accidents prevented with stronger state laws.  Finally there is new hope offered by Rep. John Fritchey (D-11th). He has proposed an amendment to HB 2094 which will bring back much needed construction safety standards to Illinois.  The legislation, entitled The Construction Safety Act of 2008, will help correct the legislative mistake made in 1995 and protect construction workers and pedestrians once again, by: 

• Inspections: Granting Department of Labor officials the authority to immediately and fully inspect any construction site thought to be dangerous.

• Safety Standards: Requiring that scaffolds, cranes, and ladders be safely erected and secured.

• Building Plans: Requiring that architects and draftsmen follow these standards in their designs.

• Accountability: Giving injured workers and their families the power to hold accountable anyone involved with keeping a worksite safe, from owners and contractors to architects and foremen.

• Incentives: Holding everyone responsible for preventable accidents by giving all parties incentives to make worksites accident-proof.

This legislation would make things it safer not only for workers but also for all Illinoisans.

Critics say that this type of legislation could hurt Illinois' economy, but this is untrue and we have the lesson of history to prove it. For example, building contracts both before and after the repeal of the safety act in 1995 (from 1980 to 2003), showed a steady increase in numbers of contracts, as well as, the overall dollar value of these contracts, a significant sign of the good financial health of the Illinois' construction industry. This occurred both while the earlier law was in effect and after.  Additionally, during the 5-year period immediately preceding the repeal (1991- 1995), housing starts, in the form of new permits for private construction in Illinois, had increased substantially – by 30.8 percent. Thus, the safety act had little or no impact on this industry.

Illinois has a chance again to protect its citizens by enacting better safety standards. With the rise of construction in Illinois, we owe it to ourselves to Support HB 2094. 

To read more about Illinois construction safety and how the 1995 repeal of the Structural Safety Act hurt Illinois, please read The Center for Justice & Democracy - Illinois' report, which can be found here.

Sun-Times runs our letter--with a twist

The Sun-Times this morning ran a letter we wrote about an important bill (SB 2784) being discussed in the state senate--we blogged on it before.

When the Illinois Senate reconvenes this week, our legislators will look at an important piece of legislation, Senate Bill 2784. This bill allows people who have been wronged to still be able to receive compensation in a civil court even if the responsible wrongdoer dies.

When we are wronged by someone, it is our right to stand up in front of a jury and seek redress. A victim's pain or their right to justice does not suddenly go away if their wrongdoer dies. SB 2784 would ensure that these innocent people don't have to pay for another's unlawful conduct.

SB 2784 is scheduled to go before the Senate and all Illinoisans should support this legislation. 

Contact your local state senator and let him or her know you support this bill, too.

Normally I'd be really happy to have a giant resource like the Sun-Times help us get the word out about such a serious issue.  Then again, normally the Sun-Times wouldn't decide to pull a bad April fool's joke on us by giving it a bogus title.  "Back bill on suing the dead?"  Are they kidding?  This issue is about protecting victims' basic right to justice, plain and simple.  Hopefully our senators aren't as easily susceptible to "tort reform" rhetoric as editorial editors.