Should troops get the right to sue the US for medical malpractice?

A medically retired airman filed suit against the U.S. government Friday in Texas, according to the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

Colton Read contends military surgeons so badly botched a routine gallbladder procedure in July 2009 that his legs had to be amputated to save his life, the newspaper reported Sunday.

The case is the latest challenge to the so-called Feres Doctrine, which places strict limits on the ability of active-duty personnel to sue military doctors for medical malpractice. The 62-year-old legal precedent protects the U.S. government from being held liable for negligence suffered by troops while on duty.

The Supreme Court in June 2011 refused to hear a military medical malpractice case involving Staff Sgt. Dean Witt, who was left in a persistent vegetative state after an Air Force hospital botched what should have been a routine appendectomy in 2003.

Read the entire story here.

Quietly, U.S. Moves to Block Lawsuits by Military Families

Politicians and bureaucrats of all persuasions typically trip over themselves when it comes to praising the values and virtues, the courage and the sacrifice, of America's military families. East Coast. West Coast. Red State. Blue State. Democrats. Republicans. It doesn't matter. Everyone wants to stand up in public and say that brave and stoic military families should get the best that America can offer (cue the applause). Take the First Lady herself, Michelle Obama, who has worked consistently with and for these families since 2009.

Commemorating the 10th anniversary of the terror attacks on America, Mrs. Obama wrote in USA Today:

As we reaffirm our commitment to hold dear the heroism, strength and compassion we saw on Sept. 11, let's also pledge to keep our military families in our hearts long after this anniversary has passed. These men, women and children have served valiantly in the decade since that fateful day. Now it's up to us to serve them as well.

Amen. But while public officials are out waving the flag toward these families, federal lawyers in court are now quietly trying to expand the U.S. government's legal immunity from exposure to medical malpractice claims brought by those very same military folks. Now, the feds want the courts to recognize a bold application of an old doctrine -- an already heavily criticized old doctrine -- that would bar many plaintiffs, whose loved ones serve their country, from exercising the right merely to be able to present the substance of their claims at trial.

Worse, Congress has consistently refused over the past 60 years to ensure that courthouse doors remain open to military personnel and their families. In one recent iteration of this battle, in 2009, it was reported that Congressional Republicans refused to go along because doing so it would allow more malpractice cases to get to trial, a goal many of those very same Republicans find contrary to their so-called "tort reform" agenda. It's a legal issue, it's a political issue, and its a moral one: How much do we really care about these families?

Read the entire story here.

-- submitted by Pam Baragona Robinson

Fort Hood shooting victims, families seek $750 million

In what could be the first step toward a massive federal lawsuit, 83 people —victims of the 2009 shooting rampage at Fort Hood and family members of those killed in the attack — have filed administrative claims against the U.S. government alleging willful negligence and seeking about $750 million in damages.

The claimants include family members of eight of the 13 people killed during the rampage, the worst shooting ever on an American military installation.

The claims allege that the federal agencies bowed to "political correctness" in ignoring warning signs regarding Maj. Nidal Hasan, the Army psychiatrist facing 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder in the shooting. Witnesses have said Hasan, who was scheduled to deploy to Afghanistan shortly after the shooting, shouted "Allahu Akbar" — an Arabic refrain meaning "God is greatest" and something of a war cry for Muslim terrorists — before opening fire inside Fort Hood's Soldier Readiness Processing Center, killing 12 soldiers and one civilian and wounding more than 30.

Read the entire article here.

Article submitted by Richard Stites

Army settles malpractice claim for $2.15 million

An Army soldier who filed a lawsuit over the treatment of his wife’s cancer at a military hospital at Fort Campbell, Ky., has reached a settlement with the federal government for $2.15 million, The Associated Press reported.

A Nashville judge on Friday approved the settlement of the medical malpractice claim made by Staff Sgt. Adam Cloer on behalf of his wife Melodee Cloer, who died last year at age 53 after being diagnosed with rectal cancer. The settlement is subject to final approval by the U.S. Attorney General.

Read the entire story here.

Supreme Court deals devastating blow to Feres Doctrine opponents

ByLeo Shane III

Stars and Stripes

Published: June 27, 2011

 

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear the latest military medical malpractice case involving the controversial Feres Doctrine, a defeat that strengthens the 61-year-old legal precedent and could effectively stop future legal challenges.
The decision follows the trend in recent years by the court not to hear cases involving the doctrine, which places strict limits on the ability of active-duty personnel to sue military doctors for medical malpractice.

Critics of the doctrine had hoped the court would be swayed by the emotional case of Staff Sgt. Dean Witt, who was left in a persistent vegetative state after an Air Force hospital botched what should have been a routine appendectomy.

But the court declined to hear the case without comment. Family members called that decision devastating.

Read the rest of the story here.

Is the Feres Doctrine fair?

The legal precedent that protects the U.S. military from medical malpractice suits is challenged

ByTravis J. Tritten

Stars and Stripes

Published: June 19, 2011

Staff Sgt. Dean Witt would likely still be alive and raising his two children if an Air Force hospital had not botched a routine appendectomy.

Medical staff at Travis Air Force Base in California committed mistake after mistake following Witt’s 2003 surgery — including pushing a breathing tube into his stomach and using resuscitation equipment designed for children — that left the blond-haired, blue-eyed airman in a persistent vegetative state until he was finally removed from life support three months later by his family.

Read the entire story here.

Rule shielding military doctors from liability faces legal battle

The U.S. Supreme Court will decide in June whether to hear a case challenging a decades-old doctrine preventing military members from suing the federal government for medical negligence.

If the Feres Doctrine is reversed, experts predict that the government will face hundreds of millions of dollars -- if not billions -- worth of medical liability claims.

The family of Air Force Staff Sgt. Dean Witt sued the government in 2008, claiming that his death was the result of carelessness by military health center staff. Witt was admitted to the David Grant Medical Center at Travis Air Force Base in California for a routine appendectomy in 2003, according to court records. The suit alleges that after the surgery, he was left in the postoperative care of student nurses who failed to re-establish his airway after a laryngospasm. Hospital staff also allegedly used pediatric equipment on Witt when adult equipment was available and placed an endotracheal tube down the wrong part of his throat, the lawsuit alleges. Witt had serious brain damage from hypoxia and died in 2004 after being taken off life support.
In 2009, a trial court dismissed the family's lawsuit, ruling the court was bound by the Feres Doctrine.

Read the entire story here.

Malpractice shield challenged

Military medical corps may soon face lawsuits

• By Mitch Stacy Associated Press
• Posted April 22, 2011 at 11:21 p.m.

BRADENTON, Fla. — Veterans, military families and others who oppose a decades-old law that shields military medical personnel from malpractice lawsuits are rallying around a case they consider the best chance in a generation to change the widely unpopular protection.

The U.S. Supreme Court has asked for more information from attorneys and will decide next month whether to hear the case of a 25-year-old noncommissioned officer who died after a nurse put a tube down the wrong part of his throat.

If the law is overturned, it could expose the federal government to billions of dollars in liability claims. That makes it highly unlikely a divided Congress desperate to cut expenses will act on its own to change what's called the Feres Doctrine, a 1950 Supreme Court ruling that effectively equates injuries from medical mistakes with battlefield wounds.

Read the entire story here.

H.R. 1478 - Carmelo Rodriguez Military Medical Accountability Act of 2009

To read about this bill, which would create legal accountability for Military Doctors and Hospitals, click here.

To read one story which illustrates the need for this bill to be made into law, click here.

-- submitted by Lisa Parris

Hold the Military Accountable For Negligent Medical Care

Urge Your Representative in Congress to Support

H.R. 1478: The Carmelo Rodriguez Military Medical Accountability Act

Sgt. Carmelo Rodriguez, who was a decorated Marine and platoon leader in Iraq, died of skin cancer last year after a series of extraordinary mistakes and misdiagnoses made by military medical personnel. The cancer spread throughout Rodriguez's body and weakened him to the point that he went from being an athletic 190 pound man to weighing less than 80 pounds. Carmelo left behind a loving family, including a seven year old son. His family, however, has no recourse for this tragedy. A 1950 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, known as the Feres Doctrine, denies servicemen and women the ability to seek damages from the federal government for medical malpractice. Unfortunately, the Rodriguez family is not alone.

H.R. 1478, which New York Congressman Maurice Hinchey authored, holds the military accountable for its responsibility to military personnel and if enacted, will encourage the steps needed to improve military care so that more families do not experience what the Rodriguez family has endured.

It is imperative that the United States Congress put our military personnel on equal footing with all Americans. Joining the military should not mean that one has to give up his or her right to hold medical providers accountable.

What can you do to help?

1) Go to http://www.house.gov/

2) Type in your zip code to find your member of Congress

3) Call your member's Washington D.C. office and confidently share the following message:

Or, if you already know the name of your member of Congress, call the House of Representatives' switchboard and ask to be patched through to that office: (202) 224-3121.

"Hi, my name is (your name), and I am a constituent of (your member of Congress). I have a message that I would like you to share with the Congressperson and the legislative assistant handling defense or judiciary issues.

"I ask that (he/she) co-sponsor H.R. 1478, The Carmelo Rodriguez Military Medical Accountability Act. Our servicemen and women already make tremendous personal sacrifices by serving in our military; giving up the right to hold their medical providers accountable for negligent care should not be one of them. I respectfully request a written response and can be reached at (address, phone number). Thank you."

--submitted by Barb Cragnotti

Repeal the Feres Doctrine

Cindy Wilson was a 37 year old technical sergeant stationed at Langley Air Force Base. On February 20, 2007, she was to give birth to her first child. Sergeant Wilson was excited that her parents were making the trip from Georgia to experience the birth of their grandson. On that same day, Dr. Michael Carozza, the lead obstetrician on staff at Langley, had not even been issued his Virginia medical license. He was 31 years of age and had just completed his residency a few months before.

Just before midnight on Feb. 20, 2007, Sergeant Wilson gave birth by cesarean section to a healthy boy. But she never got to hold her baby. According to her medical records, a uterine artery was cut during the delivery, causing massive internal bleeding. The estimated blood loss was equivalent to the total blood volume of an average adult. Then, during frantic efforts to repair the damage, two surgical sponges were left in Wilson’s abdomen. Wilson's parents went to her Smithfield home to get some sleep. Around 4 a.m., her husband called. Wilson was going back to the operating room for emergency surgery caused by the sponges left in her body. When her parents got back to the hospital, “her room looked like a tornado had hit it,” Connie Wilson said. A piece of medical equipment was overturned and a needle lay on the floor.

Twelve hours after giving birth, she was dead. Dr. Carozza's Virginia medical license was issued on Feb. 21, 2007 – the day Cindy Wilson died. Carozza is still on the obstetrics staff at Langley.

In the following months, Sergeant Wilson's devastated parents got a second shock when they learned that they had no recourse – even for what seemed to them an egregious case of medical malpractice – because of a legal precedent known as the Feres Doctrine , which bars military members from recovery for personal injury or death "incurred incident to miltary service or duty." "Incident to service" means any and all activities, not just work-related military duties, to which the service member is exposed due to her military service- including use of base recreational facilities and receipt of health care services.

Read the entire story by clicking here.

Marine’s Family Asks for Right to Sue Government for Medical Malpractice

Thursday, March 26, 2009 :: Staff infoZine

By Alex Hering - Marine Sgt. Carmelo Rodriguez fought in Iraq but lost his life fighting a different war.

Washington, D.C. - infoZine - Scripps Howard Foundation Wire - Cancer that went undiagnosed for nearly nine years killed the 29-year-old Rodriguez, of Ellenville, N.Y., said his sister, who testified about her family's story Tuesday before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law.

"Carmelo wanted his story to be heard, even if his life couldn't be saved. He wanted to ensure that what happened to him would not happen to another service member," Ivette Rodriguez said.

To read the entire story, click here.