Clinical trials are supposed to be carried out for any kind of drug before they are sold to the public to determine if they are safe for use, not after. They are also designed to identify certain classes of people or conditions which will be adversely affected by it. This is true for over-the-counter medication and prescription drugs, and it is the responsibility of the drug manufacturer to carry them out. In most cases, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will require these trials prior to approval for use for specific conditions.
In the case of the anti-emetic drug Zofran (ondansetron) produced and marketed by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), the drug company carried out clinical trials that showed it was highly effective for suppressing nausea associated with chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and post surgery. However, the clinical trials presumably did not go far enough, because recent studies show that it could increase the risk of developing heart arrhythmia. And that isn’t even the biggest problem. The problem is with its off-label use to treat severe nausea and vomiting of pregnancy (NVP). Zofran has been associated with causing birth defects.
Studies were undertaken to prove it one way or the other. The results, however, are maddeningly vague. There are “indications” or “failed to find” results that instead of clearing up the matter for the public, merely muddy up the waters. According to Williams Kherkher’s website about the Zofran lawsuit, it falls on affected patients to come forward and tell their stories in order to gather evidence that will prove the drug does cause birth defects.
GSK has already been made to pay for encouraging the drug’s use for NVP although it was not approved for that purpose by the FDA. However, because GSK insists that Zofran is safe for pregnant women and studies show conflicting results, women continue to be prescribed with the drug for NVP.
If you have been prescribed with Zofran for NVP, and you child had birth defects, you may be able to help. Contact a Zofran lawyer in your area to add your voice to women who have been similarly harmed.
Child safety is one of the paramount concerns of parents, which is why most would make considerable effort to ensure that the products they buy for their children are safe. This includes their food, clothes, shoes, beds, strollers, and car seats. Most would pay a premium to buy brands that have a reputation for strict safety standards. As pointed out on the Habush Habush & Rottier S.C. ® website, however, it doesn’t matter what brand your car seat is; if the manufacturer fails to properly test their products before selling them, your child is in danger. As it is turning out, one of these is Graco.
Graco is perhaps one of the more recognizable brands of child car seats and other baby products, with an income of $1.1 billion reported for 2013. The Atlanta-based company was founded in 1942 and was acquired by Rubbermaid in 1996.
In 2010, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission announced that Graco was voluntarily recalling some of their most popular models of strollers and car seats because they had a high risk of laceration and fingertip amputation. More recently, Graco again issued a recall for more than 3 million of their harnessed booster and toddler convertible car seats manufactured between 2009 and 2013 for a defective buckle that could be difficult to unlatch in an emergency. Graco claims that no injuries caused by the defective party had been reported.
This claim may be true or not, but as one parent put it, children have been in a constant state of danger for years because the company knew about the defect but failed to warn them about it until recently. Events may also unfold that would reveal that some preventable child injuries and deaths in the past may have been due to these defective car seats.
If you suspect that your child was injured because of a defective car seat or other untested product meant for children, you could be right. Consult with an experienced defective car seat lawyer in your area to discuss your case.
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) prohibits any discriminatory acts (based on age) against persons 40 years and older in matters wherein employment conditions or privileges are the issues; these, of course, include hiring, promotion, retention of employment, job assignment, compensation and benefits, training, layoff, and all other employment-related issues. The protection provided by ADEA is intended for both job applicants and employees and the Act itself applies to state and local governments, labor organizations, employment agencies and all private companies with 20 or more employees (this Act also provides protection for US citizens hired and working for US employers overseas, so long as no laws of that country will be violated by the Act).
ADEA offers protection against discrimination based on age as well as against any form of retaliatory acts. This latter protection is also provided by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which makes it unlawful for an employer or manager to retaliate against an employee who: complains about age discrimination practices in the workplace; files a complaint to the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) about a violation on any of the stipulations of ADEA (or other discriminatory acts based on other reasons); or, participates or testifies in an investigation or lawsuit proceedings regarding employment discrimination.
Some of the other types of protection that ADEA provides include:
- The non-inclusion of age specification, limit or preference in job advertisements and notices, unless in jobs where age is a bona fide occupational qualification, such as an actor supposed to play the role of a young adult in a film
- Strictly limiting inquiries regarding a person’s age (during job interviews) for lawful purposes, such as to determine the possible length of service a person may be able to render. This is applicable in jobs like an airline pilot or bus driver which requires a mandatory retirement age
- Prohibition of offensive remarks about a person’s age, which may be construed as harassment (except when such remarks are made as offhand comments or simple ways of teasing and not as insults on the person concerned)
- Prohibition on employers to deny older employees the work benefits that they legally deserve. However, since the law recognizes the fact that costs of certain benefits provided to older employees are higher than the cost of same benefits when provided for younger workers, the law allows employers, in limited circumstances, to reduce benefits based on age, so long as the cost of the reduced benefits to older workers and the cost of the benefits provided to younger workers are the same.
With regard to making remarks about a person’s age, the law firm of Cary Kane LLP explains on its website that if such remarks are made too often, leading to the creation of a hostile working environment or resulting to employment decisions that will demote or end the older worker’s employment, then it would be necessary to consult a legal counsel. Having a competent lawyer, to protect one’s rights, becomes more essential if the older employee gets to be asked to sign accept a severance package in exchange for signing a release form.
A report from the state adult protection agency estimates that there has been a significant rise in nursing home abuse and neglect incidents in Kentucky’s elder care facilities from 18% in 2010 to 28% in 2011.
The Cabinet for Health and Family Services are only able to estimate the actual incidence rates from existing data gathered for the Elder Abuse in Kentucky report because many of these go unreported. As an article on the Sampson Law Firm website points out, many of the elderly are unable or afraid to report neglect or abuse, something that abusers and negligent nursing home staff count on, enabling them to act with impunity. This may be the reason for the escalating numbers in nursing home abuse despite increasing attention on the problem.
Kentucky has one of the fastest aging population in the US, which means that there are more people over 60 in proportion to its total population than most other states. This is a serious problem as Kentucky is also among the worst ranking states when it comes to elder care according to the United Health Foundation and the American Association of Retired Persons.
The elderly are among the most vulnerable population segments, especially if they suffer from physical and/or mental problems that make them dependent on others. While elder abuse is certainly not confined to nursing homes or other long-term care facilities, the abuse or neglect is more likely to go unremarked because they have been pulled out of a regular community.
There have been increased efforts to improve the situation for elderly Kentuckians as a result of the governor’s initiative towards nursing home reform following an article series in the Lexington Herald-Leader entitled “Voiceless & Vulnerable: Nursing Home Abuse” published in 2010. Gov. Steve Beshear put the machinery into motion that would improve the outlook for the elderly in long-term care facilities.
In the meantime, nursing home abuse is ongoing and needs to be addressed. If you suspect nursing home abuse as a friend or relative of a nursing home resident in Kentucky, report it to the proper authorities. At the same time, consult with a skilled nursing home negligence lawyer to help you build a personal injury case against the responsible parties.
The state of Illinois follows the modified comparative fault which means that you can get compensation seven if you have some fault for the accident, but the amount will be deducted by the percentage that is equal to your share of liability. However, if your liability for the accident is over 50 percent, you will not be given compensation under the Illinois comparative negligence law. According to the website of Habush Habush & Rottier S.C. ®, it’s because of these laws that it is important to have car insurance to make sure that your well-being and property are covered in an event of an accident.
Because of the “fault” system that the state of Illinois follows, the person or persons who are liable for an accident is legally responsible for compensating those who have been injured or suffered property damage. This generally means that, directly or indirectly, the at-fault driver’s insurance company will cover for the damages and losses that the victims have gone through. Being the victim, you can get compensation is three ways: first is by filing a personal injury claim against the person or persons at-fault for the accident, second is by filing a claim to your insurance company (expecting that the loss is included), and lastly by filing a claim straight to the at-fault person’s insurance company. Chicago car insurance companies, just as with any companies is other states, have requirements. Illinois laws demand their motorists to have liability insurance, namely: $20,000 for death or injury of one person (whether you, a passenger, pedestrian, or another driver), $15,000 to cover for property damage, and $40,000 for injury or death or more than one person due to the accident.
As Habush Habush & Rottier S.C.® have determined, it is more expensive to NOT have insurance rather than having one. Accidents can be very expensive, and being in one without car insurance can cause serious financial issues to you and your family. Being a motorist, you shouldn’t be getting car insurance just because the law requires it, but because you need to be financially covered for possible medical and repair expenses to yourself and other people should an accident occur.
As the aging population grows, laws have been made to help them with issues that they may encounter. Elder law is the area of juridical practice that cover various categories, generally in order to provide legal services for senior citizens and even for young people who require special needs. When thinking about planning for living the remaining years of your life, it is important to know how the Elder Law could help you or just your loved one. Not having enough information when planning for the future often results to more problems.
Knowing what to expect and what you want to know before consulting with an elder law lawyer play a vital role in getting what you want. Because elder law can become complicated and confusing to those who are not really aware of it, it would be best to research more about the matter. Having the right questions to ask an elder law lawyer would help the process or planning easier and smoother. If you ask any Chicago elder law lawyer, they can attest that having a lawyer by your side can aid in determining the best option for long-term health care, evaluate your needs in connection with federal tax, Medicaid, Medicare, property laws, and social security. Furthermore, when you already have an understanding of elder law, you can easily talk with your Chicago elder law lawyer regarding the drafting of trusts and wills, and even advising you on how to move forward in accordance to present laws.
Various states can have their own laws regarding elder law, therefore it is important that you seek a lawyer who specializes and knows the laws in your state. Consulting with an elder lawyer would serve as understanding the guidelines on how to work through the health care system. Because elder law is a pretty new arm of law, there may be many changes and updates that would affect your case.
When you have been in a car accident, it is important to determine the one who caused the accident. Establishing who caused the accident would make filing for an insurance claim or a personal injury claim easier and smoother. If you were the victim or a careless or reckless action on another motorist, you have the right to file for an insurance or injury claim. However, what may complicate the claims would be the different laws and regulations the each state in the US has regarding car accidents and injury claims.
Being a victim who will file an insurance or injury claim, it is important to know how these different state laws will affect the case and possible settlement or compensation that would be given. In the state of Michigan, for example, a Detroit personal injury lawyer would inform you that you have three years to file a case against the person at-fault for the accident. This statute of limitations generally begins on the day of the accident, and exceptions such as not fully “discovering” any injuries until after the accident would alter the start of the statute of limitations. Additionally, Michigan follows the Comparative Negligence rule, which indicate that any compensation you will receive will be influenced or eventually reduced by the percent of liability you may have to the accident. Your compensation may be reduced depending on the amount of fault for the injuries, and even have a chance of being eliminated if the fault is determined to be more than 50 percent.
The comparative negligence rule is also applied in the state of Texas, and because this is required to be applied in personal injury claims, many insurance adjusters tend to use this argument in court. The difference between the state of Michigan and Texas when it comes to injury laws is that in Texas, you only have two years to file for an insurance or injury claim following an accident. Because this statute of limitation sets the time restraints of filing for a personal injury claim, immediately contacting a Houston personal injury lawyer to help you set up the case would ensure that your chances for compensation will not be lost. Furthermore, there are limits or caps on the amount of compensation you can be given, as well as the amount of settlement. This is another reason why contacting a lawyer who knows the state laws in your area is important before actually filing a personal injury claim.
Many prescription medications have been the subjects of lawsuits because of their adverse and often irreversible effect on patients. One of many prescription medications facing many lawsuits from their consumers is the prescription drug Reglan. Reglan, with the generic name metoclopramide, is a prescription medication primarily used to help with nausea and vomiting. Over the years, Reglan has been prescribed to control GERD (gastroesophageal reflux disease), heartburn and decreased appetite in both children and adults alike. Although there have been positive results from taking the medication, there has also been adverse side effects, one of which is tardive dyskinesia or TD.
Tardive dyskinesia is a severe and often permanent disorder that results in involuntary and repetitive body movements that begin slowly. Children or infants who have taken Reglan tend to have higher risks of developing tardive dyskinesia. Although approved by the FDA, they are only recommended to be taken as short-term treatment and when other methods were not effective. Reglan should only be taken between 4 to 12 weeks, but apparently many consumers have taken them longer than prescribed.
Studies have determined that as many as 1 in every 4 patients have very high risk of developing symptoms of tardive dyskinesia after taking Reglan for more than a year. And because Reglan can make it is often difficult to diagnose tardive dyskinesia since it conceals the symptoms, consumers tend to develop and display advance state of this condition. Presently, there is no cure for tardive dyskinesia, which makes it even more painful and hard to cope with.
Some of those who have developed this condition have already sought the help of a lawyer to help in fling a defective pharmaceutical lawsuit and seek compensation. Although there have been risks that come with taking Reglan and metoclopramide in general, nothing in the label have explained the dangers clearly. Because of this negligence, the manufacturer can be held liable, as with the case to those who have taken NuvaRing, a birth control pill that have caused serious blood clots and stroke in women. Just as what a NuvaRing lawyer would advice, consulting with lawyers who understand how medical malpractice and personal injury lawsuits work would play a huge part in ensuring that compensation will be given and that those who are responsible for the injury are made accountable for their actions.
Cruise ships nowadays not only offer vacations in a boat, but they also offer on-shore excursions on the places that they pass by. The various activities that these on-shore excursions can both be enjoyable and fun, but they can also be risky and lead to injuries. The physical nature of these on-shore activities is what makes these on-shore activities dangerous: improper or poor instructions and faulty equipment can lead to accidents. In a cruise ship excursion, it is a common thing to hear about passengers getting scraped knees, bruises, and other minor injuries. There are instances, however, where major accidents that cause serious injuries can occur. When this happens, it is important to know who can be held responsible in order to determine who will pay for the compensation claim.
When it comes to cruise ship on-shore accidents, there may be multiple defendants in a personal injury claim, since more than one company or persons can be held liable for the accident. It is generally understood that the cruise line is responsible for the actions (or inactions) of their agents and employees. For on-shore excursion accidents, the cruise line may share responsibility of the accidents of their passengers, since it is understood that these on-shore activities are believed to be safe. Most cruise lines deny their responsibility with on-shore excursion accidents, which is why it is important for victims to consult with cruise ship injury lawyers to determine and establish a strong case.
Many cruise ships offer on-shore activities but tend to shy away from liability should an accident occur by having these excursion activities have independent contractors. Yet the cruise line still have the authority and responsibility of ensuring that who they hire are competent, and failing to do this and to guarantee the safety of their passengers, then they can still be held liable for the injuries that these on-shore excursion accidents cause. Law states that cruise lines have the duty of informing and warning their passengers of any type of dangers, even on shore. Should they neglect this duty, they can be accountable, thus the importance of consulting and hiring cruise ship accident lawyers to help investigate and determine the compensation claim.
Many workers have been injured while working can benefit from both worker’s compensation and Social Security Disability Insurance, provided that the injury is qualified as a disability by the Social Security Administration. Both benefits are available for injured workers because they are separate programs. If you have been injured at work and would like to see if you qualify for both benefits, it is important that you consult with either a Social Security lawyer or a worker’s compensation lawyer to guide and inform you of your options and possibilities.
Worker’s compensation is a state- based benefit program, therefore it may depend this can differ from state to state. This means that if you are living in the state of Iowa, it may be best to talk with a Des Moines workers’ compensation lawyer to help explain how you may be eligible for both benefits. Generally, worker’s compensation is a temporary compensation benefit and is given as a form of continuing income while the injury heals. Already receiving worker’s compensation after an accident will not affect any eligibility you may have when applying for a disability claim with SSA.
According to the website of the Hankey Law Office P.C., the thing that differentiates worker’s compensation benefits from Social Security disability are the requirements to be considered “disabled.” For worker’s compensation, being considered or classified as “disabled” means that the injury you have prevents you from capably performing a job or task. On the other hand, SSA defines “disabled” as an injury preventing you from not only performing your former tasks or job, but also any other meaningful work in any field you may be reasonably trained for. This injury should be disabling that could last for over a year or lead to death. This, and many other differences, can make applying for Social Security disability insurance difficult. It may help if you consult with a Social Security lawyer to see if you do qualify and how you can properly proceed with your application.
It may seem advantageous to apply for both benefits when you believe that your injuries can qualify you for them and if they are available. However, it is vital that you talk with a lawyer first, preferably someone who understands the state laws regarding worker’s compensation and how Social Security Disability Insurance works. This will not only ensure that you determine whether you qualify for both benefits or not, but also how both of your claims may be approved. Additionally, a lawyer’s knowledge will reduce the chances that your application will be denied.