Miami Personal Injury Lawyer

Florida teen dies because he was not wearing seatbelt

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 22:46:03 GMT

Matthew Kornya's Nov. 7 car accident didn’t have to be tragic. He was not supposed to be driving a car because, as a minor, he only held a learner’s permit. He may have also been speeding, reports have said. By all accounts, “Matthew was a good kid, an honor student at Wellington High School, who loved to fish and hang out with friends.”

But Kornya’s life was jeopardized. Purposefully. Intentionally. And not because he was only 15 and should not have been behind the wheel. While the 15-year-old Kornya died from injuries sustained when he was tossed from the Nissan 350Z after it rolled off the road, his passenger, Michael McMahon, walked away from the accident. The difference? McMahon was wearing his seatbelt. Kornya was not.

Florida law requires drivers with learners’ permits to be accompanied at all times by someone 21 or older and prohibits them from driving later than 10 p.m., the Palm Beach Post reports. But a basic facet of driving or riding in a car, buckling up, that ultimately could have saved Kornya’s life.

None of that matters now, as Kornya’s classmates, friends and family must deal with the aftermath of a life taken too soon and for no good purpose. So the Kornya family members are sending the message out, hoping to make a difference once and for all. "Please wear your seatbelts, just drive carefully, there is no need to rush for anything," said Paul Kornya, Matthew's young cousin.

"Classmates planned on wearing red nail polish and beads to school on Monday, while the boys were to don red shirts in honor of their fallen peer and his favorite color. The Post also reported that students were also planning to wear T-shirts made by Guy Harvey, a popular fishing and sportswear line that Kornya loved, to school Monday. A local store confirmed that the shirts have been flying off the shelves since the accident."

Kornya was affectionately known as “Korndog,” according to one of the many comments on the “We Love Matthew Kornya” Facebook group page, which had more than 900 members as of Monday evening.

Other classmates and friends recalled school projects, giving Kornya workout tips to get girls while others lamented an opportunity missed to get to know a teenager taken too young.

Hopefully by buckling up when they get in the car, many of these same classmates and friends can take something from Kornya in death in addition to the joy he brought them in life.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte

Plane Headed For Ft. Pierce Crashes When Taking Off From Charleston. All Are Confirmed Dead.

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 08:44:23 GMT

Tragedy struck again Wednesday for a small airplane and its passengers. Federal authorities said four people were killed when a small plane headed to Fort Pierce, FL, crashed Wednesday shortly after departure in South Carolina. Federal Aviation Administration spokeswoman Kathleen Bergen said the Piper PA-23 was engulfed in flames when firefighters arrived. The aircraft crashed shortly after departure at 6:45 a.m.

Bergen said the plane was headed to St. Lucie County Airport in Fort Pierce. The pilot has been identified the pilot as Peter Radding of North Charleston, S.C. One of Radding’s neighbors, Jim Deaton, told The Post and Courier of Charleston, S.C., that Radding had planned to stop in Florida, pick up more passengers, then head to the Bahamas.

It’s the second four-person, fatal crash in the Southeast. On Sept.20, a Piper PA-32R Saratoga plunged into the Everglades killing pilot Bruce Barber, his wife, son and a family friend. It was the "fourth fatal accident at the (Dorchester, SC) airport in recent years" according to Jason Ward, a Dorchester Counter Administrator who commented on the investigation.

Radding had 40 years of flight experience, and, like Barber, was described as very meticulous with his airplane. The front seat passenger in Radding's plane, James Randolph Hargenrader, was also a licensed pilot. National Transportation and Safety Bureau officials were expected on the scene late Wednesday. There had been no public speculation by officials as to the cause of the crash by late Wednesday afternoon. Radding was reputed to be an excellent pilot, and "volunteered to fly mercy air ambulance trips and introduced young people to flying".

One is left to wonder in an accident like this, where there are experienced pilots and (for now) a seemingly maintained aircraft, how does something like this happen. The trouble with airplane crashes, is the fuel generally causes tremendous damage to the remaining parts, and essentially wipes out evidence of what went wrong. Meanwhile, the family members who are left, are devastated by the accident, and all the questions remaining. It seems a difficult decision to make, but allowing the FAA do do the only investigation on the aircraft may result in more questions than answers, which is why experts are retained to perform an "oversight" of the inspection, particularly in the hours and days immediately following the crash, which is when most of the information is gleamed.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte

Americans should look at Insurance Reform Before Espousing Tort Reform

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 16:39:30 GMT

There is a lot of energy about the various Health Care Bills that are being prepared and proposed by Congress. One issue on lots of minds is tort reform. Some elected officials are for tort reform, but those are the same politicians that accept big checks from insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies and corporations who have a vested interest in "reform" (i.e. elimination of access to court by victims of medical negligence).

Sadly, the tort reformist politicians who have an agenda separate and apart from protecting their own constituencies, are propped up by Fox News and other "journalists". But the reporters are not being completely honest with the public. Either that or they simply don't do their homework and research the issue. Either option is irresponsible because the American public is actually buying into what is being reported. Now there is an entire group of tort reform supporters, which based on the information they believe to be accurate, are claiming tort reform is necessary in order to drastically reduce the cost of healthcare for Americans. “Enacting a typical set of proposals would reduce federal budget deficits by roughly $54 billion over the next 10 years,” wrote Congressional Budget Office Director Doug Elmendorf in his blog.

Others, like former Democratic Sen. Bill Bradley, have said that tort reform should be bundled with a healthcare package to attract Republican support for universal coverage. But while lowering costs may sound nice, it’s not reality. And in the case of Bradley, nobody wins with a pork-laden bill.

“Liability isn’t even the tail on the cost dog. It’s the hair on the end of the tail,” Tom Baker, a professor of law and health sciences at the University of Pennsylvania School of Law, told the New York Times in a recent interview.

Baker said medical malpractice tort costs in 2007 were $30.4 billion out of a more than a $2 trillion health care system, meaning litigation costs and malpractice insurance constituted about 1 to 1.5 percent of total medical costs. In fact, he argued that since there have been about the same number of claims today as 20 years ago, the cost of health care has doubled in that time frame, the number of medical encounters between doctors and patients has gone up and research shows a more or less constant rate of errors per hospitalizations, there actually is a declining rate of lawsuits relative to numbers of injuries.

But medical costs still have skyrocketed. Baker says to consider that the American population is aging, we’ve had expensive advances in technology, the US is a rich nation, and the richer you get, the more money you spend on health care, and compared to other countries, the US has heavy administrative costs from the private-insurance system.

And in some parts of the country, notably Florida, doctors aren’t even required to carry insurance. Interestingly, Florida doctors are doing some of the loudest complaining, but a considerable number of them,particularly ones who perform surgery, don't pay a single dollar in premiums. A state physician database showed that one in eight doctors statewide in Florida opt out of malpractice insurance under a state law that lets them go without coverage. The law says doctors can go uninsured if they post signs in their offices and promise to pay up to $250,000 per malpractice award, with a maximum of $750,000 per year.

This policy has negative consequences. First, the patient is left with little discourse in the case of legitimate medical malpractice. Second, the insurance companies raise premiums to make up for all the doctors who aren’t insured. According to the South Florida. More responsible reporting, such as the Sun-Sentinel, has disclosed that premiums since 2003 have gone down yearly by less than 10 percent as insurer profits climbed to an average of 20 percent in 2006.

Instead of focusing energy on tort reform, the focus would be better on reducing premiums and reforming insurance companies. And there is no doubt that uninsured doctors should not be allowed to practice. Period. Anywhere. Unless of course they will agree to submit that all acquisitions in their name, their wife's or husband's name, and the companies created as shell corporations are jointly and several liable for monies awarded by a jury in a negligence case.

In the cases where those doctors who are uninsured . That starts with helping insure doctors are compensated in a way they deem fair, which includes making premiums affordable. And should someone be injured through negligence, and there not be either assets or insurance to recover from, unless that person is independently wealthy, guess who pays for the ongoing needs and medical care they require going forward? That's right- the taxpayers.

Medical malpractice litigation isn’t the problem; it’s time to focus on some solutions.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte

Is 2009 is becoming a record year for Airplane/Airliner crashes?

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 15:21:25 GMT

As 2009 has unfolded, we have read about several high-profile airline crashes, many of which resulted in fatalities and serious injuries. While accidents are nothing new, the combination of the Internet, the 24-hour news cycle and an insatiable desire by the media, and consumers, for front-page news has brought them to the public consciousness.

And the public is not the only one listening.

Federal Aviation Administration chief Randy Babbitt recently called for the need to “step up professionalism” in citing crashes that occurred due to preventable negligence. “The biggest factor I think for all of aviation is the need to step up professionalism in the workplace,” Mr. Babbitt said in prepared remarks. “It’s definitely there in the vast majority of the aviation workforce, but it’s not uniform throughout the industry.” ¹

There are few professions where the consequences of lack of professionalism on human life are greater than with flying an airplane. Throw in bad weather, long commutes, inexperience, low wages, sleep deprivation and antiquated rules, and you have a recipe that is sure to produce some disasters.

That’s why Randy Babbitt has it right. Professionalism, in all aspects of a flight – from mechanics to air traffic control to pilots – is crucial to maintaining air travel’s excellent safety record and reputation.

This isn’t the first time that the air travel industry has needed to step up the accountability. In 1996, following two crashes that killed more than 300 people, a White House commission told the airline industry and its regulators to slice the domestic rate of fatal accidents 80 percent over 10 years. ²

In 2007, after cutting the domestic fatal accident rate by nearly 65%, former administrator of the FAA Marion C. Blakey proclaimed, “This is the golden age of safety, the safest period, in the safest mode, in the history of the world.”² To get to that point, adjustments were made, including to the alarm system that warned, too often falsely, of an imminent collision with a mountain; and changing the approach system at a major domestic airport.

It was put best by John Cox, an Air Line Pilots Association safety representative for 20 years, who told the New York Times in 2007: “It’s not one thing. It’s a series of small things.” Meaning the biggest changes weren’t rocket science, just small issues found in everyday operations, he said, which were corrected before an accident could occur. ²

In 2009 and beyond, the call for professionalism should be heeded by doing the little things right, and there are a few areas that can be looked at to bring the vast minority of aviation industry personnel up to snuff.

Checking the Weather

Could professionalism be as simple as checking the weather? Recent reports show that literally throwing caution into the wind is not the best policy.

Earlier this year, an ATR-72 turboprop plane carrying 68 passengers and four crew members slid off the runway at Koh Samui airport in Thailand. The aircraft slammed into an old air traffic control tower, killing Captain Chartchai Punsuwan while his co-pilot remains in a critical condition in hospital. Seven passengers were injured. According to early reports, the plane was attempting to land in a storm, and heavy rain and strong winds may have played a role in the accident. ³

It was just one of a string of weather-related airplane emergencies this year. Two people were hurt when a Detroit-bound Delta Air Lines plane was “hammered” with severe weather, a spokesman said, and was forced to land in Kentucky. And at least 28 passengers aboard Continental Flight 128 were injured as the plane flew from Rio de Janeiro to Houston. The flight made an emergency landing in Miami. ⁴

Between 1994 and 2003, there were 4,167 weather-related accidents, according to a report by the Federal Aviation Administration’s National Aviation Safety Data Analysis Center. Of those accidents, 1,717 show no record of a weather briefing. ⁵

If the weather is monitored than maybe fewer risks should be taken if a flight is potentially going to land during a thunderstorm.

Sleep Deprivation

In a National Transportation Safety Board safety study of US major carrier accidents involving flight crew from 1978 to 1990, one finding stated: “Half the captains for whom data were available had been awake for more than 12 hours prior to their accidents. Half the first officers had been awake for more than 11 hours.” ⁶

This may seem like a tired argument since the study’s last subjects were analyzed nearly 20 years ago. But consider that many of the current rules for pilots’ work schedules haven’t changed in nearly 50 years. ⁷

And commuter flight rules may need the most attention. Passengers probably have no awareness that the pilot and crew of their plane may be on their sixth flight of the day, and that before the first of those six flights, the pilots and crew weren’t tucked in a comfortable bed but packed into a dark “crash” house with several other commuter airline crew members trying to sneak in a couple hours of shut-eye. ⁸

There could be as many as 1,000 such houses in the United States in cities like Pittsburgh, Newark, Houston and Chicago. Joe Williams, a spokesman for Pinnacle Airlines, parent company of Manassas-based regional carrier Colgan Air, said that Pinnacle supports "the right of our pilots to live where they choose. . . . Some pilots choose crash pads, and some choose to move to the area where they are based." ⁸

Airplane crew members bemoan low pay as a reason for the need to use a crash house, and some industry people agree.

According to a Washington Post story, "The sad truth of this industry is that [air travel] has been and remains one of the great bargains for the consumer," said Bill Swelbar, a researcher at the International Center for Air Transportation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "When adjusted for inflation over the last 30 years, fares are down some 50-plus percent. And that just does not make for a sustainable business model. It doesn't make a model that allows them to compensate their people well, like they have in the past." ⁸

Mr. Babbitt told the Wall Street Journal that "It's absolutely unsafe to think" that commuter cockpit crews can fly as many hours as long as pilots who may fly one long-range route during the same day. 9

The results of this sleep deprivation can be fatal. Studies show exhaustion can impair a pilot's judgment in much the same way alcohol does. Overtired pilots can focus on a conversation or a single chore and miss other things going on around them, including critical flight information. ⁷

Additionally, studies show that the average adult needs seven to eight hours of sleep to function at maximum capacity. Without this sleep, doctors say, accidents, depression, anxiety and cardiovascular problems can occur. ¹⁰

But there is hope on this point. An advisory committee on pilot fatigue delivered its recommendations to the Federal Aviation Administration in late summer, though the FAA asked for them not to be made public. Though to counter that point, it has been reported that since 2002, the National Transportation Safety Board has made 16 safety-related recommendations of the on-demand flight industry, but that the FAA has not implemented any of them. ¹¹

Time will tell if this go-round will produce results.

Follow the rules

On Aug. 8, a small airplane and a tourist-carrying helicopter collided over the Hudson River in New York killing all nine people aboard both vessels.

On Sept. 16, it was reported that the mid-air crash could have and should have been prevented.

The pilot of the plane read back the wrong radio frequency to an air traffic controller but wasn’t corrected by the controller, a federal safety official said. The air traffic controllers tried to warn the plane’s pilot that he was approaching the helicopter but couldn’t reach him because they were on two different radio frequencies. ¹²

It was reported earlier that the air traffic controller was on the telephone at the time of the crash and that the controller’s supervisor also wasn’t in the building, as required, at the time of the Aug. 8 crash, the FAA said in a statement in mid-August. The FAA placed the employees on administrative leave. ¹³

In his remarks on professionalism, the FAA’s Mr. Babbitt cited specifically the February crash of a Pinnacle Airlines Corp. Colgan unit plane near Buffalo, N.Y., which killed 50 people, and a 2006 accident in Lexington involving Comair with 49 fatalities as examples of inexperienced pilots who didn't follow basic operating standards. The captain in the Colgan crash had failed three in-cockpit exams, called “check rides,” before he came to the airline. ¹⁴

“Whether you have a wrench in your hand, whether you sit at a yoke or carry a clipboard, wear a headset or work in the galley, I'm not seeing consistent professionalism," Mr. Babbitt said. ¹⁵

Merriam Webster defines a professional as someone who is “characterized by or conforming to the technical or ethical standards of a profession.” Which means something as basic as recognizing an incorrect code could have saved nine lives.

Risky Business

Even the most prepared pilots face risk when they take to the skies.

South Florida resident Bruce Barber was meticulous when it came to flying. His business partner, Eric Elliott, described him as “always ahead of the activity. Every possible piece of gear you could have on a plane, he had,'' including three GPS systems and a storm scope. ¹⁶

Another friend said of Mr. Barber: “He was a very safe pilot -- very cautious. If there was going to be bad weather, we left earlier or we didn't go. In the last six months, he got a new radar system. He was very fussy about that plane.'' ¹⁶

Yet on Sept. 20, flying his small personal aircraft, Mr. Barber, his wife, son and friend perished in a crash that still doesn’t have a cause.

The industry does have tools for helping pilots become more aware of For the 13^th year in a row this fall, Bombardier’s safety seminar, Safety Standdown, challenged “pilots and crew to expand their understanding of the human factors involved in aviation accidents. Knowledge Ace refers to the concept of using the acquired information to minimize the possibility of human error,” said Rick Rowe, chief pilot of Learjet, in BART International magazine. “Knowledge-based training integrated with skill-based training is our greatest defense against error, bridging the gap between what the industry gets and what it needs. New for this year’s event were a Smart Pilot workshop and Mind and Body Wellness - a workshop examining cardiovascular risk factors among pilots and crew. ¹⁷

In the end, the responsibility to maintain professionalism will fall on many shoulders. Flight crews know their work schedules and it is ultimately their responsibility, like anybody with a job, to come to work ready to go. The FAA needs to put modern, relevant rules in place that jibe with what science and research has shown are the most tiring or non-tiring flights. The airlines have to make tough choices with an eye on their bottom lines of hiring more crews or risk over-taxing existing crews. And the passengers, ultimately, may face the choice of paying higher fares to fund the extra crews that may end up saving their lives.

Citations

1. www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601110&sid=ajzpzsoVMJfU

2. www.nytimes.com/2007/10/01/business/01safety.html

3. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8182962.stm

4. www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-08-04-turbulence_N.htm

5. www.asias.faa.gov/aviation_studies/weather_study/wbrief.html

6. http://aeromedical.org/Articles/Pilot_Fatigue.html

7. www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32648418/ns/travel-news/

8. www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/03/AR2009080302837.html

9. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124950069377208687.html

10. www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/03/04/sleep.stress.economy/index.html

11. http://mobile.wsvn.com/news/articles/national/MI129871/

12. www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i7snJnN8kUVlX69sAmaPg4IPi6aQD9AOJVA02

13. www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=anrLkbMmv5qc

14. www.nytimes.com/2009/06/16/nyregion/16colgan.html

15. www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2009-09-14-faa-buffalo-crash_N.htm

16. www.miamiherald.com/news/broward/story/1245084.html

17. www.bartintl.com/content/faa’s-randy-babbitt-ntsb-chairman-and-nbaa-president-slated-open-safety-standown

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte

Why Link Medical Malpractice Reform With Healthcare Reform? Does not make sense.

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 09:20:48 GMT

For the past few months, the one public policy that has been on every American's mind is health care reform. It seems like everyone has their own, unique opinion on the state of our country's health care system and how to best reform it, if reform is even necessary.

If you even begin to do some research on the subject, though, you find that there are a lot of red herrings in the health care debate, and it is very easy to be swayed by biased information that serves a particular interest group.

Take, for instance, the argument for litigation reform. Many doctors and insurance companies claim that the rising health care costs in America are caused by rampant medical malpractice claims by people who want to "get rich quick" off of the medical system, and by the subsequent need for doctors to perform "defensive medicine", wherein they perform unnecessary tests to cover themselves in case their patient decides to sue them for negligence. If we were to believe the people who support caps on awards in malpractice cases, all we would have to do to ensure quality, affordable universal health care is stop rewarding the countless individuals who rob the medical system of millions of dollars in rewards for petty injuries. Stories like the McDonald's customer who spilled coffee on her lap and supposedly won rewards of $2.7 million do not help the case that malpractice reform is a red herring in the health care debate. (It is worth knowing that the case of Liebeck vs. McDonald's is a bit more complicated than the story known by most people, and the woman's rewards were not as ridiculous as many have made them seem and in fact she ended up with very little money despite that the McDonald's store that she sued had several earlier similar instances of burning coffee which had caused injuries to customers).

So, is medical malpractice reform the solution to our health care problem? Not according to several prominent economists. Take, for instance, the opinion of Amitabh Chandra, a well-respected Harvard economist:

“Medical malpractice dollars are a red herring,” Chandra said in a telephone interview. “No serious economist thinks that saving money in med mal is the way to improve productivity in the system. There’s so many other sources of inefficiency.”

The results of a study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services show that medical malpractice cases make up only 2% of the country's health care spending, and "defensive medicine" only accounts for 5-9%. These numbers hardly reflect a significant source of spending in our health care system.

Proving this point even further, the Congressional Budget Office has concluded that even if states were to lower malpractice costs by 25-30%, health care costs would only be lowered about 0.4%, and there would be an equally negligible effect on health care insurance premiums.

The real cost of health care is outlined very clearly on the Henry J. Kaiser Foundation website, which finds the causes of rising health care to be:

Prescription drugs and technology – Spending on prescription drugs and new medical technologies has been cited as the primary contributor to the increase in overall health spending. Some analysts state that the availability of more expensive, state-of-the-art drugs and technological services fuels health care spending not only because the development costs of these products must be recouped by industry but also because they generate consumer demand for more intense, costly services even if they are not necessarily cost-effective.

Chronic disease – The nature of health care in the U.S. has changed dramatically over the past century with longer life spans and greater prevalence of chronic illnesses. This has placed tremendous demands on the health care system, particularly an increased need for treatment of ongoing illnesses and long-term care services such as nursing homes; it is estimated that health care costs for chronic disease treatment account for over 75% of national health expenditures.

Aging of the population – Health expenses rise with age and as the baby boomers are now in their middle years, some say that caring for this growing population has raised costs. This trend will continue as the baby boomers will begin qualifying for Medicare in 2011 and many of the costs are shifted to the public sector. However, experts agree that aging of the population contributes minimally to the high growth rate of health care spending.

Administrative costs – It is estimated that at least 7% of health care expenditures are for administrative costs (e.g. marketing, billing) and this portion is much lower in the Medicare program (<2%), which is operated by the federal government. Some argue that the mixed public-private system creates overhead costs and large profits that are fueling health care spending.

The facts are clear: medical malpractice claims are not a significant contributor to rising health care costs, and capping rewards in malpractice cases would not make health care more affordable. They make up less than 1% of total health care costs. 1%! If anything, capping rewards for malpractice cases is dangerous, because it means that doctors are held less accountable for their mistakes, and that patients who need compensation for wrongful pain, injury, or death will not be able to receive the justice they are due. It also means that the states supplement the medical care and treatment of the terribly injured person who cannot afford their ongoing care. What caps mean s we pay for doctor's negligence while insurance companies collecting premiums are given a pass. How does this make sense to anyone? If it doesn't make sense to you, I would hope you stay away from linking tort reform with any discussion on health care reform.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte

Family’s weekend trip ends in tragedy when Piper Aircraft goes down in the Everglades

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 08:24:53 GMT

Bruce Barber was meticulous when it came to flying.

His business partner, Eric Elliott, described him to the Miami Herald “`It's all about risk management,'' he said. ``You're always preparing for something to go wrong. You want to get everything where it's supposed to be in case you lose power'' and need to land. Mr. Elliott continued: Mr. Barber was ``always ahead of the activity. Every possible piece of gear you could have on a plane, he had,'' including three GPS systems and a storm scope.

Family friend Danny Ponce said of Mr. Barber: “He was a very safe pilot -- very cautious. If there was going to be bad weather, we left earlier or we didn't go. In the last six months, he got a new radar system. He was very fussy about that plane.''

So what went wrong on Sunday, Sept. 20, when the Piper PA-32R Saratoga plunged into the Everglades in Broward County killing Mr. Barber, his wife Karen Chubbuck Barber, son Payton, and family friend Phillip Marsh of Coral Springs?

A Federal Aviation Administration official said Mr. Barber reported engine trouble and called in a “mayday” before communication cut out. But the National Transportation Safety Board (NTS B) may take months to figure out what exactly went wrong.

If there was a manufacturer defect or if there was pilot error on account of Mr. Barber, there may be damages to be gained or a lesson to be learned. But now the moment belongs to mourning a philanthropic, model family and the future of 10-year-old Chloe Barber, the daughter who didn’t make the trip with her parents and brother.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte

Air Traffic Controller On A Personal Phone Call Just Before the Hudson Crash

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 11:37:00 GMT

Quoting from the the Daily Record, the Chairman of the NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board) Deborah Hersman, "...told a congressional committee Wednesday that shortly after the single-engine Piper took off from Teterboro Airport in New Jersey, a Teterboro controller handed off the plane to nearby Newark Liberty International. During the handoff, the controller instructed the Piper pilot to contact Newark and gave him the radio frequency.

Less than a minute after the incorrect readback, the plane collided with an air tour helicopter, sending both aircraft hurtling into the river. All three people aboard the plane and a pilot and five Italian tourists aboard the helicopter were killed."

While recent scruntiy has come over pilot fatigue (especially since the commuter plane crash this summer Buffalo, little has been suggested about air traffic controllers' role in recent crashes. Until now that is.

On Sept. 16, it was reported that the mid-air crash between a small plane and a tourist-toting helicopter over the Hudson River that killed nine could have and should have been prevented. The pilot of the plane read back the wrong radio frequency to an air traffic controller but wasn’t corrected by the controller, a federal safety official said. Meanwhile, other air traffic controllers tried to warn the plane’s pilot that he was approaching the helicopter but couldn’t reach him because they were on different radio frequencies.

Meanwhile, FAA chief Randy Babbitt recently called for the need to “step up professionalism.” He cited the February crash of a Pinnacle Airlines Corp. Colgan unit plane near Buffalo, N.Y., which killed 50 people, and a 2006 accident in Lexington involving Comair with 49 fatalities as examples of inexperienced pilots who didn't follow basic operating standards. “The biggest factor I think for all of aviation is the need to step up professionalism in the workplace,” Mr. Babbitt said in prepared remarks. “It’s definitely there in the vast majority of the aviation workforce, but it’s not uniform throughout the industry.”

What’s clear is that whether its inclement weather, physical damage to the plane, tired pilots, miscommunication with air traffic control or inexperienced pilots, flying is loaded with inherent dangers. One can only hope officials are doing everything to can to make sure every pilot steps up “professionalism” to make sure accidents happen as infrequently as possible.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte

Pilot Fatigue- FAA is taking notice but are they telling passengers the truth

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 09:38:01 GMT

Federal Aviation Administration head Randy Babbitt says "It's absolutely unsafe to think" that commuter cockpit crews can fly as many hours or stay on duty for as long as pilots who may fly one long-range and execute a single landing route during the same day. In other words, the rules of flying, some of which have been in place for decades, may be wrong. Passengers probably have no awareness that the pilot and crew of their plane may be on their sixth flight of the day.

Keep in mind that before the first of those six flights, the pilots and crew weren’t tucked in a comfortable bed. According the Washington Post, they were packed into a dark “crash” house with several other commuter airline crew trying to get some shut-eye.

Sleep deprivation and fatigue have long been known to be a dangerous factor in flying. In a National Transportation Safety Board safety study of US major carrier accidents involving flight crew from 1978 to 1990, one finding stated: “Half the captains for whom data were available had been awake for more than 12 hours prior to their accidents. Half the first officers had been awake for more than 11 hours. Crews comprising captains and first officers whose time since awake was above the median for their crew position made more errors overall, and significantly more procedural and tactical decision errors."

Studies show exhaustion can impair a pilot's judgment in much the same way alcohol does. Overtired pilots can focus on a conversation or a single chore and miss other things going on around them, including critical flight information.

There are solutions being worked out, but after the advisory committee on pilot fatigue delivered its recommendations to the Federal Aviation Administration late Tuesday, the FAA asked for them not to be made public. The airlines want to schedule some pilots with less-taxing flights — fewer takeoffs and landings — but for longer, not shorter, hours in the cockpit. The unions say they won't agree to more hours for those pilots in exchange for fewer hours for pilots who fly as many as a half dozen short flights a day or take off at odd times.

In the end, the responsibility will fall on many shoulders. Flight crews know their work schedules and it is ultimately their responsibility, like anybody with a job, to come to work ready to go. The FAA needs to put modern, relevant rules in place that jibe with what science and research has shown are the most tiring or non-tiring flights. The airlines have to make tough choices with an eye on their bottom lines of hiring more crews or risk over-taxing existing crews. But passengers, ultimately, may face the choice of paying higher fares to fund the extra crews that may end up saving their lives.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte

Presidents get to address our children? Nothing new in Obama's speech that hasn't been said before

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 15:53:04 GMT

Bush's Presidental Address and Remarks to Students and Faculty at Alice Deal Junior High School October 1, 2001

Thank you, Ms. Mostoller, and thanks for allowing me to visit your classroom to talk to you and all these students, and millions more in classrooms all across the country.

You know, long before I became President I was a parent. I remember the times that my kids came up with a really tough question or a difficult decision. I tried my best never to shut them down with a quick ``no.'' I would simply say those three magic words that made that problem disappear: ``Ask your Mother.'' [Laughter]

Let me tell you why I've made the trip up from the White House to Alice Deal Junior High. I'm not here to teach a lesson. You already have a very good teacher. I'm not here to tell you what to do or what to think. Maybe you're accustomed to adults talking about you and at you; well, today, I'm here to talk to you and challenge you. Education matters, and what you do today, and what you don't do can change your future.

Every day, we hear more bad news about our schools. Maybe you saw today's headline, I don't know if you had a chance to look at it, about the release of the new National Goals Report. Get the camera to come in and take a look at this for a moment. In math, for instance, this national report card shows that, nationwide, five of six eighth graders don't know the math they need to move up to the ninth grade.

In spite of troubling statistics like this one, I don't see this report, however, as just bad news, and I'll tell you why. This report tells us a lot about what you know and what you don't know. It gives us something to build on. It shows us our strengths and the weaknesses that we've go to correct. It sets forth a challenge to all of us: Work harder, learn more, revolutionize American education.

I know you've heard about stanines and percentiles, surveys and statistics, but here's what all that fancy talk really means: Education means the difference between a good future and a lousy one. Reports don't give us the right to make excuses. Our scores will tell us where we are and where we need to go.

I mentioned earlier the bad news we hear about schools today. But what we don't hear enough about are the success stories. You know, all over America, thousands of schools do succeed, even against tough odds, even against all odds. Kids from all over the District of Columbia petition to get into Alice Deal School here because parents know this school works. It works because of teachers like the one standing over here, Ms. Mostoller, who decided at the age of 25 -- maybe you all know this, but a lot of people around the country don't -- she decided at the age of 25 that she wanted to teach. She was standing in a supermarket checkout line when she saw a magazine ad about college. She went back to school, worked her way through in 7 years, waiting tables to pay tuition. She made it, and so can you.

This school here works because of students like the ones with me today, students like Rachel Rusch -- where's Rachel? Right there, okay -- a member of Alice Deal's award-winning ``Math Counts'' team. Rachel, you tell me if I'm wrong, but you and six other students in this class alone have taken part in the Johns Hopkins Talent Search. They took the college entrance exams on an experimental basis last year as seventh graders. Even in junior high, some of them scored well enough to get into college right now. So, let's just put it on the line. You've got the brains. Now, put them to work -- certainly, not for me, but for you.

Progress starts when we ask more of ourselves, our schools and, yes, you, our students. We made a start nationally now by setting six National Education Goals to meet the challenges of the 21st century. By the year 2000, at least 9 in every 10 students should graduate from high school. We should be first in the world in math and science. We need to regularly test student's abilities. Every American child should start school ready to learn; every American adult should be literate; and every American school should be safe and drug-free. Reaching those goals is the aim of a strategy that we call America 2000, a crusade for excellence in American education, school by school, community by community.

But what does all this mean, you might say, what is he doing, what does this all mean for the students right here in this room? Fast-forward -- 5 years from now. Unless things change, between now and 1996 as many as one in four of today's eighth graders will not graduate with their class. In some cities, the dropout rate is twice that high or higher. Imagine: Out of a total of nearly 3 million of your fellow classmates nationwide, an army of more than half a million dropouts.

I ask every student watching today: Look around you. Count four students. Start with yourself. No one dreams of becoming a dropout, but far too many do. Which one of you won't make it through school?

The fact is, every one of you can. Let's make a pact then right here. Let's work to see that 5 years from now, you and your friends will be more than sad statistics. Give yourself a decent shot at your dreams. Stay in school. Get that diploma.

Let's go back to the future. In the fall of 1996, 5 years from now, nearly half of today's eighth graders who get their diplomas will enter the working world. More than half the graduates will stay in school and become the college class of the year 2000.

The question each student watching today should ask is: Where will I be, where will I be 5 years from now? Will I be holding down a good job and maybe working toward a better one, or will I be out of school and out of work? Will I be on a college campus, or out running the streets?

Think about that tonight when you're at a kitchen table doing some homework; while your parents are meeting your teachers like so many millions do this year at back-to-school nights all across our great country.

I'm asking you to put two and two together: Make the connection between the homework you do tonight, the test you take tomorrow, and where you'll be 5, 15, even 50 years from now. You see, the real world doesn't begin somewhere else, some time way down there in the distant future. The real world starts right here. What you do here will have consequences for your whole lives.

Let me tell you something, many of you may find very hard to believe this. You're in control. You're thinking: How can the President say that about kids like us when we don't even have our driver's license? But think about it, and you'll see what I mean.

Think about drugs. You see films. You hear police experts and tough speakers from the outside. You get stern lectures from everyone: movie stars, athletes, teachers, parents, friends. But you know and I know that all the drug prevention programs, all the pledges, all the preaching in the world won't pull you through that critical moment when someone offers drugs. At that moment, everything comes down to you. Yes or no, you've got to choose, and the answer will change your life. Your parents won't make the decision. Your teachers won't make the decision. Your friends won't make the decision. It's up to you. It takes guts to take control.

A sound body and a sound mind, they go together, as my friend, and he is a friend, Arnold Schwarzenegger says. He's crossing the Nation talking with students about the importance of fitness. And real fitness means no drugs.

Studies show a decline in drug use, and that's good, that's encouraging, I think. And every student who draws the line against drugs really deserves credit for that. But drugs and violence continue to threaten every school, every small town and suburb in America. And as students, you have a right to be physically safe at school. You should never have to worry that a quarrel in the hallway will lead to gunfire in the playground. Fear should never follow you into the classroom.

If you have to take the long way home after school so you don't cross paths with the gang hanging on the corner, if outsiders roam the halls of your school hassling kids, hassling students, you must take control. Go to your teacher, or go to your principal, or go to your parents, as difficult as it may be, go to the school board if you have to. Demand discipline. If good people chicken out, bad people take control. Together, we can -- I really believe this -- we can drive the drugs and guns and senseless violence out of our schools.

When it comes to your own education, what I'm saying is take control. Don't say school is boring and blame it on your teachers. Make your teachers work hard. Tell them you want a first-class education. Tell them that you're here to learn.

Block out the kids who think it's not cool to be smart. I can't understand for the life of me what's so great about being stupid. If someone goofs off today, are they cool? Are they still cool years from now when they're stuck in a dead-end job? Don't let peer pressure stand between you and your dreams.

Take control -- challenge yourself. Only you know how hard you work. Maybe you can fake, maybe, just maybe you can fake your way into a job, but you won't keep it for long if you don't have the know-how to get the job done. Maybe you can cram the week before that marking period ends, and turn that C into a B. But you can't con your way past the SAT and into college. If you don't work hard, who gets hurt? If you cheat, who pays the price? If you cut corners, if you hunt for the easy A, who comes up short? Easy answer to that one: You do.

You're in control, but you are not alone. People want you to succeed. They want to help you succeed. Here at Deal, teachers like your outstanding teacher standing here with us today, Ms. Mostoller, from your principal, Mr. Moss, to your custodian, Mr. Francis. Right now in classrooms across this country, in the communities you call home, when things get tough, when answers are hard to come by, there's a teacher, a parent, a friend or family member ready to help you. They want to see you make it.

If you take school seriously, you won't have to settle for a job, just any job. You'll have a career. If you make it your business to learn, one day you'll be a better parent. You may not think about it now, but one day your children will want to look up at you and say, ``I've got the smartest Mom and Dad in the world.'' Don't disappoint them.

Let me leave you with a simple message: Every time you walk through that classroom door, make it your mission to get a good education. Don't do it just because your parents, or even the President, tells you. Do it for yourselves. Do it for your future. And while you're at it, help a little brother or sister to learn, or maybe even Mom or Dad. Let me know how you're doing. Write me a letter -- and I'm serious about this one -- write me a letter about ways you can help us achieve our goals. I think you know the address.

Now we're going to walk over to the school auditorium to say hello to the rest of the student body. To all the students across the country who watched us here in this great classroom today, may I simply say thank you and good luck to you this school year.

And now, Ms. Mostoller, if you'll kindly lead the way. Thank you all very much. Nice to be with you.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte

A Family's Liability- when a family is negligent, does the liability extend down the family chain?

Gabrielle D'Alemberte — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 18:24:03 GMT

On July 26^th 2009, Diane Schuler loaded her 2 children and three nieces into her car and hit the road, returning home to Long Island after a weekend of camping. This was 9:30 in the morning. By 1:30 in the afternoon, Schuler, her nieces, one of her children, and three men from another vehicle were dead; killed in a head-on collision after Schuler drove for almost two miles the wrong way down the Taconic Parkway. The most recent toxicology reports from Schuler’s autopsy suggest that at the time of her death she had extremely high blood alcohol levels and had recently smoked marijuana. At this time, prosecutors have declined to file criminal charges, saying that “Diane Schuler died in the crash and the charges died with her.”

In the wake of this tragedy, the families of the three men killed are considering filing a variety of civil suits. They have publically, through the media, condemned her and her family members and said the civil suits are the only way to enforce justice is served. This piece is just a brief examination of what sort of wrongful death suits might be filed, and under what legal theories. The following discussion will assume that Ms. Schuler was in fact drunk at the time of the accident.

Most wrongful death suits are filed under a negligence theory, and this matter will probably not be an exception. Simply put, negligence means that the defendant had a duty toward the plaintiffs to take reasonable precautions to avoid causing injury, defendant failed to take those precautions, and the plaintiffs were actually injured as a result. In the current matter, it seems fairly clear that Diane Schuler was negligent. We all know that driving while drunk is dangerous. Reasonable people, therefore avoid doing it. The more interesting question is who can be sued.

If Schuler was negligent, her estate can be sued. Potentially the company insuring the car she was driving can be sued. The car was actually owned by, Warren Hance, Schuler’s brother, so he might potentially have been liable. This last theory is known as the doctrine of negligent entrustment. It means that if the plaintiff can show that Hance knew, or should have known that his sister was drunk, that Hance may have been negligent in allowing her to drive his car. At this time it does not appear that Schuler had begun drinking before she began driving, so this last theory is unlikely to be a winner.

Schuler’s autopsy indicated that she had ingested at least 10 shots of vodka and had high levels of THC, a metabolite of marijuana, in her bloodstream. This sort of binge drinking is often indicative of a long-term substance abuse problem and attorneys for the families of the three men killed have suggested that Schuler’s family must surely have known of any such problem. If this is so, the question becomes, were those family members negligent in allowing Schuler to drive that day, and should the families of those killed be allowed to recover from them?

This is a question that doesn’t appear to have been previously litigated, and ultimately the answer will come down to how far we, as a society, think duty should be extended. We have laws that hold sellers of liquor responsible for harm caused by their customers, but we don’t generally hold social hosts responsible for damage done by their drunken guests.

If Diane Schuler did have a substance abuse problem, which her family denies, how closely related would a family member need to be in order to be held legally responsible for her behavior? Her husband, surely, but who else? Three completely innocent people are dead here, and their families should receive restitution, to the extent that is possible. However, as a society we need to decide just how comfortable we would be if we personally were held responsible for the actions of our families.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Gabrielle D'Alemberte