Lawsuits launched against hip implant...

Lawsuits launched against hip implant manufacturers as Canada's hospitals hide records

There are 12 comments on the Toronto Sun story from Nov 27, 2010, titled Lawsuits launched against hip implant manufacturers as Canada's hospitals hide records. In it, Toronto Sun reports that:

Battle brews over access to hospital records

Eric Mets is recovering from his third hip-replacement operation in two years, a painful saga the Toronto man blames in part on a faulty implant.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Toronto Sun.

medical errors

Toronto, Canada

#1 Nov 28, 2010
Paul Shykora ARTs

Calgary, Canada

#2 Nov 29, 2010
..DOCTORs'..are ''NOT-GOD's''.....eh.
Allen Green

East Brunswick, NJ

#3 Dec 1, 2010
Just want to let the readers of this blog know that the National Hip Replacement Registry has been created in an attempt to centralize information and patients who may have been subject to a hip implant recall or FDA warning. If you have had a hip replacement, please register at http://www.hiprecallregistry.com
thx Allen

Caledon, Canada

#4 Dec 1, 2010
Legal challenges may imperil medicare, public health care advocates say

November 11, 2010

Canadian Medical Association Journal

Single-tier medicare is in peril because of legal challenges to provincial legislation that limits private sector medicare, delegates to a one-day session on the lawsuits were told Monday in Toronto, Ontario.

“This is a fight for the hearts and minds of Canadians,” Natalie Mehra, director of the Ontario Health Coalition, which sponsored the session,

told roughly 70 medicare advocates, public interest lawyers, health professionals and representatives of seniors and people living with AIDS.

“Unless we fight, we will lose public health care,” Mehra added.

Among the court challenges is one in British Columbia brought by former Canadian Medical Association President Dr. Brian Day, whose lawsuit claims that the province’s Medicare Protection Act contravenes section seven of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Day’s suit contends that the “rights to liberty, life and security of the person are a constitutional guarantee of access to medical care, and include both a right to access to medical care of one’s choice,

whether public or private, and a right of access to adequate and timely medical care”( www.courthousenews.com/2009/01/30/CanadaClini... ).
Ontario Health Coalition

Caledon, Canada

#5 Dec 1, 2010
Day’s Cambie Surgery Centre openly charges patients for medically necessary services, which is illegal under provincial law, said Rachel Tutte, cochair of the British Columbia Health Coalition.

If Day’s case is successful, Tuttle warns that Charter challenges would inevitably follow suit across the country, leading to “the dismantling of the universal Medicare system.”

Day launched his case in early 2009 after B.C.’s quasi-judicial Medical Services Commission attempted to audit his and other private clinics.(Other private clinics were originally plaintiffs in the case, but they have since withdrawn.)

The audit requests came about after a group of patients filed a lawsuit alleging the government wasn’t fulfilling its role to uphold medicare.

When private centres charged for essential services, said Stephanie Drake, a lawyer representing the BC Nurses Union,“the BC government’s policy was to ask the doctor nicely to pay back that patient and then leave him alone.”

Tutte said the number of private clinics in BC has grown to 33 over the past decade partly as a result of funding shortfalls in medicare. She added that BC clinics have become “more bold in openly violating”

the province’s medicare legislation since the Supreme Court’s landmark 2005 ruling that Quebec's ban on private health insurance for medically necessary services violated provincial human rights law,

(Chaoulli and Zeliotis v. A.G. Quebec et al.,

www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2005/2005scc35/2... ).
Ontario Health Coalition

Caledon, Canada

#6 Dec 1, 2010
Meanwhile, in Ontario, two patients are also demanding the Ontario Superior Court of Justice allow doctors and companies to charge for essential medical services.

Shona Holmes and Lindsay McCreith both travelled to private clinics in the United States for care and have alleged in a statement of claim against the province of Ontario that their health suffered because they were denied access to care outside of Ontario “government-run monopolistic” health care system.

Ontario legislation deprives residents “of the opportunity to secure timely access to essential health services and thereby violate the right to life and security of the person guaranteed by section 7 of the Charter,”

the lawsuit states ( www.law.utoronto.ca/healthlaw/docs/case_McCre... ).“The prohibitions on direct billing, extra billing, private medical insurance and MRI [magnetic resonance imaging] facility fees also deprive Ontarians of the right to make fundamental personal choices with regard to their life and health and therefore violate the right to liberty as guaranteed by section 7 of the Charter.”

A similar case was filed in Alberta in 2006 in which a 59-year-old man challenged a provincial law that precluded residents from purchasing private health insurance for provincially insured services ( www.law.utoronto.ca/healthlaw/docs/case_Willi... ). The case remains on the books but has not moved forward.

Mehra said the Canadian Constitution Foundation is behind both the Alberta and Ontario cases and had been “trolling” for patients they could use to launch a constitutional challenge.

The foundation, which describes itself as “a registered charity, independent and non-partisan” that acts as a “voice for freedom in Canada’s courtrooms and law schools,” lists McCreith & Holmes v. Ontario as one of its court cases ( www.canadianconstitutionfoundation.ca/court.p... and www.canadianconstitutionfoundation.ca/files/1... ).
Matthew Taylor

Chicago, IL

#9 Mar 17, 2011
Manufacturers of hip replacements such as DePuy's ASR hip series should be held liable for the pain, losses and suffering its hip implants have caused on its recipients. It is essential that affected patients arm themselves with the right information regarding the recall. Updates are found in http://www.hiprecalllaw.com

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#11 Jul 22, 2011
Hip implant manufacturers facing lawsuits because of their defective devices have been going on since last year. In fact, right now, Johnson & Johnson’s DePuy Pinnacle Hip Replacement is the latest addition to this issue. If you want to know more about it, visit http://www.depuypinnaclelawsuit.com/ now!
Sam

Chicago, IL

#17 Dec 9, 2011
DePuy have been accused of gleaning information from patients which they would have otherwise no access to without a court order by offering to shoulder the revision surgery of patients affected by its hip replacement recall. To distance themselves from the issue, Johnson & Johnson, DePuy's mother company, even had the revision evaluation handled by BroadSpire. I learned about it in this website http://www.depuyhipreplacementlawsuit.com .
Jason Johnson

Chicago, IL

#18 Dec 16, 2011
Recently, various lawsuits have been instituted by law firms in Australia, UK and against DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. on behalf of their clients who have become the victims of hip replacement surgeries. DePuy is a subsidiary company of Johnson and Johnson who issued a worldwide recall of their hip replacement products. Legal experts report that numerous patients filed lawsuits against Johnson and Johnson. They were the victims of DePuy hip implants failures such as loosening, fractures, and displacements.See http://www.hiprecalllaw.com/symptoms/ for a more comprehensive discussion.
Sandra

Atlanta, GA

#20 Dec 20, 2012
This is to prove that metal-on-metal hip implant devices has a high failure rate. Lawsuits had grown because of the number of patients needed for legal counseling , complaint against the manufacturer and to claim for their entitled compensation. Read more information here http://www.rotlaw.com/stryker-abg-rejuvenate/

Since: Jun 12

Canada

#21 Dec 21, 2012
Ontario Health Coalition wrote:
Meanwhile, in Ontario, two patients are also demanding the Ontario Superior Court of Justice allow doctors and companies to charge for essential medical services.
Shona Holmes and Lindsay McCreith both travelled to private clinics in the United States for care and have alleged in a statement of claim against the province of Ontario that their health suffered because they were denied access to care outside of Ontario “government-run monopolistic” health care system.
Ontario legislation deprives residents “of the opportunity to secure timely access to essential health services and thereby violate the right to life and security of the person guaranteed by section 7 of the Charter,”
the lawsuit states ( www.law.utoronto.ca/healthlaw/docs/case_McCre... ).“The prohibitions on direct billing, extra billing, private medical insurance and MRI [magnetic resonance imaging] facility fees also deprive Ontarians of the right to make fundamental personal choices with regard to their life and health and therefore violate the right to liberty as guaranteed by section 7 of the Charter.”
A similar case was filed in Alberta in 2006 in which a 59-year-old man challenged a provincial law that precluded residents from purchasing private health insurance for provincially insured services ( www.law.utoronto.ca/healthlaw/docs/case_Willi... ). The case remains on the books but has not moved forward.
Mehra said the Canadian Constitution Foundation is behind both the Alberta and Ontario cases and had been “trolling” for patients they could use to launch a constitutional challenge.
The foundation, which describes itself as “a registered charity, independent and non-partisan” that acts as a “voice for freedom in Canada’s courtrooms and law schools,” lists McCreith & Holmes v. Ontario as one of its court cases ( www.canadianconstitutionfoundation.ca/court.p... and www.canadianconstitutionfoundation.ca/files/1... ).
many Canadian women have been denied access to skilled doctors with ultrasound imaging techniques in the US to diagnose and map out transvaginal mesh complications and are being forced to use Canadian surgeons who cut in blind digging for degraded mesh implants......its horrendous to fight to get an accurate diagnosis and then mesh removal ASAP....

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Health Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Knee Replacements with DePuy (Feb '10) 9 min Marcy 102
News Put down the smokes: New rule prohibits smoking... 27 min Dr Pendyke 5
News Medicare looms over Trump-Ryan alliance 3 hr Bubblesss2212 8
News Study: 'Obamacare' repeal-only would make 30M u... 3 hr Just Think 74
Esophagus Spasm - How my mom STOPS her Esophage... (May '12) 11 hr Auntie M 244
News New IDT webinar to highlight benefits of using ... 13 hr Stephany McDowell 1
Country Fusion Workout - Demo Class 17 hr Country Fusion 1
News Pregnancy Symptoms - 12 Very Early Symptoms of ... (Jun '07) Wed her 7,021
More from around the web