Mom: Hospital worker gave toddler whooping cough
Thom Jensen
KXTV-TV
May 26, 2014
Jessica Chavez said it was just a normal trip to the hospital. Her 18-month-old daughter Adalena had come down with a mild virus, so she took her to Kaiser Permanente in south Sacramento in mid-to-late April.
But, when Adalena got sicker and sicker, Chavez said they went back to Kasier on May 12. Adalena was coughing uncontrollably and sometimes had difficulty breathing.
"I took her there to get better not to get worse," Chavez said.
Test results after that visit showed Adalena had Pertussis, also known as whooping cough.
"It really scared me. I was at work when I found out," Chavez said. "I broke down crying. It terrified me to death."
Then Chavez discovered an employee at the hospital went to work with pertussis in April at the same time Adalena was there. She said she believes her little girl contracted the potentially deadly disease at the hospital.
"They should have more strict rules and regulations for how they allow their employees be at work," Chavez said.
Kaiser Permanente South Sacramento's Chief of Infectious Disease Dr. John Belko released the following statement:
Regarding recent media reports about the ongoing pertussis outbreak in Sacramento County, Kaiser Permanente South Sacramento did recently confirm that an employee, who was vaccinated against the disease [Maura Larkins’ comment: if the employee was not vaccinated, my personal experience indicates that Kaiser would most likely have hidden the truth and made up a false story], tested positive for pertussis. The employee left work as soon as symptoms appeared and was diagnosed.
As a precaution Kaiser Permanente is contacting members and employees who may have been exposed to the employee as much as three weeks prior to the diagnosis because those infected with pertussis can carry the disease for some time before symptoms appear. Out of an abundance of caution, we are contacting members who may have been exposed between April 22 and May 6.
Due to patient privacy laws, we cannot discuss specific patient cases.
Chavez said she's glad Kaiser is taking proactive steps to help stop the disease from spreading.
As of last week, the Sacramento County Health Department had 69 confirmed cases of whooping cough. Last year, there were just 59 cases.
Showing posts with label Kaiser Foundation Hospital. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kaiser Foundation Hospital. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 27, 2014
Saturday, January 4, 2014
Baby's Disability Blamed on Kaiser Negligence
Baby's Disability Blamed on Kaiser Negligence
By BARBARA WALLACE
Courthouse News Service
January 02, 2014
(CN) - A Kaiser hospital botched the birth of a baby girl who now has Erb's palsy, her mother claims in a court.
Charnesha Cobb sued Kaiser Foundation Health Plan Inc., Kaiser Foundation Hospitals and the Permanente Medical Group Inc. in San Francisco County Superior Court on behalf of her now 2-year-old daughter, Joy Barnes.
Online medical resources describe Erb's palsy as a shoulder injury that can happen during a breach delivery or when the baby's neck is overstretched during a head-first delivery. The prognosis depends upon the extent of nerve damage.
Cobb blames Kaiser for Joy's injuries, saying in her complaint that the "defendants neglected to adequately select a competent medical staff and to periodically review the competency of its medical staff and failed to adequately monitor its staff."
As a result, "Joy Barnes has been diagnosed with Erb's palsy and is permanently disabled," the complaint states.
Cobb seeks economic and noneconomic damages, past and future medical expenses, loss of future earning and earning capacity, prejudgment interest, costs of suit and a jury trial. She is represented by Thomas Donahue and Rebecca Cucu of Donahue & Horrow in El Segundo, Calif.
By BARBARA WALLACE
Courthouse News Service
January 02, 2014
(CN) - A Kaiser hospital botched the birth of a baby girl who now has Erb's palsy, her mother claims in a court.
Charnesha Cobb sued Kaiser Foundation Health Plan Inc., Kaiser Foundation Hospitals and the Permanente Medical Group Inc. in San Francisco County Superior Court on behalf of her now 2-year-old daughter, Joy Barnes.
Online medical resources describe Erb's palsy as a shoulder injury that can happen during a breach delivery or when the baby's neck is overstretched during a head-first delivery. The prognosis depends upon the extent of nerve damage.
Cobb blames Kaiser for Joy's injuries, saying in her complaint that the "defendants neglected to adequately select a competent medical staff and to periodically review the competency of its medical staff and failed to adequately monitor its staff."
As a result, "Joy Barnes has been diagnosed with Erb's palsy and is permanently disabled," the complaint states.
Cobb seeks economic and noneconomic damages, past and future medical expenses, loss of future earning and earning capacity, prejudgment interest, costs of suit and a jury trial. She is represented by Thomas Donahue and Rebecca Cucu of Donahue & Horrow in El Segundo, Calif.
Friday, August 2, 2013
Woman Blames Kaiser for Multi-Organ Failure
Woman Blames Kaiser for Multi-Organ Failure
By BARBARA WALLACE
Courthouse News Service
July 31, 2013
PORTLAND, Ore. (CN) - A Kaiser patient started to bleed internally during an elective surgery to remove a mass from her kidney, and within days she was debilitated due to Kaiser's slow response, she claims in Multnomah County Circuit Court.
Patricia and Joseph Moore sued Northwest Permanente, Kaiser Foundation Hospitals and Kaiser Foundation Healthplan of the Northwest dba Kaiser Permanente for $9.5 million for medical malpractice and loss of consortium.
Within hours of the surgery Moore's abdomen was distended. Other symptoms "consistent with acute hemorrhage" followed, but it was not until shortly after midnight the next day that Kaiser "initiated their rapid transfusion protocol," according to the complaint.
Over the next two days Moore's complications escalated, including falling blood pressure, increasing abdominal distention, rapid heart beat and breathing problems, the complaint says.
"Following numerous transfusions, Patricia Moore sustained respiratory failure and was intubated. During the intubation she aspirated abdominal contents into her airway."
The next morning, "Patricia Moore was diagnosed with acute renal failure," and this was followed by removal of her left kidney and three months on a ventilator, after which she was discharged to a care facility, according to the complaint.
Moore blames Kaiser's failure to timely diagnose and surgically correct the internal bleeding for a host of problems she has experienced, including hemorrhagic shock, multisystem organ failure, acute respiratory failure, gangrene of her left leg and foot, anoxic brain injury and prolonged ventilator dependence.
The plaintiffs are represented by Timothy J. Jones and Ken L. Ammann of Salem, Ore.
By BARBARA WALLACE
Courthouse News Service
July 31, 2013
PORTLAND, Ore. (CN) - A Kaiser patient started to bleed internally during an elective surgery to remove a mass from her kidney, and within days she was debilitated due to Kaiser's slow response, she claims in Multnomah County Circuit Court.
Patricia and Joseph Moore sued Northwest Permanente, Kaiser Foundation Hospitals and Kaiser Foundation Healthplan of the Northwest dba Kaiser Permanente for $9.5 million for medical malpractice and loss of consortium.
Within hours of the surgery Moore's abdomen was distended. Other symptoms "consistent with acute hemorrhage" followed, but it was not until shortly after midnight the next day that Kaiser "initiated their rapid transfusion protocol," according to the complaint.
Over the next two days Moore's complications escalated, including falling blood pressure, increasing abdominal distention, rapid heart beat and breathing problems, the complaint says.
"Following numerous transfusions, Patricia Moore sustained respiratory failure and was intubated. During the intubation she aspirated abdominal contents into her airway."
The next morning, "Patricia Moore was diagnosed with acute renal failure," and this was followed by removal of her left kidney and three months on a ventilator, after which she was discharged to a care facility, according to the complaint.
Moore blames Kaiser's failure to timely diagnose and surgically correct the internal bleeding for a host of problems she has experienced, including hemorrhagic shock, multisystem organ failure, acute respiratory failure, gangrene of her left leg and foot, anoxic brain injury and prolonged ventilator dependence.
The plaintiffs are represented by Timothy J. Jones and Ken L. Ammann of Salem, Ore.
Friday, May 31, 2013
Suicidal Patient Escaped From Kaiser, Mom Says
Suicidal Patient Escaped From Kaiser, Mom Says
By BARBARA WALLACE
Courthouse News Service
May 31, 2013
ROSEVILLE, Calif. (CN) - A suicidal patient escaped through an unlocked door at a Kaiser hospital while awaiting transfer to a psychiatric facility, his parents claim in court.
Brian and Suzanne Amsbaugh sued Kaiser and Securitas Security Services for wrongful death and premises liability. Their son, Corey Amsbaugh, was diagnosed at Kaiser Roseville's emergency room with "psychosis, paranoia and suicidal ideation," the complaint says. "Health care providers and/or others at Kaiser Roseville determined that decedent was a 'high risk for suicide' and detained decedent," involuntarily, pending transfer to a psychiatric facility, according to the complaint.
"While waiting for the transfer to a psychiatric facility, decedent was placed, put, brought to, detained or otherwise kept in a designated room at Kaiser Roseville, chosen by defendants, to prevent his escape and the Kaiser Roseville's security personnel were summoned for 'bedside patient observation' to prevent decedent from escaping," the complaint continues. However, the next day "decedent walked out of the hospital room, through an unlocked door, escaped from Kaiser Roseville and committed suicide," according to the complaint.
The Amsbaughs allege Kaiser and Securitas "created, knew, or in the exercise of reasonable care and diligence, should have known, that unless reasonable inspections, repairs, modifications, supervision, control, monitoring and other appropriate measures were made and/or undertaken, such dangerous and defective conditions endangered the safety of patients."
Plaintiffs are represented by Werner Meissner of San Pedro.
By BARBARA WALLACE
Courthouse News Service
May 31, 2013
ROSEVILLE, Calif. (CN) - A suicidal patient escaped through an unlocked door at a Kaiser hospital while awaiting transfer to a psychiatric facility, his parents claim in court.
Brian and Suzanne Amsbaugh sued Kaiser and Securitas Security Services for wrongful death and premises liability. Their son, Corey Amsbaugh, was diagnosed at Kaiser Roseville's emergency room with "psychosis, paranoia and suicidal ideation," the complaint says. "Health care providers and/or others at Kaiser Roseville determined that decedent was a 'high risk for suicide' and detained decedent," involuntarily, pending transfer to a psychiatric facility, according to the complaint.
"While waiting for the transfer to a psychiatric facility, decedent was placed, put, brought to, detained or otherwise kept in a designated room at Kaiser Roseville, chosen by defendants, to prevent his escape and the Kaiser Roseville's security personnel were summoned for 'bedside patient observation' to prevent decedent from escaping," the complaint continues. However, the next day "decedent walked out of the hospital room, through an unlocked door, escaped from Kaiser Roseville and committed suicide," according to the complaint.
The Amsbaughs allege Kaiser and Securitas "created, knew, or in the exercise of reasonable care and diligence, should have known, that unless reasonable inspections, repairs, modifications, supervision, control, monitoring and other appropriate measures were made and/or undertaken, such dangerous and defective conditions endangered the safety of patients."
Plaintiffs are represented by Werner Meissner of San Pedro.
Friday, April 26, 2013
Kaiser surgeon, or surgical resident, bungles colostomy closure, patient passes stool through vagina
Woman Blames Kaiser for Poop Through Vagina
By BARBARA WALLACE
Courthouse News
April 25, 2013
PORTLAND (CN) - A Kaiser surgeon, or a surgical resident practicing under a surgeon, bungled Vicki Lopez-Lunn's colostomy closure, puncturing her vagina with one or more staples and causing an abnormal opening between her colon and vagina, Lopez-Lunn claims in a malpractice lawsuit filed in Multnomah County Circuit Court. "As a result, Ms. Lopez-Lunn began passing stool through her vagina," according to the complaint.
James W. Dennis, M.D. and Emily Bubbers, M.D. are named as defendants.
"Vicki Lopez-Lunn was never informed of the increased risks associated with having a resident surgeon, [such as] Emily Bubbers, M.D. perform surgical procedures like the one performed on plaintiff," the complaint states. "Had Dr. Dennis and /or Dr. Bubbers informed Ms. Lopez-Lunn of the risks associated with this surgery, Ms. Lopez-Lunn would have elected not to proceed with the surgery."
"Defendant Dennis and/or Bubbers knew or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known that puncturing Ms. Lopez-Lunn's vaginal cuff with surgical staples would cause injury to Ms. Lopez-Lunn," the complaint asserts.
The plaintiff is seeking $1.7 million in damages and is represented by Clayton Morrison of Beaverton, Ore.
By BARBARA WALLACE
Courthouse News
April 25, 2013
PORTLAND (CN) - A Kaiser surgeon, or a surgical resident practicing under a surgeon, bungled Vicki Lopez-Lunn's colostomy closure, puncturing her vagina with one or more staples and causing an abnormal opening between her colon and vagina, Lopez-Lunn claims in a malpractice lawsuit filed in Multnomah County Circuit Court. "As a result, Ms. Lopez-Lunn began passing stool through her vagina," according to the complaint.
James W. Dennis, M.D. and Emily Bubbers, M.D. are named as defendants.
"Vicki Lopez-Lunn was never informed of the increased risks associated with having a resident surgeon, [such as] Emily Bubbers, M.D. perform surgical procedures like the one performed on plaintiff," the complaint states. "Had Dr. Dennis and /or Dr. Bubbers informed Ms. Lopez-Lunn of the risks associated with this surgery, Ms. Lopez-Lunn would have elected not to proceed with the surgery."
"Defendant Dennis and/or Bubbers knew or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known that puncturing Ms. Lopez-Lunn's vaginal cuff with surgical staples would cause injury to Ms. Lopez-Lunn," the complaint asserts.
The plaintiff is seeking $1.7 million in damages and is represented by Clayton Morrison of Beaverton, Ore.
Friday, April 5, 2013
Kaiser: Guts Pulled Out through Cervix, Woman Claims
Kaiser: Guts Pulled Out Cervix, Woman Claims
By BARBARA WALLACE
Courthouse News
April 04, 2013
LOS ANGELES (CN) - During uterine surgery, a Kaiser surgeon perforated a woman's uterus and pulled part of her small intestine out through her cervix before realizing what it was, the woman claims in court.
According to the complaint, Dorothy Ho had uterine surgery performed by a Dr. Murray because of postmenopausal bleeding. "During the operation, as was later discovered, defendant Murray apparently, in attempts to remove a polyp during the course of the medical surgery, noted a protrusion of tan colored tissue, which defendant Murray then attempted to remove from plaintiff's cervix. As defendant Murray continued to pull on the tissue, it continued to elongate and when the tissue was sufficiently removed from the vaginal area, it was discovered that the tissue was not of gynecologic origin. Upon further consultation and confirmation with other medical staff, it was determined that defendant had perforated plaintiff's uterus and instead caused a small bowel injury to plaintiff's bowel due to a tear in her bowels caused by said surgery," according to the complaint.
"In this, defendant Murray failed in defendant's position as a trusted surgeon to perform the surgery with the level of skill, knowledge, and care that other reasonably careful surgeons would use in similar circumstances when confronted with a tissue of unknown origin attached to and protruding from an abnormal growth," the complaint states.
Next, defendant Murray, "immediately performed" a procedure, "during which a large portion, i.e. approximately 40 cm, of plaintiff's small bowel had to be removed," according to the complaint.
"After the operation, defendant Murray informed plaintiff Ho that despite the complication during the procedure, i.e. perforation and small bowel tear, that plaintiff would make a full recovery and would suffer no further, significant effects from the medical complications from the procedure," the complaint says. However, Dorothy Ho remained hospitalized for nine days, during which she "suffered from vomiting, abdominal cramping, bloating, and pain, which she was advised were normal complaints arising from such surgery," according to the complaint.
Dorothy Ho did not learn the full extent of her injuries for four months, during which time she continued to have abdominal pain and needed to take a leave of absence from her job as a Kaiser pharmacist, the complaint says.
Having lost 40 centimeters (about 15.6 inches) of her small bowel, Dorothy Ho's medical problems continue, including "inability to eat much, inability to eat greasy foods, inability to undertake hikes, [and] travel abroad," and "major depressive and anxiety disorders," requiring prescriptions for Xanax, Cymbalta and Ativan, according to the complaint.
Plaintiff is represented by David Lin of Pasadena.
By BARBARA WALLACE
Courthouse News
April 04, 2013
LOS ANGELES (CN) - During uterine surgery, a Kaiser surgeon perforated a woman's uterus and pulled part of her small intestine out through her cervix before realizing what it was, the woman claims in court.
According to the complaint, Dorothy Ho had uterine surgery performed by a Dr. Murray because of postmenopausal bleeding. "During the operation, as was later discovered, defendant Murray apparently, in attempts to remove a polyp during the course of the medical surgery, noted a protrusion of tan colored tissue, which defendant Murray then attempted to remove from plaintiff's cervix. As defendant Murray continued to pull on the tissue, it continued to elongate and when the tissue was sufficiently removed from the vaginal area, it was discovered that the tissue was not of gynecologic origin. Upon further consultation and confirmation with other medical staff, it was determined that defendant had perforated plaintiff's uterus and instead caused a small bowel injury to plaintiff's bowel due to a tear in her bowels caused by said surgery," according to the complaint.
"In this, defendant Murray failed in defendant's position as a trusted surgeon to perform the surgery with the level of skill, knowledge, and care that other reasonably careful surgeons would use in similar circumstances when confronted with a tissue of unknown origin attached to and protruding from an abnormal growth," the complaint states.
Next, defendant Murray, "immediately performed" a procedure, "during which a large portion, i.e. approximately 40 cm, of plaintiff's small bowel had to be removed," according to the complaint.
"After the operation, defendant Murray informed plaintiff Ho that despite the complication during the procedure, i.e. perforation and small bowel tear, that plaintiff would make a full recovery and would suffer no further, significant effects from the medical complications from the procedure," the complaint says. However, Dorothy Ho remained hospitalized for nine days, during which she "suffered from vomiting, abdominal cramping, bloating, and pain, which she was advised were normal complaints arising from such surgery," according to the complaint.
Dorothy Ho did not learn the full extent of her injuries for four months, during which time she continued to have abdominal pain and needed to take a leave of absence from her job as a Kaiser pharmacist, the complaint says.
Having lost 40 centimeters (about 15.6 inches) of her small bowel, Dorothy Ho's medical problems continue, including "inability to eat much, inability to eat greasy foods, inability to undertake hikes, [and] travel abroad," and "major depressive and anxiety disorders," requiring prescriptions for Xanax, Cymbalta and Ativan, according to the complaint.
Plaintiff is represented by David Lin of Pasadena.
Sunday, January 6, 2013
What does non-profit Kaiser do with its billions of dollars of profit each year?
Kaiser is a non-profit with billions of dollars of profits every year(!?) Much of that money is used to buy political clout--and it is very effective. Kaiser seems to control the Department of Managed Care in California.
Also, a lot of the money is funneled into Permanente Medical Group, which aggressively strives for big profits. Permanente uses it to pay generous pensions for doctors and administrators.
Patients are not Kaiser Permanente's shareholders, the doctors are. Perhaps consumers need a health care organization with the public as the owner.
Kaiser Permanente HOSPITAL GIVE $5 million to another hospital when customers continue to pay 10% average increases every year Oakland, California
Ripoff Report
Reported By: SteveW
Livermore California USA
January 05, 2013
Kaiser Permanente has donated/given away $5 MILLION DOLLARS to another hospital, how can this medical company give away $5 million when each and every year they increase customer cost by approximately 10%. 10% increase includes co-pays for doctor visist, monthly premiums and medicine co-pays as well as hospital stays. When customer cost continue to rise and I am now paying $1,237.00 per month plus co-pays on doctors, medicine and related cost. Something is wrong when my cost go up every year and this KAISER CAN donate money to some other hospital. Customer service and call backs are also problem and when you complain nobody ever calls you to explain why things are happening.
Also, a lot of the money is funneled into Permanente Medical Group, which aggressively strives for big profits. Permanente uses it to pay generous pensions for doctors and administrators.
Patients are not Kaiser Permanente's shareholders, the doctors are. Perhaps consumers need a health care organization with the public as the owner.
Kaiser Permanente HOSPITAL GIVE $5 million to another hospital when customers continue to pay 10% average increases every year Oakland, California
Ripoff Report
Reported By: SteveW
Livermore California USA
January 05, 2013
Kaiser Permanente has donated/given away $5 MILLION DOLLARS to another hospital, how can this medical company give away $5 million when each and every year they increase customer cost by approximately 10%. 10% increase includes co-pays for doctor visist, monthly premiums and medicine co-pays as well as hospital stays. When customer cost continue to rise and I am now paying $1,237.00 per month plus co-pays on doctors, medicine and related cost. Something is wrong when my cost go up every year and this KAISER CAN donate money to some other hospital. Customer service and call backs are also problem and when you complain nobody ever calls you to explain why things are happening.
Saturday, January 5, 2013
Kaiser Safety Worries Led to Firing, Nurse Says
Kaiser can't seem to figure out whether it's an organization devoted to patient care or an organization that tasks its lawyers and administrators with squeezing every dime possible out of its operations, regardless of the effect on its customers.
No, I'm wrong about that. Kaiser has definitely figured this out. Most employees understand the rules, but apparently Helen Raquipiso thought she was supposed to be concerned about patient welfare.
Kaiser Safety Worries Led to Firing, Nurse Says
By PHILIP A. JANQUART
Courthouse News Service
January 04, 2013
SAN MATEO, Calif. (CN) - A nurse was fired after blowing the whistle on unsafe patient care practiced at a San Francisco Kaiser Permanente hospital, she claims in San Mateo County Superior Court.
Helen Raquipiso began working as an assistant nurse manager for Kaiser Permanente's South San Francisco Medical Center in 2005, but alleges she was fired in 2010 for reporting unsafe "incidents" involving errors in medication distribution, patients being transferred to inappropriate care units and admissions violations.
Raquipiso worked during the evening shift and was responsible for the northwest, central east and southwest medical-surgical units, according to the complaint.
"Between mid-2009 and December 2010, she complained of various incidents that not only affected patient safety, but violated specific regulations governing patient care," the complaint states.
The incidents involved an error in dispensing "high alert medication," Kaiser employees transferring a stroke patient to Raquipiso's unit, which is not certified to care for stroke patients, and over-admitting patients, violating the hospital's 5 to 1 patient-to-nurse ratio requirements.
Raquipiso claims hospital staff retaliated against her for voicing the complaints, receiving a negative performance review, written warnings and placed on a performance improvement plan.
She says she was only given an incomplete, oral explanation of her performance evaluation, which was conducted January 2009, and that despite repeated requests, did not receive a written copy of the evaluation until a meeting held April 16, 2010.
"At this meeting, she was also given a 'notice of final warning' despite never having been given any previous warnings, written or otherwise," the complaint states. "Although this 'final' warning was ultimately withdrawn after Raquipiso complained, it was replaced with another written warning on or about Oct. 1, 2010."
She was ultimately fired for "failure to meet the required performance improvement expectations," according to the complaint.
She is suing for retaliation under California Labor Code and wrongful termination in violation of public policy. She seeks compensatory, consequential and punitive damages.
Andrew Agtagma of San Mateo, represents Raquipiso.
No, I'm wrong about that. Kaiser has definitely figured this out. Most employees understand the rules, but apparently Helen Raquipiso thought she was supposed to be concerned about patient welfare.
Kaiser Safety Worries Led to Firing, Nurse Says
By PHILIP A. JANQUART
Courthouse News Service
January 04, 2013
SAN MATEO, Calif. (CN) - A nurse was fired after blowing the whistle on unsafe patient care practiced at a San Francisco Kaiser Permanente hospital, she claims in San Mateo County Superior Court.
Helen Raquipiso began working as an assistant nurse manager for Kaiser Permanente's South San Francisco Medical Center in 2005, but alleges she was fired in 2010 for reporting unsafe "incidents" involving errors in medication distribution, patients being transferred to inappropriate care units and admissions violations.
Raquipiso worked during the evening shift and was responsible for the northwest, central east and southwest medical-surgical units, according to the complaint.
"Between mid-2009 and December 2010, she complained of various incidents that not only affected patient safety, but violated specific regulations governing patient care," the complaint states.
The incidents involved an error in dispensing "high alert medication," Kaiser employees transferring a stroke patient to Raquipiso's unit, which is not certified to care for stroke patients, and over-admitting patients, violating the hospital's 5 to 1 patient-to-nurse ratio requirements.
Raquipiso claims hospital staff retaliated against her for voicing the complaints, receiving a negative performance review, written warnings and placed on a performance improvement plan.
She says she was only given an incomplete, oral explanation of her performance evaluation, which was conducted January 2009, and that despite repeated requests, did not receive a written copy of the evaluation until a meeting held April 16, 2010.
"At this meeting, she was also given a 'notice of final warning' despite never having been given any previous warnings, written or otherwise," the complaint states. "Although this 'final' warning was ultimately withdrawn after Raquipiso complained, it was replaced with another written warning on or about Oct. 1, 2010."
She was ultimately fired for "failure to meet the required performance improvement expectations," according to the complaint.
She is suing for retaliation under California Labor Code and wrongful termination in violation of public policy. She seeks compensatory, consequential and punitive damages.
Andrew Agtagma of San Mateo, represents Raquipiso.
Friday, December 21, 2012
Kaiser Urology Department in San Diego admits truth about removing the wrong kidney
In the article below, Kaiser says that its mistakes are "rare." The truth is that it is rare for Kaiser to honestly report its mistakes, and the policy of falsifying medical records is supported at the highest levels of Southern California Kaiser Permanente Medical group and Kaiser Foundation Hospitals.
Here's a link about how Kaiser Permanente's urology department in San Diego covers up the truth: comparison of hospital urology departments.
Also see: Kaiser kidney transplant scandal
Here's a list of recent Kaiser lawsuits taken from the Courthouse News website: Kaiser Bad News.
San Diego Kaiser Hospital Fined For Removing Wrong Kidney
City News Service
December 20, 2012
A San Diego hospital was among 10 medical centers across the state that were assessed administrative penalties today for actions that caused, or could have caused, serious injury or death to patients.
According to state Department of Public Health officials, Kaiser Foundation Hospital failed to follow surgical policies and procedures in 2010, leading to a surgeon removing the wrong kidney from an 85-year-old man.
Hospital officials said that while extensive safety measures were in place, staffers acted quickly to identify the cause of the error and implemented safety measures to help ensure such an event would not be repeated.
"We sincerely regret that this error in 2010 occurred at the Kaiser Permanente San Diego Medical Center. While these types of incidents are very rare, we take the matter extremely seriously,'' according to a hospital statement. "At the time of the incident, we immediately reported the matter to the California Department of Public Health, and fully cooperated with the investigation.''
The hospital was fined $75,000 -- the second administrative penalty the medical center has received.
The hospital was assessed a $50,000 penalty after a towel was left inside a patient who underwent surgery for gallstones in 2009, U-T San Diego reported.
The CDPH issued 12 penalties to hospitals in San Diego, San Francisco, Oakland, San Rafael, Harbor City, Arcadia, Visalia, Mission Viejo, Fountain Valley and Crescent City.
Administrative penalties for incidents that happened before 2009 carried a fine of $25,000. For later incidents, $50,000 was assessed for a first violation, $75,000 for a second and $100,000 for subsequent violations. Incidents before 2009 were not included.
Hospitals were also required to provide a plan to prevent future incidents. Kaiser's plan included updated policies and procedures, and staff training "to prevent the reoccurrence of a surgical procedure being performed on a wrong body part.''
Surgeons and operating-room nurses will also ensure all relevant imaging studies are available and any surgical or invasive procedure for which an image was obtained will be available and reviewed, according to CDPH documents.
A multidisciplinary surgical safety team that meets weekly to discuss ideas for continuously promoting safe operating practices was implemented in May 2011, according to hospital officials.
Hospitals can appeal an administrative penalty by requesting a hearing within 10 days of the notification.
Here's a link about how Kaiser Permanente's urology department in San Diego covers up the truth: comparison of hospital urology departments.
Also see: Kaiser kidney transplant scandal
Here's a list of recent Kaiser lawsuits taken from the Courthouse News website: Kaiser Bad News.
San Diego Kaiser Hospital Fined For Removing Wrong Kidney
City News Service
December 20, 2012
A San Diego hospital was among 10 medical centers across the state that were assessed administrative penalties today for actions that caused, or could have caused, serious injury or death to patients.
According to state Department of Public Health officials, Kaiser Foundation Hospital failed to follow surgical policies and procedures in 2010, leading to a surgeon removing the wrong kidney from an 85-year-old man.
Hospital officials said that while extensive safety measures were in place, staffers acted quickly to identify the cause of the error and implemented safety measures to help ensure such an event would not be repeated.
"We sincerely regret that this error in 2010 occurred at the Kaiser Permanente San Diego Medical Center. While these types of incidents are very rare, we take the matter extremely seriously,'' according to a hospital statement. "At the time of the incident, we immediately reported the matter to the California Department of Public Health, and fully cooperated with the investigation.''
The hospital was fined $75,000 -- the second administrative penalty the medical center has received.
The hospital was assessed a $50,000 penalty after a towel was left inside a patient who underwent surgery for gallstones in 2009, U-T San Diego reported.
The CDPH issued 12 penalties to hospitals in San Diego, San Francisco, Oakland, San Rafael, Harbor City, Arcadia, Visalia, Mission Viejo, Fountain Valley and Crescent City.
Administrative penalties for incidents that happened before 2009 carried a fine of $25,000. For later incidents, $50,000 was assessed for a first violation, $75,000 for a second and $100,000 for subsequent violations. Incidents before 2009 were not included.
Hospitals were also required to provide a plan to prevent future incidents. Kaiser's plan included updated policies and procedures, and staff training "to prevent the reoccurrence of a surgical procedure being performed on a wrong body part.''
Surgeons and operating-room nurses will also ensure all relevant imaging studies are available and any surgical or invasive procedure for which an image was obtained will be available and reviewed, according to CDPH documents.
A multidisciplinary surgical safety team that meets weekly to discuss ideas for continuously promoting safe operating practices was implemented in May 2011, according to hospital officials.
Hospitals can appeal an administrative penalty by requesting a hearing within 10 days of the notification.
Friday, November 30, 2012
Kaiser Employee Reported Illicit Patient Charges, Fired
Most Kaiser Permanente management employees, including doctors, understand what is required of them: they must go along with whatever is needed to increase profits. This woman didn't understand how Kaiser and other healthcare entities do business.
Woman: Reported Illicit Patient Charges, Fired
By TISH KRAFT
Courthouse News
November 29, 2012
PORTLAND (CN) - Kaiser fired its director of patient access business services for reporting what she believed was patient fraud, the director says in a complaint filed in Multnomah County Court.
Aimee Mansell sued Kaiser and her boss Lisa Morrison for wrongful termination and whistle blowing.
Mansell says in her complaint that she blew the whistle on Morrison, who had "devised a policy where Emergency Department employees, including Ms. Mansell, would collect an additional 'triage' charge from Emergency Department patients, or include the triage charge on that patient's invoice for services."
Because she believed the charges to be a violation of state and/or federal law, Mansell reported these violations to defendant's complaint hotline, the court complaint says.
"On numerous occasions Ms. Mansell complained to her supervisors, human resources department, and managers at Kaiser about what she believed in good faith were different work related violations which were being committed by defendant Ms. Morrison and other Kaiser employees," her court complaint continues.
"A substantial factor in Kaiser's decision to terminate Ms. Mansell's employment was due to her fulfilling the societal obligation of reporting what she believed in good faith was patient fraud, and by protesting these triage charges which defendant Ms. Morrison had imposed or planned to impose on patient accounts," Mansell says in her complaint.
A few months before she was fired, Mansell was presented an award "In recognition of many achievements and contributions throughout the year," signed by her direct supervisor and defendant Morrison, the Patient Access Business Services Director, according to the complaint.
Plaintiff is represented by Patrick D. Angel of Portland.
Woman: Reported Illicit Patient Charges, Fired
By TISH KRAFT
Courthouse News
November 29, 2012
PORTLAND (CN) - Kaiser fired its director of patient access business services for reporting what she believed was patient fraud, the director says in a complaint filed in Multnomah County Court.
Aimee Mansell sued Kaiser and her boss Lisa Morrison for wrongful termination and whistle blowing.
Mansell says in her complaint that she blew the whistle on Morrison, who had "devised a policy where Emergency Department employees, including Ms. Mansell, would collect an additional 'triage' charge from Emergency Department patients, or include the triage charge on that patient's invoice for services."
Because she believed the charges to be a violation of state and/or federal law, Mansell reported these violations to defendant's complaint hotline, the court complaint says.
"On numerous occasions Ms. Mansell complained to her supervisors, human resources department, and managers at Kaiser about what she believed in good faith were different work related violations which were being committed by defendant Ms. Morrison and other Kaiser employees," her court complaint continues.
"A substantial factor in Kaiser's decision to terminate Ms. Mansell's employment was due to her fulfilling the societal obligation of reporting what she believed in good faith was patient fraud, and by protesting these triage charges which defendant Ms. Morrison had imposed or planned to impose on patient accounts," Mansell says in her complaint.
A few months before she was fired, Mansell was presented an award "In recognition of many achievements and contributions throughout the year," signed by her direct supervisor and defendant Morrison, the Patient Access Business Services Director, according to the complaint.
Plaintiff is represented by Patrick D. Angel of Portland.
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
Kaiser Permanente lays off 530 Calif. workers
Kaiser Permanente lays off 530 Calif. workers
By The Associated Press
Nov. 17, 2012
LOS ANGELES — Kaiser Permanente, one of the nation's largest HMOs, has laid off 530 employees in Southern California.
The Inland Valley Daily Bulletin reports ( http://bit.ly/U0MQ1i ) the cutbacks are spread across the company's 60,000 staff members in offices and hospitals from Kern County south to San Diego County. Doctors are not affected.
Under certain contracts, the laid-off employees who are in unions will get income and benefits for a year. Many may also get their jobs back next year, when Kaiser expects membership levels to grow, after the federal Affordable Care Act is implemented.
At least 85 positions were eliminated at the Fontana and Ontario medical centers, according to the newspaper. Exact locations of the rest of the layoffs were not available.
By The Associated Press
Nov. 17, 2012
LOS ANGELES — Kaiser Permanente, one of the nation's largest HMOs, has laid off 530 employees in Southern California.
The Inland Valley Daily Bulletin reports ( http://bit.ly/U0MQ1i ) the cutbacks are spread across the company's 60,000 staff members in offices and hospitals from Kern County south to San Diego County. Doctors are not affected.
Under certain contracts, the laid-off employees who are in unions will get income and benefits for a year. Many may also get their jobs back next year, when Kaiser expects membership levels to grow, after the federal Affordable Care Act is implemented.
At least 85 positions were eliminated at the Fontana and Ontario medical centers, according to the newspaper. Exact locations of the rest of the layoffs were not available.
Sunday, October 14, 2012
Kaiser charged member $4,029 AFTER Kaiser hospital bill was entirely paid
Kaiser Member Upset Over Hospital Charges
Diane Lund-Muzikant
Lund Report
October 11, 2012
Susan Chaney is convinced insurance companies are some of the highest profiting companies in America at the expense of people such as herself who deserve the right to affordable healthcare.
She spoke out after her husband, Jerry, a diabetic, was hospitalized at Kaiser Sunnyside in January for a foot ulcer that had gone undiagnosed.
After receiving the bill, Chaney realized their deductible and co-insurance hadn’t been met. That, she said, was never the issue.
Chaney became upset when Kaiser sent paperwork known as an Explanation of Benefits indicating that its medical center had billed $20,809.45 for the surgery, medical equipment and hospital stay, while the allowed amount was $28,300.65. Kaiser paid $24,644.32 toward the bill, while the Chaney’s were left owing $4,029.92.
“How does the hospital get paid $8,000 more than the cost of care?” asked Chaney who sent a complaint to the Oregon Insurance Division. “Everyone seems to think we’re trying to get out of paying, but that’s not the case. This is one reason people can’t afford healthcare is when they have to pay more than the actual cost. We’re the lucky people; we have insurance. But this is absolutely ludicrous.”
Earlier, Chaney had contacted Congressman Earl Blumenauer’s office in Portland, speaking with his casework manager Emily Hebbron who encouraged her to file a complaint with the Insurance Division.
“I want to make sure she gets an answer,” Hebbron said. “And I comment her for looking at the hospital bill so closely. Not everyone would have done so.”
The Insurance Division did look into this issue, according to a letter sent by Dennis Kuckartz, a consumer advocate. “When the allowed amount is greater than the billed charges, the benefits are calculated on the billed charges,” he wrote. “Even if Kaiser Permanente would have only allowed the billed charges, Mr. Chaney’s liability would have been the same. The claim was processed correctly.”
That explanation doesn’t satisfy Chaney. ”I still contend that this is what’s wrong with the entire system. I do not feel that a hospital or doctor or anyone for that matter should be able to negotiate a higher payment than the cost of care. Add that to the fact that then Kaiser tried to ‘strong arm’ us into making payments of nearly $400 a month on our portion when they had already received $4,000 more than the actual cost of care is absurd. After months and many, many phone calls Kaiser did finally agree to take only $175 per month until our portion is paid.”...
Diane Lund-Muzikant
Lund Report
October 11, 2012
Susan Chaney is convinced insurance companies are some of the highest profiting companies in America at the expense of people such as herself who deserve the right to affordable healthcare.
She spoke out after her husband, Jerry, a diabetic, was hospitalized at Kaiser Sunnyside in January for a foot ulcer that had gone undiagnosed.
After receiving the bill, Chaney realized their deductible and co-insurance hadn’t been met. That, she said, was never the issue.
Chaney became upset when Kaiser sent paperwork known as an Explanation of Benefits indicating that its medical center had billed $20,809.45 for the surgery, medical equipment and hospital stay, while the allowed amount was $28,300.65. Kaiser paid $24,644.32 toward the bill, while the Chaney’s were left owing $4,029.92.
“How does the hospital get paid $8,000 more than the cost of care?” asked Chaney who sent a complaint to the Oregon Insurance Division. “Everyone seems to think we’re trying to get out of paying, but that’s not the case. This is one reason people can’t afford healthcare is when they have to pay more than the actual cost. We’re the lucky people; we have insurance. But this is absolutely ludicrous.”
Earlier, Chaney had contacted Congressman Earl Blumenauer’s office in Portland, speaking with his casework manager Emily Hebbron who encouraged her to file a complaint with the Insurance Division.
“I want to make sure she gets an answer,” Hebbron said. “And I comment her for looking at the hospital bill so closely. Not everyone would have done so.”
The Insurance Division did look into this issue, according to a letter sent by Dennis Kuckartz, a consumer advocate. “When the allowed amount is greater than the billed charges, the benefits are calculated on the billed charges,” he wrote. “Even if Kaiser Permanente would have only allowed the billed charges, Mr. Chaney’s liability would have been the same. The claim was processed correctly.”
That explanation doesn’t satisfy Chaney. ”I still contend that this is what’s wrong with the entire system. I do not feel that a hospital or doctor or anyone for that matter should be able to negotiate a higher payment than the cost of care. Add that to the fact that then Kaiser tried to ‘strong arm’ us into making payments of nearly $400 a month on our portion when they had already received $4,000 more than the actual cost of care is absurd. After months and many, many phone calls Kaiser did finally agree to take only $175 per month until our portion is paid.”...
Friday, September 14, 2012
Doctor, Hospital Deals Probed, but not Kaiser Permanente, which does the exact same thing
Isn't this exactly what Kaiser Permanente has done? Does Kaiser have the political clout to escape examination?
Doctor, Hospital Deals Probed
September 13, 2012
By ANNA WILDE MATHEWS
The Sacramento Bee/Associated Press
California's attorney general has launched a broad investigation into whether growing consolidation among hospitals and doctor groups is pushing up the price of medical care, reflecting increasing scrutiny by antitrust regulators of medical-provider deals.
The office of the attorney general, Kamala D. Harris, has sent subpoenas, known as civil investigative demands, to several big hospital operators in the state, including San Francisco-based Dignity Health and San Diego's Scripps Health and Sharp HealthCare. Northern California's 24-hospital Sutter Health system has also received one, as has Santa Barbara-based Cottage Health System, according to people with knowledge of the matter. Subpoenas have also gone to major California health insurers, those people said.
The probe, which has been under way for several months, is examining hospital systems' reimbursement from the insurers, according to people with knowledge of the matter. The regulator appears to be focusing on whether the systems' tie-ups with physicians, as well as ownership of hospitals, have given them the market power to boost prices in a way that violates antitrust law, these people said.
Nationally, health-care providers are rapidly merging into bigger health systems, moves that they say will improve efficiency. The number of hospital deals last year, 86, was the biggest since 2000, according to Irving Levin Associates, a research firm that tracks health-care transactions.
Also, nearly a quarter of all specialty physicians who see patients at hospitals are now employed by the hospitals, according to an estimate from the Advisory Board Co. ABCO +0.51% That is more than four times the 5% in 2000. Among primary-care doctors who see patients in hospitals, the employed share has doubled to about 40% in the same time frame.
The American Hospital Association said consolidation doesn't routinely drive up prices; the California Hospital Association referred questions to the national group. Hospitals are merging and employing more doctors in order to streamline and improve care, under pressure from health regulators urging a more integrated approach under the federal health overhaul law, said Melinda Hatton, AHA's general counsel. "The antitrust agencies and national health-care policy don't seem to be really in sync at this point," she said.
Some research suggests that mergers can drive up health-care prices. A 2010 study published in the journal Health Affairs said concentration among health-care providers in California had led to "a definite shift in negotiating strength toward providers, resulting in higher payment rates and premiums."...
Doctor, Hospital Deals Probed
September 13, 2012
By ANNA WILDE MATHEWS
The Sacramento Bee/Associated Press
California's attorney general has launched a broad investigation into whether growing consolidation among hospitals and doctor groups is pushing up the price of medical care, reflecting increasing scrutiny by antitrust regulators of medical-provider deals.
The office of the attorney general, Kamala D. Harris, has sent subpoenas, known as civil investigative demands, to several big hospital operators in the state, including San Francisco-based Dignity Health and San Diego's Scripps Health and Sharp HealthCare. Northern California's 24-hospital Sutter Health system has also received one, as has Santa Barbara-based Cottage Health System, according to people with knowledge of the matter. Subpoenas have also gone to major California health insurers, those people said.
The probe, which has been under way for several months, is examining hospital systems' reimbursement from the insurers, according to people with knowledge of the matter. The regulator appears to be focusing on whether the systems' tie-ups with physicians, as well as ownership of hospitals, have given them the market power to boost prices in a way that violates antitrust law, these people said.
Nationally, health-care providers are rapidly merging into bigger health systems, moves that they say will improve efficiency. The number of hospital deals last year, 86, was the biggest since 2000, according to Irving Levin Associates, a research firm that tracks health-care transactions.
Also, nearly a quarter of all specialty physicians who see patients at hospitals are now employed by the hospitals, according to an estimate from the Advisory Board Co. ABCO +0.51% That is more than four times the 5% in 2000. Among primary-care doctors who see patients in hospitals, the employed share has doubled to about 40% in the same time frame.
The American Hospital Association said consolidation doesn't routinely drive up prices; the California Hospital Association referred questions to the national group. Hospitals are merging and employing more doctors in order to streamline and improve care, under pressure from health regulators urging a more integrated approach under the federal health overhaul law, said Melinda Hatton, AHA's general counsel. "The antitrust agencies and national health-care policy don't seem to be really in sync at this point," she said.
Some research suggests that mergers can drive up health-care prices. A 2010 study published in the journal Health Affairs said concentration among health-care providers in California had led to "a definite shift in negotiating strength toward providers, resulting in higher payment rates and premiums."...
Wednesday, September 5, 2012
Man Wins Lawsuit Against Kaiser Permanente; first time a Fresno jury finds Kaiser guilty of malpractice
I doubt that this was the first time that Fresno Kaiser failed to properly care for a patient. It's just the first time that Kaiser lawyers failed to convince a Fresno jury that Kaiser shouldn't have to pay for patient's damages.
Kerman Man Wins Lawsuit Against Kaiser Permanente
By Audrey Asistio
KSEE24 News
September 4, 2012
It's been a rough three years for Dusten Chevalier. Before the 27-year-old became confined to a wheelchair, he loved the outdoors. Racing dirt bikes, football, baseball, he did it all. But Chevalier says that all changed after he ended up in a Kaiser Permenente emergency room, in Fresno.
“It all started off with my stomach hurting and I actually got my appendix taken out. When I got home my if side was kind of hurting and was a little red. So we went back to the ER. Come to find out, I had an infection but they never told me any of this. I didn't even know I had a blood test pending,” said Chevalier.
He says the hospital failed to tell him that he tested positive for MRSA, an infection that could be fatal. The infection went untreated and he eventually lost the use of his legs and feet.
“At first it didn't seem real. It was hard to even imagine my life now, because before I was really into sports everything I did was outside. It was hard. It still is. Every day is really hard, but I don't know I'm just thankful I'm alive because I could have died,” expressed Chevalier.
Chevalier took Kaiser to court. After a month long battle, The jury verdict included damages in the total amount of $5,000,000.
Kaiser Permanente released a statement regarding this case that reads in part, “Kaiser Permanente, immediately after diagnosing the patient's infection, made repeated attempts to contact him to get him the treatment he needed. This was to no avail, as he provided inaccurate addresses and contact information. Kaiser Permanente went so far as to contact the Clovis Police Department to help locate the patient to get him to come in for treatment. Given these facts the jury found that, for the most part, much of the responsibility in this case fell upon the plaintiff himself, thus reducing the award by 70%.” This means Kaiser will only need to pay Chevalier 1.5 million dollars.
Chevalier claims he provided Kaiser with accurate contact information. Medical experts say the cost of his care will cost millions of dollars over the course of his lifetime.
Chevalier's attorney says this is the first time a Fresno County Jury ruled against Kaiser Permanente in a malpractice case.
Kerman Man Wins Lawsuit Against Kaiser Permanente
By Audrey Asistio
KSEE24 News
September 4, 2012
It's been a rough three years for Dusten Chevalier. Before the 27-year-old became confined to a wheelchair, he loved the outdoors. Racing dirt bikes, football, baseball, he did it all. But Chevalier says that all changed after he ended up in a Kaiser Permenente emergency room, in Fresno.
“It all started off with my stomach hurting and I actually got my appendix taken out. When I got home my if side was kind of hurting and was a little red. So we went back to the ER. Come to find out, I had an infection but they never told me any of this. I didn't even know I had a blood test pending,” said Chevalier.
He says the hospital failed to tell him that he tested positive for MRSA, an infection that could be fatal. The infection went untreated and he eventually lost the use of his legs and feet.
“At first it didn't seem real. It was hard to even imagine my life now, because before I was really into sports everything I did was outside. It was hard. It still is. Every day is really hard, but I don't know I'm just thankful I'm alive because I could have died,” expressed Chevalier.
Chevalier took Kaiser to court. After a month long battle, The jury verdict included damages in the total amount of $5,000,000.
Kaiser Permanente released a statement regarding this case that reads in part, “Kaiser Permanente, immediately after diagnosing the patient's infection, made repeated attempts to contact him to get him the treatment he needed. This was to no avail, as he provided inaccurate addresses and contact information. Kaiser Permanente went so far as to contact the Clovis Police Department to help locate the patient to get him to come in for treatment. Given these facts the jury found that, for the most part, much of the responsibility in this case fell upon the plaintiff himself, thus reducing the award by 70%.” This means Kaiser will only need to pay Chevalier 1.5 million dollars.
Chevalier claims he provided Kaiser with accurate contact information. Medical experts say the cost of his care will cost millions of dollars over the course of his lifetime.
Chevalier's attorney says this is the first time a Fresno County Jury ruled against Kaiser Permanente in a malpractice case.
Thursday, August 2, 2012
Witness tampering in Grotz v. Kaiser Permanente retaliation case?
It appears that there may have been witness tampering by Kaiser Permanente and/or SEIU in the Grotz v. Kaiser Permanente case.
Courthouse News reported on July 11, 2012:
Kristinna Grotz sued Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, the Permanente Medical Group, and SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West, which allegedly failed to stick up for her.
Grotz claims she worked in Kaiser's admitting department from 2002 until she was fired in the summer of 2011.
She says that from early 2008 department manager (nonparty) D. T. used drugs - "in all likelihood methamphetamine" - at work, and that D. T. retaliated against her for reporting it.
This case sounds very familiar.
As a patient of Kaiser Permanente, I was amazed to learn that Kaiser forced its doctors to falsify medical records in my case, apparently to justify denial of care. I have published some of the obviously false documents HERE.
As an employee of a different institution, I experienced a similar problem to that of Grotz. I was a teacher at Chula Vista Elementary School District when my employer retaliated against me for asking for an investigation into abusive, illegal actions by teachers. One of my witnesses told me that Richard Werlin, the Assistant Superintendent for human resources, came to her school and interrogated her about her prospective testimony. It was pure intimidation. The district wasn't interested in the facts; they didn't even interview me! Later, teachers contradicted themselves and each other in their depositions. See Linda Watson deposition HERE.
My union behaved exactly like Grotz' union. California Teachers Association supported teachers who had committed crimes instead of supporting me. My local president,Gina Boyd, said 60 times during her deposition that she didn't know or didn't remember something. See deposition HERE.
Still, I was shocked when one of the witnesses in the Grotz v. Kaiser case contacted me and asked me to remove her name from my post about the case, saying she could lose her license. Apparently she has been threatened, and may be planning to change her story.
I removed the names of both witnesses who were mentioned, but I am concerned that Kaiser and SEIU may be tampering with witnesses in this case, a serious felony.
Courthouse News reported on July 11, 2012:
Kristinna Grotz sued Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, the Permanente Medical Group, and SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West, which allegedly failed to stick up for her.
Grotz claims she worked in Kaiser's admitting department from 2002 until she was fired in the summer of 2011.
She says that from early 2008 department manager (nonparty) D. T. used drugs - "in all likelihood methamphetamine" - at work, and that D. T. retaliated against her for reporting it.
This case sounds very familiar.
As a patient of Kaiser Permanente, I was amazed to learn that Kaiser forced its doctors to falsify medical records in my case, apparently to justify denial of care. I have published some of the obviously false documents HERE.
As an employee of a different institution, I experienced a similar problem to that of Grotz. I was a teacher at Chula Vista Elementary School District when my employer retaliated against me for asking for an investigation into abusive, illegal actions by teachers. One of my witnesses told me that Richard Werlin, the Assistant Superintendent for human resources, came to her school and interrogated her about her prospective testimony. It was pure intimidation. The district wasn't interested in the facts; they didn't even interview me! Later, teachers contradicted themselves and each other in their depositions. See Linda Watson deposition HERE.
My union behaved exactly like Grotz' union. California Teachers Association supported teachers who had committed crimes instead of supporting me. My local president,Gina Boyd, said 60 times during her deposition that she didn't know or didn't remember something. See deposition HERE.
Still, I was shocked when one of the witnesses in the Grotz v. Kaiser case contacted me and asked me to remove her name from my post about the case, saying she could lose her license. Apparently she has been threatened, and may be planning to change her story.
I removed the names of both witnesses who were mentioned, but I am concerned that Kaiser and SEIU may be tampering with witnesses in this case, a serious felony.
Saturday, July 21, 2012
New US Hospital Ratings are out for 2012-2013
U.S. News and World Report does an excellent job, but it's hard to compare hospitals when you can only see one hospital at a time. I've started preparing comparisons of San Diego hospitals.
My first page is the urology comparisons for San Diego. Three local hospitals had better-than-expected survival, and three had worse-than-expected survival.
U.S. News Best Hospitals 2012-13
U.S. News surveyed nearly 10,000 specialists and sifted through data for approximately 5,000 hospitals to rank the best in 16 adult specialties, from cancer to urology. Death rates, patient safety, and hospital reputation were a few of the factors considered. Only 148 hospitals were nationally ranked in one or more specialties. The Honor Roll features the 17 that scored near the top in at least six specialties.
My first page is the urology comparisons for San Diego. Three local hospitals had better-than-expected survival, and three had worse-than-expected survival.
U.S. News Best Hospitals 2012-13
U.S. News surveyed nearly 10,000 specialists and sifted through data for approximately 5,000 hospitals to rank the best in 16 adult specialties, from cancer to urology. Death rates, patient safety, and hospital reputation were a few of the factors considered. Only 148 hospitals were nationally ranked in one or more specialties. The Honor Roll features the 17 that scored near the top in at least six specialties.
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
Fired Worker Says Kaiser Backed Drug User
See UPDATE to this story.
"...Keefer, Burnett and two union representatives told her to sign a "last chance" agreement which included "false and inaccurate information" about those allegations. She says that when she refused to sign the agreement she was fired, on July 7, 2011. Grotz says Taylor was fired the same day."
Fired Worker Says Kaiser Backed Drug User
By MATT REYNOLDS
Courthouse News (CN)
Kaiser Hospital fired a longtime employee after she complained about her drug-using boss, whom the fired worker says she saw with a rolled-up bill in her nose, "snorting a white powdery substance" at work, the worker claims in a federal lawsuit.
Kristinna Grotz sued Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, the Permanente Medical Group, and SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West, which allegedly failed to stick up for her.
Grotz claims she worked in Kaiser's admitting department from 2002 until she was fired in the summer of 2011.
She says that from early 2008 department manager (nonparty) D. T. used drugs - "in all likelihood methamphetamine" - at work, and that D. T. retaliated against her for reporting it.
Grotz claims that in early 2010 she joined six other employees and wrote a letter complaining to Kaiser about D. T.'s alleged drug use and acts of retaliation and favoritism.
Kaiser then allegedly launched an investigation headed by Taylor's superior and friend Diane Keefer and human resources manager Alan Burnett, neither of whom are parties to the lawsuit.
Grotz say that though Kaiser told her and the other employees that they would be "immune" from retaliation, that "proved to be untrue."
"Thereafter, plaintiff and others were called in one at a time and were interviewed by Ms. Keefer and Mr. Burnett. During her interview, plaintiff informed Ms. Keefer and Mr. Burnett about Ms. Taylor's ongoing substance abuse problem in detail. She informed them that she had personally observed Ms. Taylor and another employee, Terry Caballero, an employee from another Kaiser department, in Ms. Taylor's office, with rolled up bills in their noses snorting a white powdery substance. Plaintiff also said she was aware that Ms. Taylor's apparent drug use had been observed by at least two other individuals who signed the October 15, 2010 letter... Plaintiff stated that she believed that Ms. Taylor received most of her drugs from other employees within the facility," the 14-page complaint states.
Kaiser's "investigation" was bogus, Grotz says, because Keefer helped Taylor cover up her drug use and dismissed the allegations for lack of evidence, despite "contrary eyewitness testimony of Ms. Taylor's drug use from plaintiff and other staff."
Grotz claims Kaiser then turned the matter over to an employee assistance counselor. She claims that during a meeting with that counselor, "Debbie Taylor looked plaintiff right in the eye while mouthing the words, 'You f---ing bitch.' The EAP counselor quickly closed the meeting. Only one meeting took place after this aborted meeting and only the admitting staff was in attendance, but not Ms. Taylor.
In fact, none was ever scheduled again with Debbie Taylor present. To plaintiffs' knowledge, employer did nothing further to remedy the hostile working environment or address the illegal use of drugs by Taylor and others in the workplace. Instead, plaintiff and the other employees remained in constant fear of retaliation by Ms. Taylor and Ms. Keefer, which did not take long to materialize."
Beginning in late 2010, Grotz was falsely accused of timecard fraud, threatening Taylor and acting unprofessionally, the complaint says.
Finally, Grotz claims, Keefer, Burnett and two union representatives told her to sign a "last chance" agreement which included "false and inaccurate information" about to those allegations. She says that when she refused to sign the agreement she was fired, on July 7, 2011.
Grotz says Taylor was fired the same day.
Grotz seeks a jury trial and damages for unlawful discharge and breach of the union's duty of fair representation, wrongful termination, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligent infliction of emotional distress.
She is represented by George Camerlengo with Camerlengo & Johnson of Redwood City.
Neither Kaiser nor SEIU-United Healthcare workers immediately responded to requests for comment.
"...Keefer, Burnett and two union representatives told her to sign a "last chance" agreement which included "false and inaccurate information" about those allegations. She says that when she refused to sign the agreement she was fired, on July 7, 2011. Grotz says Taylor was fired the same day."
Fired Worker Says Kaiser Backed Drug User
By MATT REYNOLDS
Courthouse News (CN)
Kaiser Hospital fired a longtime employee after she complained about her drug-using boss, whom the fired worker says she saw with a rolled-up bill in her nose, "snorting a white powdery substance" at work, the worker claims in a federal lawsuit.
Kristinna Grotz sued Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, the Permanente Medical Group, and SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West, which allegedly failed to stick up for her.
Grotz claims she worked in Kaiser's admitting department from 2002 until she was fired in the summer of 2011.
She says that from early 2008 department manager (nonparty) D. T. used drugs - "in all likelihood methamphetamine" - at work, and that D. T. retaliated against her for reporting it.
Grotz claims that in early 2010 she joined six other employees and wrote a letter complaining to Kaiser about D. T.'s alleged drug use and acts of retaliation and favoritism.
Kaiser then allegedly launched an investigation headed by Taylor's superior and friend Diane Keefer and human resources manager Alan Burnett, neither of whom are parties to the lawsuit.
Grotz say that though Kaiser told her and the other employees that they would be "immune" from retaliation, that "proved to be untrue."
"Thereafter, plaintiff and others were called in one at a time and were interviewed by Ms. Keefer and Mr. Burnett. During her interview, plaintiff informed Ms. Keefer and Mr. Burnett about Ms. Taylor's ongoing substance abuse problem in detail. She informed them that she had personally observed Ms. Taylor and another employee, Terry Caballero, an employee from another Kaiser department, in Ms. Taylor's office, with rolled up bills in their noses snorting a white powdery substance. Plaintiff also said she was aware that Ms. Taylor's apparent drug use had been observed by at least two other individuals who signed the October 15, 2010 letter... Plaintiff stated that she believed that Ms. Taylor received most of her drugs from other employees within the facility," the 14-page complaint states.
Kaiser's "investigation" was bogus, Grotz says, because Keefer helped Taylor cover up her drug use and dismissed the allegations for lack of evidence, despite "contrary eyewitness testimony of Ms. Taylor's drug use from plaintiff and other staff."
Grotz claims Kaiser then turned the matter over to an employee assistance counselor. She claims that during a meeting with that counselor, "Debbie Taylor looked plaintiff right in the eye while mouthing the words, 'You f---ing bitch.' The EAP counselor quickly closed the meeting. Only one meeting took place after this aborted meeting and only the admitting staff was in attendance, but not Ms. Taylor.
In fact, none was ever scheduled again with Debbie Taylor present. To plaintiffs' knowledge, employer did nothing further to remedy the hostile working environment or address the illegal use of drugs by Taylor and others in the workplace. Instead, plaintiff and the other employees remained in constant fear of retaliation by Ms. Taylor and Ms. Keefer, which did not take long to materialize."
Beginning in late 2010, Grotz was falsely accused of timecard fraud, threatening Taylor and acting unprofessionally, the complaint says.
Finally, Grotz claims, Keefer, Burnett and two union representatives told her to sign a "last chance" agreement which included "false and inaccurate information" about to those allegations. She says that when she refused to sign the agreement she was fired, on July 7, 2011.
Grotz says Taylor was fired the same day.
Grotz seeks a jury trial and damages for unlawful discharge and breach of the union's duty of fair representation, wrongful termination, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligent infliction of emotional distress.
She is represented by George Camerlengo with Camerlengo & Johnson of Redwood City.
Neither Kaiser nor SEIU-United Healthcare workers immediately responded to requests for comment.
Lawsuit against San Diego Kaiser Permanente for problems related to delivery with vacuum device June 2012
UPDATE: I realized why the complaint in this case doesn't talk about malpractice by the doctor. It's becaue Kaiser would simply shift the case to secret, binding arbitration.
I love the new word "mid-evil". It seems perfect, doesn't it? Of course, the teacher in me forces me to admit that the old word "medieval" is also an excellent word, and should probably be used when one is turning in work to a boss or a teacher. But for blogging, I think "mid-evil" will do just fine.
This leaves us with the question, are the actions of Kaiser doctors and administrators too often mid-evil? The sad story below reminds me of the shocking story of Dr. Hamid Safari, who was protected by Kaiser administrators and some Kaiser doctors even after two babies died horribly. In fact, the doctor who complained about Hamid Safari was fired for not keeping his mouth shut!
I am wondering, however, why the complaint does not give more details about the actual events that led up to problems with the birth of Angelina. The deliveries by Dr. Hamid Safari have been described in painful detail, including by the Los Angeles Times. This suit does not name any negligent doctor. Who, exactly, should have warned Plaintiffs about the vacuum device? Was a C-section considered? Who decided against it? I have a sneaking suspicion that not enough education and communication went on in this case. Did the patient speak English? Perhaps the doctor was not at fault, but since Kaiser has falsified so many medical records to cover up problems, we can not know with any certainty what really happened.
See Complaint filed in San Diego Superior Court June 26, 2012.
Complaint can also be seen HERE.
Kaiser Permanente Lawsuit
07/06/2012 10:11:33
by National-Health-Insurance
Soad and Ziad Oraha are suing Kaiser Permanente, they state that Kaiser Permanente used a vacuum device to deliver their baby and caused their baby not only to have a fractured skull but also brain damage.
I am no Doctor but what happened to a C-Section? Using a vacuum device for delivery of a baby sounds down right mid-evil. I wonder if the vacuum device is another one of Kaiser Permanente's money saving devices?
I love the new word "mid-evil". It seems perfect, doesn't it? Of course, the teacher in me forces me to admit that the old word "medieval" is also an excellent word, and should probably be used when one is turning in work to a boss or a teacher. But for blogging, I think "mid-evil" will do just fine.
This leaves us with the question, are the actions of Kaiser doctors and administrators too often mid-evil? The sad story below reminds me of the shocking story of Dr. Hamid Safari, who was protected by Kaiser administrators and some Kaiser doctors even after two babies died horribly. In fact, the doctor who complained about Hamid Safari was fired for not keeping his mouth shut!
I am wondering, however, why the complaint does not give more details about the actual events that led up to problems with the birth of Angelina. The deliveries by Dr. Hamid Safari have been described in painful detail, including by the Los Angeles Times. This suit does not name any negligent doctor. Who, exactly, should have warned Plaintiffs about the vacuum device? Was a C-section considered? Who decided against it? I have a sneaking suspicion that not enough education and communication went on in this case. Did the patient speak English? Perhaps the doctor was not at fault, but since Kaiser has falsified so many medical records to cover up problems, we can not know with any certainty what really happened.
See Complaint filed in San Diego Superior Court June 26, 2012.
Complaint can also be seen HERE.
Kaiser Permanente Lawsuit
07/06/2012 10:11:33
by National-Health-Insurance
Soad and Ziad Oraha are suing Kaiser Permanente, they state that Kaiser Permanente used a vacuum device to deliver their baby and caused their baby not only to have a fractured skull but also brain damage.
I am no Doctor but what happened to a C-Section? Using a vacuum device for delivery of a baby sounds down right mid-evil. I wonder if the vacuum device is another one of Kaiser Permanente's money saving devices?
Saturday, June 16, 2012
Kaiser Foundation Hospital Overtime Pay Class Action Lawsuit
Kaiser Foundation Hospital Overtime Pay Class Action Lawsuit Complaint Filed On Behalf of Kaiser Site Support Specialists
JUNE 11, 2012
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, Inc., a subsidiary of Kaiser Permanente (“Kaiser Hospital” or “Defendant”) in the Superior Court for the State of California , County of Sacramento (captioned Jozette Lemmons v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, Inc., Class Action Case No. 34-2012-00125488) alleging, among other things, a failure to pay overtime wages in purported violation of Cal. Labor Code section 510, 1194 and 1198, failure to provide accurate itemized wage statements in purported violation of California Labor code section 226 and alleged unfair competition in purported violation of California Business and Professions code section 17200, according to the Kaiser Foundation Hospital Site Support Specialist Overtime Pay class action lawsuit complaint.
The Kaiser Foundation Hospital Site Support Specialist Overtime Pay class action lawsuit complaint is reportedly brought as a class action on behalf of the following proposed class (“Class”):
All individuals who are or previously were employed by Defendant Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, Inc., as Site Support Specialists in California classified as Non-Exempt and who worked on-call hours (“CALIFORNIA CLASS”) at any time during the period beginning on October 6, 2008 and ending on the date as determined by the Court (“CALIFORNIA CLASS PERIOD”).
The Kaiser Foundation Hospital Site Support Specialist Overtime Pay class action lawsuit complaint reportedly seeks, among other things, compensatory damages, injunctive relief, restitution, and pre-judgment and post-judgment interest.
JUNE 11, 2012
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, Inc., a subsidiary of Kaiser Permanente (“Kaiser Hospital” or “Defendant”) in the Superior Court for the State of California , County of Sacramento (captioned Jozette Lemmons v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, Inc., Class Action Case No. 34-2012-00125488) alleging, among other things, a failure to pay overtime wages in purported violation of Cal. Labor Code section 510, 1194 and 1198, failure to provide accurate itemized wage statements in purported violation of California Labor code section 226 and alleged unfair competition in purported violation of California Business and Professions code section 17200, according to the Kaiser Foundation Hospital Site Support Specialist Overtime Pay class action lawsuit complaint.
The Kaiser Foundation Hospital Site Support Specialist Overtime Pay class action lawsuit complaint is reportedly brought as a class action on behalf of the following proposed class (“Class”):
All individuals who are or previously were employed by Defendant Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, Inc., as Site Support Specialists in California classified as Non-Exempt and who worked on-call hours (“CALIFORNIA CLASS”) at any time during the period beginning on October 6, 2008 and ending on the date as determined by the Court (“CALIFORNIA CLASS PERIOD”).
The Kaiser Foundation Hospital Site Support Specialist Overtime Pay class action lawsuit complaint reportedly seeks, among other things, compensatory damages, injunctive relief, restitution, and pre-judgment and post-judgment interest.
Sunday, June 3, 2012
The Rawlings Group plunders its own employees as it plunders Kaiser Permanente Patients
Click on image to enlarge. Thanks to Jacqueline Finney for the image.
See video on Fix US Health website about the Rawlings Group's actions on behalf of Kaiser Permanente: "Kaiser Permanente Plunders Patients' Piece of the Pie."
Here's a quote from the site:
"Managed Care: Kaiser Permanente Plunders Patients’ Piece of the Pie. Kaiser Permanente has colluded with the Rawlings Company to illegally coerce patients to disclose confidential information in order to track down accident victims to shake them down. The technical term is subrogation. If you have received a letter from Kaiser or Rawlings, demanding accident information, you are at risk that their lawyers may steal money required to ease your suffering. Please e-mail us if you have you have received such a letter from Kaiser or Rawlings. Together we can petition public officials to stop this scam. Kaiser’s and Rawlings’ false statements violate California’s Unfair Competition Law and offend public policy. Our e-mail is feedback@hmohardball.com. We invite you to visit our patient protection website at www.hmohardball.com."
The same video is available on YouTube.
Also see post re HMO Hardball's story on Angela Farnum.
Rawlings/Kaiser actions in the Heriberto Sandoval case are documented in this lawsuit.
Rawlings Group sued over OT
The Rawlings Group has 550 employees in its 156,000-square-foot headquarters off New Moody Lane in La Grange.
Andrea Uhde
courier-journal.com
Sep 16, 2008
Oldham County's largest private employer, The Rawlings Group, is being sued by two current and two former employees who say they are owed money for overtime they worked in the last five years.
Diana Johnston, Denise Matthews, Tawnya Davis and Tracy Hobbs, all of Jefferson County, filed the lawsuit in Oldham Circuit Court Aug. 26.
In it, they claim they were regularly required to work more than 40 hours a week and weren't paid overtime because they were misclassified as exempt rather than non-exempt employees, in violation of Kentucky Wage and Hour Laws. Overtime is 1.5 times regular rate pay...
Rawlings Group seems to agree with Jacqueline Finney that respecting the law and patients' rights is not one of its goals:
WHY RAWLINGS--FOCUSING ON YOUR BOTTOM LINE
There are many criteria to consider when selecting a claims recovery vendor, but proven ability to deliver bottom line results is among the most important of all. At The Rawlings Group, that is exactly what we deliver.
The Rawlings Group has made significant investments in our internal systems, procedures, and staff. The infrastructure that we have built as a result of these investments has allowed us to consistently generate gross recoveries that are significantly higher—often by multiples—than what other vendors are routinely able to produce. And that means significantly higher bottom line results for our clients.
So what does this mean to you? Simple. When it comes time to select a vendor, do not be distracted by lowball fees, extravagant claims, etc. Rather, focus on bottom line results. When you do, the decision is clear—Rawlings delivers more net revenue to your bottom line than what any other company can deliver.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)