The law restricts the number of passengers in the young driver’s car and imposes a curfew by limiting nighttime driving. The study discovered that many teens are deciding to wait until they are 18 to become licensed driver, which means they are no longer subject to provisional licensing laws despite the fact that they are still novice drivers.

Statistics Involving Teen Drivers

California Highway Patrol officials say 18-year-olds are most at risk for getting involved in car accidents and 19- and 20-year-olds are right behind them in terms of crash risk. The study, which uses data from 1999 to 2007, comes in time of California Teen Safe Driving Week when officials are trying to spread awareness about the importance of provisional licensing laws and the important part they play in educating teens about safe driving practices.

In the United States, distracted driving was a factor in car accidents that killed about 2,700 people between the ages of 16 and 19, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. April is also National Distracted Driving Awareness Month.

The Value of GDL Programs

This study further shows that the importance of a Graduated Driver’s Licensing (GDL) program cannot be minimized. GDL is a system to phase in young beginners to full driving privileges. It introduces novice drivers to operating their vehicle in a low-risk way as they become more mature and develop their skills. There are three stages to a graduated system: supervised learner’s period; an intermediate license that limits driving in high-risk situations such as nighttime and with teen passengers; and a license with full privileges.

Circumventing the GDL process is not helpful, but harmful for young drivers. The GDL program helps novice drivers learn driving skills under supervision and in a low-risk environment. However, when they try to get around the process, they are putting themselves and others at great risk because they are thrust into dangerous situations without the experienced they need.

Lawsuit Alleges Failure to Accommodate

Officials say in the lawsuit that the employee, Homeyra Kazerounian, had previously established a three-year record of good service at the organization’s Auburn facility, where she was supported with interpretation especially when she was in training and mandatory staff meetings. However, when she was transferred to the group’s facility in Roseville in 2008, her supervisors refused to get her interpretation for the daily, mandatory staff meetings and forced her to communicate in English although she knew she was more fluent in American Sign Language.

ADA and the Issue of Reasonable Accommodation

The supervisors’ actions “isolated and frustrated” Kazerounian that she felt she had no other choice but to quit her job. An EEOC attorney pointed out the irony that a group dedicated to helping people with disabilities failed to treat its own disabled employee properly. He stated that by denying Kazerounian sign language interpretation her employer “was denying her an important resource for her job.”

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires that employers make reasonable accommodations for employees with disabilities. The law defines “reasonable accommodation” as any modification or adjustment to a job or the work environment that will enable a qualified applicant or employee with a disability to participate in the application process or to perform essential job functions. Reasonable accommodation also includes adjustments to assure that a qualified individual with disability has rights and privileges in employment equal to those of employees without disabilities.

Some examples of reasonable accommodation may include restructuring a job; changing work schedules; getting new equipment or changing existing ones; providing qualified readers or interpreters; and modifying training programs. What employers are not required to do under ADA is to find a position for an applicant who is not qualified for the position sought. Employers are also not required to lower quality standards as an accommodation or provide personal use items such as corrective lenses or hearing aids.

Compensation for Employees

Employees who have been discriminated against or mistreated because of their disabilities have legal rights. It is important that victims of such mistreatment contact an experienced California employment attorney who has a thorough understanding of state and federal laws and is committed to obtaining justice and fair compensation for victims.

Family members say he had his wisdom teeth extracted on March 21. Getting wisdom teeth pulled out is considered a routine dental procedure. However, Lapinski’s family members say he began to cough during the surgery and went into cardiac arrest. He was rushed to a local hospital where he died a few days later.

His sister Natalie Lapinski told reporters that her brother was given at least six different sedatives including propofol by the surgeon, Dr. Stephen Paul. She also said that Lapisnki’s oxygen levels indicated that he may have gone without air for 10 minutes. The ambulance report also states that a piece of gauze was found in Lapinski’s airway. Family members say Lapinski was perfectly healthy. Investigators are still awaiting autopsy results.

What Went Wrong Here?

Based on this news report, it appears that Lapinski had gone to the hospital for something most of us routinely do – get our wisdom teeth pulled out. Something obviously went terribly wrong here. I hope a complete investigation is launched into this incident. There are several unanswered questions here. What caused the victim’s cardiac arrest? Family members say he had no known medical conditions. Did he have unknown medical issues? How did the piece of gauze get in the patient’s airway? Did that play a part in his coughing during surgery? Did it cause him to choke or go into cardiac arrest?

Seeking Answers

Lapinski’s grieving family members deserve to get answers to these questions. If negligence on the part of the surgeon or any of his staff played a part in this wrongful death, a medical malpractice claim can be filed against the surgeon as well as the hospital. Families of deceased victims in such cases can seek compensation for damages including medical expenses, funeral costs, lost future income and loss of love and companionship. The best personal injury law firms will always offer a free consultation and comprehensive case evaluation to injured victims and their families.

According to a Reuters news report, the study was published in the Journal of Urology. Researchers say that patients getting those types of surgeries often need to be tilted steeply with their head by the floor and their feet in the air in order to give the surgeon better traction. Patients placed in that position tend to slide down causing constant pulling on the muscles or nerves during surgery.

FDA Review

Last month, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced that it would be taking a closer look at safety reports concerning the da Vinci surgical robots that are manufactured by Intuitive Surgical. The most recent study reviewed records from 334 robot-assisted urology procedures done at the School of Medicine in 2010 and 2011 – including prostate, kidney, adrenal gland and bladder surgeries. About 7 percent of the patients who underwent these procedures woke up with a positioning injury such as weakness, numbness or immobility in the hands or feet. Half of the injuries resolved within a month, but five lasted more than six months.

Getting all the Facts

The study also found that patients undergoing longer procedures are more likely to get hurt. Researchers are quick to warn that this study does not mean that robotic surgery is not safe. They say doctors and nurses can prevent these types of injuries by paying closer attention to their patients’ body position during surgery. Minor readjustments may be needed to avoid these types of injuries. It is also important that doctors make patients aware of the possibility of nerve injury so they know that it is one of the potential risks of robotic surgery.

This new study once again emphasizes the importance of consumers getting the data and details they need in order to make informed decisions about their health. Robotic surgery is cutting-edge ground-breaking technology that is currently being sold to consumers. Just as it has its benefits, robotic surgery also comes with risks. It is unacceptable for doctors or hospitals to hide potential risks or market the procedure as something that is low-risk, when that is not the case.

Anyone who has suffered injuries or complications as a result of undergoing robotic surgery would be well advised to contact an experienced personal injury lawyer who will be able to better explain their legal rights and options.

Patients Urged to Seek Medical Tests

State and local health officials are mailing out notices urging 7,000 patients of the dentist to seek medical screenings for hepatitis B, hepatitis C and HIV. Officials initiated the investigation after a patient of Harrington’s who had no known risk factors tested positive for both Hepatitis C and HIV. Officials caution that this is not an outbreak and that their investigation is very much in the preliminary stage. Harrington has voluntarily handed in his license and shuttered his offices in Tulsa and Owasso. He faces a hearing in April 19 when is license is expected to be permanently revoked. Harrison has been a practicing dentist for 36 years.

Negligence and Liability

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention officials say that such situations involving dental clinics are extremely rare. Last year, an oral surgeon in Colorado was accused of using dirty needles and syringes. That case involved 8,000 patients. In addition to other allegations, Harrington is also accused of allowing his assistants to perform tasks only a licensed dentist is allowed to do such as administering IV sedation.

This is no doubt an appalling case. The negligence and reckless disregard for patient safety in this case is quite apparent. I’m relieved to hear that the clinics have been shut down and that the dentist will likely never be able to practice again for the rest of his life. However, all this came too late for the 7,000 or so patients who were exposed to life-threatening diseases here. Patients who believe they may be infected or have found that they have been infected, would be well advised to contact an experienced medical malpractice attorney who will help them better understand their legal rights and options.