Chicago Brain Injury Lawyer Blog

A story this week from Summit Health Sciences began with the provocative title “Concussion Breakthrough?” As we reported yesterday, concussion research—particularly in the sports context—is receiving a large push from advocates hoping to prevent their occurrence and limit deadly subsequent head injuries. Our Chicago brain injury attorneys understand that the focus of most research is not necessarily on concussion prevention. It is a bit unrealistic to assume that there will not be physical contact sufficient to cause a concussion in the midst of certain activities. Of course protective gear and rule changes can be implemented to try to limit the chance of traumatic contact, but these efforts are not realistically going to drop the concussion rates to zero. This is no different than conceding that we cannot stop every single car accident and the potential for a traumatic brain injury resulting from them.

However, much focus has been given to the best ways of actually identifying concussions and providing proper treatment. At this point, the young athletes’ health can best be protected not by taking away all chance of suffering a head injury, but by ensuring that the injury is not aggravated and that necessary treatment is received.

The apparent “concussion breakthrough” is similarly geared toward reducing the harm cause by the injury.

The breakthrough refers to a newly approved antioxidant product that claims to immediately increase the level of uric acid in the human body. It is suggested that this indirectly strengthens one’s immune system and prevents the build-up of dangerous free radicals. The maker of the product is arguing that there is evidence that a significant portion of damage from traumatic brain injuries (including concussions) is caused by oxidative stress or inflammation of the brain. Proponents of the natural product argue that anything that reinforces the immune system to combat brain inflammation may go a long way to minimizing brain damage following one of these injuries.

The makers of the product are apparently working with a major university of a study the effects of the product in relation to brain injuries. The lead researchers explained, “We cannot prevent concussions, but our scientists believe that a stronger immune system can significantly reduce the recovery time and minimize the overall damage of these injuries.”

While all possible efforts to improve the well being of injury victims should be encouraged, our Illinois traumatic brain injury lawyers realize that certain things have to be taken with a grain of salt. While natural remedies such as this may very well be found to have some real effect on recovery and treatment for victims, it is important not to exaggerate the apparent benefits. At the end of the day we have to rely on our expert medical researchers to continue delving into the mysteries of the brain to determine exactly how to prevent deterioration and encourage improvement. As with anything, it is important to separate the claims of those with a financial incentive in a product to the product’s actual ability to help in the way that it is intended.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Thin Neck Collars May Prevent Sports Head Injuries

NFL to Train Referees to Identify Brian Injuries

The Daily Breeze reported earlier this week on a new documentary on the dangers of traumatic brain injuries—particularly concussions—that is hoping to coincide with the fervor of Super Bowl season. Each Chicago brain injury lawyer at our firm has become familiar with the dangers of sports-related brain injuries, most notably those affecting young athletes in sports like football, hockey, and soccer. There has been much attention devoted to these issues over the past couple years. However it remains unclear if that attention has trickled down to those who are most in a position to prevent the injuries from occurring or ensuring that they are properly treated.

That is where the documentary comes in. The creators are hoping to use the film to truly hammer home the seriousness of the issue to parents, coaches, school administrators, trainers, and the young athletes themselves. The documentary push is being spearheaded by CNN’s chief medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta. Entitled “Big Hit, Broken Dreams,” the film is scheduled to air for the first time this Sunday. There will be three different showings—5pm, 8pm, and 11pm—so hopefully many will get the chance to watch the material and arm themselves with vital safety information about this very real concern. The documentary apparently focuses most on football, where the issue of traumatic brain injury and concussions are most apt—but its lessons can be applied to any sport where physical contact occurs.

One problem, says Gupta, is that the issue is receiving attention generally but the seriousness of it is not taking root. In other words, more people than in the past realize that concussions are a problem. However, fewer truly understand that concussions are not some trivial knock on the head that can be brushed off. Dr. Gupta noted, “I personally think the term ‘concussion’ itself almost needs to be changed because while it’s an accurate term, it sort of minimizes the symptoms that result.” Our Chicago injury lawyers wholeheartedly agree.

Instead, all those involved need to understand that a concussion is a brain injury caused by trauma to the head. It isn’t “like” a brain injury or in some special category of less serious accident—it has the potential to lead to just as much long-term damage as other head trauma cases. That is why it continues to be a pressing concern for those in the athletic world to understand how to identify the injury immediately. The worst harm always comes when a concussion is missed, meaning that the brain does not have time to heal before more trauma is inflicted.

The most common concussion symptoms include confusion, headaches, ringing the ears, and blurred vision. Unlike what some may mistakenly believe, one need not lose consciousness to have a concussion. The damage can occur anytime that one’s head experiences significant trauma. According to Dr. Gupta, he was spurred to take a harder line on concussions when he heard about the case of 16-year old high school football star Jaquan Waller. Waller died a few years ago from what is known as “second-impact syndrome.” This occurs when the brain swells suddenly following a second concussion which is experienced before the first concussion has a chance to heal.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Head Injury Lawsuit Filed on Behalf of Ex-Football Players

Former Illinois Athletes File Brain Injury Lawsuit Against Eastern Illinois University

In an encouraging bit of new, WebMD reported earlier this week on a new research effort which has found that the long-term prognosis for some traumatic brain injury child victims is better than previously thought. This finding is an important bit of positive news considering that our Chicago brain injury lawyers have noticed that most news around the topic these days involves concerns that current prevention and treatment plans are woefully inadequate. It is high time that families dealing with these injuries received a bit of good medical news.

Head injuries, even seemingly mild ones, can have particularly troubling effects on young children, because their brains are still developing when the injury occurs. In this way, the overall harm caused by the injury is often not known until even years later when an expected development that should take place misfires because of the previous head injury. When it comes to recovery, many parents of child victims are told that they can expect their child to plateau in recovery, with gains stalled as the child ages. In a few cases victims can actually get worse over time—a particularly frightening prospect for worried parents.

However, recently published research which involved following child brain injury victims for ten years has uncovered encouraging findings. The main take-away from the study was that for those children whose injuries were not too severe, gains could be seen even after the apparent plateau. The plateau still occurs—after a rapid rate of improvement following the injury—but it does not signify the limit of the child’s recovery. Interestingly, the researchers also found that there is an “injury threshold” which is the point at which a victim with less severe injury may ultimately escape serious problems.

Expectedly, researchers found that children who had suffered the most severe injuries were the ones who had the worst outcomes on measures like IQ, thinking skills, social interactivity, and behavior indicators. However, with all victims, time was needed for full recovery. The “plateau” period often does not set in for five or ten years. However, even many years after the plateau, further treatment is often helpful in allowing the child to make increased gains. When it comes to recovery the researchers found that environment and therapy matter greatly. The final take-away from the lead researcher is that prolonged treatment is essential because, “a head injury does not inevitably imply that your child will have impairments forever.”

Our Chicago brain injury attorneys believe that these findings offer even more support to the already logical notion that child victims need access to as much quality therapy as possible. Unfortunately, many insurance companies do not provide the resources that families need to actually receive this long-term therapy. As a result, victims often do not reach their full potential. When the injury itself was caused by the wrongdoing of another—such as in a car accident—it is absolutely critical for involved families to ensure that they have access to all that their child will need to recover fully.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Family Struggles to Find Support Services After Brain Injury

Many Illinois Brain Injury Victims Never Fully Recover

A rising wave of support seems to be building for the federal piece of legislation known as the Pediatric Acquired Brain Injury Plan (PABI Plan). Blog readers are well versed in the details of this proposal as our Chicago brain injury attorneys discussed the issue this week. Just this week another newspaper editorialized in support of the proposal.

The South Bend Tribune editorial reminded readers that information on brain injury prevention and treatment remained relatively sparse—especially compared to advances made in other areas in recent years. Of course, it is obvious that traumatic brain injuries can be prevented by stopping the trauma from occurring—whether that be in auto accidents, falls, sports accidents, or the like. However, as we’ve frequently reported, often the most damage to the brain occurs in the hours or days after a trauma has actually occurred. This wave of brain cell death is often referred to the “brain tsunami.” Working to prevent this wave of damage would go a long way to drastically improving the lives of those who suffer head trauma. In addition, there remains a long way to go before medical experts are uniformly aware of the best treatment practices.

The editorial explained that the PABI Plan was first envisioned by the father of a pediatric brain injury victim—a young girl who suffered damaging harm after falling victim to a traumatic birth injury when only five days old. When the father was looking for answers to determine the best way to help his daughter he was amazed at the lack of clear information available to him or even to medical professionals who were in charge of her care. There was no repository of information, clear prevention plans, or treatment options. Instead what he found was that prevention and treatment goals were essentially arbitrarily made from one office to the other.

After dealing with his frustration, the father decided that something needed to be done. That is when he became involved in an effort to pass the PABI Plan—also known as H.R. 2600—which would fund a comprehensive initiative to create a “best practices” system to both diagnose and treat these injuries. The specific plan that is being considered by Congress was proposed by an advisory board of the foundation dedication to the young girl.

The plan, if passed would allow for data collection each state. The data would then be shared in a national database to maximize the overall effectiveness of the process. In addition, the project would provide special focus on brain injuries suffered by servicemen and women. The term “pediatric” is deceptive in this case, because it actually includes all those under the age of 25 years old—meaning many injured Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans would be accounted for in the plan.

Of course, considering the tens of thousands of victims of these injuries, passage of this bill is a common sense step that all legislators should support. Also, the funding for the measure would be provided for entirely from funds already held by the secretary of Health and Human services. Therefore it would not put any more strain on the federal budget. If all goes to plan the measure will pass both houses of Congress by the end of the session—this summer. It will then be sent to the President’s desk for his signature.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Traumatic Brain Injury Treatment Advanced By PABI Plan

Advocates Urge Support for National Pediatric Acquired Brain Injury Plan Act

Our Chicago brain injury attorneys closely follow the legislative debates surrounding so-called “tort reform” laws, because we realize that they have a very real effect on the lives (and legal rights) of our clients. In general these laws come in three flavors:

1—Thoes that take away rights after a lawsuit has been won (i.e. medical malpractice damage caps).

2—Those that make it harder or a plaintiff to win at trial (i.e. limit on who can testify in a medical malpractice case).

3—Those that make it harder for plaintiff’s file a lawsuit altogether (i.e. added requirements before a case can move forward).

Damage caps are likely most familiar to community members, because they have garnered the most headlines over the years. However, all three forms are incredibly dangerous for the vast majority of community members. At the end of the day the courtroom is supposed to be one of the few places where money, title, power, and influence have no bearing on the proceedings. What is supposed to matter is simple truth and justice. If someone’s negligence hurt another, the court is supposed to be the place where the evidence is rooted out and the wrongdoer pays for the consequences of their actions. It matter not whether the defendant is a famous face or a big business.

Tort reform efforts seek to change that. These laws are promulgated by the very big interests who are not accustomed to having to deal on a level playing field with ordinary consumers. Our Chicago medical malpractice attorneys believe that these interests support these laws mostly because they represent a way to shortcut the system and not be forced to deal fairly with victims. The net effect of every single tort reform effort is to keep even more money in the pockets of those with the most money to begin with, preventing them from providing fair redress even when their unreasonable conduct hurts those around them.

To fight these efforts we essentially have two choices: prevent the laws from being passed to being with and, if they are passed, explain to high courts how these laws violate fundamental constitutional principles. It is important to keep the effort up on both fronts, because both arguments are strong.

For example, just last week the Arkansas Supreme Court struck down one tort reform provision for violating the separation of powers doctrine in the state’s constitution. The issue in the case related to a provision passed in the state which required experts in medical malpractice cases to have the exact same specialty as the defendant. In practice this could be an immense burden for plaintiff, because it is not always easy to find medical practitioners who also testify in certain areas. Doctor could be supremely well qualified to testify about a certain course of conduct, but if they happened to have a different background in certain respects from the defendant, then that expert could not testify.

The court already has a system in place that actually looks at each case individually to determine whether or not the expert is qualified to speak on the matter. This individual analysis is far superior to some arbitrary disqualification imposed without any analysis at all about the individual merits of a case. Fortunately the state court recognized this inappropriate breach of legislative power and struck the law down.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

State Court Throws Our Medical Expert Testimony Limitation in “Tort Reform” Law

Judicial “Hellhole” Report is a PR Stunt

An editorial in the Milford Daily News this weekend emphasized the need for real attention to be paid to pediatric acquired brain injuries (PABIs)—those affecting infants, children, and young adults. Our Chicago brain injury lawyers realize that there has been a sharp increase in news discussing this issue, but the increased publicity is only beneficial when it spurs action to help victims and prevent future injuries. All those in a position to limit these brain injuries must not only be aware that they occur with more frequency than previously thought but they must actually take proactive steps to use the new information.

This particular editorial was written by the father of a six-year old little girl who suffered a traumatic brain injury while only five days old when shaken by a child nurse. The accident broke four ribs, her collarbone, and led to a permanent traumatic brain injury that has affected the child’s life from that moment on. Sadly the victim is not alone, as an astounding 765,000 young people under the age of 18 enter the hospital ever year because of these injuries. Ultimately, over 80,000 people in that group require hospitalization and 11,000 die from their injuries. Those numbers are frightening enough. However, they may be underreported as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention admits that those figures do not account for the rising number of sports-related brain injuries that affect young athletes every year.

This is clearly a problem that could use some solutions.

One proposal which hopes to be a starting point at tackling this traumatic brain injury problem is taking the form of a piece of federal legislation—HR2600. Known as the National Pediatric Bain Injury Plan (PABI Plan), the bill would streamline the care nationwide received by these victims. As it now stands, prevention and treatment for these victims is all over the board. There are few agreed upon standards by which to ensure that victims actually receive the best care possible and are given the best chance of recovering their brain functioning as much as possible. Without this standardization, some victims who could improve even more are left to languish while not receiving the best help available.

Part of the reason why there has been a lack of standardization is because the actual causes of these traumatic brain injuries are quite varied. Children often suffer the harm in auto accidents, sports collisions, assaults, falls, child abuse, and similar events. In fact, many of the returning soldiers who have suffered brain injuries would be included in these efforts. Pediatric acquired brain injuries actually include all those who are under the age of 25. Considering that many of our soldiers—particularly those like to be on the front lines—are under 25, they would have much to gain from the passage of this legislation and the standardization of treatment.

Hopefully the PABI Plan will pass this upcoming Congressional session. It is already supported by at least 100 members of Congress. In addition, the funds needed to run the program would come directly out of the budget already allocated to the Health and Human Services discretionary fund. In that way it helps hundreds of thousands of community members without any net cost for taxpayers.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Pediatricians Say Boxing Not Safe for Kids & Teenagers

Former Illinois Athlete Files Brain Injury Lawsuit Against Eastern Illinois University

Anytime someone suffers a severe personal injury, the harm affects not only the victim but also those who are personally close to the victim. This is obviously most apt when it comes to close family members. Parents, spouses, and children often suffer intensely when their loved one is hurt because of another’s negligence. There are a few ways that damage awards in personal injury lawsuits try to account for this harm (loss of companionship, consortium, support, and similar damages). However, damage awards never fully compensate victims for the full scope of what they experience following one of these accidents.

Our Chicago injury lawyers know that this is particularly true with brain injuries.

For example, consider injuries suffered in a car accident. If a father is hurt in the accident and breaks both of his legs, that injury will have repercussions on his family. The man may not be able to work, his wife may be needed to stay home and provide help, and the whole family is likely to experience the financial strain of the situation. Now imagine that the father suffers a traumatic brain injury. That injury may completely alter the father’s personality, make it impossible to create new memories, and make it so that he needs observation around the clock because he is prone to become confused about his surroundings. Imagine the impact on the family in that situation. It is impossible to fully comprehend how that will affect the family dynamics and relationships.

One aspect of that issue that has received a bit of attention lately is the effect that traumatic brain injuries have on marriages. The Republic published a post this week that addressed the subject. It was noted how the strong bond between Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and her husband Mark Kelly creates a false impressions that it may not be all that difficult to keep a marriage intact after a traumatic brain injury. Even though Congresswoman Giffords has made amazing progress in her recovery (much more than others experience), her husband admits that he has “had new realities to live with—the reality and pain of letting go of the past.”

It is undeniable that some marriages are ended following these injuries. This is not any one person’s fault but simply a reality that must be understood. However, the divorce rate following a traumatic brain injury is actually much lower than one might expect—17% when measured a few years after the injury.

Of course while a couple may remain married after one of these injuries, depending on the severity of the harm and the personality change that the victim experiences, the quality of that marriages is undoubtedly strained. Some psychologists have actually been working on unique marriage counseling strategies specifically for those who have a brain injured spouse. Those involved say that the goal of the therapy is not to restore a relationship to the previous levels of happiness (as is done in traditional counseling) but is instead geared toward helping spouses cope with a new reality. Those who have participated have explained that it is beneficial for both the injured and un-injured spouse.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Facts on Traumatic Brain Injury

Personal Injury Lawsuit Filed After 15-year old Injured During Deliveries

Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords is likely the nation’s most famous traumatic brain injury victim. The tragic attack that caused her injury as well as her public recovery has led many Americans to truly see the impact of these injuries first-hand. Of course our Chicago brain injury lawyers know that this publicity is incredibly helpful as a way to focus attention on a problem that plagues hundreds of thousands of community members every year. Just last week the First Lady announced a large new initiative which seeks to provide increasing resources to medical professionals who are working both to prevent and treat traumatic brain injuries. If these trends continue hopefully very important advances can be made to actually help improve the lives of victims.

Yet, with all the publicity surrounding Congresswoman Giffords’s situation, many observers might get the wrong impression about the resources available to other brain injury victims—those without the platform, publicity, or resources of Giffords. The sad truth is that many (most) victims of traumatic brain injury have nowhere near the quality of care provided to the Congresswoman. In the aftermath of the tragedy the very best brain injury care was provided to Giffords. Then, in the weeks and months after the event, the top of the line full spectrum of treatment, rehabilitation, and therapies have been provided which have allowed her to make what seems to be a miraculous recovery. She still faces many challenges, particularly when it comes to communication, but it is unmistakable that she has made progress that no one would have thought possible from someone who received a gunshot to the head only a year earlier.

Now Congresswoman Giffords is taking her experience to the public policy arena by championing proper brain injury treatments for all those in similar situations. She fully understands that most community members do not have nearly he access that she does to prolonged, quality treatment and therapy. Instead, as so many local families have explained to our brain injury lawyers, insurance companies usually only cover the bare minimum of stabilization care. Few families are able to secure permanent therapy which, as Congresswoman Giffords case shows, is absolutely essential to allowing an injured brain to recover as much as possible.

A Tucson Sentinel story this week noted that the average American with one of these injuries faces two problems: lack of information about the best courses of treatment and a lack of resources to have access to those courses of treatment. The costs alone can be staggering. As a new research project from the National Institute of Health explained, treatments for a single brain injury victim can run as high as $2 million to $4 million. When the injury is caused by the negligence of another, it is obviously appropriate for those costs to be borne by the one who created the problem. That is where the civil justice system comes into play.

As it stands now, according to the Brain Injury Association of America president, what treatment a victim receives is heavily dependent on “your state, insurance plan (or lack of one), hospital and the people advocating for you.” For example, while most insurance plans cover the life-saving surgeries often needed directly after an accident, fewer cover the prolonged rehabilitation which is necessary for mental and physical recovery.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Mother of Brain Injury Victim Vents: Not Everyone Has Resources of Congresswoman Giffords

Congresswoman Giffords Case Highlights Traumatic Brain Injuries

The Yale Daily News published an article this week that caught the eye of our Chicago brain injury lawyers about new information regarding brain development. As blog readers know, this is an exciting time for all those working in fields related to brain injuries, because new information about the workings of the brain are just now slowly being unraveled. For the longest time, there was essentially little to no information available about the most complex issues of brain functioning and development. That is changing.

Yale researchers recently released information on a new study which discovered information about how the nervous system linking the eyes and brain develop in new babies. The research, published last month in the journal Nature Neuroscience, found that brain development is actually affected even while the child is in the womb from immature neural circuits. This affects how the child builds connection between the eyes and brain. This means that even when the eyes of the unborn baby are closed, they still produce messages which are sent to the brain helping to ensure that the wiring system of the child develops correctly. This discovery was reached, as is often the case in brain research, through use of newborn mice.

The lead researchers summarized by explaining that, “There was speculation based on theories about how activity might shape brain development, but nobody has previously manipulated the temporal pattern of activity in the two eyes in vivo, and examined the consequence on brain wiring.”

Involved researchers explained that the development of neural circuits between the eyes and brain is similar to that of other systems including the spinal cord and other parts of the brain. This means that similar in vitro activities may play a role in overall development.

All of these developments may impact brain injury lawsuits. Here’s how…

For one thing, when one suffers an injury that affects their brain, a lawsuit is only implicated when another party acted negligently which contributed to that brain injury. Negligence is based on a reasonableness standard which takes into account the information that was (or should have been known) to the individual involved. The more that medical professionals learn about these brain issues (and the more that the information becomes common knowledge among professionals), the standard of reasonableness is influenced. Doctors will be required to take this information into account and may be held responsible for failing to prevent preventable injuries if they do not take the information into account.

In addition, these advances will—hopefully—lead to improvements in treatment options for brain injury victims. When a brain injury lawsuit is filed and won, the damage portion of the case includes evaluation of a wide range of issues, including the help that the victim will need in the future, the cost of that aid, and the long-term consequences. Increased knowledge about brain injury recovery will therefore factor into damage assessments in brain injury cases. A brain injury lawyer could see how advances could both lower awards or increase them. If certain harm can be reversed, the awards for long-term harm might be lessened. Conversely, families will more readily ask for increased awards to ensure that they actually have the funds they need to access these new treatment options.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Simple Heart Defect Screenings May Save Infant Lives

New Research Gives Hope to Those Seeking Cerebral Palsy Prevention

The Star News reported this week on some exciting new related to traumatic brain injury (TBI) treatments. In previous posts we have counseled against the work of some scam artists who are using the promise of stem cell research to con unsuspecting families into paying top dollar for unproven and potentially dangerous experimental treatments. This is a very real problem that all local families must guard against. However, there is now some research coming from credible sources which offers more evidence that down the road stem cells may hold the key to brain injury research.

Our Chicago brain injury attorneys were excited to read about the latest study which was published online in the Journal of Neurotrauma regarding the role that implantation of human stem cells may have in spurring rejuvenation in the damaged brain of TBI victims. We touched upon this research in a post earlier this year. According to those involved, the study involved the implantation of human neuron stem cells into rats who had suffered a traumatic brain injury. What was the result? Amazingly much of the damage to the rats’ brains was reversed, which meant that there was a reconnection of filaments in the brain’s nerve cells.

The study’s lead author explained that filaments are necessary to make connections between nerve cells in the brain. It is upon these connections that learning and memory are possible. While traumatic brain injuries often cause actual cells to be lost, the filaments are often retracted. Per the findings of this study, use of stem cells may work to reconnect those filaments (though not regenerate the brain cells).

In the study researched used both the rats as well as a new apparatus that apparently mimics human neuron brain damage. By doing so they were able to identify a specific mechanism which allows the implanted stem cells to aid in the recovery of brain damage to certain brain pathways. The specific pathways are known as the axons and dendrites. When those pathways are disturbed the trauma is known as a traumatic axonal injury. The lead research explained that, “In this study we found that our stem cell transplantation both prevents further axonal injury and promotes axonal re-growth.”

So exactly how do stem cells help repair the damage and prevent more damage? According to the researcher the human stem cells release a neurotrophic factor known as “GDNF.” Apparently it is GDNF which specifically causes the positive improvements discussed.

Not only were the pathways repaired in the damaged rats, but another benefit of the stem cells is that they reduce the levels of “alpha-smooth muscle actin.” This is a protein which essentially builds and clogs up the brain after trauma. Rats that had trauma but no stem cells treatment had higher levels of this protein than those who received the treatment. This protein build-up is another problem faced by brain injury victims, and so if the stem cells limit the growth it should undoubtedly be viewed as a positive development. As the lead researcher summarized, “We are quite excited about these discoveries. This kind of detailed study is essential to developing safe and effective therapies for traumatic brain injury.”

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Lawsuit Filed After Inmate Suffers Brain Injury

New Technology Aims to Help Victims of Traumatic Brain Injuries

Illinois traumatic brain injury victims, like all personal injury victims, often have a direct stake in the debate around so-called “tort reform” efforts. Contrary to the public portrayal made by some, at the root of these efforts is a simple premise: made it harder (if not impossible) for certain injury victims to receive any justice against their wrongdoers. Those calling for tort reform are striving for that goal in slow steps on a variety of fronts. Damage caps are called for which limit the amount that a negligent party has to pay, no matter how much damage they cause. Rule changes are sought which increase the requirements of filing suit, acting as a barrier which keeps certain victims out of court altogether. At the end of the day these efforts are not about fairness but saving money for those who are frequent defendants. The companies, industries, and individuals who harm others negligently are focused on their own bottom line, not justice for regular community members.

Knowing the motives of these efforts makes it all the more frustrating for each Illinois brain injury lawyer at our firm to read things like the “Judicial Hellhole” report which seek to demonize certain courts in our state. As the president of the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association Jerry Latherow explained in a recent editorial published in the State Journal-Register, the “report” is nothing more than a recycled public relations stunt to gin up controversy once again. The goal is always to influence public opinion in ways that allow these interests to hammer through new laws which undermine access to the court system.

Time and again the claims made by this “report” have been shown to be based on junk science.

For example, one argument made is that because Illinois courts are a so-called “judicial hellholes,” then jobs are lost from the state. Is this true? Of course not. A recent National Federation of Independent Business survey of actual job creators found that fear about litigation did not even make the list of considerations that these businesses make when deciding where to expand and bring jobs. Things like tax concerns and energy prices were actual concerns.

It should not surprise readers that the funding for these studies comes from a virtual “Who’s Who” of big businesses that have a lot to gain by demonizing Illinois injury lawyers and taking away rights of those who are hurt buy their misconduct. There is nothing wrong with businesses working hard to increase their profits. However, there is a problem when they feel free to avoid responsibility for their errors as part of their plan to increase profits. If a business or industry acts negligently and hurts an innocent victim, that business should pay for the consequences of their mistakes. It is that simple. If these industries would spend as much time improving their services and safety that they put into attacking Illinois injury victims, they might actually save the money they are hoping to save. Instead, they continue to work to fund ridiculous efforts (like this latest report) in order to sway public opinion to believe things about the tort system that are simply untrue.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

“Judicial Hellhole” Report is a PR Stunt

Chicago Medical Malpractice Lawyer Suggests Latest “Judicial Hellhole” Designation Distracts from Real Issues

Last week in the Santa Cruz Sentinel, a reporter shared the heartbreaking story of how a car accident caused by a negligent driver took the life of her brother, severely injured her mother, and threw her into a coma. The tragedy struck many years ago in 1985 when the reporter was only ten years old. However, the after-effects of the incident linger on, both in the memory of her brother and the effects of the traumatic brain injury that she still feels. Her story is one that all local community members could learn from, as it mirrors the situation that each Chicago brain injury lawyer has seen in the local clients who we help in similar situations.

The tragedy occurred in the middle of the summer when the family was on their way home from the library. A man, blinded by the setting sun, ran a stop sign and broadsided their car. The girl survived the accident, but she doesn’t remember any of it. What she does know was only learned from those who told her afterward. As a result of the collision, she suffered a serious brain injury that has affected the rest of her life. When talking about her brother and the accident she harrowingly admits that “sometimes, on my darker days, my survivor’s guilt is tinged with envy. Maybe he was the lucky one. He may have died, but at least he never had to suffer.”

After the accident it took the girl six weeks to fully get out of her coma. She notes that it was a gradual process, and she just has flashes of fuzzy images and reminders of eventually regaining consciousness. She was not able to talk or communicate in any meaningful way at first, and it was only when she could scratch out a message on a white board that she first was able to reach out to those around her. Initially the girl’s doctors did not think that she would survive. When she did, they explained that she was unlikely to ever recover much. At the time she had the mental capacity of a toddler but with even less coordination and emotional control. Her parents were given little hope that she would be able to ever take care of her own basic needs or do anything other than sit outside and enjoy the sun. The effects of traumatic brain injuries can be that severe, even after physical injuries like cuts and broken bones heal.

When the girl was discharged from the hospital she had recovered some of her ability to speak and feed herself. But the family’s insurance company claimed that she was not going to recover any more and so they refused to pay for further rehabilitation. The family fought with the insurance company, doing everything in their power to give their daughter the best possible chance of recovering as much as possible. It was only after an agonizing ordeal and dozens of run-arounds that they were finally able to have rehabilitation arranged at a local Children’s hospital. While there the girl re-learned how to talk, walk, socialize, and conduct other basic living functions.

The girl was slowly able to recover. She credits most of it to the persistence of her parents who never gave up on her—even amid their own immense grief. The family spent hours at her bedside, play audio recording of her favorite movies and filled her room with cherished trinkets. Family and friends recorded message for her as well, which her parents played for her while she was recovering.

It is only now, decades after the accident, following what she assumed was a full recovery, that the girl (now a woman) understands that she is still affected by the accident. She contacted a local brain injury association recently and learned that her current problems at work may well be tied to the incident as a child. An injury to a young brain, contrary to adult brain injuries, can create long-term problems even long after the initial trauma. This is the case because certain parts of the brain may not even be fully developed when they are injured. This means that the victim may not fully understand the consequences of the injury until they reach an age where that part of the brain was supposed to be fully developed. For the certain parts—like the frontal lobe—that might not be until one’s mid twenties.

See Our Related Blog Posts:

Walk Draws Crowd to Raise Awareness for Traumatic Brain Injuries

Soldiers Brain Injuries from Blasts in Afghanistan Take A Toll