Medical negligence can happen in Sacramento or anywhere else. If a medical professional fails to determine the right diagnosis from symptoms of appendicitis, the organ may rupture before it is treated, causing serious complications.
In order to arrive at a correct diagnosis, the medical professional must collect all the pertinent information and perform several tests to confirm their suspicions. With proper diagnosis, the patient has a good chance of recovery. A failure to identify the problem in time may lead to serious injuries or death.
Appendicitis is the third most-often-missed medical diagnosis. Close to 30 percent of people diagnosed with acute episodes of appendicitis were previously been seen by another doctor and were not accurately diagnosed. The failure to identify appendicitis is higher among children and infants.
One in fifteen people will end up with appendicitis during the course of life. It often happens to those ranging in age from 10 to 30 years old, but the inner lining of the organ could become inflamed and fill with pus at any point in time. An untreated, inflamed appendix is at high risk to rupture. Once that happens, infection spreads rapidly throughout the abdominal cavity.
The symptoms commonly associated with appendicitis include:
- Pain in the upper or lower abdomen that increases in intensity in the lower right quadrant
- Constipation or diarrhea and gas
- Nausea and/or vomiting
- Abdominal swelling
- Loss of appetite
- Painful urination
- Deferred pain in the back, rectum or upper/lower abdomen
A medical professional could fail to diagnose appendicitis if he or she:
- Does not order the right tests
- Follows up inadequately with the patient
- Does not ask the right questions to determine symptoms
- Gives painkillers without identifying the cause of the pain or further pursuing symptoms
- Diagnoses an unrelated illness
- Misidentifies symptoms when they are other than the classic signals used to diagnose
If you have been in such a situation, contact an experienced personal injury attorney. You have the right to an intelligent, educated diagnosis. If you are misdiagnosed, someone needs to be held accountable for that medical negligence.
Grover and Kelly, two San Francisco attorneys, have launched an online platform that will help workers understand their legal rights as employees.
The pair developed CAWageHourLaw.com to ensure that California workers are aware of common, usually unreported labor law violations. In launching the site, they stated that many employer actions that may seem normal to a worker are actually violating existing labor laws.
Some of the more common labor violations include:
- Allowing work to be done “off the clock”
- Refusing to offer proper, mandated break periods
- Charging of fees to cash out-of-state checks
- Misclassifying jobs
Grover and Kelly also turned these violations into questions that employees can ask themselves to find out if their rights are being violated.
- Have you used you own vehicle or other personal items for work?
- Have you worked more than five hours consecutively without a designated break?
- Have you paid fees to cash a company out-of-state wage check?
Know your rights. You need to protect yourself from exploitation.
Call us today at 916.486.1712 or visit http://www.lawbarron.com.
A federal court in Colorado has allowed a former worker to move forward with an age discrimination claim, in spite of the fact that he had signed a release and severance agreement when he lost his job during company downsizing.
In Foster v. Mountain Coal Company, LLC., the court disqualified the exemption of the age discrimination claim because it did not completely meet the requirements of the Older Workers’ Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA).
The court focused on the section of the OWBPA that the company did not meet: the “knowing and voluntary” requirement. The employer did not properly advise the worker to discuss the agreement with an attorney before signing it. The OWPBA is intended to guarantee that older workers have every chance to make informed choices about signing or not signing a release that includes an age discrimination claim.
In this case, the agreement stated that the plaintiff was voluntarily signing it, completely understanding its contents after he had the chance to consult with a legal advisor. But the past tense language meant the plaintiff had been given an opportunity — but was not specifically advised to act on that opportunity — to discuss the agreement with an attorney. The agreement should have clearly stated the plaintiff must be advised to talk to a lawyer before signing anything.
Across the United States, more cases of severance agreements that waive employee rights and are illegally couched in broad, vague terminology have been surfacing in the last five years. The EEOC has also been filing more cases of this nature. And these rulings could all become applicable in California.