Atlanta, Georgia Personal Injury Lawyer
Atlanta personal injury lawyer blog
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
How Should We Tackle Sexting? The Debate Rages On
Monday, March 8, 2010
Parents: How to Choose Qualified Childcare
Friday, March 5, 2010
Atlanta Doctor Convicted for Child Pornography
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Georgia Baby Dies in Unlicensed Childcare
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Delaware Pediatrician Case Moves Forward
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Marine Continues to Battle Traumatic Brain Injury, Part 2
Monday, March 1, 2010
Battle Not Over for Brain Injured Marine
Friday, February 26, 2010
Awareness of Distracted Driving on the Rise
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Adult Surgeries Used to Treat Obesity in Children
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Good Samaritan Saves Cobb County Girl from Pit Bull
The "sexting" phenomenon is nothing new to this blog. In the past, I have written both about how the media may inflate the fear of sexting and punish young offenders disproportionately, and also about the possible dangers when sexting comes together with harassment and inaction on the part of authority figures. But the conversation on this controversial topic is far from over.
State governments across the country are still in the midst of dealing with the dilemma of how to treat sexting, a dialogue which they share with parents and child advocacy groups as well as schools and the police. There are lines to be drawn - on that, most parties can agree. Where those lines need to be, however, is something no two groups can quite agree on.
Last week, Slate magazine's Emily Bazelon wrote an article on this problem which added not only one more voice to the ongoing debate, but encouraged the discussion on the online magazine's message board, as well as most likely in homes and offices, and other places people air their opinions on current conflicts.
Bazelon starts out with describing a case where sexting and related behavior was used in a predatory fashion. In this incident, a teenage boy named Anthony Stancl - either seventeen or eighteen at the time when events began - created an account on Facebook where he posed as a girl. Using this account, Stancl convinced dozens of his male schoolmates to send him nude pictures or videos of themselves. He then used those pictures coercively; he threatened to upload them on the internet unless the boys performed sex acts with him. Seven of the boys claimed to have done so.
So on the one hand, there are times when sexting is clearly involved in activity which should be punished, but on the other hand the article contrasts this case with that of a twelve year old boy and thirteen year old girl in Indiana who she describes as essentially playing a high tech game of "You show me yours, I'll show you mine." In this second case, the children were not charged but rather referred to juvenile probation. Even so, some people found the state and school's actions too harsh, since it funneled two apparently healthy, normal children who had made a bad decision into the juvenile justice system.
And entering that system itself is something which some people - parents and child advocacy groups - see as something to avoid if possible. The ACLU and the Juvenile Law Center have argued against putting children into the justice system already in Pennsylvania. Their reasons cited include possible future complications that "may hinder a juvenile's future plans to seek higher education, obtain employment, or enlist in the military."
Another fear which the article explores is the fact that in some cases, punishment may harm victims more than predators. There have already been cases where girls have had nude photos which they sent, either freely or through coercion, used as blackmail against them to perform other sex acts, or as part of bullying or harassment. In those cases, seeing them as offenders for sending sexts may actually deter them from coming forward to authority figures for the help they need.
After reading about these different arguments, where do you stand on the punishment for teen sexting? Should all sexters be treated equal, or should the act be prosecuted by varying degrees? I would appreciate hearing your opinion in the comments.
State governments across the country are still in the midst of dealing with the dilemma of how to treat sexting, a dialogue which they share with parents and child advocacy groups as well as schools and the police. There are lines to be drawn - on that, most parties can agree. Where those lines need to be, however, is something no two groups can quite agree on.
Last week, Slate magazine's Emily Bazelon wrote an article on this problem which added not only one more voice to the ongoing debate, but encouraged the discussion on the online magazine's message board, as well as most likely in homes and offices, and other places people air their opinions on current conflicts.Bazelon starts out with describing a case where sexting and related behavior was used in a predatory fashion. In this incident, a teenage boy named Anthony Stancl - either seventeen or eighteen at the time when events began - created an account on Facebook where he posed as a girl. Using this account, Stancl convinced dozens of his male schoolmates to send him nude pictures or videos of themselves. He then used those pictures coercively; he threatened to upload them on the internet unless the boys performed sex acts with him. Seven of the boys claimed to have done so.
So on the one hand, there are times when sexting is clearly involved in activity which should be punished, but on the other hand the article contrasts this case with that of a twelve year old boy and thirteen year old girl in Indiana who she describes as essentially playing a high tech game of "You show me yours, I'll show you mine." In this second case, the children were not charged but rather referred to juvenile probation. Even so, some people found the state and school's actions too harsh, since it funneled two apparently healthy, normal children who had made a bad decision into the juvenile justice system.
And entering that system itself is something which some people - parents and child advocacy groups - see as something to avoid if possible. The ACLU and the Juvenile Law Center have argued against putting children into the justice system already in Pennsylvania. Their reasons cited include possible future complications that "may hinder a juvenile's future plans to seek higher education, obtain employment, or enlist in the military."
Another fear which the article explores is the fact that in some cases, punishment may harm victims more than predators. There have already been cases where girls have had nude photos which they sent, either freely or through coercion, used as blackmail against them to perform other sex acts, or as part of bullying or harassment. In those cases, seeing them as offenders for sending sexts may actually deter them from coming forward to authority figures for the help they need.
After reading about these different arguments, where do you stand on the punishment for teen sexting? Should all sexters be treated equal, or should the act be prosecuted by varying degrees? I would appreciate hearing your opinion in the comments.
Labels: atlanta child safety attorney, Atlanta child safety lawyer, child sexual abuse, child sexual exploitation, sexting, teen sexting
One of the most pressing decisions new parents can make is how they will address their childcare needs. Can one parent take time away from work to stay home with the children? Or perhaps work from home? Can schedules be adjusted so someone is always available? Who can be trusted to babysit?
Every parent's situation is different, and those different experiences mean that there is no one size fits all answer for everyone. One mother might be able to cut back on hours at the office and work from her home computer, while another might have a job which requires her to be on site forty hours a week without compromise. One family may have a devoted grandmother nearby who can babysit odd hours, while another may not have any relatives living in the state.
For many parents, some kind of daycare becomes the most reasonable option. However, choosing a daycare can be a daunting task - and as many a news exposé or frightened friend's experience can illustrate – there is good reason for parents to be nervous when it comes to finding qualified, trustworthy childcare. Just last week I wrote about a young child who died because his mother left him with an unqualified babysitter. These are people who parents trust with the lives of their children. Suspicion is not only natural, it's healthy.
Parents looking for a daycare should keep several things in mind:
Research - If possible, avoid making quick decisions without comparing options. Investigate daycare centers in your area, get recommendations from friends, family, doctors, and referral agencies. Find out which of them are accredited, and make sure that they are properly licensed. Licensing varies greatly from state to state, and does not necessarily ensure a good childcare provider, but it is a place to start.
Ask Questions - Parents should always talk extensively with daycare providers before making a decision. They should talk to providers on the phone and in person, and make sure that the provider meets both their needs and their standards. It is perfectly reasonable not to pick a daycare provider because of a bad feeling. These are people with whom parents trust their children. Important questions to remember are how many years experience a provider has, what the ratio of children to adults on site is, what kind of training and education providers have.
Investigate - Visit the daycare center or provider's home before hand. Make sure that it's clean and suitable for children. Know what the daycare provider's rules are and how those rules are enforced; rules should be reasonable and punishment for breaking the rules clear and consistent.
Continued Involvement – A parent’s responsibility doesn’t end once her or she has identified a suitable childcare provider. Parents should attempt to stay involved with their daycare provider, speaking with them regularly, asking questions and being aware of problematic situations as they arise. Ask to be notified of staff or policy changes that could potentially change the environment of the daycare.
Obviously, not everyone is in an ideal situation where these things are always popular, and some people prefer informal childcare environments. That may be what is better for a particular parent. But keeping these things in mind while seeking out a daycare provider is one more step a parent can take to ensuring their child's continued safety.
Every parent's situation is different, and those different experiences mean that there is no one size fits all answer for everyone. One mother might be able to cut back on hours at the office and work from her home computer, while another might have a job which requires her to be on site forty hours a week without compromise. One family may have a devoted grandmother nearby who can babysit odd hours, while another may not have any relatives living in the state.
For many parents, some kind of daycare becomes the most reasonable option. However, choosing a daycare can be a daunting task - and as many a news exposé or frightened friend's experience can illustrate – there is good reason for parents to be nervous when it comes to finding qualified, trustworthy childcare. Just last week I wrote about a young child who died because his mother left him with an unqualified babysitter. These are people who parents trust with the lives of their children. Suspicion is not only natural, it's healthy.Parents looking for a daycare should keep several things in mind:
Research - If possible, avoid making quick decisions without comparing options. Investigate daycare centers in your area, get recommendations from friends, family, doctors, and referral agencies. Find out which of them are accredited, and make sure that they are properly licensed. Licensing varies greatly from state to state, and does not necessarily ensure a good childcare provider, but it is a place to start.
Ask Questions - Parents should always talk extensively with daycare providers before making a decision. They should talk to providers on the phone and in person, and make sure that the provider meets both their needs and their standards. It is perfectly reasonable not to pick a daycare provider because of a bad feeling. These are people with whom parents trust their children. Important questions to remember are how many years experience a provider has, what the ratio of children to adults on site is, what kind of training and education providers have.
Investigate - Visit the daycare center or provider's home before hand. Make sure that it's clean and suitable for children. Know what the daycare provider's rules are and how those rules are enforced; rules should be reasonable and punishment for breaking the rules clear and consistent.
Continued Involvement – A parent’s responsibility doesn’t end once her or she has identified a suitable childcare provider. Parents should attempt to stay involved with their daycare provider, speaking with them regularly, asking questions and being aware of problematic situations as they arise. Ask to be notified of staff or policy changes that could potentially change the environment of the daycare.
Obviously, not everyone is in an ideal situation where these things are always popular, and some people prefer informal childcare environments. That may be what is better for a particular parent. But keeping these things in mind while seeking out a daycare provider is one more step a parent can take to ensuring their child's continued safety.
Labels: atlanta child safety attorney, atlanta child safety lawyer, child abuse, childcare, daycare
Adam Wayne Lebowitz, a former Grady doctor who was caught in a sting in 2006, has finally been convicted of one count of producing child pornography and one count of attempting to coerce a minor into unlawful sex acts.
Lebowitz, now fifty, came under investigation from the Coweta County Sheriff's office when the mother of a fifteen-year-old boy contacted them about the solicitous emails and sexually explicit instant messages that her son was receiving. Lebowitz had initiated a series of contacts with the boy through MySpace and AOL's instant messenger, according to the boy, and his mother's reaction was in keeping with what any responsible parent would do - she pursued an investigation.
The arrest which followed took place in the boy's driveway. At that time, the former doctor was in possession of both condoms and sexual lubricant, which fact as presented at his trail as evidence of his intention to have sex with the fifteen-year-old boy. Also presented as evidence of his pattern of behavior were VHS and digital recordings seized in Lebowitz's home which showed him having sex with two different underage boys. After the FBI identified and contacted the victims in Lebowitz's videos, both gave incriminating statements to police.
With this evidence, the state was able to construct a convincing case for the jury, who found Lebowitz guilty.
“If not for the diligence of a mother and her son, and the quick work of county and federal law enforcement," Acting U.S. Attorney Sally Quillian Yates said in a written statement regarding the investigation, "this doctor could still be preying upon young victims."
The fact that he is no longer preying on young victims is something that, I believe, makes all of us feel somewhat better. It is heartening to see that with time and due process, this sort of anti-child pornography sting can yield a conviction. This is doubly true with the recent efforts of local and national law enforcement to crack down on child pornography and child trafficking. Such efforts can sometimes seem to be an uphill battle, and unlikely to turn the tide of child exploitation in this country - this case and conviction serve as a reminder that this is not the case.
A sentencing date has not yet been set for Lebowitz. Given the nature of his crimes, he may serve a life sentence. For the child porn conviction, he will serve no less than fifteen years, and no less than ten more for the coercion conviction.
Felony convictions do not necessarily prevent the issuing of a medical license in Georgia. Lebowitz's licenses - a learning license, as he had never gotten enough experience to apply for a full medical license - was suspended as a result of his arrest, but in the event that he should be released, he would still be able to apply for a medical license. The board would then consider whether or not his crime affected his ability to practice medicine.
Lebowitz, now fifty, came under investigation from the Coweta County Sheriff's office when the mother of a fifteen-year-old boy contacted them about the solicitous emails and sexually explicit instant messages that her son was receiving. Lebowitz had initiated a series of contacts with the boy through MySpace and AOL's instant messenger, according to the boy, and his mother's reaction was in keeping with what any responsible parent would do - she pursued an investigation.
The arrest which followed took place in the boy's driveway. At that time, the former doctor was in possession of both condoms and sexual lubricant, which fact as presented at his trail as evidence of his intention to have sex with the fifteen-year-old boy. Also presented as evidence of his pattern of behavior were VHS and digital recordings seized in Lebowitz's home which showed him having sex with two different underage boys. After the FBI identified and contacted the victims in Lebowitz's videos, both gave incriminating statements to police.
With this evidence, the state was able to construct a convincing case for the jury, who found Lebowitz guilty.
“If not for the diligence of a mother and her son, and the quick work of county and federal law enforcement," Acting U.S. Attorney Sally Quillian Yates said in a written statement regarding the investigation, "this doctor could still be preying upon young victims."
The fact that he is no longer preying on young victims is something that, I believe, makes all of us feel somewhat better. It is heartening to see that with time and due process, this sort of anti-child pornography sting can yield a conviction. This is doubly true with the recent efforts of local and national law enforcement to crack down on child pornography and child trafficking. Such efforts can sometimes seem to be an uphill battle, and unlikely to turn the tide of child exploitation in this country - this case and conviction serve as a reminder that this is not the case.
A sentencing date has not yet been set for Lebowitz. Given the nature of his crimes, he may serve a life sentence. For the child porn conviction, he will serve no less than fifteen years, and no less than ten more for the coercion conviction.
Felony convictions do not necessarily prevent the issuing of a medical license in Georgia. Lebowitz's licenses - a learning license, as he had never gotten enough experience to apply for a full medical license - was suspended as a result of his arrest, but in the event that he should be released, he would still be able to apply for a medical license. The board would then consider whether or not his crime affected his ability to practice medicine.
Labels: child abuse, child pornography, child sexual abuse, child sexual exploitation, georgia child pornography conviction
A six month old Georgia boy died last week due to an embolism associated with bronchitis. By the time his babysitter took him to the hospital, the baby boy was already dead.
Riverdale Police Chief Samuel Patterson explained to AJC that when the child arrived at Southern Regional Medical Center, his body was already stiff, his lungs full of fluid. Rigor mortis was already setting in before the babysitter sought help. A preliminary autopsy identified the cause of death as an embolism, while a more conclusive report was pending on the return of toxicology results.
The babysitter will face charges, though the police are satisfied with the initial results to say that there was no foul play.
According to Patterson, the six month old's mother was desperate to find someone to watch her son while she worked the overnight shift. Both the babysitter and the baby's mother advertised on Craigslist, a popular online classified site. While the police are unsure which of them approached the other, Patterson described them as "satisfied" with the knowledge that the two women met through Craigslist, where the babysitter offered her services.
The police chief has indicated that he feels the blame for this tragic death rests with the babysitter, who the dead child's mother trusted to be responsible with the care of her son in a time when she had very few choices.
"Had it been left with the right person, I would hope that the child would still be alive today. Quite frankly, the child was dead before it left home because the charge nurse at the hospital said rigor mortis had already set in [by the time the child arrived at the hospital]," he said.
The babysitter was watching the now deceased six month old, along with two other unrelated children, at the Hometown Inn on Highway 85 in Riverdale when this tragedy took place. She faces state and local charges for running an unlicensed daycare. The woman's husband, who was also present and described the child dying of bronchitis as "whiny," was arrested by police when they discovered that he had a warrant for unpaid child support in Carroll County.
The other two children were thankfully unharmed, and returned to their parents by police.
It is always difficult to say what might have happened in other circumstances. If the child had been with his mother, or if he had been in the care of a trained and licensed childcare provider, it is possible that he would still have died. However, it is impossible to know that now. This woman, who advertised herself as a childcare professional to a working mother in a tight position, failed to respond to a clear emergency in a timely manner. Not only did the child die, but the police have indicated that he was dead before the woman even left the hotel where she was staying with the children.
It is very possible that with prompt and attentive care, this baby would still be alive, and this fact highlights the great trust place in their daycare providers, as well as the parents' responsibility to ensure that those providers are capable of living up to that trust.
Riverdale Police Chief Samuel Patterson explained to AJC that when the child arrived at Southern Regional Medical Center, his body was already stiff, his lungs full of fluid. Rigor mortis was already setting in before the babysitter sought help. A preliminary autopsy identified the cause of death as an embolism, while a more conclusive report was pending on the return of toxicology results.
The babysitter will face charges, though the police are satisfied with the initial results to say that there was no foul play.
According to Patterson, the six month old's mother was desperate to find someone to watch her son while she worked the overnight shift. Both the babysitter and the baby's mother advertised on Craigslist, a popular online classified site. While the police are unsure which of them approached the other, Patterson described them as "satisfied" with the knowledge that the two women met through Craigslist, where the babysitter offered her services.
The police chief has indicated that he feels the blame for this tragic death rests with the babysitter, who the dead child's mother trusted to be responsible with the care of her son in a time when she had very few choices.
"Had it been left with the right person, I would hope that the child would still be alive today. Quite frankly, the child was dead before it left home because the charge nurse at the hospital said rigor mortis had already set in [by the time the child arrived at the hospital]," he said.
The babysitter was watching the now deceased six month old, along with two other unrelated children, at the Hometown Inn on Highway 85 in Riverdale when this tragedy took place. She faces state and local charges for running an unlicensed daycare. The woman's husband, who was also present and described the child dying of bronchitis as "whiny," was arrested by police when they discovered that he had a warrant for unpaid child support in Carroll County.
The other two children were thankfully unharmed, and returned to their parents by police.
It is always difficult to say what might have happened in other circumstances. If the child had been with his mother, or if he had been in the care of a trained and licensed childcare provider, it is possible that he would still have died. However, it is impossible to know that now. This woman, who advertised herself as a childcare professional to a working mother in a tight position, failed to respond to a clear emergency in a timely manner. Not only did the child die, but the police have indicated that he was dead before the woman even left the hotel where she was staying with the children.
It is very possible that with prompt and attentive care, this baby would still be alive, and this fact highlights the great trust place in their daycare providers, as well as the parents' responsibility to ensure that those providers are capable of living up to that trust.
Labels: atlanta, atlanta child safety attorney, atlanta personal injury attorney, child neglect, child safety, Georgia, wrongful death
I wrote last month about the investigation of Dr. Earl Bradley, the Lewes, Delaware, pediatrician who had allegedly molested many of his young patients.
Now, I return to this nauseating topic after a grand jury returned with a 160 page indictment against Bradley, one which has now publically confirmed investigators suspicions that the dangerous pediatrician had over one hundred victims. Bradley is being charged with 471 counts of sexual crimes with 103 victims.
"The charges in this indictment are unique in the history of the state of Delaware, as far as I can tell," said Attorney General Beau Biden when he spoke of Bradley's crimes.
Over the more than a decade, Bradley worked as a pediatrician in the small town of Lewes, and during that time he molested a staggering number of victims - all but one of whom who have so far been identified as girls, and all under the age of sixteen. Some were victimized multiple times. One of the girls was raped over a dozen times in the course of a year.
Even now, Biden suspects that the list of victims will keep growing.
"I expect that we will add to this indictment with new charges over the coming months," he said, and encouraged the parents of victims to come forward regardless of age or gender. Prosecutors have even set up an office to handle the weight of complaints and to meet the needs of victims and their families as the investigation progresses.
The charges against Bradley range from rape and continuous sexual abuse of a child to reckless endangering. No one in any way doubts the weight of these crimes. If convicted, Bradley will face life in prison without any possibility of parole.
"I am determined to see that this defendant will never, ever be in a position to hurt another child," stated Biden.
Bradley's attorney, Eugene Maurer, has made clear his intention to move the trial to Sussex County, though his words did not seem to indicate that he thought that shift of venue would be the "real battleground." Instead, Maurer sees his client's mental state as the pivotal portion of this case. That, he's indicated, cannot be seen in the thirteen hours of video tape which police seized from his client as evidence.
Maurer has not read the indictment, but claims to be unsurprised by it. He pointed out that, under state law, one conviction of rape would have been enough to earn Bradley a lifetime sentence.
"I'm sure they have their reasons for including all these different victims in this indictment," he said.
As before, I am struck by the truly horrific nature of the crimes allegedly perpetrated by Dr. Bradley. Parents and communities trust doctors with their children, expecting them to be safe in their pediatricians’ offices. These crimes represent an incredible betrayal of the trust we place in physicians. While there were suspicions about Bradley before, he was still allowed to practice for over ten years even within a small, close knit community, and in doing so rape and serially abuse a staggering number of children.
Reviews have been called to investigate whether doctors, hospitals or some other agencies somehow failed in their obligation to report unprofessional behavior. I’ve said this many times, but will say it again now. If you suspect that a child is being abused or exploited, it is your responsibility to step up. It’s better to be wrong and embarrassed than right and silent while a child goes through the hell of abuse. If you suspect child abuse, contact local law enforcement or, if you feel a child is being exploited, these resources:
Georgia Statewide Tip Line
(404) 577-8477
National Center For Missing and Exploited Children Hotline
1-800-THE-LOST
Dear John Hotline
(404) 379-3602
Now, I return to this nauseating topic after a grand jury returned with a 160 page indictment against Bradley, one which has now publically confirmed investigators suspicions that the dangerous pediatrician had over one hundred victims. Bradley is being charged with 471 counts of sexual crimes with 103 victims.
"The charges in this indictment are unique in the history of the state of Delaware, as far as I can tell," said Attorney General Beau Biden when he spoke of Bradley's crimes.
Over the more than a decade, Bradley worked as a pediatrician in the small town of Lewes, and during that time he molested a staggering number of victims - all but one of whom who have so far been identified as girls, and all under the age of sixteen. Some were victimized multiple times. One of the girls was raped over a dozen times in the course of a year.
Even now, Biden suspects that the list of victims will keep growing.
"I expect that we will add to this indictment with new charges over the coming months," he said, and encouraged the parents of victims to come forward regardless of age or gender. Prosecutors have even set up an office to handle the weight of complaints and to meet the needs of victims and their families as the investigation progresses.
The charges against Bradley range from rape and continuous sexual abuse of a child to reckless endangering. No one in any way doubts the weight of these crimes. If convicted, Bradley will face life in prison without any possibility of parole.
"I am determined to see that this defendant will never, ever be in a position to hurt another child," stated Biden.
Bradley's attorney, Eugene Maurer, has made clear his intention to move the trial to Sussex County, though his words did not seem to indicate that he thought that shift of venue would be the "real battleground." Instead, Maurer sees his client's mental state as the pivotal portion of this case. That, he's indicated, cannot be seen in the thirteen hours of video tape which police seized from his client as evidence.
Maurer has not read the indictment, but claims to be unsurprised by it. He pointed out that, under state law, one conviction of rape would have been enough to earn Bradley a lifetime sentence.
"I'm sure they have their reasons for including all these different victims in this indictment," he said.
As before, I am struck by the truly horrific nature of the crimes allegedly perpetrated by Dr. Bradley. Parents and communities trust doctors with their children, expecting them to be safe in their pediatricians’ offices. These crimes represent an incredible betrayal of the trust we place in physicians. While there were suspicions about Bradley before, he was still allowed to practice for over ten years even within a small, close knit community, and in doing so rape and serially abuse a staggering number of children.
Reviews have been called to investigate whether doctors, hospitals or some other agencies somehow failed in their obligation to report unprofessional behavior. I’ve said this many times, but will say it again now. If you suspect that a child is being abused or exploited, it is your responsibility to step up. It’s better to be wrong and embarrassed than right and silent while a child goes through the hell of abuse. If you suspect child abuse, contact local law enforcement or, if you feel a child is being exploited, these resources:
Georgia Statewide Tip Line
(404) 577-8477
National Center For Missing and Exploited Children Hotline
1-800-THE-LOST
Dear John Hotline
(404) 379-3602
Labels: child abuse, child exploitation, child molestation, child safety, child sexual abuse, child sexual exploitation
After years of faithful dedication the Marines, Staff Sergeant David Marino found himself struggling with a desk job. Formerly reliable, Marino found himself forgetting phone calls and conversations that he'd had only minutes before. Formerly even-tempered, he quickly became frustrated with his wife or the men in his command when they pointed out his uncharacteristic lapses. The Marine, who had been stationed in Iraq and respected for his service, a man who had been known as a "Marine's Marine," had thought he was coming home to a desk job while he treated injuries to his back and knee. What he discovered was a much longer and more fraught road to recovery than he ever expected.
Marino was suffering the permanent effects of a traumatic brain injury (TBI) - a fact which had gone undiagnosed for two years.
He was also not alone. Nearly one in five of the men and women in uniform who have served in Afghanistan and Iraq have suffered TBI. In a service which prides itself on its able-bodied men and women in uniform, these people too often find themselves suddenly invisible, fighting a new battle. As for Marino, finally armed with the knowledge of what was wrong with him, he was placed in the Wounded Warrior Battalion.
The Wounded Warrior Battalion is a relatively new sort of organization, created by Lt. Colonel Timothy Maxwell after his own experience with TBI when an explosion left shrapnel near the left side of his brainstem. Maxwell's injuries were terrible, but it was the isolation of coping with treatment alone, without any support system that truly understood what he was going through, which he found unbearable. Starting in 2004, the Wounded Warrior Battalion has served as a home for Marines too injured for regular duty. There, they could heal together, sharing barracks as well as support.
Over time, the Wounded Warrior Battalion has grown into the Wounded Warrior Regiment. Over 4,000 soldiers strong, the regiment now has Battalions in North Caroline and California, as well as a budget of 4.5 million dollars with which to attempt to see to the soldier’s needs.
The Wounded Warrior Battalion is not a permanent solution for Marino – simply being assigned there is not a solution for soldiers who wish to continue to serve in the Corps. However, without their help and support, he would find himself facing a continuing uphill battle alone.
Marino needed to be granted permanent limited duty status (PLD). Very few uniformed Marines actually achieve this status. In 2008, after nearly a year of paperwork, requests, and medical examinations, Marino became one of only 50 Marines recognized for PLD out of a force of 203,000.
Now, Marino works with the Wounded Warrior Battalion as a career retention specialist in their West Coast Battalion, where he can continue to support others who have had suffered TBI in the service of their country. With his help, hopefully, more American soldiers will be able to continue their careers doing what they want – serving their country actively. While TBI itself may be associated with a life of limited abilities, the success of soldiers like Marino prove that overcoming brain injury is not impossible.
Marino was suffering the permanent effects of a traumatic brain injury (TBI) - a fact which had gone undiagnosed for two years.
He was also not alone. Nearly one in five of the men and women in uniform who have served in Afghanistan and Iraq have suffered TBI. In a service which prides itself on its able-bodied men and women in uniform, these people too often find themselves suddenly invisible, fighting a new battle. As for Marino, finally armed with the knowledge of what was wrong with him, he was placed in the Wounded Warrior Battalion.The Wounded Warrior Battalion is a relatively new sort of organization, created by Lt. Colonel Timothy Maxwell after his own experience with TBI when an explosion left shrapnel near the left side of his brainstem. Maxwell's injuries were terrible, but it was the isolation of coping with treatment alone, without any support system that truly understood what he was going through, which he found unbearable. Starting in 2004, the Wounded Warrior Battalion has served as a home for Marines too injured for regular duty. There, they could heal together, sharing barracks as well as support.
Over time, the Wounded Warrior Battalion has grown into the Wounded Warrior Regiment. Over 4,000 soldiers strong, the regiment now has Battalions in North Caroline and California, as well as a budget of 4.5 million dollars with which to attempt to see to the soldier’s needs.
The Wounded Warrior Battalion is not a permanent solution for Marino – simply being assigned there is not a solution for soldiers who wish to continue to serve in the Corps. However, without their help and support, he would find himself facing a continuing uphill battle alone.
Marino needed to be granted permanent limited duty status (PLD). Very few uniformed Marines actually achieve this status. In 2008, after nearly a year of paperwork, requests, and medical examinations, Marino became one of only 50 Marines recognized for PLD out of a force of 203,000.
Now, Marino works with the Wounded Warrior Battalion as a career retention specialist in their West Coast Battalion, where he can continue to support others who have had suffered TBI in the service of their country. With his help, hopefully, more American soldiers will be able to continue their careers doing what they want – serving their country actively. While TBI itself may be associated with a life of limited abilities, the success of soldiers like Marino prove that overcoming brain injury is not impossible.
Labels: athletes and traumatic brain injury, children and brain damage, Marines and brain injury, Marines and traumatic brain injury, soldiers and brain injury, traumatic brain injury
Our nation's armed forces take pride in their abilities - the ability to face circumstances that most Americans would shy away from, to be ready and on the scene as soon as humanly possible, to do what needs to be done. The image that we as citizens have of them, and the image which they project through ceremony and symbolism, is an able bodied one.
However, as careers wear on and wars continue to wage on, these high expectations leaves more and more of our service men and women at loose ends. What happens to soldiers who find themselves no longer able to serve? What does it mean for the nearly 20 percent of soldiers who have served in Afghanistan and Iraq who, in their tours of duty, have suffered from traumatic brain injury?
There are no cures for traumatic brain injury (TBI), but for soldiers who have been diagnosed, and who wish to continue serving their country, there is still hope. The way ahead may not be easy, and far too many of them slip through the cracks or fall by the wayside in what is an uphill battle both to recovery, and to continued service. But, true to their reputation as spirited fighters, at least some of these injured soldiers choose to fight this battle.
Marine Staff Sergeant David Marino is such a man.
Marino enlisted at seventeen, over a decade ago now. He continued a family tradition, following both his father and brother into the armed services.
"I didn't want to go to college," he said. "I wanted to be a warrior."
Between 2004 and 2006, Marino served in Iraq, where he led mean on a variety of missions, from patrols and escort missions, to raids to capture resistance fighters. It was in the course of this duty that Marino received his traumatic brain injury.
Marino was exposed to two separate explosions. After the first, he talks about feeling out of sorts. There was not any time or place for worrying about vague feelings of sickness. He experienced headaches, ringing in his ears, and what he describes as being "discombobulated." He was not gushing blood, not suffering from obvious, visibly life threatening injuries. He did what he had to - he did his best to meet his responsibilities, to not make anyone else pick up the slack because he could not keep up.
"Back then, if you weren't physically bleeding, you didn't go to medical. We would just try to be hard as nails, take care of your brother," Marino explained. "Because if you missed a patrol, you were making someone else fill your position."
Even after his injuries, Marino was a respected Marine. It was not until other injuries landed him in a desk job that the symptoms of TBI began to surface. He was supposed to be receiving treatment for severe back and knee pain which were preventing him from maintaining the rigorous lifestyle being a Marine demands. Instead, Marino found himself frustrated with confusion, memory lapses and mood swings - all tell-tale signs of a traumatic brain injury.
For more on dedicated Marine David Marino’s story, stay tuned to tomorrow’s post.
However, as careers wear on and wars continue to wage on, these high expectations leaves more and more of our service men and women at loose ends. What happens to soldiers who find themselves no longer able to serve? What does it mean for the nearly 20 percent of soldiers who have served in Afghanistan and Iraq who, in their tours of duty, have suffered from traumatic brain injury?There are no cures for traumatic brain injury (TBI), but for soldiers who have been diagnosed, and who wish to continue serving their country, there is still hope. The way ahead may not be easy, and far too many of them slip through the cracks or fall by the wayside in what is an uphill battle both to recovery, and to continued service. But, true to their reputation as spirited fighters, at least some of these injured soldiers choose to fight this battle.
Marine Staff Sergeant David Marino is such a man.
Marino enlisted at seventeen, over a decade ago now. He continued a family tradition, following both his father and brother into the armed services.
"I didn't want to go to college," he said. "I wanted to be a warrior."
Between 2004 and 2006, Marino served in Iraq, where he led mean on a variety of missions, from patrols and escort missions, to raids to capture resistance fighters. It was in the course of this duty that Marino received his traumatic brain injury.
Marino was exposed to two separate explosions. After the first, he talks about feeling out of sorts. There was not any time or place for worrying about vague feelings of sickness. He experienced headaches, ringing in his ears, and what he describes as being "discombobulated." He was not gushing blood, not suffering from obvious, visibly life threatening injuries. He did what he had to - he did his best to meet his responsibilities, to not make anyone else pick up the slack because he could not keep up.
"Back then, if you weren't physically bleeding, you didn't go to medical. We would just try to be hard as nails, take care of your brother," Marino explained. "Because if you missed a patrol, you were making someone else fill your position."
Even after his injuries, Marino was a respected Marine. It was not until other injuries landed him in a desk job that the symptoms of TBI began to surface. He was supposed to be receiving treatment for severe back and knee pain which were preventing him from maintaining the rigorous lifestyle being a Marine demands. Instead, Marino found himself frustrated with confusion, memory lapses and mood swings - all tell-tale signs of a traumatic brain injury.
For more on dedicated Marine David Marino’s story, stay tuned to tomorrow’s post.
Labels: brain injury, children and brain damage, Marines, Marines and brain injury, soldiers and brain damage, soldiers and brain injury, traumatic brain injury
I have written many times about the dangers and consequences of distracted driving - and considering the number of teens who text while driving and the devastating potential consequences of driving while distracted, I suspect that distracted driving will continue to be a common topic on this blog. It should come as no surprise that I am pleased to see increased understanding of the risk of texting or talking on a cell phone while driving.
Until relatively recently, it seemed that to a large portion of the country, the cell phone had become an all too accepted part of the driving experience. Seeing someone else driving with phone in hand or glued to his ear was simply too ubiquitous to work up concern over. And for too many of us, multitasking our phone and text conversations into our driving time was simply too tempting.
But in the past few years, and even just the past few months, we have witnessed more and more states discussing and passing legislation which penalizes or even criminalizes cell phone distractions while driving. In some states, only younger drivers are prohibited from talking or texting while driving, while in others, teens and adults alike are not allowed to text or talk while driving. And both groups can face hefty fines.
This push back against distracted driving has been motivated in no small part by insurance providers seeking to avoid the increasing liability presented by distracted drivers. And this is no mean nickel and diming on the side of insurance agencies - in 2008, nearly 6,000 people in the United States died in accidents where driver distraction was a factor. That is 16 percent of all traffic fatalities for that year. It is also only a small fraction of all of the accidents caused by distracted driving.
Insurance companies and the government, however, are not the only driving force behind this growing awareness.
Following in the footsteps of MADD and other, similar groups who have sought to raise money and awareness of driving and cell phone dangers, anti-distracted driving accidents have been appearing in greater and greater numbers on television and in the news. These groups, such as FocusDriven, are often fueled by individual experiences with loss of friends or family members to distracted driving. They have even begun hiring celebrities to endorse their platform.
Oprah herself is among those who have helped this issue find a platform. The popular television host has devoted time on her show to highlighting those who have had their lives altered and loved ones lost to distracted driving. She took the opportunity to ask her audience to take a No Phone Zone pledge.
With this sort of pressure on communities and law makers, perhaps we really will see a change in distracted driving statistics.
At present, nineteen states and the District of Columbia have regulations in place either limiting or outright banning texting while driving a vehicle. Nine states prohibit novice drivers from texting while driving.
Six states ban the use of hand held cell phones while driving entirely.
Until relatively recently, it seemed that to a large portion of the country, the cell phone had become an all too accepted part of the driving experience. Seeing someone else driving with phone in hand or glued to his ear was simply too ubiquitous to work up concern over. And for too many of us, multitasking our phone and text conversations into our driving time was simply too tempting.
But in the past few years, and even just the past few months, we have witnessed more and more states discussing and passing legislation which penalizes or even criminalizes cell phone distractions while driving. In some states, only younger drivers are prohibited from talking or texting while driving, while in others, teens and adults alike are not allowed to text or talk while driving. And both groups can face hefty fines.
This push back against distracted driving has been motivated in no small part by insurance providers seeking to avoid the increasing liability presented by distracted drivers. And this is no mean nickel and diming on the side of insurance agencies - in 2008, nearly 6,000 people in the United States died in accidents where driver distraction was a factor. That is 16 percent of all traffic fatalities for that year. It is also only a small fraction of all of the accidents caused by distracted driving.
Insurance companies and the government, however, are not the only driving force behind this growing awareness.
Following in the footsteps of MADD and other, similar groups who have sought to raise money and awareness of driving and cell phone dangers, anti-distracted driving accidents have been appearing in greater and greater numbers on television and in the news. These groups, such as FocusDriven, are often fueled by individual experiences with loss of friends or family members to distracted driving. They have even begun hiring celebrities to endorse their platform.
Oprah herself is among those who have helped this issue find a platform. The popular television host has devoted time on her show to highlighting those who have had their lives altered and loved ones lost to distracted driving. She took the opportunity to ask her audience to take a No Phone Zone pledge.
With this sort of pressure on communities and law makers, perhaps we really will see a change in distracted driving statistics.
At present, nineteen states and the District of Columbia have regulations in place either limiting or outright banning texting while driving a vehicle. Nine states prohibit novice drivers from texting while driving.
Six states ban the use of hand held cell phones while driving entirely.
Labels: atlanta auto wreck attorney, auto wrecks, cell phone, distracted drivers, driving, driving and cell phones, driving and technology, driving and texting
Fear of obesity has been a mounting concern in our country for some time. Across the United States, people's awareness of weight has been increasing as the media tosses out words like epidemic and crisis to describe the state of the nation's waistlines.
Childhood obesity has come under particularly harsh review in recent years as fear grew in the public consciousness that we are facing the first generation of people who will, on average, not live longer lives than their parents did. Parents and schools have both come under criticism as people see overweight and obese children and view them as growing less and less healthy. The question of how to address this issue, however, has often come under heavy criticism as well.
Among the latest controversies in the ongoing debate over how to treat childhood obesity stood out to me, as a lawyer with malpractice experience.
Gastric bypass, a surgery most commonly used to help control obesity in adults, has been growing increasingly more common among teenagers. While still relatively rare, the number of teenagers getting bariatric surgery every year has grown sharply. The only available numbers, reflecting a period between 2000 and 2003, show the number of teens receiving weight loss surgery tripling. And while that still put the total figure at around 800 a year, that kind of growth has not stopped according to the anecdotal evidence of the hospitals and doctors performing the surgeries.
In keeping with this trend, the manufacturers of the Lap-Band System have begun seeking FDA approval for pediatric use. With the FDA's approval, they would be able to market their product for use on children.
The problem is that in both of these surgeries, there is very little understanding of the long term affects of bariatric surgery when performed on minors. Some doctors support the shift, citing the fact that the initial weight loss presented after a bariatric surgery as reason to make them more wildly available to combat childhood obesity. Other doctors, however, are hesitant. What studies have observed the effects of bariatric surgery on adolescent patients have rarely tracked participants for more than two years. The possibility of some unforeseen complication to permanently altering a child's body or implanting a device which may cause scarring or malfunction, seems unreasonably high to some.
Dr. Mary L. Brandt, a pediatric surgeon, said, "There’s no way you can give a 70-year guarantee."
Some doctors worry that surgeons who normally perform bariatric surgery on adults will find themselves increasingly often handling underage patients, because the surgical procedure is the same. Unfortunately, while the surgery is the same, the patients are not. Doctors experienced with adults may not be able to provide the support and counseling necessary for a teen faced with the option of a gastric bypass or other alternative surgery.
Following a gastric bypass, patients have to alter their diets drastically. If they do not, they stand to have serious complications - complications which could prove fatal. Dr. Brandt has said that her team, operating in Houston, turns down nine out of ten of the requests they receive for bariatric surgery on children simply because of the fear that children are unequipped to follow through with that diet.
"If you don’t follow the rules afterward," she said, "you can die."
Childhood obesity has come under particularly harsh review in recent years as fear grew in the public consciousness that we are facing the first generation of people who will, on average, not live longer lives than their parents did. Parents and schools have both come under criticism as people see overweight and obese children and view them as growing less and less healthy. The question of how to address this issue, however, has often come under heavy criticism as well.
Among the latest controversies in the ongoing debate over how to treat childhood obesity stood out to me, as a lawyer with malpractice experience.
Gastric bypass, a surgery most commonly used to help control obesity in adults, has been growing increasingly more common among teenagers. While still relatively rare, the number of teenagers getting bariatric surgery every year has grown sharply. The only available numbers, reflecting a period between 2000 and 2003, show the number of teens receiving weight loss surgery tripling. And while that still put the total figure at around 800 a year, that kind of growth has not stopped according to the anecdotal evidence of the hospitals and doctors performing the surgeries.
In keeping with this trend, the manufacturers of the Lap-Band System have begun seeking FDA approval for pediatric use. With the FDA's approval, they would be able to market their product for use on children.
The problem is that in both of these surgeries, there is very little understanding of the long term affects of bariatric surgery when performed on minors. Some doctors support the shift, citing the fact that the initial weight loss presented after a bariatric surgery as reason to make them more wildly available to combat childhood obesity. Other doctors, however, are hesitant. What studies have observed the effects of bariatric surgery on adolescent patients have rarely tracked participants for more than two years. The possibility of some unforeseen complication to permanently altering a child's body or implanting a device which may cause scarring or malfunction, seems unreasonably high to some.
Dr. Mary L. Brandt, a pediatric surgeon, said, "There’s no way you can give a 70-year guarantee."
Some doctors worry that surgeons who normally perform bariatric surgery on adults will find themselves increasingly often handling underage patients, because the surgical procedure is the same. Unfortunately, while the surgery is the same, the patients are not. Doctors experienced with adults may not be able to provide the support and counseling necessary for a teen faced with the option of a gastric bypass or other alternative surgery.
Following a gastric bypass, patients have to alter their diets drastically. If they do not, they stand to have serious complications - complications which could prove fatal. Dr. Brandt has said that her team, operating in Houston, turns down nine out of ten of the requests they receive for bariatric surgery on children simply because of the fear that children are unequipped to follow through with that diet.
"If you don’t follow the rules afterward," she said, "you can die."
Labels: child health, child safety, medical malpractice, medical malpractice attorney, medical malpractice lawyer
An unnamed seven-year-old is recovering now from a severe wound to her leg which she received when she was attacked by a pit bull while walking home last week.
The mauling injury was serious, but could have been much worse if not for a bystander who observed the attack and reacted quickly. Cobb County police believe that in all likelihood, without this good Samaritan's intervention the girl would have been killed.
“It was bad," said Sgt. Dana Pierce of the Cobb County Police. "But it could have been worse had he not intervened.”
The police officer described the events to the local media. The young girl was walking in the Valley View mobile home park near Marietta alone when the incident took place last Tuesday. The dog, which had roamed one street over from its owner’s home, approached the girl then attacked her aggressively, doing serious damage to her leg before the Good Samaritan was able to intervene. The man, who witnessed the unprovoked attack, came to the girl's aid with a piece of wood.
Luckily, the bystander was able to separate the dog and the girl, and then rush the girl to WellStar Kennestone Hospital. At Kennestone, Pierce explained, and off-duty police officer heard what had happened and reported the attack to the Cobb County police.
The dog, a 115lb pit bull, was signed over to animal control to be euthanized and tested for rabies.
The injured girl was later transported to Children's Healthcare of Atlanta at Egleston, where her condition was upgraded. Pierce described the injury to her leg as severe. She will, without a doubt, suffer from this injury for some time.
This is not the first time that the issue of dogs attacking children has come up on this blog. I wrote about it before, early last month, when a mother killed a dog as it attacked her young daughter. The CDC estimates something like 4.5 million people a year are injured by dog bites in the United States alone. Of those bitten, approximately one in five requires medical attention. Many even require reconstructive surgery. The bills for these injuries cost Americans huge sums of money every year. Children are among those most at risk in these situations, both because of their size - a seven-year-old can be only too easily overwhelmed by a dog, especially one as large as 115lbs - and the likelihood that they will not know how to respond in the event of a dog attack.
This incident, like that one, only serve to once again remind us all of dog owners’ responsibility to see that their dogs are properly trained and socialized. And, unlike in this unfortunate case, secured somewhere so that they are not a danger to others in the neighborhood.
The pit bull’s owners will likely face charges as a result of this attack.
The mauling injury was serious, but could have been much worse if not for a bystander who observed the attack and reacted quickly. Cobb County police believe that in all likelihood, without this good Samaritan's intervention the girl would have been killed.
“It was bad," said Sgt. Dana Pierce of the Cobb County Police. "But it could have been worse had he not intervened.”
The police officer described the events to the local media. The young girl was walking in the Valley View mobile home park near Marietta alone when the incident took place last Tuesday. The dog, which had roamed one street over from its owner’s home, approached the girl then attacked her aggressively, doing serious damage to her leg before the Good Samaritan was able to intervene. The man, who witnessed the unprovoked attack, came to the girl's aid with a piece of wood.
Luckily, the bystander was able to separate the dog and the girl, and then rush the girl to WellStar Kennestone Hospital. At Kennestone, Pierce explained, and off-duty police officer heard what had happened and reported the attack to the Cobb County police.
The dog, a 115lb pit bull, was signed over to animal control to be euthanized and tested for rabies.
The injured girl was later transported to Children's Healthcare of Atlanta at Egleston, where her condition was upgraded. Pierce described the injury to her leg as severe. She will, without a doubt, suffer from this injury for some time.
This is not the first time that the issue of dogs attacking children has come up on this blog. I wrote about it before, early last month, when a mother killed a dog as it attacked her young daughter. The CDC estimates something like 4.5 million people a year are injured by dog bites in the United States alone. Of those bitten, approximately one in five requires medical attention. Many even require reconstructive surgery. The bills for these injuries cost Americans huge sums of money every year. Children are among those most at risk in these situations, both because of their size - a seven-year-old can be only too easily overwhelmed by a dog, especially one as large as 115lbs - and the likelihood that they will not know how to respond in the event of a dog attack.
This incident, like that one, only serve to once again remind us all of dog owners’ responsibility to see that their dogs are properly trained and socialized. And, unlike in this unfortunate case, secured somewhere so that they are not a danger to others in the neighborhood.
The pit bull’s owners will likely face charges as a result of this attack.
Labels: animal attack, animal attack lawyer, animal safety, atlanta, dog attack, dog attack lawyer, dog bite, dog mauling, dog safety, Georgia
Archives
February 2007 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 January 2009 March 2009 April 2009 May 2009 June 2009 July 2009 August 2009 September 2009 October 2009 November 2009 December 2009 January 2010 February 2010 March 2010
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
