Traverse City Personal Injury Lawyer - All Topics

Survive Black Friday?

Timothy Smith — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 14:19:54 GMT

A number of years ago, I represented a young woman who was injured by a crowd that had gathered outside a Wal-Mart in Cadillac Michigan after reading about a new home video gaming system that was being released. My client was 7 months pregnant and had hoped to surprise her husband with a new video gaming system for his birthday.

By 5am, the crowd was nearly 100 and the Walmart had advertised that quantities were limited to 25 gaming units. As the store approached the opening hour, the crowd was getting restless. Bullies in the back of the line began pushing forward and tempers began to flare. You'd think that Wal-Mart would have recognized this and set up a system to ensure that the sale of the systems occurred in a safe manner to the 25 first individuals in line. Simple measures such as handing out wristbands to the first 25 or any number of approaches would have spared the crowd from what came next.

At the time of the opening, a Wal-Mart employee came forward and simply unlocked the front door. The crowd surged forward as it became every man and woman for themselves. My client, who was 8th person in line, was pushed to the ground and trampled by the folks behind her.

By the time the dust settled on the stampede, my client lay on the floor of the entry to Wal-Mart - bruised, battered and going into labor from the trauma. Emergency medical technicians from Cadillac were called to the scene and transported her to Cadillac Mercy Hospital where the doctors were able to stop the labor. She wasn't able to have any x-rays of her injured pelvis, hips and back because of the risk to the fetus. She spent the next 2 months on her back wondering if her unborn child was going to be okay.

When I sent my first notice of claim letter to Walmart, they responded by denying that their store or it's employees had done anything wrong. Suit was filed against Walmart in Wexford County Circuit Court. I was able to secure a copy of the security tapes from the front door. The tapes showed the Walmart employees laughing at the crowd gathered outside and then laughing at the stampede that ensued once the front doors were unlocked. The video was very similar to this YouTube clip from a Black Friday Stampede in Grand Rapids Michigan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeSgBL7gpAk

It's shocking to me that this happens every year at the Big Box stores like Wal-Mart, Sam's Club, Best Buy and others. Even more shocking are the security regulations that each store has drafted and implemented which are rarely followed when the store is releasing a new limited quantity gaming system or on the morning of Black Friday. Through extensive discovery [which Walmart fought every step of the way], my office obtained internal safety rules and regulations that, if followed, could have prevented my client's injury.

What's even more shocking is that Wal-Mart and other big box stores not only endanger the lives of their customers, but evn their employees aren't safe during these Black Friday Riots. In fact, one Wal-Mart employee was killed during one of the Black Friday riots like you just watched above.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5S6UKRaM5fA

Wal-Mart called this death of it's employee "an unfortunate event". That's an understatement. Every big box store knows that Black Friday brings big crowds and that big crowds can cause big problems. So why is it that every year we have people getting injured and even killed while trying to shop? Why aren't stores following the rules and regulations they themselves have implemented to provide a safe shopping experience for it's customers? I suppose we can answer that question in a single word - Profits. Proper security measures are expensive to implement....

My client was one of the lucky ones. The money that Wal-Mart paid to her at the conclusion of the litigation more than covered her medical bills and her pain and suffering. More importantly, after laying in bed under doctors orders for 2 months, her child was born healthy. She still has days where she has aches and pains in her pelvis and low back from where she was trampled, but she knows that it could have been worse. Much worse.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Timothy Smith

Dog Bite Basics in Michigan

Timothy Smith — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:13:50 GMT

DOG BITE

In Michigan, when a dog bites a person, the person must sue the owner of the dog within three years from the date of the dog bite under MCL 600.5805(10). Proper plaintiffs would include:

· Person the dog bit and injured, as well as their spouse, child, or parent;

· Personal representative of the person killed in a dog attack, who would be a stand-in for the deceased and could recover on behalf of the dead person’s estate.

The proper defendant in a dog bite case includes:

1) the “registered owner” of the dog, or person who has represented him or herself to be the “owner”;

2) the “keeper,” or the “temporary caretaker” of the dog.

The jury will determine the fact question of whether the defendant having possession of the dog rises to “keeper” status and is usually defined as exercising the type of control over the dog that the owner would exert.

Three common potential causes of action for dog bite cases include:

1) The dog bite statutory action, applying to an owner of a dog

The good news in these cases is that generally if a dog bites a plaintiff, the plaintiff must only prove these facts:

· The dog bit the plaintiff and the plaintiff was injured as a result;

· The plaintiff did not provoke the bite, typically a fact question for your jury;

· The defendant owned the dog; and

· The plaintiff was lawfully at the location where the dog bite occurred.

2) Common law strict liability action against the dog owner and “keeper”

When the dog bite occurs while the dog is under the control of an owner or a “keeper,” who knew or should have known of the dog’s dangerous propensities, the plaintiff must prove in addition to the facts listed above.

3) Common law negligence

The same facts as listed under number 1 above plus that the owner or “possessor,” or temporary caretaker of the dog had the dog long enough to know of the dog’s dangerous propensities, breached a duty to the plaintiff of controlling the dog, and therefore was negligent.

More good news for Michigan victims related to defense of dog bite cases:

· Provoking the dog, an issue the jury will decide, is the only defense under a statutory claim

· Reacting to a dog’s viciousness does not constitute provocation under the statute.

If you or someone you know has been attcked by a dog, click here for a prior article I authored on how to treat bite injuries.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Timothy Smith

Disbursing Funds under Michigan's Wrongful Death Statute

Timothy Smith — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 15:01:22 GMT

Recently, we've resolved a number of wrongful death cases here in Northern Michigan. In Michigan, these types of cases are governed by a statute that controls every aspect of the case, including how the recovered funds are distributed to the family members that survive the deceased. One of the families that I represent asked me to explain to them how the distribution of the monies we recovered would take place.

In order to fully answer their question, I turned to Andrew Shotwell, a probate specialist with my office here in Traverse City, Michigan. I asked Andrew to draft an informative letter to the family to answer the question and thought I'd share the substance of it with my readers in case they were facing a similar issue.

The procedure and applicable law depends on various facts. First, if a complaint has been filed in circuit court, the distribution is governed by MCL 600.2922. Essentially under that statute, if no conscience pain and suffering was present or to the extent an award is for other than conscience pain and suffering, the circuit can distribute under 600.2922. The Court approves distributions “to those…who suffered damages and to the estate of the deceased for compensation for conscious pain and suffering, if any, in the amount as the court or jury considers fair and equitable considering the relative damages sustained by each of the persons and the estate of the deceased.”

If there is conscience pain and suffering awarded, the award passes to the estate and is distributed in accordance either with the decedent’s last will and testament, or by intestate succession [this is the law that governs how an individual's estate passes when they have no will]. There is no precise formula for determining the damages for the loss of a loved one’s society and companionship. In re Claim of Carr, 189 Mich App 234, 471 NW2d 637 (1991). The measure of damages is gauged by the relationship the decedent had with the claimant, including the amount of time the decedent and the claimant spent together. McTaggart v Lindsey, 202 Mich App 612, 509 NW2d 881 (1993).

If a complaint has not been filed and settlement has been reached, the distributions occur pursuant to MCL 700.3924, which is similar to 600.2922, requiring the distributions to be fair and equitable. The persons entitled to notice and an opportunity be heard in a wrongful death case under both 700.3924 and 600.2922 are as follows:

1) The deceased's spouse, children, descendants, parents, grandparents, brothers and sisters, and, if none of these persons survive the deceased, then those persons to whom the estate of the deceased would pass under the laws of intestate succession determined as of the date of death of the deceased.

2) The children of the deceased's spouse; and

3) Those persons who are devisees under the will of the deceased, including beneficiaries of a trust under the will, those persons who are designated in the will as persons who may be entitled to damages under this section, and the beneficiaries of a living trust of the deceased if there is a devise to that trust in the will of the deceased.

In any case, an estate would need to be opened with the probate court in the county of residence for the decedent. If a will exists, it is submitted to probate and a Personal Representative appointed, as nominated in the will. If no will exists, or the will fails to nominate a Personal Representative, the Court will appoint one according to the priority schedule, starting with the surviving spouse. Notice is required to be sent to all the people indentified above as having an interest in the distribution.

Once a settlement or an award has been granted, if all of the potential distributees are competent, nondisappeared adults, they may stipulate to a specific distribution scheme. If all of the interested persons stipulate to a proposed allocation, the court must order that distribution. However, if a disagreement exists, a hearing would be required.

If a minor is involved a guardian ad litem may be required to advocate on the minor’s behalf.

If after reading this summary of the approaches to distribution under the wrongful death statute, you still have questions, feel free to shoot me an email or call with further questions.

In my next article, I'll address and give some examples of what happens when the family can't agree on the distribution and an evidentiary hearing is required.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Timothy Smith

Update on Insurance Bad Faith Reform Package in Michigan

Kevin Elsenheimer — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 16:47:40 GMT

I've been asked to talk briefly about the manner in which the insurance reform package left the Michigan House of Representatives, and to give an update as to its status in the Michigan Senate.

House Bills 4244, 4844, 5020, and 5144-5151 were passed out of the House on what was essentially a partisan vote (most Democrats voting for, Republicans mostly opposed) in the early Fall. The bills were referred to the Committee on Economic Development and Regulatory Reform in the Michigan Senate. My staff has communicated with the staff of the committee's chairman, Sen. Alan Sanborn, and we have been advised that the bills will not be taken up by the Senate committee, which means that the issue is likely dead for this legislature.

To my mind, it is a shame these bills moved in such a poor state. I think there was a middle ground that could have been reached on the issue which might have led to an improved policy. Unfortunately, policy took a backseat to politics and there was no opportunity given for compromise.

When the bills were voted on by the House, I issued a strongly-worded press release as Republican Leader in the House chastising both the actions of the Insurance Commissioner, Butch Hollowell, and the House Democrats in moving bills that were so one-sided they virtually gauranteed no action in the Republican-led Senate. Let me address each one of these comments.

On the day of the vote on the bills, my office began receiving contacts from Republican members of the House complaining that their offices had been contacted by the Office of the Insurance Advocate regarding clearly political matters, such as who the member's key supporters and donors were, when the members conducted office hours and the names of their political opponents. My members viewed this contact as a poorly-vieled threat on the part of the Insurance Advocate's Office, and by proxy, the Granholm Administration, to seek out political retribution on those who would oppose the Bad Faith Reform package. That this was being done on the taxpayer's dime made the matter even more infuriating.

It should be noted that Butch Hollowell has said he knew nothing about the calls made to my members' offices. I take him at his word, but the actions of his department had a lot to do with the attitude that House Republicans brought to this particular set of bills. But it wasn't the only cause of that attitude.

There are several members of my caucus who would support some kind of bad faith fix. No member of my caucus, however, was willing to support the one-sided language that suddenly came from the House Committee on Insurance. I am told that we had at least one member that was working with the chair to come up with compromise language that would actually have the potential of moving in the Senate. When the bills were suddenly moved to the floor of the House, my Insurance Committee members felt like the rug had been pulled out from under them.

In my experience, this kind of rushed work only happens when a powerful special interest group demands some kind of action. The Justice League (or whatever the trial lawyers call themselves now) was the prime mover of this package, and I called out the House Democrats as pushing the legislation as a pay-off to trial lawyers.

Not surprisingly, I received some contacts from some fellow attorneys about my comments. Tim Smith, who blogs regularly on this site, was particularly unhappy and was kind enough to ask me to explain in this forum what happened on the ground.

In hindsight, my press release was a bit strong, but there is more than an air of truth in my comments. This package moved before its time. It did so without meaningful compromise and as a result is dead in the Senate. The fact that House Democrats moved it in this way, which is unusual, and that the Insurance Advocate's Office was involved led me to believe at the time that the real goal of moving this package was to have political ammunition for future campaigns. I still believe that is the case today. The fact that the MAJ gave 99.73% of the $591 thousand-plus that it spent from July of '08 to July of '09 to Democrats isn't lost on me either.

Someone needs to ask, is the goal here to enact real policy reform or to advance a political objective? This and other policy objectives can be achieved - again, let me stress that I have members who are willing to enact bad faith reform - if the MAJ and the insurance lobby are willing to compromise. That means both sides will need to move. In this instance, I saw those on one side of the argument pick up their toys and go home.

Thanks again to Tim Smith for the opportunity to blog, and I'm sorry for the delay in doing so.

Kevin Elsenheimer

House Republican Leader

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Kevin Elsenheimer

Michael Sincic: Brain Injury Survivor & Artist

Timothy Smith — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 11:49:25 GMT

One of the nicest things about editing the Traverse City InjuryBoard.com blog is the people I've met and the relationships I've developed as the editor of this site. One of those people is local artist Michael Sincic.

His love of art began in Junior High and High School and continued into college. His approach to art was drastically altered in 1995 when he was diagnosed with a brain tumor. Prior to the tumor, he was regularly sketching and drawing cartoons. But, this passion was paused while he focused on address this serious injury to his brain.

Thanks to his parents and an incredible neurosurgeon in New York, his life was saved and he has continued in his love of art through painting and sculpting. Unfortunately, he lost most of his sight and his pituitary gland due the removal of the tumor, but he has learned to "feel" with his hands as he continues to create his art.

He began his company, "Michael's Unique Visions" in the fall of 2000. One of his original art works was commissioned for Steve Yzerman, captain of the Red Wings Hockey team which spends summers up here in Traverse City at their training camp. His art is sold throughout northern Michigan at DeYoungs in Traverse City, Elements Gallery in Charlevoix and Harbor Springs and Main Street Gallery in Milford.

I will be in Lansing next week at the Annual Conference of the Brain Injury Association of Michigan. Look for the Smith & Johnson booth in the vendors area. Michael has been kind enough to allow me to take some of his art work with me to Lansing and we'll have it on display at our booth.

Michael is an amazing brain injury survivor, a very polite and thoughtful young man and a very, very talented artist.

To quote Michael:

"People with disabilities are still people. We all accomplish things, like to have fun, and can communicate in some way. We can do just about everything anyone else can do - maybe just in a different way."

I hope to see some of you there.

-Tim

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Timothy Smith

Insurance Reform Package Passes State House - Likely to Stall in Senate

Timothy Smith — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 14:48:57 GMT

If you're not up to speed on the problem itself or the proposed fix, click here as I wrote an article on this very issue not too long ago - http://grandrapids.injuryboard.com/automobile-accidents/wrongfully-denied-insurance-claims.aspx?googleid=268418 .

I'm sending a copy of this article directly to our Northern Michigan Representatives. As many of you readers know, we have guest bloggers on InjuryBoard.com and I'm going to turn the reins over to our representatives to see if they can get us up to speed on what has happened and what will happen to these important pieces of legislation.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Timothy Smith

The American Academy of Pediatrics Steps Up in Support of the National PABI Plan

Timothy Smith — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 17:09:20 GMT

Just a few minutes ago, I received an email from Patrick Donohue at the Sara Jane Brain Foundation. Attached was this letter from the American Academy of Pediatrics describing their support for the National Pediatric Acquired Brain Injury Plan.

There is a need to develop a comprehensive approach to the prevention, evaluation, and treatment of pediatric acquired brain injuries. Multisite collaborative investigation such as that proposed by The Sarah Jane Brain Foundation Project would allow the development of evidence based, standardized approaches to the prevention, evaluation, and treatment of pediatric acquired brain injuries so that all children would have access to the highest quality, most effective pediatric health services.

There seems to be a very real groundswell of support for this very important project. If any of my reader's are interested in learning more about The Sara Jane Brain Foundation or donating money to this worthy cause, please click here to find out more.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Timothy Smith

The National Pediatric Acquired Brain Injury Plan - Part IV

Timothy Smith — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 16:55:25 GMT

Today, we will wrap up our look at the National Pediatric Acquired Brain Injury Plan. Yesterday, we concluded our 3rd article by discussing how the Plan and the regional centers will address the transition of these children from minors to adults.

The sixth category of care to be addressed by the regional centers will include the issues facing rural and Tele-health. The scope of this problem is enormous. Approximately 40% of all Americans live in cities with less than 200,000 people. Rural hospitals without specialty staffing for neurological emergencies comprise approximately 80% of hospitals nationwide, yet they provide care for nearly 54 million US citizens. This data from the American Hospital Association evidences the fact the majority of Americans are not living near a hospital that can properly address the issues facing pediatric acquired brain injury. Part one of the solution to this problem would include the Sarah Jane Brain Foundation state lead centers. When funded, these state lead centers will provide expertise and coverage within a 200 mile radius for 42% of the United States, including Hawaii, Alaska and Puerto Rico. The question for the reader must be, "What about the other 58%?" The easy answer would be, "Where there is cellular service and/or internet access, there is expertise available". The concept of tele-medicine (part two of the solution), would involve the Sarah Jane Brain Foundation Tele-Medicine National Center. This center will provide:

1. Access for physicians and nurses in remote, rural or community hospital settings to interact during acute, sub-acute and chronic stages with experts in all specialties;

2. Allow access by experts in distant locations to review, monitor and assess patient status;

3. Quality monitoring across state lead lines.

This technology is FDA approved for remote delivery of vital signs including high enough quality video for visual exams and surgical guidance from remote sites. Tele-Medicine is already in use in the U.S. Military and many hospitals throughout the United States. The Tele-Medicine component will rely upon all other national leads to provide the best care possible for children who have sustained a closed head injury regardless of location.

The last category of care for the regional centers will involve a concept of a virtual center of care. It is anticipated that the stages of the virtual center will include the following:

1. Patient and family centered registry;

2. Electronic health and personalized record portal integration across life-ecosystems; and

3. Online, up-to-date and relevant content to provide continual resources for child, families and care providers.

This virtual integration of constantly updated information across patient, advocate, provider and researcher lines will ensure a virtual ecosystem model of care for pediatric acquired brain injury. By linking all categories of care, virtual technology will allow access to a shared community both rural and urban. Virtual technology will allow rapid access to break-throughs across mild injuries and acute injuries as well as reintegration and adult transition. Virtual training for prevention and long term care as well as repeat check-ups through Tele-Health, will not only provide high quality care to rural groups, but also standardize best practices on a nationwide basis.

Ultimately, the virtual center will be focused in promoting research, advancing discovery speed to application, empowering patients as well as outreach to the community, providing anonymous and highly linked care as well as integrating data to inform public policy.

As Patrick Donohue, the founder of the Sarah Jane Brain Project, is often quoted saying, "Things work out best for those who make the best out of the way things work out", I cannot think of a better approach to standardizing our care for the future of our society who have suffered, at times, a subtle, yet severe, injury to their brains and minds. By establishing this national PABI plan, we ensure, as a society, that our children who have sustained these injuries have the best chance at living a full and meaningful life.

As a final note, I think it important for you to put a face with and meet the folks beind the Sara Jane Brain Foundation. Here's the founder Patrick Donohue and his daughter Sara Jane.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ybrEJD6MOY&feature=related

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Timothy Smith

The National Pediatric Acquired Brain Injury Plan - Part III

Timothy Smith — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 11:35:57 GMT

Yesterday, we finished our discussion of the early stages of the National Pediatric Acquired Brain Injury Plan [PABI Plan]. I promised the readers I would focus on the concepts of "mild" traumatic brain injury and the next steps to the NABI Plan for the regional centers here in the United States.

In talking about mild traumatic brain injury, the word "mild" is merely a relative term. The clinical experience and the severity of the injury itself is not "mild". Millions of children, adolescents and young adults sustain traumatic brain injury each year and the great majority (90%) are classified as mild. Even concussions which young athletes sustain on an annual basis are a subclass of "mild" TBI. [for more information on young athletes and concussions, click here]

As we sit here today, the current status of "mild" traumatic brain injuries is, in a nutshell, one of a lack of education and awareness about the condition itself. Medical, educational, sports and recreational systems are universally under-prepared and ill-equipped to handle these injuries. There is a lack of trained responsive systems including first responders such as EMS and athletic trainers as well as primary care physicians and clinicians. There is also a lack of services in the form of emergency departments, pediatric offices as well as on the schools and playing fields themselves.

Because mild traumatic brain injury is under-recognized and under-identified, there is not only poor, but incomplete management of the injury itself. Because the injury is under-recognized and under-identified, those children would suffer an increase risk for a more serious outcome. Further, repeat concussions and/or mild traumatic brain injuries can cause cumulative injuries resulting in death (second impact syndrome), chronic traumatic encephalopathy as well as persistent symptoms and/or prolonged recovery from the post-concussive syndrome.

The National PABI Plan for mild traumatic brain injury is to develop nationwide a master plan to ensure equal assessment and treatment that includes the best practices standards, ensuring early identification of the injury, education, training of personnel systems as well as equal entry to services at all points.

The next category of care charged to the regional centers will be that of reintegration and/or long term care. As far as reintegration into the school community, there is no systematic method for connecting children and their families with services within the school and community following a traumatic brain injury. In particular, failure to identify the injury for purposes of special education, causes significant problems within the school.

Annually, 62,000 children are hospitalized for traumatic brain injury. Of those 62,000 children, approximately 19% need special education support. This means that the cumulative total kindergarten through 12^th grade of children needing special education support totals nearly 150,000 children. Yet in 2005, the total recognized pediatric need for special education due to traumatic brain injury was just 23,509. In fact, many educators had acknowledged that they simply do not have a handle on this specific disability.

Why? All you have to do is look at the contributing factors to this under-identification and the poor services. Traumatic brain injury is generally defined as an invisible disability. Students may look normal or have no physical signs of disability yet their brain is functioning in an abnormal matter following trauma. Further, when children are injured at an early age, the impact may not be seen until years later as they begin missing certain developmental milestones or acting in socially or academically inappropriate ways.

Further, parental expectations are askew as there is a rapid pace to the early recovery from a traumatic brain injury [especially in children], yet this recovery typically tapers off over time. Also, there is universally poor tracking of the injury and its outcome as transitions are not well coordinated.

As part of the national PABI Plan, the Sarah Jane Brain Foundation will provide research on effective interventions which will allow services for educators and other service providers. This, in turn, will allow those educators and schools to provide services for the children and their families as well. These academic services will help transition the child on referral from acute care, rehabilitation or community agency through the academic environment and into a proper and smooth transition to adulthood.

The fifth category of care for the regional centers will include adult transition. Under the current scheme, transition to adult life following pediatric acquired brain injury would include medical, psychological and rehabilitative services such as physical therapy, occupational therapy and speech and language therapy which would be received through special education and end suddenly at age 21 with the end of school eligibility. The IEP process should mandate a transition program to support the transition from school to post secondary education or work. Further, social opportunities can be developed if acquired brain injury appropriate education is offered to community personnel and case managing is provided to the individual's family.

The current problems with transitioning to adult life following pediatric acquired brain injury would be the following:

1. Lack of adult medical providers including primary care physicians and specialists;

2. Lack of pediatric acquired brain injury education among psychologists, psychiatrists and community mental health providers which, to date, tends not to include emotional problems causing serious psychiatric disorders in adulthood because of the transition;

3. Lack of insurance coverage for non-acute physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech and language therapy, cognitive rehabilitation or psychological treatments;

4. Extreme variability in conduct of education transition services with regard to program quality relevance from district to district and success which is quantified by functional outcomes; and

5. The lack of any opportunity for a formal social interaction by the brain injury survivor.

The main question for the reader should be, "How does the Pediatric Acquired Brain Injury Plan address the identified problems?" Currently, the PABI registry will provide an educational resource for physicians and other providers. It will also clarify the course of PABI through development including addressing the impact of PABI trauma and medications on physical systems over time. Lastly, the PABI registry will provide an integration of knowledge and practice. With regard to the PABI virtual center, the center will bridge the knowledge gap between pediatric and adult providers, will provide data collection on long term medical and health parameters and outline the effective treatments including "best practices" for young children with brain injury. Further, the virtual center will replicate all of these quality programs in every community which will reduce variability in service access due to the lack of knowledge and non-existing case management.

Tomorrow we will wrap up our look at this amazing nation-wide attempt to standardize the diagnosis and treatment of children with acquired brain injuries. We will look at the difficulties faced by families living in rural area, far away from the hospitals and treatment centers that could provide the appropriate care. We will also discuss 'the virtual center of care"; a center focused in promoting research, advancing discovery speed to application, empowering patients as well as outreach to the community, providing anonymous and highly linked care as well as integrating data to inform public policy.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Timothy Smith

Brain Injury Association of Michigan Updates - August 5th, 2009

Timothy Smith — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 18:18:12 GMT

When I was elected to the Board of Directors to the Brain Injury Association of Michigan, I promised my InjuryBoard readers that I would provide them with regular updates from the front lines of brain injury advocacy. Today we have some very good news straight from Michael Dabbs, the president of the BIAMI:

Appropriations Update

TBI Act

On Friday, July 24, 2009 the House of Representatives passed a $730.5 billion bill to fund health, education and labor programs in fiscal 2010. The bill (HR 3293) allocates $10 million to the HRSA state grant and protection and advocacy programs. The accompanying committee report states:

"The Committee provides $10 million for the Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) program. This is $123,000 above the fiscal year 2009 funding level and the budget request. The TBI program funds the development and implementation of statewide systems to ensure access to care, including pre-hospital care, emergency department care, hospital care, rehabilitation, transitional services, education and employment, and long-term community supports. Grants also go to State protection and advocacy systems. In fiscal year 2009, 16 States will receive TBI awards, and 57 State and territorial protection and advocacy systems will be funded. The Committee intends that HRSA allocates the TBI funding increase to States and protection and advocacy systems in the same proportion as they received with fiscal year 2009 funding."

The National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research

Also, considered as part of the bill, funding for the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research as stated in the Committee Report is as follows:

"The Committee recommends $110,741,000 for the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, which is $3,000,000 above the fiscal year 2009 funding level and the same as the budget request. The Institute supports research, demonstration, and training activities that are designed to maximize the employment and integration into society of individuals with disabilities of all ages. The Committee encourages the Administration to establish an Interagency Committee on Disability Research to develop a comprehensive government-wide strategic plan for disability and rehabilitation research, including capacity building and knowledge translation."

Social Security Administration

The Social Security Administration's program that supports seniors and the disabled received $11.4 billion in the bill, $993 million above 2009, for a limitation on administrative expenses for SSA. The Committee expressed dedication to helping the Social Security Administration (SSA) address several challenges, including processing a rising number of retirement and disability claims, reducing the backlog of disability claims, and improving service to the public.

BIAA will continue to monitor the bill as the Senate Appropriations Committee is scheduled to begin marking up its version of the bill July 28. Look for more details and action alerts in the coming weeks. In the meantime, BIAA thanks grassroots advocates for their assistance!

Health Care Reform Update

House

After more contentious private and public negotiations on a health overhaul between House leaders and moderate Democrats, prospects are uncertain for a vote on the bill before lawmakers leave for a long August recess.

The Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman, Henry Waxman, is aiming to come to an agreement by Monday or Tuesday of this week in order to report the bill to the full house.

House Democratic leaders will attempt to convince their caucus of the merits of the legislation Monday evening, in the hope of holding a vote at the end of this week or early next week.

Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, had earlier dismissed the idea that Energy and Commerce might have to discharge the bill without voting on it --- something Waxman said, in the heat of his dispute with moderate democrats, that he was considering himself. "I'm not interested in that, and I don't think the Speaker is either," Hoyer said. (CQ)

He said chances are "very small" they will take the bill to the floor before the House's scheduled July 31 break for the August recess. However, he said it was possible the leadership would hold the chamber in session beyond that date.

Senate

Senate leaders last week abandoned plans to pass their own bill before August, but work continues among a bipartisan group of six Finance Committee members - backed by their leadership - to reach agreement on an overhaul.

BIAA will continue to monitor Health Care Reform closely as debate continues.

The fact that 10 million was earmarked to the traumatic brain injury program and that this figure was a six-figure increase over 2008 is good news indeed. My hat is off to the National Brain Injury Association and all the folks that are working behind the scenes to help the survivors of traumatic brain injuries.

Originally posted at InjuryBoard by Timothy Smith