This is a wide ranging story that includes at least ten whistleblower lawsuits filed in numerous states. The qui tam suits suggest Amgen defrauded Medicare, Medicaid and other government health care programs, by promoting off label uses for Aranesp or darbepoetin alfa, which is used to treat anemia as a result of chronic renal failure. Aranesp is apparently not the only drug the company was suggesting that doctors use off label either. Their campaign was to encourage physicians and other health care professionals, to prescribe Aranesp and Sensipar, among other drugs, and pay kickbacks to them.

The whistleblower in this case, United States ex rel. Cantor v. Amgen, Inc., Civil Action No. CV-04-2511 (E.D.N.Y.), is Tom Cantor. His suit alleges Amgen, in essence, bribed doctors to boost the sales of six of their drugs, the two already mentioned and four others, Neupogen, Neulasta, Engrel and Epogen. The idea was to get doctors to prescribe their drugs for off label uses, earning the physicians cash back in the deal. Using a drug off label means it is utilized for a different disease/condition than the drug was created to treat, is given in a different manner than suggested or given in a dose that differs from what is approved on the FDA approved drug label.

The suit was filed under seal in 2004 in New York City and just recently, all the lawsuits were unsealed, with the government, who had joined the suit, announcing the settlement with Amgen. Typically a defendant will settle out of court if they feel they stand to lose more by going to court. It provides them some measure of damage control. While they suggest a settlement is not an admission of guilt, 9 out of 10 people would think otherwise. Amgen also pled guilty to illegally introducing Aranesp, a misbranded drug, into the marketplace, which is a misdemeanor. Overall, their legal leg to stand on was not that solid or convincing.

Paying someone to make a decision based on how much money they stand to make for prescribing a drug is not only illegal, it is immoral and unethical. Drugs are supposed to be prescribed based on medical reasons and medical necessity, not in the anticipation of greenbacks. While off label marketing and drug usage is sometime done in the medical field, the fact is that doctors should prescribe their patients drugs that will help them. If doctors do that with integrity and honesty, that is one thing. If they do that with an eye on their bank account, that is another.

Without whistleblowers filing qui tam lawsuits, the federal government would continue to be ripped off for millions of dollars every year. There appears to be an attitude that the government is fair game when it comes to taking money for fraudulent activities. Whistleblowers are slowly leveling the playing field.

Are you in a situation where you have evidence of fraudulent activities being perpetrated against the federal government? Contact an experienced and knowledgeable Cleveland whistleblower lawyer. You will need one to file suit.

Tom Robenalt is a Cleveland whistleblower Lawyer specializing in Cleveland whistleblower cases cases in Ohio. To learn more, visit www.mellinorobenalt.com.

It seems various states, and groups, are mulling over a variety of ways to deal with medical malpractice compensation, rather than leave justice to an independent court and jury. People don’t seem to recognize that capping medical malpractice compensation is making a plaintiff a victim twice, or that if the victim is short-changed in terms of compensation, they will not be able to care for themselves properly. Someone needs to be held accountable for medical errors, and it’s not the victim that should be paying for those mistakes.

A Georgia-based group, Patients for Fair Compensation, is suggesting a medical liability structure based on the workers’ compensation system. Their reason for suggesting a change is that such a system brings down health care costs, as physicians will no longer practice defensive medicine. It makes one wonder if advocates for this type of a system truly understand the horrendous situation seriously debilitated victims find themselves in when people suggest they should take less money as compensation for the outrageous injustice of medical negligence.

With a philosophy like taking less for medical malpractice injuries, it should not come as too much of a surprise to learn that Patients for Fair Compensation is not a group of actual medical malpractice patients. It is headed up by a man who runs Jackson Healthcare. Jackson Healthcare provides hospitals with medical care professionals. On reflection, this group would hardly be in favor of pro-patient compensation.

According to their stated goals, they promote an advocate to guide a patient through the system. The main question here would be who that advocate is really working for – the insurance industry or the patient? Chances are it would be the insurance industry, which indicates a distinct bias. Once the claim has been filed, the idea is that it would be forwarded to a Medical Review Department to gather facts.

From there, it would move to an independent medical panel in charge of reviewing the claim once again and determining if it was an avoidable medical mistake causing injury. Once again, the concern is who does this process really protect, if the goal is to reduce compensation for medical malpractice victims?

The next step in the process would involve a compensation department, in charge of determining a fee schedule that addresses non-economic and economic damages. If a patient is eligible, they would be awarded damages according to a pre-determined schedule. Who determines the fee schedule? Not an independent jury. Who determines if a patient is eligible? Not an experienced medical malpractice lawyer. While this process may sound like it makes sense, the whole goal is to short-change the injured victim. Where is the justice in that?

The long and short of a compensation system, such as the one proposed by Patients for Fair Compensation, is that it makes the patient a victim twice, under the guise of trying to help the settlement process. What is really going on is that the insurance industry wants to save money on the backs of innocent people, injured by medically negligent health care professionals. Hope this system, or anything else like it, does not come to a state you live in. The determination of compensation for medical malpractice should rest solely with an independent jury – period.

Tom Robenalt is a Cleveland Malpractice Lawyer specializing in Cleveland Medical Malpractice cases in Ohio. To learn more, visit www.mellinorobenalt.com.