Posts
Gulf
doctor: BP settlement won't help my patients
17
December, 2012
Dr.
Michael Robichaux is frustrated. Since the earliest days of the
Deepwater Horizon spill, Dr. Robichaux — based in Mathews, La. —
has done little else besides treating fishermen, cleanup workers and
coastal residents who’ve been make sick by their exposure to
the oil or the toxic dispersant that was sprayed in the Gulf. In
recently months, Robichaux has looked closely as the $7.8 billion
settlement that’s on the table between BP and local residents and
small businesses, and he believes the deal is grossly unfair to
thousands suffering chronic health problems.
Before
the hearing that was held before U.S. District Judge Carl Barbier
this fall, Dr. Robichaux filed a letter of objection to the pending
settlement. His primary objections to the medical provisions of the
deal are two-fold: It favors workers and others who suffered acute,
short-term exposure to the spill while failing to properly
acknowledge the chronic, long-term illnesses that many now face in
coastal communities. What’s more, the low financial ceilings on the
payments to claimants in the case won’t be nearly enough to cover
medical bills that some will be facing for the rest of their lives.
Late
last month, Dr.
Robichaux sent a second letter to Judge Barbier that re-states
his objections, adding his frustration with what he believes are
misrepresentations made to the court about the medical issues for
those exposed to toxic pollution in the wake of the 2010 catastrophe.
He spells out — in very specific terms — the severe conditions
such as frequent headaches, severe stomach pain or fatigue that his
patients are coping with, and he voices his worry that the settlement
terms will obscure the true nature of the health crisis in the Gulf
for good.
“It
appears that the interests of a large, foreign corporation has
superceded the needs of thousands of Americans who reside along the
coast of the Gulf of Mexico,” Dr. Robichaux told Judge
Barbier. ”Equally as important to me, as a physician, is the
fact that this settlement will result in a permanent record that
completely ignores the truly significant illnesses that have resulted
from this tragic event.”
Dr.
Robichaux wrote that he’s treated 113 patients who were exposed to
toxic pollution from the BP oil spill, and about 100 of them have had
severe chronic health effects, to the point that many of them are
unable to work because of constant headaches or fatigue and are
unable to work, relying instead on Social Security, Medicaid or other
social programs.
Of
the 113 patients that he’s treated, Dr. Robichaux said that the
most common symptoms are headaches (93), memory loss (89), fatigue
(85), irritability (63), vertigo (60), nausea (49) and blurred
vision (43), with others suffering from insomnia, persistent cough,
or rashes. Of the 20 who experienced some sort of stomach pain, many
reported it was severe. He writes:
While
many of the people we treated at our facility experienced amazing
improvements in their symptoms, we were to later to realize that they
often became ill once again when they returned to their home
environments.
Ordinary
household chemicals, petroleum products, perfumes, deodorants, etc.
often become extremely noxious to patients who have had toxic
exposures and prevent them from leading normal lives.
Two
of my fishermen patients, a husband and wife team, had extraordinary
results from their detox treatment. When they
returned home to resume fishing, the wife became extremely ill as
soon as she began working on their boat. Her
husband resumed working and he too developed problems and has been
unable to work since that time.
As
a layperson discussing what is largely a legal issue, I am certainly
at a disadvantage in making a case for my patients.
However, I do not see any other health professionals rushing
to the aid of these victims, and I feel obligated to do the best that
I can to assist them with their dilemma. The
irony of this situation is that while I am a physician traversing the
legal universe, the attorneys in this situation have decided to play
doctor and to make decisions based on symptoms that are significantly
less common and less serious than those that actually exist.
In
the letter, Dr. Robichaux said he was frustrated with the medical
testimony that he heard in court on behalf of the Plaintiffs’
Steering Committee. He said that the physician advising lawyers from
the PSC seemed to get their information largely over the telephone
from other doctors — but it bore little resemblance to the actual
patients he’s treated along the Gulf.
The
result, he argues, is a settlement that not only is unfair to those
seeking medical compensation but in fact creates a false record of
what should be widely acknowledged as a public health crisis in the
Gulf. This, he correctly notes, is a grave injustice. For those who
do qualify as medical claimants, he adds, the proposed compensation
is not adequate:
This
creates a dilemma for these clients. The maximum compensation
available to them will probably be in the $60,000 range.
However, that remains to be seen, as many of these individuals who
are severely affected by this dilemma do not have the far less
significant symptoms that qualify for compensation.
Another
dilemma is the fact that many of these patients will be affected by
their disease for the rest of their lives. How can $60,000 come
even close to compensating these people for an illness that has
completely disrupted their lives and will affect them for as long as
they live?
My
friend and legal colleague Robert McKee made similar arguments
to the court objecting to the proposed medical
compensation. McKee pointed out, for example. that a worker who
bagged oil-soaked items may have passed out on the job and thus
qualifies for a settlement, while a boom operator who suffered
chronic exposure and didn’t report anything at the time —
but now experiences significant symptoms, would not be covered.
Dr.
Robichaux and I agree on one fundamental point: It is far more
important to do this BP settlement right, and to do it fairly, than
it is to do quickly. For far too many people suffering from serious,
chronic illnesses, they have all the time in the world.
To
read the full text of Dr. Robichaux’s letter to the court,
please go to:
http://www.stuarthsmith.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/11-26-12-MRR-to-Barbier-BP-PSC-Proposed-Settlement-Hearing.doc
Here
is my Nov. 12 blog post about my verbal objections to the $7.8
billion BP settlement:
http://www.stuarthsmith.com/arbitrary-and-capricious-bp-settlement-needs-a-do-over/
To
read my Sept. 12 post recording our written objections to the $7.8
billion settlement, please read:
http://www.stuarthsmith.com/we-object-why-bps-8-7-billion-deal-is-a-failed-settlement/
To
read the earlier declaration to the court by Dr. Robichaux,
please read
http://www.stuarthsmith.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/120906Robichaux1.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.