Birth Defect Lawyer Blog

One source of toxins that has caught the attention of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is large-scale laundries. Large-scale laundering facilities are responsible for cleaning linens for hospitals, prisons, hotels, and other entities. However, the toxic fumes released during the cleaning process might be making laundry workers and the general public ill.

The problem may not be the cleaning process itself, but rather what is cleaned. The biggest offenders may be shop towels from industrial plants sent to the laundries already covered in oil, paint, solvents, and other chemicals. Once the towels are washed and dried, the toxins that were on them enter the atmosphere. They exit the laundry facilities through vents and exhaust valves, becoming a major source of smog.

In addition to the dangers posed by inhaling the vapors, having so many different toxins together can be dangerous in different ways -- such as causing fires or explosions when chemicals mix together. Until now, regulators have had difficulty cracking down because they did not know whom to hold responsible, with each industrial plant using different chemicals. The EPA, however, has stated that it is the laundry facilities that should be held responsible for what they clean.

Last year, the EPA set its sights on two New England laundry facilities where residents had complained about poor air quality: one in Massachusetts and one in New Hampshire. The EPA got the New Hampshire facility to pay a civil penalty of $65,000, install better filters to prevent so much toxic escape through the vents, and undertake a $220,000 initiative to improve air quality in that part of the state. Up to 35 other facilities have been probed, with some of them facing similar penalties.

Large-scale laundry facilities are not usually the first example that comes to mind when people think of toxic offenders, so it is good that the EPA has chosen to keep an eye on them. Toxins in the air and water have been linked to a variety of health problems, as well as birth defects. However, if the EPA or another regulator has not taken steps to regulate the facilities, you could file a toxic tort lawsuit against the facility if you believe that your health problem, or your child's birth defect, could be the result of its toxins. You would argue that the laundry facility had a duty to the surrounding community to operate reasonably according to health and safety regulations. The facility breached its duty by permitting harmful amounts of toxins to escape into the air when it could have taken reasonable efforts to prevent the emissions. As a result of the breach, you were injured through exposure to the toxins while pregnant. The resulting damage was your child's birth defect.

Continue reading "EPA Starts Regulating Industrial Laundries With the Goal of Preventing Toxic Emissions" »

Reseachers have discovered more about how human cytomegalovirus (HCMV), a virus transmitted through contact with human bodily fluids, has managed to become one of the leading causes of birth defects in the United States. In a new study, researchers learned that the virus acts to prevent a cell's normal ability to repair itself. This has led to a situation where, of the 40,000 babies born each year infected with the virus, 4,000 have birth defects ranging from hearing loss to cerebral palsy to microcephaly, where the head is too small.

While HCMV typically remains dormant in healthy individuals, when a woman is pregnant, her immune system becomes weakened, making it more likely that she will be infected by the virus. At present there is no cure, but researchers hope that through learning more about the way the virus functions, they can develop treatments that would prevent birth defects.

Through this latest study, researchers have determined that when HCMV infects a cell, it creates "centers" inside the cell's nucleus through which it replicates itself. The proteins that repair cellular damage become trapped in these centers and are therefore unable to stop the virus's destruction. To test this theory, they exposed the virus to ultraviolet irradiation, which damaged the DNA of both the cell and the virus. One day later, the researchers found that while the virus had repaired itself, the cell remained damaged. The damaged cells could ultimately lead to the fetus being infected.

For now, researchers still don't know what parts of the virus are responsible for preventing cellular repair, and note that it will require further study. They emphasize that HCMV is entirely preventable and urge people to wash their hands well and to use gloves in unsanitary situations.

It would be very unfortunate to have a baby with a birth defect as a result of such a virus. Birth defects such as mental retardation or cerebral palsy mean a lifetime of medical bills, which can quickly steep a family in debt. If that were your situation, would you have recourse against the source of the virus through litigation, which could lead to a monetary award? You might, though it would likely be difficult. First, you would have to determine that the birth defect was actually the result of the virus. Unfortunately, there are many different potential causes of birth defects, including environmental toxins, genetics, and lifestyle. Even if you did determine that the virus, and nothing else, caused the birth defect, you would have to determine how it was caused. If it was transferred sexually and you had few partners, you might be able to determine the source. However, if it was transferred through contact with someone else's saliva or urine, you could potentially have thousands of sources and no ability to narrow it down. In all likelihood, you would not be able to get monetary relief if you sued the potential source of the virus because you would not be able to meet your burden of proof.

Continue reading "Researchers Are a Step Closer to Determining How the Human Cytomegalovirus Causes Birth Defects" »

In Canada, the Supreme Court has certified a class for a class-action lawsuit against UK company GlaxoSmithKline, the manufacturer of Paxil. While in the United States, there have already been more than one class-action lawsuit against Paxil, this would be the first class-action lawsuit against any antidepressant manufacturer in Canada involving birth defects.

The class-action suit began with the case of one individual, Faith Gibson of British Columbia, whose daughter was born with a hole in her heart in 2005. Gibson was prescribed Paxil by her physician in 2002 and took it throughout the duration of her pregnancy. In 2005, GlaxoSmithKline informed Health Canada, Canadian physicians, and other relevant parties of a study of 3,581 women that found double the risk of birth defects for women exposed to generic Paxil, paroxetine, compared to those who took other antidepressants. Although information about the risks of taking antidepressants during pregnancy was published two weeks after Gibson's daughter's birth, Gibson and other mothers in her position argue that GlaxoSmithKline knew, or should have been aware, of the risks before then. They argue that the company then failed to inform physicians in a timely manner about the risks. Gibson claims that had she known about the potential for birth defects, she would never have taken the antidepressant.

With the class certification, Gibson became what, in the United States, at least, is known as the "class representative." She will represent any person in Canada born to a woman who took Paxil while pregnant, as well as the mothers of those persons.

A class-action lawsuit is often an important way to not only help affected individuals get relief, but also to send a message to the offender that it cannot get away with such behavior. In the United States, a group is usually considered a "class" if it contains more than 40 people, while a group of more than one million has been, in other contexts, considered too large to be a class. The class is composed of "similarly situated" individuals, consisting of those who have claims that are "sufficiently alike" that they can be grouped together. The class must be certified by a court before any class-action lawsuit can proceed. From there, the lawsuit mainly follows the same guidelines as an individual lawsuit. This includes the type of relief given -- just as an individual may receive a monetary award, a successful class typically receives a "common fund," or one giant award out of which the individual claims are paid.

If your child has a birth defect that you believe could be due to your taking Paxil while pregnant, you don't need to join a class-action lawsuit to get relief -- you can simply file an individual lawsuit. It would require you to hire your own lawyer and make your own case, but you might get an outcome more tailored to your specific situation.

Continue reading "Canadian Supreme Court Certifies Class For First Class-Action Lawsuit Against Paxil Involving Birth Defects" »

This blog has discussed the potential risks posed to pregnant women by certain antidepressant medication. Those who take antidepressants, especially during the first trimester of pregnancy, have a higher risk of having a baby with a birth defect. Pregnant women with depression would be wise to talk to their doctors about how to proceed. However, as a recent review demonstrates, finding the right approach is not always easy.

In a review of over 100 studies published in the journal Human Reproduction, researchers from Tufts University School of Medicine and Boston IVF found that there was no conclusive evidence that taking antidepressant medication led to better birth outcomes than not taking the medication. In fact, many women with mild depression tended to avoid selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) such as Celexa, Paxil, and Prozac. At the same time, many doctors are reluctant to take any woman with depression off of antidepressants, believing that it is better for the fetus to be exposed to the effects of antidepressants than to higher stress hormones and other physiological problems the woman could have without the medication.

However, the researchers and many experts note that while there is no evidence connecting depression to problems with delivery or birth defects, there is evidence connecting antidepressants to these problems. For instance, for those who take the medication while pregnant, the rate of miscarriage increases from 8% to 12 to 16%. Moreover, women who take medication while pregnant double their risk of having their babies prematurely, which can lead to health and developmental problems. Finally, the effects of antidepressants could be found in many newborns' behavior. One third of newborns exposed to antidepressants in the womb developed "newborn behavioral system," which consisted of jitters, difficulties with feeding, and ceaseless crying. Researchers note that this condition is rare in babies who have not been exposed to antidepressants. While it clears up after a short time, it is unknown whether the condition leads to long-term effects, though animal studies suggest that it can change brain chemistry.

Researchers also note that it is mainly women with mild to moderate depression who do not show any major benefit from staying on antidepressants. It is not necessarily the case for women with severe depression.

It is a situation that deserves a lot of careful consideration. If you are pregnant and have concerns about whether to stay on your antidepressant medications, you should talk to your doctor and determine whether your depression is mild enough to permit a break from antidepressants if you so chose. In any event, your physician has a responsibility to discuss all possible risks and benefits so that you can make an informed decision. If he or she fails to do so, and you have a child with a birth defect as a result of your taking antidepressants while pregnant, you would have grounds to sue your physician for medical malpractice.

Continue reading "Researchers Find That For Women With Mild to Moderate Depression, Not Taking Antidepressants During Pregnancy May Provide the Best Outcome" »

In past posts, this blog has discussed at length the health problems posed by a practice known as "mountaintop removal mining," or just "mountaintop mining." Performed by coal and mineral mining companies throughout several Appalachian states, it involves stripping the top soil on mountains in order to get to the coal or minerals underneath. The top soil is then often dumped in nearby waterways, with the result being that toxic metals, most notably mercury, seep into the air and water, leading to serious health problems in the surrounding communities, as well as birth defects.

Until recently, those who tried to resist mountaintop removal mining faced an uphill battle. While public opinion appeared to be against the practice, there were state politicians who would defend it as "necessary" for the one of the state's most important industries. Yet now, it appears that Patriot Coal will become the first major mining company to stop the mountaintop removal mining practice, thanks to an agreement made with three environmental groups. The deal came after the three groups sued Patriot Coal over its water pollution in several West Virginia mining locations. The coal mining company agreed to phase out and eventually cease all mountaintop removal mining in central Appalachia. The deal would allow Patriot Coal, which is currently going through Chapter 11 bankruptcy, to postpone $27 million in expenses. This would increase the likelihood of the company emerging from bankruptcy intact.

The agreement places a cap on the amount of coal that Patriot Coal can mine through the strip mining method, from 6.5 million tons in 2014 to 5 million tons in 2017. The company will also immediately retire equipment used for the removal process and will eventually put into place selenium treatment systems at several of its mines. Selenium is an element that at high levels can be toxic to humans, causing damage to the kidneys, liver, and central nervous system.

The environmental groups involved in the agreement have hailed the deal as "historic." It remains to be seen if Patriot Coal's actions will become a model for the industry, but at the very least, it promises to make some difference for the health of the surrounding community. The agreement also highlights the good that can come from filing lawsuits against toxic offenders. In this case, environmental groups sued the coal company, rather than individuals effected, but if your child has a birth defect that you think is the result of mountaintop removal mining, you could file an individual lawsuit. You would most likely accuse the company of acting negligently, of not following reasonable safety standards, leading to your exposure to the harmful toxins while pregnant. The resulting damage would be your child's birth defect. Since you would likely not be the only member of the community suffering from the harmful effects of mountaintop removal mining, you could potentially become part of a class action lawsuit.

Continue reading "Patriot Coal Becomes the First Mining Company to Agree to Phase Out Mountaintop Removal Mining" »

In the past, this blog has discussed the health risks posed by beauty salon treatments, including a hairstyle known as the "Brazilian Blowout." These types of beauty treatments often involve using harmful toxins in a poorly ventilated space. While this can be dangerous for customers, it is especially dangerous for beauty salon workers who are repeatedly exposed to these treatments. Yet there are few regulatory safeguards in place to protect workers from their effects.

The Brazilian Blowout, in particular, has been linked to health problems and birth defects. It involves using formaldehyde, a known carcinogen that can cause nose and throat cancers and leukemia. Salon workers who have administered the treatment have complained of feeling nauseous and of suffering from burning eyes and a sore throat after repeated exposure to the chemicals. Yet there is no federal law requiring cosmetics companies to disclose the toxic chemicals in their products or to receive prior approval before they go on the market. Nor does the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have the authority to recall the products if they are found to be harmful. Part of the reason may be because toxic chemical laws have not kept up with the times: the Safe Chemicals Act, the first major update to the 1976 Toxic Chemicals Act, is slowly working its way through Congress.

Some states, like California and New York, have been fighting back to enforce safety standards. For instance, California's attorney general won a $600,000 settlement against GIB, the manufacturer of Brazilian Blowout, for engaging in deceptive advertising practices. Individual stylists and their customers have also sued GIB, most recently reaching a $4 million settlement. Still, both are probably a drop in the bucket for GIB, given that as many as 100,000 customers have received the treatment from more than 15,000 stylists. Many stylists are reluctant to part with the treatment because customers may pay up to $350 at a time.

Nonetheless, they should be concerned about the treatment's effects on their long-term health, as well as other cosmetic treatments. If you are a salon worker and you have cancer or a child with a birth defect, you also have the option of filing a lawsuit against the cosmetic manufacturer if you suspect its product was responsible. You would file a product liability suit, arguing that the manufacturer had a duty to create as safe a product as was reasonably possible, but breached that duty by designing an unreasonably dangerous product. As a result of the breach, you were injured through exposure to the product's toxins. The result was either your child's birth defect or your health problems, or both. The manufacturer might try to argue that its efforts were reasonable, given the lack of government standards, but since various states and individuals have had successful suits, it is highly possible that this argument will not resonate.

Continue reading "Brazilian Blowout and Other Salon Treatments Continue to Harm Workers While Facing Little Government Oversight" »

A new study has identified two parts of the human genome associated with a birth defect known as nonsyndromic craniosynostosis, or premature closure of the plates of the skull. The study was conducted by an international group of doctors, including pediatricians, geneticists, epidemiologists, and surgeons.

Before birth and during the first couple of years, a child has bony plates in the skull that have not entirely fused together, leaving certain soft spots around the head. Should the bones fuse together too soon, the child's head will be abnormally shaped. If that occurs, the brain may suffer from compression, leading to neurological problems, learning difficulties, and visual problems. While 20% of craniosynostosis cases can be traced to genetics, most cases have no known genetic or other type of cause. Since nonsyndromatic craniosynostosis was the most common form of premature closure, researchers focused on potential causes for it specifically.

Researchers therefore conducted the first study involving scanning the entire genome of a group with craniosynostosis and comparing it to a group of people without the condition. They evaluated the DNA of children with the condition and determined that DNA changes affecting two proteins linked to skeletal development could be responsible. These two proteins were a factor regardless of the gender or ethnicity of the child.

Researchers are hopeful that discoveries such as this one could lead to early screening and prevention. They note that the causes of the genome abnormalities are not fully explained by genetics, and that environmental factors may also play a role. Some medical professionals claim that it may be caused by exposure in the womb to toxins like phenytoin, valproic acid, or other teratogens. As this blog recently noted, one community in New York is trying to determine whether the cause of some children's craniosynostosis could be toxins at a nearby manufacturing plant.

If your child has craniosynostosis and you believe the cause could be environmental toxins, you have the option of filing a toxic tort lawsuit against the party responsible for disposing of the toxins. You would argue that the party had a duty to dispose of dangerous toxins safely, but failed to do so, and ended up disposing of them in such a way that they contaminated the community. As a result of that party's negligence, you were injured through exposure to the toxins while pregnant. The damage you incurred was your child's birth defect. In order to make an effective case, you would need to have evidence that the cause of the craniosynostosis was not genetics, or another possible source. One way in which your case could be strengthened is if others in the area have children with similar conditions.

Continue reading "New Study Locates Two Parts of the Human Genome That Could Be Responsible For Premature Skull Closure" »

Yet more products that people use on a routine basis have been linked to a higher risk of cancer, obesity, and birth defects. In this case, the culprits are men's grooming products. A recent report by a Canadian environmental group, Environmental Defence, found that dangerous levels of toxins could be found in common products like deodorant, shaving cream, and aftershave.

Currently in Canada, the men's grooming industry is growing and is now worth $690 million. In the United States, the average man uses up to six grooming products per day, containing over 80 chemicals.

Environmental Defence conducted its study by testing 17 different products that had been recommended to them by men who had used them. The environmental group found that, of the 17, four held possible human carcinogens, five had chemicals that harmed reproductive health, and 10 had artificial musks linked to hormone disruption. Hormone disrupting toxins have been linked to a variety of health problems, from sperm damage to testicular cancer. This does not even include toxins that seeped into the products through processing.

Overall, the worst 10 toxins that Environmental Defence found in these products were: (1) triclosan, linked to endocrine disruption; (2) artificial musks, linked to hormone disruption; (3) parabens, linked to an increase of breast cancer; (4) dibutyl phthalates, linked to genital abnormalities and testicular cancer; (5) petrolatum, linked to skin irritation and may be linked to cancer; (6) formaldehyde releasing agents, a possible carcinogen linked to immune system toxicity; (7) sodium laureth sulphate, a possible carcinogen that may be linked to brain and nervous system disruption; (8) silicon chemicals, which may be carcinogenic and a reproductive toxin; (9) coal tar-derived colors, linked to cancer; and (10) BHA and BHT, which are possibly carcinogenic and are endocrine disrupters. Although available in Canada, these chemicals are restricted or banned in Europe.

While some of these chemicals (such as dibutyl phthalates) have been banned in the United States for certain products, most appear to still be used in a wide variety of products -- including, quite likely, men's grooming products.

Continue reading "Canadian Environmental Group Issues Report Showing Link Between Toxins in Men's Grooming Products and Health Problems, Including Birth Defects" »

A new study has found that 10% of children born with birth defects of the kidneys may have a certain genome linked to brain development delays and mental illness. Currently congenital kidney defects occur in one of every 200 births.

For the study, researchers at Columbia University Medical Center collaborated with other medical centers in the United States, Poland, Italy, Croatia, and the Czech Republic. They discovered a mutation known as "copy number variations," or extra copies or deletions of DNA large enough to contain several genes. When copy number variations are present, the amount of the genes impacted is either higher or lower than usual, which could result in health disorders. Conventional wisdom used to be that copy number variations caused only a small number of health problems, but since then, they have been discovered in a far wider range of disorders, from autism to Parkinson's disease.

In the study, researchers scanned the genomes of 522 people with deformed kidneys from the U.S. and Europe to see if copy number variations were present. They found that 17% carried copy number variations that appeared to account for the kidney disorder, while 10% carried variations that were linked to mental disorders. Researchers do not understand why there is a link between deformed kidneys and mental disorders, except that the same genes might have been responsible for both. Researchers hope that eventually, testing for genomic alternations will become a routine part of a clinical workup.

It is not clear what causes genome abnormalities, whether it is simply genetics or whether lifestyle or environmental factors could be a cause. However, some evidence suggests that DNA can be altered by outside factors, such as repeated exposure to certain environmental toxins. For instance, bisphenol A (BPA) a chemical used for polycarbonate plastics, has been found to cause genetic damage in tests involving animals. Although many stores have removed containers with BPA, it is still used to line certain food containers.

If your child has a birth defect like deformed kidneys that you believe was the result of your exposure to toxins like BPA while pregnant, you might consider filing a toxic tort or product liability lawsuit against the offender. The problem with this is that toxins such as BPA are so prevalent. For years, they were in a wide variety of products, and no one knows exactly how much exposure is necessary to cause changes to DNA and impact the fetus. If you were to try to sue a manufacturer that used BPA in its product, you might have trouble determining exactly which manufacturer was responsible for your child's birth defect. If you do have clear evidence that one or more specific manufacturers were responsible, you could try to make the case that they should be held liable. However, in all likelihood, you will probably never know for certain.

Continue reading "New Study Finds Connection Between Genome That Causes Birth Defects in Kidneys and Mental Illness" »

Cerebral palsy is a challenging condition on the best of days, and those living with it may have to deal with alienation from their peers on top of other challenges. Fortunately for Hakam Daley, peer alienation is one challenge that he won't have to worry about, at least for now.

A high school student at St. Lucile West Centennial High School in Florida, Daley was recently crowned homecoming king. This occurred after Daley's friends secretly petitioned other high school seniors to nominate Daley for homecoming court. When Daley's name was announced, Daley chose to walk out onto the field with the help of his caregiver rather than use his wheelchair.

Growing up, Daley had far less to smile about: he was put up for adoption when he was young and has gone in and out of foster homes over the years. By selecting Daley for homecoming king, his friends wanted to give him an experience that "he would remember for the rest of his life."

Cerebral palsy is a condition that affects the body's brain and nervous system function. It is not a birth defect, but instead is caused by a specific brain injury, either while the baby is in utero (or is being delivered), or during the first year or two of the child's life, while the brain is still developing. Cerebral palsy can result in tight muscles and joints, leading to abnormal movements, an unsteady gait, and a lack of coordination. Those with cerebral palsy may also suffer from speaking, sight, and learning disabilities.

While many people like Hakam Daley manage to live full lives with cerebral palsy, the condition comes at a cost, both in terms of lifelong therapies and medical bills, and in terms of wages that the person is unable to earn due to the impairment. While the causes of brain injury may vary, it can often be linked to accidents during the child's birth -- such as if the child is left without oxygen for long periods of time in the birth canal.

Continue reading "High School Senior With Cerebral Palsy Crowned Homecoming King" »

A new study has found that both adults and children are exposed to an alarming amount of toxins through their food. The study measured the level of exposure by determining which foods had high levels of toxins and how much people typically consumed. Researchers discovered that family members, especially children of preschool age, were at high risk of exposure to toxins such as arsenic, dioxins, dieldrin, and acrylamide. Such toxins can increase one's risk of developing cancer, disabilities, and of having children with birth defects.

To assess the risk of toxic foods, researchers from the University of California at San Diego and U.C.L.A. compared toxic consumption to established benchmarks for amounts that presented a cancer risk and amounts that did not present a risk. They used information from the 2007 Study of Use of Products and Exposure-Related Behavior to help reach their conclusions. The 2007 Study looked at California families with children between the ages of two and five to determine how the different factors of their environment resulted in toxic exposure. The 2007 Study specifically looked at 44 foods known to have the highest concentration of toxic compounds.

In the current study, it turned out that every one of the children involved -- 364 children total, including 207 between the ages of two and seven years old -- exceeded the benchmarks for cancer risks with regard to the toxins cited above. Nearly all of the preschool children (95%) also exceeded the benchmarks for non-cancer risks for acrylamide, which is a byproduct found in manufactured foods such as potato chips. Overall, the foods most likely to present a risk were agricultural products such as tomatoes, peaches, peppers, spinach, and celery, which contained high pesticide use.

Researchers were especially concerned about young children's exposure to toxins because even mild amounts can harm development. While food processing may account for some of the toxins, others may seep in that have nothing to do with the way the food is made or processed. Researchers must determine the sources of these toxins. Until then, they urge families to try and adopt a varied diet, and especially avoid too much meat and dairy, in order to prevent toxin overexposure.

The situation presents an interesting dilemma for a family dealing with cancer, or who has a child with a birth defect. It might be possible to blame the health problem on food manufacturing, but if so, it could be very difficult to pinpoint the exact foods or sources. Even if you were able to identify them, could you know for certain whether the manufacturer was responsible for the toxins? If as the study shows, the toxins might not be a part of the growth or processing, then the manufacturer might not be to blame for the toxins seeping in. In which case, if you planned to sue for product liability or toxic tort, you would need to determine the actual cause and take appropriate action against that source.

Continue reading "New Study Finds That Families Are Exposed to High Levels of Toxins in Their Food" »

A mother from a town in upstate New York will ask the state's Department of Health to conduct a study on birth defects that may be associated with pollutants dumped at a nearby manufacturing plant. Carol J. Molinari's two sons both suffer from skull and brain deformities, where the skull closed too quickly to permit brain growth. Ms. Molinari believes their condition may be related to the pollutants at the plant, which ended up in a nearby creek and other waterways.

Ms. Molinari was one of roughly 80 people to attend a community meeting with state Department of Environmental Conservation and Health officials to discuss the issue. The Department of Health official agreed to take Ms. Molinari's concerns to a committee in Albany, which would determine whether a study was necessary. If so, the study would also look at the occurrence of cancer and low birth rates over the past several years. It would likely require between 1.5 and two years to complete. At present, while state officials acknowledge finding chemicals on-site at the plant in 2008, they state that it was not enough to be harmful to residents. The plant has been under surveillance since that time.

Ms. Molinari claims that her situation is not unique: four other children who live within a mile of the manufacturing plant suffer from skull development problems as well. Only recently did the families begin to meet and compare stories. They had testing done to ensure that the problems were not genetic. The families suspect that levels of trichloroethylene (TCE) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB), both carcinogens, could be the source of the problem. Unacceptable levels of TCE were found in four buildings on-site in 2008.

In a situation where a study finds a connection between toxins and birth defects and other health problems in a surrounding community, an affected citizen's next step would likely be to file a toxic tort lawsuit against the plant's owner or former owner. The plaintiff would argue that the plant had a duty to the surrounding community to operate safely, which included disposing of toxins responsibly. The plant breached that duty by disposing of the toxins in such a way as to allow it to leak into the water supply. As a result of the breach, the plaintiff was injured through exposure to the toxins, and the results were her children's birth defects. If enough people were harmed by the toxins, the plaintiff might be able to form a class-action lawsuit. A "class" is normally considered large enough if it has at least 40 members.

Continue reading "New York Department of Health to Determine Whether Manufacturing Site Toxins Could Be the Source of Local Birth Defects" »

Across the country, the health effects of hydraulic fracturing, more commonly known as "fracking," have become a growing concern. Hydraulic fracturing is a process intended to extract oil and natural gas from deep within the earth. The process involves pumping fluid into the well to create pressure on the rock until the rock gives way and the oil or gas is released. While most of the fluid pumped into the well consists of water, about 3% is composed of chemicals. Environmentalists claim that that 3% is enough to contaminate the surrounding groundwater, which is usually used by nearby communities.

In Pennsylvania, state environmental protection officials have been accused of not acting swiftly enough after seven nearby residents conducted tests on drinking water from a well near a hydraulic fracturing site. The tests revealed that the residents' blood contained traces of arsenic, toluene, and benzene. Such chemicals have been linked to liver, kidney, and brain damage, as well as cancer. Toxins like arsenic have also been traced to birth defects. The residents have moved forward with a lawsuit against the owners of the hydraulic fracturing site.

Meanwhile, in California, Earth Justice sued the Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources for failing to evaluate the risks of hydraulic fracturing before permitting more than 600 wells to operate last year. Although the Department of Conservation has hosted workshops to discuss regulations of hydraulic fracturing, they are not expected to be finalized until the middle of 2013.

And in Washington, D.C., environmental groups have asked the Environmental Protection Agency to require oil and gas companies to receive the same oversight as other energy industry sectors.

While all of these efforts to hold polluters accountable are encouraging, it will take a long while before the contaminants from hydraulic fracturing wells are identified and cleaned up -- if ever. That is small comfort to anyone who might have been exposed to the contaminated drinking water and suffered health effects, or had a child with a birth defect.

Continue reading "As Hydraulic Fracturing Activity Increases, Criticism of Its Harmful Effects on Human Health Grows" »

In a new study from Case Western Reserve University, researchers found a way to produce three-dimensional maps of circulating blood and its effect on the developing heart. Researchers hope that this could help them understand what causes birth defects of the heart.

The new technology is meant to determine how certain factors affect heart development, such as the mother's alcohol or drug consumption, or other factors, genetic or environmental. Researchers believe that changes in heart development are linked to what is called "shear stress," where passing blood cells drag on cells that line the developing heart, but are unsure how the link occurs.

In addition to using a three-dimensional model to study this phenomenon, researchers also add the dimension of time, allowing them to make movies of the blood flow to the heart during a "shear stress" episode. The researchers intend to take images of the heart at the first two days, then three days, then finally eight days, when the wall between the left and right sections of the heart have formed. The team of researchers will be testing the reaction of a quail heart to alcohol and to antidepressants known as select serotonin receptor inhibitors (SSRIs). The researchers hope that if they can screen a fetus for abnormal formation of the heart, they can develop intervention strategies that could possibly repair the heart before the baby is born. One such technique could include flashing an infrared light at the heart to make it contract so that defects can be prevented or repaired.

While heart defects can be the result of the mother or father's personal choices -- such as consuming alcohol, certain foods, or illegal drugs, it is also possible that heart defects are caused by factors completely beyond the parents' control or beyond the parents' knowledge. For instance, as noted above, one contributing factor to heart defects is antidepressant medication. It is unlikely when a pregnant woman takes antidepressants that she is aware of the damage they can do to her fetus, especially if she takes them during a certain trimester. That is why it is up to her physician, the one who prescribes the antidepressants, to inform her of all of the risks before prescribing them to her. A physician has a duty to inform the patient of all possible dangers so that the patient can make a responsible choice. If a physician prescribes the antidepressants knowing that the woman is or could become pregnant, and the baby is later born with a heart defect, the woman might be able to sue successfully for medical malpractice. The woman could argue that if she had been properly informed, she never would have taken antidepressants, or at least that specific class of antidepressants. As a result of the physician's failure to inform, the woman was "injured" and the result was her child's birth defect.

Continue reading "Researchers to Study Fetal Heart Development in Hope of Finding Treatment For Heart Defects" »

In the past, this blog has often discussed new findings that show that pregnant women who take certain antidepressants are at greater risk of having children with birth defects. Now a new study has come out that provides more evidence of the dangers of antidepressant use.

The study, which was published in Human Research online, finds that those who take selective seretonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) while pregnant are at a greater risk of miscarriage, preeclampsia, having children prematurely, or having children with autism. The class of SSRIs includes well-known brands such as Paxil, Prozac, Zoloft, and Celexa. At present, up to 13% of women are believed to take antidepressants, and use of the medication is most frequent among those between the ages of 18 and 44.

The study also found that Paxil use during pregnancy was linked to an increased risk of fetal heart defects. Paxil has been classified by the Food and Drug Administration as a Pregnancy Category D drug since 2005 -- meaning that studies have shown potential risks to the fetus, but that the risks may be outweighed by the benefits. Yet the study's senior author noted that while the results showed clear dangers to those who used Paxil and other SSRIs, it did not show that there was a benefit for women with mild to medium depression.

Not everyone agreed with the study's conclusions. Dr. Currier at the University of Miami argues that there is no specific evidence linking antidepressant use to miscarriage or a higher rate of preeclampsia, although there is some evidence of a connection to low birth weight. The study's authors cautioned that this study was not intended to discourage women with severe depression from taking antidepressants.

The study's results illustrate why it is important for women with depression who are thinking about becoming pregnant to have a serious discussion with their physicians. A physician has duty to each patient to inform him or her of all of the risks of a potential medication, so that the patient can make a responsible decision as to whether to take the medication. If you were prescribed Paxil or another SSRI while pregnant and had a child with a birth defect, you may be able to successfully sue your physician for medical malpractice. You would need to prove that your physician failed to warn you about the dangers of taking that medication, even though the information was within reasonable access. Therefore, your physician breached his or her duty to you, and as a result, you were injured and the damage was your child's birth defect.

Continue reading "New Study Provides More Evidence That Certain Antidepressants Increase the Risk of Miscarriage and Birth Defects" »