Class Action Commenced against Toronto Psychiatrist for Over-prescribing Narcotics

From: http://psychiatrybuster.wordpress.com/2008/09/11/class-action-commenced-against-toronto-psychiatrist-for-over-prescribing-narcotics/

 

Class action commenced against Toronto Psychiatrist for Over-prescribing Narcotics

 

From: “angela bischoff” <greenspi@web.ca>

Date: September 10, 2008 10:09:30 PM EDT (CA)

To: can-survive@lists.riseup.net

Subject: [can-survive] Class Action Commenced against Toronto Psychiatrist for Over-prescribing Narcotics

Reply-To: can-survive@lists.riseup.net

 

Class Action Commenced against Toronto Psychiatrist for Over-prescribing Narcotics

TORONTO, Sept. 10 /CNW/ -

On August 12, 2008, the law firm of Rochon Genova LLP issued a class proceeding against Dr. Eddie Kingstone, a Toronto psychiatrist. The claim alleges that between 1996 and 2006, Dr. Kingstone negligently prescribed his patients medications including narcotics, benzodiazepines, and anti-psychotics in combinations and dosages which he knew or ought to have known would lead to drug dependency and addiction.

The claim has been filed with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Toronto.

The proposed Representative Plaintiff, Dianne Moore, was a successful account executive for a major corporation prior to becoming a patient of Dr. Kingstone. Ms. Moore alleges that after she became a patient of Dr. Kingstone, he treated her with medications, including narcotics, benzodiazepines, and anti-psychotics. As a result of Dr. Kingstone’s treatment, Ms. Moore alleges that she developed a serious and life-threatening drug dependency and addiction to those medications.

Ms. Moore brings this action on her behalf and on behalf of all other patients of Dr. Kingstone for whom he prescribed various medications, including narcotics between 1996 and 2006.

Ms. Moore said, “This lawsuit will hopefully help several hundred

patients regain some part of their lives which they lost to drug dependency and addiction. I hope this will be a message to Dr. Kingstone and other doctors about the dangers of over-prescribing these medications and the harmful effects on their patients.”

Susan M. Vella and Patricia A. LeFebour of Rochon Genova LLP are lead counsel for the Plaintiff in this proposed class proceeding. Ms. Vella stated,

“Through the courage of Ms. Moore, we are hopeful that other patients of Dr. Kingstone will come forward to be a part of this class proceeding.

Addiction and drug dependency are terrible hurdles for these patients to overcome. A class action is the most effective way for these patients to obtain access to justice in reclaiming their lives and to alter the behaviour of physicians who prescribe these medications.”

In 2006, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario found that Dr. Kingstone committed acts of professional misconduct in relation to his prescribing of narcotics, and controlled drugs and substances to 23 patients.

The allegations raised in the claim have not yet been proven in court.

The plaintiff and the prospective class members are represented by the Toronto based law firm of Rochon Genova LLP.

For further information: Rochon Genova LLP, 121 Richmond St. W, Suite 900, Toronto, Ontario, M5H 2K1, Telephone: (416) 363-1867 or toll-free:

1-866-881-2292, Website address: www.rochongenova.com

PsychRights Stands Up For Kids in Alaska

From:http://uniteforlife.wordpress.com/2008/09/10/psychrights-stands-up-for-kids-in-alaska/

PsychRights Stands Up For Kids in Alaska

On Sept. 2, 2008, Psych Rights Law Project, headed by Jim Gottstein, Esq, filed an important, potentially landmark lawsuit against the State of Alaska to Stop the massive use of harmful brain-altering psychiatric drugs on Alaskan children.   

The suit seeks Declaratory and Injunctive Relief for the administration of psychotropic medication to children and youth in the custody of, or paid for by, the State of Alaska.

See this link. 

The suit lays out the scientific evidence of harm produced by psychotropic drugs in children. The documented evidence about these drugs’ hazards has been collated by Critical Risk Rx, a curriculum for mental health professionals designed by Dr. David Cohen, Professor at Florida International University–who is an officer of the Alliance of Human Research Protection (AHRP). 

The purpose of Critical Risk Rx is to promote critical thinking skills about psychiatric medication issues. http://www.criticalthinkrx.org/ CriticalThinkRx offers an alternative perspective to the drugging of children based on empirical evidence. Its goal is to stimulate “critical thinking” and a more balanced evaluation of the “prescription situation”
based on ethical codes of practice of medical and non-medical helping professions. The curriculum aims to sharpen critical skills of mental health and child welfare professionals assessing and practicing with children and adolescents who may be medicated with psychiatric drugs. 

Two days later, on Sept. 4, federal Judge Jack Weinstein reiterated his July
statement:

“There is sufficient evidence of fraud” by Lilly in selling the drug to justify a jury trial in a 294-page decision.

Indeed, tens of thousands of Zyprexa users, investors and third-party payors filed suits, including: 30,000 personal injury claims; civil and criminal cases filed by attorneys general. A securities class action recently dismissed as time barred by Weinstein; and the present class action, initiated on behalf of tens of thousands of insurers and unions. 

In his latest ruling, Judge Weinstein gave class-action status to a case brought by insurance companies, pension funds and unions that seek billions of dollars from Lilly for overpayment for the drug. The judge certified the case as a class action on the RICO claims for all plaintiffs except individual patients who bought the drug, rejecting Lilly arguments that the pension funds, union and insurance companies had claims too different to be tried together. These plaintiffs, so-called “third-party payors,” bought the drug for members or customers.

Furthermore, Judge Weinstein ordered Eli Lilly’s Zyprexa documents to be unsealed and made publicly available, stating: 

“Lilly’s legitimate interest in confidentiality does not outweigh the public interest in disclosure at this stage…the health of hundreds of thousands of people, fundamental questions about our system of approval and monitoring of pharmaceutical products, and the funding for many health and insurance benefit plans.”

Until the unsealing of these documents, AHRP board members, Dr. David Cohen (Secretary) and Vera Sharav (President) were enjoined by Judge Weinstein from disseminating the Zyprexa documents. On August 20, 2008, Attorney, Alan Millstein filed an order on behalf of Dr. Cohen and Mrs. Sharav, requesting a Hearing on the Motion of the Alliance for Human Research Protection requesting publication of a limited number of confidential documents.

Fifteen law firms are involved, contending that Lilly hid the side effects of Zyprexa and marketed it for unapproved uses. 

The 350 sealed Zyprexa documents are significant in providing (partial) evidence of the company’s illegal marketing tactics. The documents show that Lilly promoted a drug they knew was toxic—-their experts warned about its toxic effects, in particular Zyprexa’s propensity to induce acute weight gain triggering metabolic syndrome and diabetes. Yet, the company embarked on an aggressive marketing campaign–Viva Zyprexa–for off-label unapproved uses of the drug. 

However, Judge Weinstein immediately stayed the unsealing order to give Lilly a chance to appeal it. 

The count so far, in State lawsuits against Eli Lilly charging the company with illegal marketing of Zyprexa (olanzapine) is 11:

Alaska, Connecticut, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico,
Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Utah and West Virginia.

6 State suits have been filed against Johnson & Johnson/ Jansen over marketing of Risperdal (risperidone): 

Arkansas, Louisiana, Montana, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Texas 

4 State suits against AstraZeneca over the marketing of Seroquel
(quetiapine): 

Arkansas, Montana, Pennsylvania, South Carolina 

Contact: Vera Hassner Sharav
veracare@ahrp.org
212-595-8974

Antipsychotics & Kids: States Are Cracking Down

27,500 Signatures Against TeenScreen. Petition:

http://www.petitiononline.com/TScreen/petition.html

http://www.petitiononline.com/TScreen/petition.html   

Video:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfU9puZQKBY <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfU9puZQKBY

You can make comments here: http://tinyurl.com/Antipsychotics-Kids-States

Pharmalot
Antipsychotics & Kids: States Are Cracking Down
By Ed Silverman
September 10, 2008

Chief medical officer of Washington state’s Medicaid program
Over the past few years, atypical antipsychotics have been eating up a growing portion of state Medicaid budgets, from 4.5 percent in Arizona to 13.3 percent in Massachusetts. Several states, in fact, have sued one or more drugmakers for allegedly withholding side effect info or improperly promoting their meds, prompting Medicaid overpayments. However, the fastest growth is prescribing for children, sometimes for uses not approved by the FDA, such as ADHD. Jeffery Thompson, the chief medical officer of Washington state’s Medicaid program, is heading a consortion of 15 state Medical medical directors, who plan to issue a report early next year that examines prescribing trends, dosing, and demographics, among other things. We spoke about the issue…

Pharmalot: So why are you looking into this? Why is this an issue?
Thompson: The number one drug class in expenditures is atypical anti-pyschotics in almost every state. And the fastest-growing utilization is for both on and off label use in children. And as part of our jobs, we have a special relationship with foster care children, for instance, which means we should pay particular attention as prescribers use these to treat the children We also know there is wide variation within states and across states among utilization in kids, and we believe we should understand why that is.

Pharmalot: What, specifically, is your group examining?
Thompson: There’s a rapidly evolving constellation of diagnoses these drugs are being used for that are constantly evolving, with and without evidence or FDA labeling. And when there’s both limited evidence and labeling, it’s something we need to look at. For example, at what age can you diagnose somebody with bipolar disorder? Is it three years old? Seven years old? 12 years old? 18? There’s some evidence that it’s happening at all of those ages. But when is it appropriate to add an antipsychotic in addtion to a stimulant for treating ADHD in a child? And with off-label use, should there be an upper limit of dose by certain ages? Another question is when is it appropriate, or not safe, to combine multiple drugs when treating a child? We have some children who are on one, two, three or four at any one time. We see children being prescribed three to five times the FDA-approved adult dosages. So we’re looking at whether the trend indicates what I refer to as too young, too much or too many.

Pharmalot: How did the effort get started? And why aren’t more states involved?
Thompson: Last june, Washington state Medicaid convened a meeting of Medicaid medical directors, which is a nationwide group, to discuss integration of medical and mental health. And I posed a project where we would all look at utilization of kids getting antipsychotics. So we’re now actively pulling data. There directors representing.25 to 30 states at last year’s meeting and 42 states are in the network. Some states are examining data on their own, but all can share the results.

Pharmalot: Beyond compiling numbers, what do you hope to accomplish?
Thompson: We want to define our best practices and improve antipsychotic prescrbiing to children. In Texas, they’re working with their psychiatric community on algorithms, for instance. In many states, Eli Lilly works with state programs to provide report cards. Other states have specific guidelines. But we need to share what is being done in order to develop what can be considered a best practice, and then look at any additional steps, such as further clarification of state programs or gathering other data from state databases based on our findings. And we eventually hope to publish a paper.

Pharmalot: With so many states suing these drugmakers and the point made about budget dollars being spent, it sounds like this just as much about saving money, yes?
Thompson: I would say this project is not designed to save money. It’s designed to improve the health and safety of our children. If you look at our data dictionary, cost has a deminimus amount of activity in this project. It’s actually one very small component of the data we’re looking at. Most data we’re pulling relates to safety. Again, our primary hope is to improve health and safety of prescribing the drugs to children and reduce unneeded variation in care.

Pharmalot: To what extent is the pharmaceutical industry involved?
Thompson: Well, I mentioned earlier that some states have arrangements with Lilly to monitor prescribing trends. But the effort is independent of the industry. The Agency for Health Care Research and Quality is underwriting the project. We have the sanction and approval of state medicaid directors and state mental health directors, and these groups are actually doing the work, along with researchers at Rutgers University. I know my own state, the state of Washington, has invited pharmaceutical companies to meet with our mental health network group at all times to ensure there is appropriate use of medications. Apart from that, any findings from the study will be shared with the industry.