Patient sues Twin Cities clinic for role in meningitis outbreak

  • Article by: Maura Lerner , Star Tribune
  • Updated: March 19, 2013 - 5:39 AM

A Brooklyn Park woman is still being treated for aftereffects of receiving tainted-steroid shots.

  • 5
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
  • 1 - 5 of 5
rlmcconnMar. 19, 13 7:31 AM

Which other Minnesota clinic bought the drugs? Has it been sued?

3
0
k3k30sMar. 19, 13 8:09 AM

I'm sympathetic to Ms Maccoux's health problems. But the health clinic has to be able to trust their medical suppliers and MAPS did not knowingly purchase tainted injections as did no other clinic in the 20 states NECC sold it to. Unfortunately for Ms. Maccoux, this suit is against the wrong defendant and NECC, who should be the defendent, is bankrupt.

11
6
grandmajMar. 19, 13 2:26 PM

This was not the only place this drug was available. If you had checked all clinics in MN involved when recalled, there were many, many throughout the state of MN as well as other states. Unfortunately, the base clinic of compounding is who she should sue. Not sure of her recourse. All as K3K30S states.

3
0
jee7654Mar. 19, 13 7:40 PM

I would agree with the other comments about the clinic's liability if they had bought the drugs from a licensed and inspected facility. A patient does not have the resources to verify the history of every medical device and compound they are exposed to when they are treated. The clinic could not afford to provide access to their records to every patient. A patient should be able to assume their medical providers have done their due diligence for all of their supplies. This clinic failed in that regard and should be held liable for the consequences. It is very disconcerting how many clinics failed to have proper procedures in place to protect against this kind of problem.

0
1
mnmaggiemnMar. 20, 13 8:47 AM

I have mixed feelings. The lab WAS NOT licensed to deal like this so NO the clinics should not have bought from them. It is just as much the clinic's job to assure they are purchasing legally as it is the Lab to assure the medication is safe. Yes lab should be held liable above all but we can see where that would go. No I dont believe MAPS or any other clinic would intentionally infect their patients but they should have purchased from a company that was properly licensed, which is easy to do, its law that the company presents its license if asked or a simple search with the whoever does the licensing would have worked. I dont think MAPS should technically be sued but they did act in a negligent way when they cut corners and purchased from an imporperly licensed company (there are reasons for licensing laws).

1
0
  • 1 - 5 of 5

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

question of the day

Poll: Should baseball expand instant replay?

Weekly Question

ADVERTISEMENT

Offers & Events

Showcase MN for chance to WIN

Showcase MN for chance to WIN

Mix a video with our footage to get a chance at a $1,000 vacation gift card

Start on your mix now.


ADVERTISEMENT