Texas family petitions for upgraded 911 systems after hotel death

ALBANY, GA- Last month an East Texas family suffered the loss of a young mother, Kari Hunt Dunn. She was stabbed multiple times in a hotel room where she was staying with her family, her 9 year old daughter tried calling 911 for help but couldn't get through. She tried several times but heard nothing but static, she had no idea she had to dial a prefix before making the call from the hotel phone.

"We spend a lot of time doing that and we know 911 and young children just typically know 911 and they expect to hear a voice on the other end," Albany-Dougherty Emergency Management Agency representative Jim Vault said.

That's why the Hunt family is striving to get support for an online petition that would require every single hotel and business to upgrade their 911 systems and get rid of the dial out number. So far, over 400,000 people are have signed for the change called "Kari's Law," in honor of the mother's life who was lost.

"It impacts a larger number across the nation and again with any public safety time is essence," Albany-Dougherty EMS Training Supervisor Richard Roberts shares. "It can make the big difference whether it's EMS, law or fire."

Vault explains, "If they have to dial a prefix to get out then it can become confusing and time delaying and they never get the call through."

In the Albany-Dougherty area, the enhanced 911 system is in place, it gives location and number to which the caller is calling from and the prefix is also not a requirement. However, some cities and their businesses still require the dial out before. Emergency officials feel it's an important issue that sometimes falls under the radar.

"For us it would be much better if 911 means 911," Vault said.

The Hunt family hopes the requirement will help those in need get help faster.

_____________________________________________
Source: WALB (Rosales, 1/13)

Texas Court Holds Employer Not Liable for Employee’s Death Due to Driving While Intoxicated

A Texas state appeals court has ruled employers are not required to protect their intoxicated employees from injury or death, provided the employer played no role in the employee’s intoxication.  Clark v. EOG Resources Inc., 12-CV-00262 (Tex. App. Houston 1st Dist. Jan. 7, 2014).

Robbie Lynn Clark, an employee of a contractor for EOG Resources, Inc., was killed in a fatal car crash while driving a Company truck back to work after his lunch break.  Toxicology reports indicated Clark was intoxicated, with a blood alcohol reading of over 4 times the legal limit.   Following the accident, Clark’s family sued EOG for negligence and wrongful death, claiming EOG failed to enforce its policy prohibiting drinking while on the job and negligently failed to investigate whether Clark had a history of driving while intoxicated before allowing him to drive a Company vehicle.

Clark, who had a long history of driving while intoxicated, was hired by a contractor for EOG two weeks after he was released from prison for his fourth DWI conviction.  He submitted a driving record report with his application, but the report (which was labeled as “for insurance purposes only”) only included three years of driving history.  As Clark’s most recent DWI conviction was 6 years earlier, it did not show up on the report.

Six months after he began working with EOG, Clark was arrested again for driving while intoxicated and his license was suspended.  Clark failed to report the conviction to EOG, however, and continued to drive without a license.  He died ten months later.

The lawsuit alleged EOG had a duty to closely scrutinize Clark’s employment history before allowing him to drive a Company vehicle.  Had EOG done so, according to Clark’s family, it might have discovered  in Clark’s employment as a result of serving prison sentences for his DWI convictions.  The suit further alleged that EOG failed to adequately enforce its own policy prohibiting drinking on the job.

The trial court dismissed the case on a motion for summary judgment.  It found EOG did not have any control over Clark’s decision to drink and drive.  The appeals court affirmed.  Though the court recognized that Texas case law has found employers can be liable, under certain circumstances, to third parties injured in a car crash by an intoxicated employee, it found no such liability existed here.  Absent a showing that EOG knowingly exerted control over an intoxicated Clark or encouraged or required him to consume alcohol while at work, as an employer it did not “owe a duty to prevent [an] employee from injuring himself through his own intoxicated driving of a company vehicle during a lunch break.”

Source: National Law Review, "Texas Court Holds Employer Not Liable for Employee’s Death Due to Driving While Intoxicated," Kathryn J. Barry, January 12, 2014

Laser Hair Removal’s Risks

Her first two laser hair-removal sessions went smoothly, but the third ended with burning pain that persisted for weeks, a 26-year-old Brooklyn woman recalled. Then the marks appeared: long red stripes along the backs of her legs. Over the next few months, the stripes turned dark brown.

“It was horrifying,” said the woman, who asked not to be identified in order to preserve her privacy. “It wasn't something you would see on a normal person.”
Laser hair-removal procedures have become immensely popular in recent years. Nearly half a million such treatments were performed by dermatologic surgeons in 2011, the last year for which figures are available, according to the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery. But an unknown number of procedures are performed each year by nonphysicians who may have minimal training.

The treatments are not without risk. Performed improperly, they can cause disfiguring injuries and severe burns in sensitive areas, like the bikini line and the mustache area above the lips, and, rarely, even death.
The percentage of lawsuits over laser surgery that involved a nonphysician operator rose to 78 percent in 2011 from 36 percent in 2008, according to a study published in JAMA Dermatology in October. Laser hair removal was the most commonly performed procedure cited in the litigation. Another popular treatment, intense pulse light, is used to “rejuvenate” aging skin and get rid of wrinkles.

“Not a week goes by that I don’t see a complication from a laser,” said Dr. Tina Alster, founding director of the Washington Institute of Dermatologic Laser Surgery. She and other physicians worry about the proliferation of non-medical facilities like so-called medical spas that offer laser treatments and other cosmetic treatments but may not have licensed medical personnel on site.

“There’s a perception by the public that anybody can do this,” Dr. Alster said. “People need to remember, it’s not the laser doing the work, it’s the operator.”

In the case of the Brooklyn woman, the laser operator, who was not a doctor, scheduled repeat treatments of her legs four weeks apart instead of the 10 to 12 weeks for legs and the back recommended in a treatment protocol, according to her lawyer, Harry Rothenberg. She sued and reached a confidential settlement with the laser operator.

The licensing and training of laser hair-removal operators varies from state to state, resulting in a patchwork of rules and regulations, said Dr. Mathew M. Avram, director of the Massachusetts General Hospital Dermatology Laser and Cosmetic Center and an author of the new study.

In laser hair removal, pulses of light are used to destroy hair follicles. The treatment is considered to be the practice of medicine in some 35 states; however, nonmedical personnel who offer the treatment are required to have on-site medical supervision in only 26 states.

New York, Virginia and Georgia do not consider laser hair removal to be a medical treatment, and 11 states simply don’t have laws regulating it.

“It’s basically the Wild West of medicine,” Dr. Avram said. “Some states are legislating and protecting patients, but a great many are not. The average person walks into a spa and sees someone with a white coat on and may assume they’re a physician.”

Even doctor-owned facilities may not have one on the premises when procedures are being done, Dr. Avram said. And states that require medical supervision may not require training and licensing of laser operators; training often is left up to the manufacturers that sell the laser equipment.
But the operator makes critical assessments of an individual’s skin type and how far apart to schedule treatments, as well as other decisions. Among those with the greatest risk of complications are people with more natural pigment in their skin or those who are tan.

A laser operator with no medical training also may treat something that looks like a sun spot but is actually a skin cancer, obscuring the disease until it is much more advanced, Dr. Avram said.
Allan Share, president of the International Medical Spa Association, agrees that there is very little oversight of medical and day spas, and he urges consumers to do research before seeking treatment. “It’s always important for a consumer to do their own due diligence,” he said.

For those considering laser hair removal, here are some factors to consider:
Ask whether the facility is owned by a medical doctor and whether he or she is immediately available during procedures.

• Ask the provider to review your medical history.
• Ask what procedures are in place in case of an emergency.
• Ask who will actually perform the procedure.
• What licensing and training does the operator have?
• How many times has the operator performed laser hair removal?
• Has he or she done it on the part of the body that you want treated?
• Ask whether laser treatment is appropriate for your skin type, hair color, complexion and body area.

Suggest that the operator test a small patch of skin before you undergo the procedure. Consumers with conditions like diabetes, a difficulty with wound healing, or a tendency toward keloid scarring may be especially vulnerable to complications and should talk to a doctor before undergoing laser treatment.
If you experience pain or discoloration after a procedure, don’t wait — call your doctor right away.

Source: KDH News, "Copperas Cove girl dies in pedestrian-vehicle accident," Mason W. Canales, January 7, 2014

'If drinking before five is wrong, I don't want to be right': Tweet 'posted by DUI driver hours before he crashed into kindergarten teacher and her son' killing them both

A kindergarten teacher and her son were killed following a car crash on Friday evening with a suspect -- who was found wearing only a towel and a BAC of 0.27%.

The accident took place at about 11.15pm in Northwest Austin.

Peggy Howard, 60, was declared dead just before midnight, the channel adds. She was a kindergarten teacher at Steiner Ranch Elementary School.

Worried about late-night driving, she had earlier dropped off son Cale Howard, 18, at the movies with a friend and had just picked him up.

Howard, a senior at Vandegrift High School, later died at Round Rock Medical Center several hours after the accident, Four Points News reports.

The deadly accident involved three vehicles.

Nicholas Michael Justin Wyzycowski, 21, drove a Chevrolet Avalanche when he rear-ended the Toyota Prius with Peggy and Cale Howard inside, the channel reports. An official said both cars moved into oncoming traffic, hitting a nearby Toyota Camry.

Witnesses at the scene told police the person driving the Avalanche fled from the scene without checking on the other victims, KXAN reports. He is described as only wearing a towel at the time of the accident.

Wyzykowski, witnesses added, was reportedly driving between 80 and 100 miles per hour. He reportedly was 'uncooperative, indifferent and cocky' with the investigating officer and refused to take a sobriety test, KXAN reports.

Wyzykowski's blood alcohol content (BAC), taken for medical purposes, was 0.27% -- more than three times the legal limit in Texas. He faces 19 felony charges, including 2 counts of intoxication manslaughter.

Three female passengers in the Toyota Camry had broken bones, statesman.com reports. One woman had a broken neck and another had a broken back.

Howard's friend in the Prius was sitting in the backseat and survived the crash, but had a broken femur, Four Points News reports.

The accident has left friends of the victims stunned.

Jim Freid and wife April, whose daughters went to school with Cale Howard, pulled up Wyzykowski's Twitter page on Saturday. Wyzykowski's account has since been removed, but Freid saved the posts.

Eight hours before the crash, Wyzykowski allegedly tweeted 'If drinking before 5 is wrong, I don't want to be right.' Another tweet, posted around 9pm, said 'Swangin.'

'Devastation, just absolute sadness,' Steiner Ranch Principal Susan Fambrough told KVUE. 'Because how do you explain to a 5-year-old that their teacher is gone?'

In a letter published online, Fambrough said the school has 'a plan in place' for students when they return to school on January 6.

Counselors will also available for all Vandegrift High School students needing support, principal Charlie Little wrote in a separate letter published on Sunday. A student support event was held on Sunday at 2pm, as well.

______________________________________
Source: Daily Mail (Szathmary, 12/29)

Teen Who Killed Four People Got Off On Probation Because He's Rich

A 16-year-old boy who drunkenly killed four people got probation this week because the judge — with no apparent irony — agreed with the boy's defense that he was a victim of "affluenza," whose parents taught him wealth and privilege shield consequences. The teen had faced up to twenty years in prison.

Sixteen-year-old Ethan Couch admitted to four counts of manslaughter after he and seven other boys stole alcohol from Walmart, piled into his car and struck and killed four pedestrians while going 70 miles per hour in a 40 zone. One of his passengers remains in the hospital with severe brain damage, and nine other bystanders were also injured.

Couch's BAC was a .24 and he also had Valium in his system. According to reports, he was belligerent at the scene, at one point saying, "I'm outta here." Prosecutors were hoping to get up to 20 years.

Couch's defense was that he was a victim of his parents' wealth and privilege; in that he never had to face consequences, which an expert summarized prior to sentencing.

He said Couch got whatever he wanted. As an example, Miller said Couch's parents gave no punishment after police ticketed the then-15-year-old when he was found in a parked pickup with a passed out, undressed 14-year-old girl.

Miller also pointed out that Couch was allowed to drive at 13. He said the teen was emotionally flat and needed years of therapy. At the time of the fatal wreck, Couch had a blood alcohol content of .24, said Tarrant County Sheriff Dee Anderson. It is illegal for a minor to drive with any amount of alcohol in his or her system.

The victims' families sort of agree with the reasoning, in that they too feel that Couch's privilege helped him avoid consequences.

Couch is now being sent to a $500,000-a-year counseling center. There are apparently five civil wrongful death suits pending against him totaling tens of millions of dollars.

_________________________________________
Source: Gawker (Bluestone, 12/10)

Dallas Cops Are Writing Half as Many Tickets as They Did Five Years Ago

Driving in Dallas sucks for a lot of reasons (traffic, terrible drivers, humongous potholes, et al), but overzealous traffic cops aren't one of them. This isn't just the anecdotal experience of a guy who, having been ticketed three times in five months as a teenager in Richardson, discovered similar infractions are routinely ignored by Dallas' finest. It's statistics.

As The Dallas Morning News' Scott Goldstein reports today, the number of traffic citations in Dallas dropped by 15 percent for the past year. The year before, the decline was 18 percent. The year before that, another 15 percent.

It's not a new phenomenon. A chart presented to Dallas City Council's Ad Hoc Judicial Nominations Committee shows a steady decline in tickets, from 495,007 in fiscal year 2007 to 211,843 in FY 2013.

The "no duh" explanation is that police are writing fewer tickets. The "focus of everyday Patrol Division Officers seems to have shifted away from writing citations," Assistant City Manager Joey Zapata noted in his presentation, noting that the average beat cop pulls out his ticket book almost 600 fewer times per year than he used to. In the traffic division, the number of "high writers" -- those writing more than 1,000 per year -- is half of what it once was.

The slightly more complex reason is that DPD is making a conscious shift away from traditional traffic enforcement techniques.

"The purpose of traffic enforcement is to improve traffic safety, not to raise revenue," Chief David Brown told Goldstein in an email last year. "We don't believe the citizens of Dallas want its police department writing citations to raise revenues."

And finally, the most complex reason lies with Dallas' beleaguered municipal courts system. A traffic citation can be costly to prosecute. Reforms implemented over the past year and a half have made things more efficient by disposing of more cases through guilty pleas and slashing the number of dismissals, but the city is still in the process of "rightsizing" its municipal court system.

The end result, though, is the same. You're half as likely to get a ticket in Dallas as you were five years ago.

_____________________________________
Source: Dallas Observer (Nicholson, 12/03)

Insurance industry worries about older drivers with smartphones

In any conversation about distracted driving – especially texting behind the wheel – it is almost always in the context of youthful drivers. After all, they're the ones addicted to their smartphones, right?

Not so fast. Increasingly it appears that a growing number of those heads glancing down at smartphone screens behind the wheel have gray hair. Older drivers are quickly catching up with young drivers when it comes to staying connected while driving.

And it's not just texting. A July 2013 survey by State Farm Insurance found a big jump in the percentage of drivers who own smartphones, particularly among drivers age thirty and older. At the same time the percentage of drivers who access the Internet on their phone while driving has nearly doubled over the past five years, going up from 13% in 2009 to 24% in 2013.

More hands-free talking

The survey results also showed the use of hands-free cell phones while driving has increased, while the percentage of people talking on a hand-held cell phone or texting while driving has become stagnant over the past three years.

This may be due, in part, to the growing number of new cars that have a Bluetooth connection. With this system, a driver may answer a call and carry on a conversation simply by pushing a button on the steering wheel, without removing the phone from a pocket or a purse.

While there has been research that suggests talking on a hands-free phone is also distracting, the same could be said for a driver conversing with passengers. It's all a matter of degree. But it's the growing presence of electronic gadgets among drivers that keeps insurance agents up at night.

Multiple distractions

"As smart phone ownership increases for all age groups, the safety community must ensure we are keeping pace with our understanding of the types of distractions drivers face," said Chris Mullen, Director of Technology Research at State Farm. "Much attention is paid toward reducing texting while driving, but we must also be concerned about addressing the growing use of multiple mobile web services while driving."

While 86% of drivers age 18-29 have smartphones, the new data shows 64% of drivers age 50 to 64 do as well, a 20% jump in two years. Even 39% of drivers 65 and older now have smartphones, the survey found.

Distracted driving is a major concern for the insurance industry, which profits when there are fewer accidents. But while most concede that texting while driving is very dangerous, it's less clear that simply talking and driving is.

Questioning conventional wisdom

Another study from Carnegie Mellon University and the London School of Economics and Political Science, also conducted this year, finds that talking on a phone while driving does not increase the risk of a crash.

For the study, Carnegie Mellon's Saurabh Bhargava and the London School of Economics and Political Science's Vikram S. Pathania examined calling and crash data from 2002 to 2005, a period when most cell phone carriers offered pricing plans with free calls on weekdays after 9 p.m. They compared data from mobile network operators and accident reports and found that there was no direct correlation between the number of phone calls made during a certain time period and the number of crashes during the same time.

"Using a cell phone while driving may be distracting, but it does not lead to higher crash risk in the setting we examined," said Bhargava, who is an assistant professor of social and decision sciences at CMU. "While our findings may strike many as counterintuitive, our results are precise enough to statistically call into question the effects typically found in the academic literature. Our study differs from most prior work in that it leverages a naturally occurring experiment in a real-world context."

For its part, State Farm is encouraging government agencies to continue their high profile campaign against distracted driving, which specifically targets electronic gadgets.

"State Farm continues to support a multi-pronged approach to encouraging more engaged driving," Mullen said. "Legislation, enforcement, education and technology all have a role to play in making our roads safer for all who share them."

_______________________________________________
Source: Consumer Affairs (Huffman, 11/13)