EMTALA Case Summary

It is appropriate that the patient was awarded $25,000 attorney fees. Regardless of the potential Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) violation, the patient vicariously through her family and friends was forced to seek injunction against Memorial Hospital enjoining the hospital from refusing to admit the patient. She further incurred cost in her subsequent action, which are rightly reimburse based on the findings of the court. With regard to the permanent junctive relief to prevent egregious acts from evading review in the future. The plaintiff would appear to have little benefit because of her does not change, she has the potential to become pregnant in the future and require future medical care and delivery. This
definition the patient did not appear to be in active labor as she delivered 4 days after the initial evaluation. The patient was sent home and returned to Memorial Hospital where she delivered. Based on these findings the defense argument, that the patient was not transferred to another facility nor did they attempt to transferred the patient to another facility does hold some credence. According to Zibulewsky, (2001)The initial intent of EMTALA was to ensure nondiscriminatory access to emergency medical care. The mere fact that the physician recommended follow-up at an outside facility after adequately evaluated and treating the patient, would not be an EMTALA violation. However, refusing to see the patient back in the future when she was in active labor, clearly would be an EMTALA violation. Because of the distance to Galveston, it is unreasonable to assume that the patient could without exception make it to another facility for delivery. On reviewing the case and other associated evaluations performed by Memorial Hospital, it becomes clear that the hospital has established a pattern of not managing indigent patients and was involved in the practice of diverting them to other facilities. Based on these findings it appears that several infractions of the EMTALA have been committed by the facility. Whether the case in question falls strictly under these guidelines it is unclear. I believe part of the court's decision to find against the defendant was the result of the pattern of behavior that was established by the facility and the treating physician. Because there is clear violation of EMTALA, further action should be taken by the medical review board. The fines can include up to $50,000 against the hospital and physician for each violation as well as possible termination of the hospital and providers Medicare provider