Mesothelioma and asbestos Round-Up: January 15, 2010
In recent weeks, two major stories about the exposure to asbestos appeared in the news. While it is encouraging to see an international stage to be placed on this serious problem, the two stories highlight troubling themes in response to exposure to asbestos.
In each of these cases, the focus is on the consequences of exposure to asbestos rather than prevention. Each is marked by wranglings and bitter arguments about responsibility, accountability and compensation. And as in every case, there were positive results, they also serve to illustrate how political and commercial interests can sometimes get in the way of justice.
The continuous effort of Clean Up Libby, Montana
start in the US in the past we have reported on the heartbreaking case of Libby, Montana, where contamination by 'asbestos sickened and killed the miners and their families. More than 30 years after the company became aware of the danger - and continued to expose local residents -. The mining company WR Grace was eventually tried on criminal charges
In May 09, the victims and their families were treated yet another blow that WR Grace and three former executives were acquitted of all loads. The New York Times reported that during the trial the Judge Donald W. Molloy ruled certain elements of convincing evidence provided by the prosecution as "harmful", including memoranda of the society in which leaders discussed the costs of people who die in Libby. Swift on the heels of this decision, the EPA declared a public health emergency in Libby, and the Department of Health and Human allocated $ 6 million to fund treatment at the nearby health clinic in Lincoln County .
Libby again appeared in headlines in December when discussing the proposed health care legislation recently adopted. Several media outlets have noted that, although not specifically named, Libby would receive 'buried' benefits in the bill as a proposal to extend health insurance coverage to cover certain victims of "health hazard the environment. "
Montana Senator Max Baucus defended the proposal, noting that it is a necessary and responsible part of the health care plan of the country, which should protect future victims and than Libby. "the people of Libby were poisoned and have been dying for over a decade," he said. "new residents continue to get sick all the time. public health tragedies like this could happen in a city in America. We need this type of mechanism to help people when they need it most. "
The Scottish Lose Battle Compensation insurers
The issue of compensation for victims of asbestos has also taken center stage in Scotland. During a 22-day hearing, British insurance companies have sought to overturn a law giving victims of pleural plaques the right to compensation. pleural plaques is a benign scarring of the lungs caused by exposure to asbestos. on 8 January 2010, the challenge the law was rejected, and the new law was confirmed, which requires that insurers compensate claims by people suffering from this condition.
the battle was a victory for the victims, and highlights the length to which the insurance companies are going to avoid paying compensation. According to the insurers participating in the hearing, pleural plaques do not count as a "disease", even if the state indicates a higher risk of developing mesothelioma.
The Association of British Insurers (ABI) intends to appeal the decision, saying:. "This is not the end of the road"
But member Stuart McMillan Scottish Parliament emphasized the other side of the argument: "in Scotland, we have the bill to ensure those who should be compensated for their injuries receive such compensation do not deprive people of legitimate compensation that companies insurance attempted. "
And the general secretary Alan Ritchie commentary highlighted the competing interests that led to this challenge, saying:" The insurance industry was using the judicial delay payment compensation to asbestos victims, both north and south of the border. It was a cynical maneuver and I'm glad he has failed. "
Although the new legal provisions and protections such as these can help correct some of the damage caused by exposure to asbestos, often the legal system is the last resort for victims who have been poisoned, exploited and ignored. The crusade to ban asbestos and raise awareness of this deadly substance should be our first line of attack against mesothelioma.
