Brenda Brant was admitted to a hospital by the name of Sarah Busch Lincoln Health Center to receive medical attention to her issue of urinary incontinence in the year 1998. While under the knife, a sling was implanted in Brant to help this issue. Subsequently, the maker of these slings Boston Scientific Corporation issued a recall for the same implanted sling that Brenda had just received. This recall was due to many patience complaining about medical complications. Just like these other patients, Brant had complications which led to her to have this sling removed after about a year. Brant went on to file a suit towards the circuit court of Coles County. Since this device showed up on Brant’s bill, she tried to claim there was a breach of implied warranty of merchantability under the article 24. Plaintiff Brant tried to sue defendant Boston Scientific Corporation over this sling that caused complications and reversal surgery for such reasons.
Breach of implied warranty of merchantability under the article 2A, deals specifically with purchased goods, which would be the sling in this example. Under such laws, there are certain warranties involved, and since the sling was removed a year later, this would have been a violation of the warranty. Brant, saw the medical device on the bill from surgery, and figured this law would be applicable to the case. However, in this specific case, Brant was dealing with a service rather a good as the courts proclaimed, which completely dismissed her claim. If the sale would have been a mixed one, that covers both services, and goods, Brant would have had a more convincing case or chance of winning. Another notworthy point of this case, is that the doctor was reviewed and considered as well. Brant had claimed, that the doctor appeared to be fine, and showed no reason as to why he was not eligible to perform her surgery. Therefore, it was not the fault of the medical personal, rather the company Boston Scientific Corporation for these complications.
In my opinion, ethics are very much involved in this case. Even though this breach does not necessarily cover services, in all reality, Breda did pay for a good, which in this case would be the sling. She paid for both the device, and the service of implanting it. Not to mention, that this sling was very quickly recalled very shortly after she bought it. Therefore, I feel that she should be compensated somewhat for this issue. Boston Scientific Corporation is responsible for the complications it caused this woman, and therefore should be liable for her medical bills and some. Although, the complications were not specified, we can automatically assume they were pretty bad, because she did have this sling removed about a year later. Not only was Brenda’s time, and money wasted, but also her health. It is understandable that hospitals must be aware of all of these cases, because they are sued a lot for things that aren’t necessarily their fault. However, what happened to Brenda was unfair, and she should not have to deal with all these issues alone.
127 our experts are availableright now
