Connecticut Child Injury Lawyer Blog

Fairfield Connecticut Board of Ed Incoproates Sexual Harassment into Anti-Bullying Poliicy

Fri, 02 Dec 2011 10:41:47 -0500

If you are a bully, and are in school in Fairfield, Connecticut, watch out! Your actions will not be tolerated under a more comprehensive Anti-Bullying policy, which now includes "Sexual Harassment" in its list of prohibited acts. Thanks to Kelly Crisp, a long-time advocate of child safety in her former role of prosecutor in Georgia, and in her current role of general "Do Gooder," Fairfield's new anti-bullying policy includes "Sexual Harassment." Crisp argued strenuously and convincingly that failure to include this category of bullying would leave one of the most insidious, and tolerated, forms of bullying to continue without formal recourse through the Board of Education's prior policy. Now that the Board has adopted more inclusive language, Sexual Harassment will include more than the vaguely phrased "targeting someone based on gender." Rather, it will also now include "unwanted sexual attention or insulting or degrading sexual remarks or conduct." This broad, but strong lagnuage far more accurately incoroprates what really happens when a student is bullied verbally, or by way of peer or direct pressure of a sexual nature.

Mandatory reporting, implementation of a safety protocol to protect a bullied student, and police intervention when a crime may have been committed are all part of the policy, and carry strong requirements for the Fairfield school system and its staff. Of particular interest to me is that the policy extends to activities off school property, including functions such as school dances, field trips and last but certainly not least, bus stops, where children are often left unsupervised for more than enough time for bullying to occor unimpeded.

If your child is under attack, meaning bullied in any way that is connected with their school, even remotely connected, then you are entitled to the protectino afforded under these new guidelines/rules. if you are not satisfied with how the matter is being handled, contact a knowledgable lawyer to help you understand your rights and remedies. Vishno Law Firm, and Attorney Jeremy Vishno have handled many child-related claims, and we are happy to provide feedback on your situation.

West Haven Connecticut Child Bitten & Killed by Dogs

Sun, 02 Oct 2011 12:23:43 -0500

When a dog bites, it hurts, even if it only leaves a scrape. When more than one dog bites an infant or a child, the consequences can include Serious Personal Injuries and can even be fatal.

Tragically, fatal dog bites were the reason a 20 month old West Haven, Connecticut girl died Friday, September 30, 2011. Only a few details are currently available, but we do know some important facts: the toddler was left, according to reports, on the ground; the child was in a place where the dogs were not prevented from biting her, and; the dogs invovled were apparently pit bulls. This combination is frightening for its simplicity. If there were no history of attacks by these dogs, then the owner(s) may not have had a reason to worry. However, Connecticut Dog Bite law takes account of the fact that, while dogs are truly great pets, have been domesticated for hundreds or even thousands of years, they are still prone to sudden and unexpected bites and attacks. The only escape from liability for the owner/keeper is if the biting or attack victim was tormenting, teasing or otherwise provoking the dog, or if the victim was actually an illegal trespasser, or was otherwise doing something illegal, such as trying to attack the dog's owner. Once the owner/keeper is determined to be liable, the damages to be paid include: medical bills, out of pocket expenses, compensation for the injuries, scarring, future bills for surgery, such as reconstructive procedures and for trauma related psychiatric/psychological treatment, and of course for the pain and suffering of the person attacked. While this system of compensation does not actually heal the person, it is both a way to provide some relief to the victim, and to provide a strong incentive to dog and pet owners to take precautions in advance of a problem.

Know your rights. Consult an attorney experienced in handling Dog Bite Claims, such as Vishno Law Firm , and Attorney Jeremy Vishno.

Seymour Connecticut Child Seriously Injured by Pellet Gun

Fri, 31 Dec 2010 12:18:05 -0500

A Seymour, Connecticut child was injured when a pellet gun was accidentally discharged in his friend's bedroom, according to a Connecticut Post article this morning (see December 21, 2010 P.1 headline). The 13 year old suffered a serious and "life threatening" head wound. The article goes on to state that the gun went off accidentally while the kids were rough-housing, and not while the gun was being used by anyone at the time, and all while the children's parents were at home.

Questions abound: What was a pellet gun, capable of killing someone, doing in a 13 year olds bedroom? Why is such a weapon not locked while not in use? Did the parents of the injured child know that this deadly weapon was in the house at all, let alone unlocked and able to discharge inside the house? Who is legally responsible for the damages caused by this unsuperviseed situation? I can at least answer that final question:
..

Connecticut's Youth Athletes at Risk for Overusee Injury

Tue, 15 Jun 2010 09:23:17 -0500

Connecticut's young athletes are active year-round. And, while their window of opportunity for outdoor sports is short, the aspirations of athletes, coaches and parents are long when it comes to how much they try to squeeze out of those precious few fair-weather months. Many kids seeking an edge in their respective sport play for multiple teams, playing far more games, and attending more pracatices than we used to as kids. The problems of over-use injuries arise when parents and kids don't share with their coaches the fact that they are on the court, field or other competitive arena with more than one team, on the same day, whether just before or just after the one in which they are now playing. Baseball coaches and the orgainziations that operate compettive leagues, such as Little League and Cal Ripken, are probably the most sensitized to the perils of over-use now that there are well-defined protections in place: pitch-count rules by age group being the most critical in protecting young pitchers' arms. Pitchers are not the only young atheltes that need protection, though. As a coach, I have noted too often kids on my team with historically rare problems-chronic tendonitis, plantar fascitis (inflammation of the fascia in the foot) Sever's disease (a seriously painful/disabling problem in the heel), bone spurs, stress fractures etc. What is most alarming is how parents often ignore the doctor's advice to take a break to allow healing. Even I ask the question, "When can he start playing again?" when it's my kid's injury keeping him out. What is the coach's responsibility here? I believe that the coach must be the voice of reason by only allowing a child to return to the filed/court of play with a doctor's note permitting it, and explaining what limitations there should be, and for who long. The doctor's feedback is not, as far as I can see, a requirement in any of the leagues that I have coached in. Strangely, even the most advanced of the organized sports leagues, Little League, has managed to downplay or outright disregard the warnings of the very doctor who invented the pitch count rules. Why? Because it's what the parents/members of that league want. For instance, the pitch count rules are relaxed for Little League World Series play so that the marquee pitchers are not kept off the mound. Is this the message we want our kids to hear? As long as there is an audience that wants it this way, children's protection is not a primary goal? Let's all make an effort to remember these are kids, not young profesional athletes. Encourage your local teams, clubs and athletic associations to adopt standards for addressing over-use and return to play protocols for our young athletes, such as Westport, Connecticut's PAL concussion protocol, or its strict adherernce to Little League pitch count rules for rest and pitches per game.

Connecticut School Bus Safety Legislation

Fri, 05 Feb 2010 15:53:32 -0500

I write in follow-up to my last post concerning the Connecticut student who died when the School Bus he was on left the highway. Many students suffered serious personal injuries, and one student died, perhaps due to the lack of seat-belts on the bus. The driver was certainly required to wear a seat-belt, why not the kids he was transporting. I continue to encourage all Connecticut residents to support upcoming legislative efforts to change the law to require buses to have seat-belts for student use.

Just this past week, another young student was injured in Stamford, Connecticut, simply due to the jostling he endured while the bus traversed a road under construction. A seat-belt would likely have helped. Is the cost of the seat-belt goinig to be more than the cost of the claim that could be filed by the student's family? How about the cost in the claim for the student who was killed? It can hardly be argued that there is any other consideration in play here apart from the costs of retrofitting the buses. How about an ounce of prevention? If your child has suffered a personal injury, make sure to protect their rights of recovery, and to hold the carrier accountable, by contacting an experienced personal injury attorney.

This legislative session will include proposed laws that will require seat-belts. Support them by contacting your local representtive. Find yours at: ">http://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/menu/CGAFindLeg.asp ">Connecticut Representative Locator. This is a step in the right direction, but a small one. Connecticut has an enhanced driver and owner liability requirement for a certain class and use of vehicles. The requirement applies to all "common carrierrs" which are transport vehicles carrying passengers for hire, such as taxis, city and school buses, as well as limousines and car services. Because they are deemed professionals who have undertaken responsibility for safely delivering people, rather than products, they must adhere to higherr standards of care while driving, as detailed in Connecticut case law (go to Justia.com to view relevant cases-there are lots!)

Connecticut Student Dies in Bus Crash

Mon, 11 Jan 2010 16:51:55 -0500

A Connecticut student and science enthusiast was killed when the school bus he was on was involved in a crash with a car. After the collision with the car, the school bus went over and down an embankment. Because the bus was not equipped with seat-belts, students had nothing to restrain them from being violently thrown about the interior of the bus. One student died, and another was hospitalized, according to The Hartford Courant and other sources.

Legal responsibility has yet to be determined for the cause of the crash. However, it is clear that seat-belts did not play a role in the accident because, as is the casee with almost all Connecticut school buses, they were not installed on that bus. Connecticut law does not currently require seat-belts. Why not? Economics is obviously the key component, as safety considerations must be weighed against the costs of implementation. There are studies and general concerns that simple lap belts could be more harmful than helpful, causing whipping type injuries. Combination restraints that incluude lap and shoulder belts may not only be too costly, they may be impossible to install in buses currently on the road. Is this the best we can do? Buses and other vehicles that transport people for money are already subject to stricter legal standards of care as "Common Carriers" under Connecticut Law. This means that operators of regular buses, taxis, trolleys and similar road vehicles are required to follow higher safety rules than ordinary driverrs.

School bus drivers have the added responsibility of driving our children, who cannot look out for themselves. Even a teacher's presence cannot add any measure of security where seat-belts are lacking. What to do?

Connecticut Pool Safety Requirements Meant to Reduce Drownings and Injuries

Mon, 11 May 2009 15:07:35 -0500

Connecticut's outdoor swimming pool season is short, so pool owners take great care to prepare their pools for maximum use during our warm weather season from May through September. However, with that preparation comes a word of caution about the dangers of owning a swimming pool, and the risks of serious injuries, especially to children, when proper safety guidelines are not followed.

Unfortunately, when a child is injured in a Connecticut pool, it is often a very serious injury, or even, as was the case with a six year old from Greenwich, Connecticut, a fatality. It is especially sad, and frustrating, when such injuries can, or should have been prevented. In the Greenwich, Connecticut pool tragedy, the owner of the pool company responsible for the installation was arrested for failing to comply with swimming pool design and construction regulations, in omitting a protective valve cover. Because that valve cover was not in place, the six year old boy became trapped, under water, due to the valve's strong suction. Had the cover been in place, as required by code, he could not have become trapped by that valve, it is claimed by his family's attorneys. Just this year, Congress passed the Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act. This act requires valves and drains to be properly covered, which will prevent many entrapments, and eviscerations.

Connecticut's swimming pool laws are designed to protect swimmers from serious injury and even death, which can be caused by drowning, entrapment in a drain or valve, or due to misplaced diving boards in an area that is too shallow. There are a number of Connecticut swimming pool rules relating to safety, but a few are exceptionally noteworthy, and well worth mentioning, since many pool owners may not even be aware of them.

Whenever my kids visit a friend whose house has a pool, we ask safety questions in the same manner as if they child were going to a house where guns might be present: what safety measures are in place to protect my kids from harm? Will you be present at all times if the kids are in the pool? If not, then who will be watching them? Do you have fencing around the pool, and an alarm in place, as required? Most times, unless the house is one whose owners are close friends, and we are comfortable with how they handle their pool safety, we will simply ask that our child not be allowed in or even near the pool at all absent our presence. We have had no complaints from those parents, thankfully, as they have been both accommodating of our concerns, and genuinely pleased that we take such an interest in safety.

Connecticut Children at risk of Trampoline Injury

Thu, 30 Apr 2009 13:21:52 -0500

Spring is here and from Greenwich, to Bridgeport to New Haven, Connecticut, we are outside and loving it. However, with outdoor activity comes risks of serious personal injuries to children that are both obvious and not so obvious. "Go outside and play," we tell them over and over. No more computer, texting, instant messaging, "wii"ing. The kids are bouncing off the walls, but they should not be bouncing on a trampoline, ever, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics.

My own kids have been begging for two things for several years. First is a dog. We are 4-1 on this one, with the one "no" vote being my wife, who insists she will be the one soley in charge of all dog care (she is quite right, and therefore, she wins this one). Second is a trampoline. We are 3-2 on this one, where both my wife and I agree that we will not have one (we even rejected a neighbor's offer of a free one last year-his kids no longer used it). We have both seen firsthand the serious injuries that children can suffer while on a trampoline.

Injuries to children from jumping on a trampoline are not only common, they are quite often serious enough to change a child's life forever, without warning, and without the child doing something wrong, without there being a defect in the manufacture of the trampoline and can even happen when there is proper parental supervision.

This situation begs the question: Are trampolines so dangerous that they should be banned altogether

Seymour, Connecticut Teen Loses License after Bus Collision

Wed, 25 Mar 2009 14:23:39 -0500

The Seymour, Connecticut Teen driver who crashed into a school bus has lost her driving privileges. Because she was in violation of the Connecticut teen driver laws restricting the number of passengers in her car while in the early stages of her driving career, the teen driver who crashed into a busload of children has had her license suspended.

As the parent of a near teenager, I make sure to monitor my son's whereabouts at all times. As he approaches the age when he may be in someone else's car, potentially a newly licensed teen driver, I anticipate many discussions about what is permitted, and what must be avoided at all costs. As he, and later, his younger siblings, reach driving age, I hope that these early warnings will stay with him, and them, in their driving habits.

Parents: Be sure to have proper and adequate automobile insurance in place on your vehicles. A review of your policy with your agent or insurance representative is essential when you have a new driver of your cars. If you are unclear about what these coverages mean, or have a claim that you need to discuss, speak to an experienced personal injury attorney for answers to liability questions, and what you should expect from your insurance agent or representative. Specifically, ensure that your liability coverage is high enough to protect your own assets if your car is involved in an accident that is deemed your child's fault (or anyone else driving your car). Imagine facing a claim or being sued for such an accident and learning, too late, that your coverage is not enough because your child struck a school bus full of children, and each was injured, and looking to you and your policy for coverage. If that coverage is insufficient, they can also look to your personal assets for compensation. It may be a bit more expensive, but having piece of mind where automobile liability is involved is worth the price. This is especially so because of the high number of accidents involving teen drivers.

Seymor, Connecticut Driver Hits School Bus, Ignores Teen Driving Laws

Thu, 12 Mar 2009 10:39:01 -0500

The fact that West Haven, Connecticut-based Winkle Bus Company's "mini-bus" was equipped with seat-belts was likely a key factor in reducing both the number and seriousness of injuries to its pre-school passengers. The Seymour, Connecticut head-on collision on Botsford Road, between the bus and a car driven by a teenager, may have occurred while the teen was driving with passengers, in violation of Connecticut's teen driver laws. Whether the accident was caused by this violation is certainly cause for concern, but has yet to be determined.

The driver, age 16, was not supposed to be carrying any passengers at all, because she was so new to the road, and was thus in violation of Connecticut's newly enacted teen driver laws (see C.G.S. section 14-36, multiple sub-sections) which, among other changes after 8-1-08, prohibits new drivers from having passengers for the first 6 months of having a license, other than a driving instructor, licensed parent or guardian). This teen driver had three passengers in her car.

You may recall from an earlier post I wrote, under Injury Prevention that a key recommendation of the World Health Organization in reducing child accidental death was to restrict teen drivers from having passengers until they gain sufficient experience behind the wheel. Connecticut passed this teen driver law just this past August, 2008, in response to numerous serious teen car accidents, and even fatalities, and in an effort to reduce the chances that more would occur.

Westport, Connecticut Synthetic Turf Fields: Safe or Sorry?

Tue, 03 Mar 2009 17:05:09 -0500

Saugatuck Elementary School, in Westport, Connecticut has a terrific looking 2 year old artificial turf playing field. It's composition includes recycled rubber tire particles, formed into small pellets which lie between the plastic grass strands. My kids love it! It doesn't get muddy, so they can play football in the rain at recess, and it is always soft, never dried out from the late summer sun. Further, those excrement making machines, our band of merry Canada geese, stay off it. Those pellets do come home in sneakers and clothing, but are easily shaken off or washed out.

However, while it needs no pesticides or other chemicals to stay green all year long, the make-up of this synthetic turf field may, some claim, be harmful in other ways. The risk that children playing on these types of fields might be injured, or exposed to harmful chemicals from the pellets, is the subject of many local, and national, opinions, both for and against the continued use of artificial turf instead of natural grass.

Connecticut is using money from a prior environmental contamination settlement to determine if the ground-up tires is the equivalent of a defective product when it is used for fields or in gardens as mulch. While I am not aware of any fields having been closed during this investigation, apparently, no new fields will be approved until the safety issue is resolved.

Connecticut Bicycle Helmet Safety Regulation

Fri, 27 Feb 2009 11:58:37 -0500

Each year, tens of thousands of bicycle riders tour the scenic and relatively flat coastal roads of Fairfield, Westport, Darien, Stamford and Greenwich, Connecticut. In addition, while school is out, many of the cyclists on these roads are children, who are less experienced, and not nearly as visible as adults while they ride. As a result, children are at greater risk of serious personal injuries while riding their bicycles on the roads, sidewalks and other areas where there are cars moving about.

In a prior article, Injury Prevention Bulletin, I wrote about the World Health Organization report on the number of accidental deaths of children. One of their top suggestions for reducing that shocking number of serious injuries to and death of children was to regularly use bicycle helmets.

In an effort to reduce the severity of accidents when they do occur, Connecticut, has a strict (Bicycle Helmet law: CGS section 14-286b) which requires all riders under age 15 to wear an approved helmet. This Connecticut helmet law (one of only 22 states that have one at all), appropriately holds parents accountable for ensuring compliance. To determine if a helmet is "approved," look for a label referencing either American National Standards Institute (ANSI) or the Snell Memorial Foundation's Standard for Protective Headgear for Use in Bicycling/ and click on "certified helmets" under "Find Out."

Having three young children, all of whom ride, I, too wear a helmet at all times, even when just cruising in our driveway. This consistent use of a helmet is not only an example for my kids, but has, on at least one occasion, saved me, a former triathlete and bicycle racer, form a potentially serious injury. While exiting my own driveway, I had a mechanical malfunction, which caused my bike to come to an unexpected stop, pitching me over the handlebars so suddenly I had no chance to make any mid-flight adjustment to protect myself. I landed squarely on my head, which was fortunately covered by a good helmet. While I was certainly surprised, and embarrassed, I was also relieved not to have been hurt, at all, despite cracking the top of the helmet.

Easton, Connecticut Student Injured on School Playground

Wed, 25 Feb 2009 10:04:35 -0500

An Easton, Connecticut student's attempt to break up a fight on the Staples Elementary School recess field resulted in her being seriously injured with a broken arm. In the realm of "no good deed going unpunished," the student's injury could have been prevented, say her parents, in a lawsuit alleging negligent supervision against the school's principal and the Easton Board of Education.

Boards of Education, and each school under its purview, are required to have safety protocols in place with regard to how teachers and others supervise students both inside the classroom, and everywhere else on school property and during school sponsored activities. Having those protocols is not, however, enough. There must be affirmative steps taken at all times to ensure those protocols are followed, every day. Unfortunately, even a small lapse in procedure can result in a serious compromise of student safety.

In this Easton, Connecticut school playground injury incident, one of the key elements of the claim is that there were too few recess monitors, a seemingly easy problem to have prevented. The girl's injuries are alleged to have been a broken arm requiring surgery, which has left her both mentally and physically scarred. In negligent supervision claims such as this one, it is the injured party's burden to prove that the school's negligence (not having adequate protocols, too few recess monitors) caused her injuries. If it is clear to the students that certain behavior will not be tolerated, and that there are teachers and staff diligently watching them, the risk that students will fight, or be bullied, is dramatically reduced. At the very least, we can be more comfortable that those to whom we entrust our children for most of the day are as safe as they can be.

Stratford CT High School Talent Show Fight-Bullying Suspected

Mon, 16 Feb 2009 21:03:38 -0500

Bunnell High School in Stratford, Connecticut was the scene of an allegedly racially charged fight between students at a talent show. The victim of this Stratford, Connecticut bullying incident, a participant in the talent show, and African American, alleges that she was bullied verbally during the show. When the show ended, the verbal bullying continued, and, the victim stated, threats were made by the two white girls verbally assaulting the participant.

It is unclear as to why school officials or security did not remove the two white girls, who were making the verbal assaults, from the show, or otherwise intervene to avoid a physical confrontation. The white girls were apparently told to stop, but nothing further was done, according to news reports (Connecticut Post, Thursday February 12, 2009), until the verbal confrontation turned physical. All involved were arrested on a variety of charges.

It is highly likely that, given the nature of the verbal assaults, and the claims of a racially motivated component, that this Stratford, Connecticut bullying incident will require further investigation. The question for this writer is why the school representatives and others officiating at the show did not take much earlier steps to avoid the escalation to violence, especially in light of their obligations under Connecticut's newly enacted anti-bullying statutes .

Wilton, Connecticut Teacher Accused of Inappropriate Restraint of Autistic Child

Fri, 16 Jan 2009 16:03:49 -0500

Connecticut has had legislation prohibiting the restraint or seclusion of students in schools since 2007 (Connecticut General Statutes Section 10-76b-6 & Senate Bill 977), when the parents/care-givers of three angry Wilton, Connecticut children sought help from the Connecticut Legislature. In this Wilton, Connecticut student abuse case the students' caregivers were angry over the treatment of their children at their respective schools. In one example, a teacher restrained an autistic student by locking him in a storage closet for extended periods, eventually leading the student to suffer serious personal injuries when he banged his arm against the interior of the room. The room was not properly certified for any such use.

As a result of the efforts of the two parents, and one grandparent/care-giver, Connecticut enacted legislation carefully spelling out the rules for teachers, healthcare administrators and others involved in the non-custodial (outside the home) care of children with disabilities with respect to seclusion and restraint as a method for controlling unacceptable behavior. The legislation is designed to protect these children with special circumstances or needs from suffering serious personal injuries at school and other facilities when in the care of those other than their primary care-givers. Serious injuries to these children can include extreme fear, anxiety, confusion, and can lead to physical injuries when the child attempts to escape or make their pleas heard. The legislation also includes mandatory reporting requirements for those care-givers when restraint or seclusion is used, under many circumstances, and especially where there is a longer term of restraint or seclusion.

When we place any child in the hands of another care-giver, whether that child has or does not have special needs or circumstances, we are making a great leap of faith. When the rules are not clear, the laws not strictly followed, we cannot feel secure. However, when we monitor our schools and others involved in the daily lives of our children, and call for action when there is problem, we take control of our children's safety. In this instance, the fuzzy line has now been made a bright line rule.

1-13-09 Connecticut Post