FAQ > Glossary of Terms > M Series > Mesothelioma Injury Asbestos Compensation Act

Back to M Series

Mesothelioma Types Pleural Mesothelioma, Peritoneal Mesothelioma, Pericardial Mesothelioma, Malignant Mesothelioma, Cystic Mesothelioma, Abdominal Mesothelioma, Chrysotile Peritoneal Mesothelioma, Epithelial Malignant Mesothelioma, Benign Multicystic Mesothelioma, Causes of Mesothelioma, Mesothelioma Asbestosis, Mesothelioma Cancer, Mesothelioma Claim, Mesothelioma Compensation, Mesothelioma Cure, Mesothelioma Diagnosis, Mesothelioma Help, Mesothelioma Information, Mesothelioma Injury, Mesothelioma Law, Law Suit, Attorney, Litigation, Patient, Settlement, Statistics, Support, Symptoms, Mesothelioma Treatment - Angiogenesis Therapies, Optional Drug Therapies, Multimodal Therapies, Photodynamic Therapy, Radiation Therapy, Surgery, Unconventional Therapies, Immunotherapy & Gene Therapy

Mesothelioma Injury Asbestos Compensation Act

Legislation was introduced in the House in 2000 by Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill. as the "Fairness in Asbestos Compensation Act" to address what was believed to be the last of the thousands of asbestos cases that were crowding the courts. Since then, Congress has spent four years trying to struggle through debate to get federal legislation to help people with a mesothelioma injury and other asbestos-causing cancers. When Congress wrapped up the majority of business in October 2004, the asbestos legislation issue was left still unresolved, as victims of asbestos related disease like mesothelioma injury wonder if they will even live long enough to see legislation that would allow them eligibility for damages suffered.

A mesothelioma injury is a rare asbestos-related cancer that is associated to a quickly fatal prognosis. Unlike other types of cancer research and treatment, mesothelioma injury has received very little focus as advances in discovery for other cancer forms continued to make progress. Much of the dispute surrounding the proposed Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution Act is the size of the trust fund and how much would be contributed by corporations that used asbestos, their insurance companies and the government.

The act was intended to help asbestos-exposed and sickened Americans without suing the companies by compensating people from a trust fund. Specialists in mesothelioma injury and other asbestos-related diseases think the current compromise on the table between the Republican and Democratic Senate leaders of $140 billion would not even come close to compensating the high number of people affected by asbestos. In addition, for the people suffering mesothelioma injury and other serious illnesses, the act would provide major problems in regard to the medical criteria controlling who gets help and who doesn't get help.

Mesothelioma injury victims that get excluded from eligibility would need to pocket their own medical bills, which can be extremely high, costing hundreds of thousands of dollars before they die. In September 2004, the American Thoracic Society (ATS) guidelines for identifying and treating mesothelioma injury and other asbestos-related illnesses was released in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, which differed greatly from the Senate criteria. The Senate's criteria sponsored by Sen. Orin Hatch, R-Utah, is viewed as too exclusionary. The co-author of the ATS study and chief of the Center for Occupational and Environmental Medicine at Wayne State University believes Sen. Hatch's bill uses science and medicine that is outdated, incorrect and incomplete and will only serve to further harm patients of mesothelioma injury and other asbestos-related diseases.

The ATS says studies show as little as two months of asbestos exposure can cause illnesses like mesothelioma injury, but the Hatch bill would allow only people that have been exposed to asbestos for at least five years to qualify for compensation by the trust. In addition, only people exposed to asbestos at the workplace will be covered by Hatch's bill, excluding children and spouses of workers that have been shown to suffer asbestos-related illnesses because of fibers transported into cars and homes by workers. There are other major discrepancies between the ATS guidelines and Hatch's bill that fail to address the potential scope of the asbestos problems, according to some experts.

For the mesothelioma injury patients and other greatly affected individuals exposed to asbestos, the growing national attention the issue has been receiving is important to reaching a solution to the widespread epidemic.

For more information on mesothelioma injury, Contact a Mesothelioma Attorney familiar with mesothelioma cases.