Listen: Women sue California hospital that put cameras in delivery rooms
"Hospital management theater. I'm going to be the person that walks in and presents a problem in Joe is going to be part of hospital management came up with the solution. All right. I got it. Somebody stealing drugs we need to find out who they are. What could we do to catch the person who's going into these waiting these rooms and stealing drugs that are hospital? Security cameras are the answer. We need to put security cameras in every room in every every nook and cranny probably toilet stalls every examination room. We'll put motion activated cameras. So that any time anybody gets undressed or does anything in that room. We catch it on videotape. Well that makes a bit of exaggeration. But only a bit Alison warden joins us. Alison is a partner at the Gomez law firm that is suing. Hospital chain. Well, sharp Grossman hospital in LA Mesa California, specifically for their motion activated cameras set up in various spots. Alison, welcome. How are you? Good morning. I'm well. Thank you. So what indeed was drug thefts that spurred the installation of the cameras, correct? Doubts. What? Yes, the sharp is telling us. Okay. And and where did they put those cameras? They put them on the anesthesia carts in three operating rooms in the women's center in sharp gross my hospital. So how in the women's center in particular? Yes. So basically these three operating rooms or used only for women procedures anything ranging from unfortunately, DNC, what will lose the child to to belie- Gatien's and emergency c section so all kinds of surgical procedures with women conducted on women took place in these three operating rooms where they hid the cameras. The drugs were disappearing from I'm trying to establish whether this was just ill advised stupid, or if it was perverse. There were reports that there were drugs missing from the anesthesia cart in those three operating rooms. Okay. And so instead of taking less invasive means perhaps like locking the cart. Ahead and installed these cameras which would not be visible to anybody basically staff. Dr certainly to patient were unaware. So the patients didn't know which has got to be some sort of hip violation. The doctors didn't know and then who had access to the videos. Well, that's one of the major problems and hopefully throughout this litigation. We'll get to managers that we have been unable to get. This far sharp says that their security or the ones that were doing the cameras in trying to wash to see. One doctor was taking the drugs. However, they have not been able to provide any answers or sureties as to who within sharp organization or outside of sharp organization. Did have accents. So you're so you're hospital mall. Cops have access to the most private of of procedures being done on you and seeing you and everything like that that that makes pretty good sense. I see that you have Eighty-one women named as plaintiffs thus far. That's quite a number. We do and potentially. So the cameras were installed in July of two thousand twelve and they were not turned off in till June of two thousand thirteen so they were running during that eight basically eight months time period during that time period roughly eighteen hundred six procedures were conducted in operating rooms. So did they ever catch the person that was stealing the profile that ever happened? Well, you know, the doctor that they had identified is taking the drugs from the cart was brought up or was investigated by the medical board. Here's actually cleared of taking those drugs related to the reason that sharp said that they install the cameras. Okay. All right. Well, that's that's wild. So it could be hundreds of plaintiffs eventually. And what are you hoping for? Occasionally, it could be over eighteen hundred plaintiffs. There was a class action that was initially filed. And now it's been transitioned due a mass tort. And so the case has been. In litigation and we're trying within trying to get the identities of all the women that were victimized during that time period. And so as plaintiffs contact information their identities become available, and they decide they want to join in and participate in the lawsuit that we will continue to add plaintiffs. I can't decide did we skip over this. Or is it obvious did the cameras consistently catch images of the women in question? Or was it the operating? Well, it says here if I'm you know, it's your lawsuit, but you've held back on this. So I'm going to say it. Additionally, the lawsuit alleges the women were recorded as they undressed at times. Defendants patients, the dependence patients had their sensitive genital areas visible. Absolutely. There's a wide range. I'm just curious and I'm not criticizing. But I would think you'd want to not sensationalized go beyond. But I would think you wanna put in all the worst stuff. There is news. You kind of feel like to me like you're holding back. For that a legal strategy. Absolutely. No, well there because I stated earlier there was a class action that was fouled in may two thousand sixteen. Some documents have been ordered to be protected by protective order. So some information has not been released to the public. And so I'm not allowed to speak about okay? At this time. Yeah. So moyer's is you know, never wanna hold back on their best information. But whether that's why I'm wondering why you were saving there. They were videotaping them naked with their genitals exposed in holding that back from this discussion. So little we're done just say. Goes it goes above and beyond that actually, well, then hit us. It's not just you know, the women being exposed they walk into the room. Some of them are undressing, right? They're getting on the the gurney home and already wheeled in. But these are women that range from say some of the happiest times in their life. Scariest times in the worst times in their life. You have women that lost their baby in that room. That didn't never want to you know, they'll remember forever. But certainly now it's been memorialize and they're nervous to who. Else has had access to this very intimate in horrifying include this. This is what the hill is reporting that the lawsuit says several hospital staff members, including non medical personnel were able to access the recordings through desktop computers. Additionally, the lawsuit alleges the hospitals did not keep track of who could access the recordings wire win that seems like a big deal. She got naked women, and they're not sure who could access it. And how often they did. Right. Absolutely. And who has copies right now. And whether or not this is going to end up on the. Oh, of course, it will. You know, how the internet works. Yikes. Alison warden partner at the Gomez law firm. Allison, thanks for joining us. We appreciate it. And let's stay in touch is this progresses casually. Thanks for having me. All right. Our pleasure. She would have legal reasons. I don't understand. I just thought it was interesting. She was leaving out some of the juiciest stuff from the. You're right. Well, yeah. Yeah. There are some stuff that hasn't been released. So okay. Well, okay. But I didn't want that to not get in the story because I think you should go whole hog we restrained. In good taste. No. If you had video of women getting undressed in crawling up onto the table as as women have told me, that's like the most uncomfortable thing that happens to you. Emotionally before the physically uncomfortable stuff happens right now getting undressed in climbing up there on that table. There's video that in just kinda ran does get to access at there at the hospital. And whether or not buddy, insecurity, the hospital mall cop as you put it so charmingly, I just saw her and go down there getting that tape later on. No problem. You know that happened. Yes. Garin freakin t it."