[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 16 (Monday, February 10, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E193]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   BREAST IMPLANT ACCOUNTABILITY ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                      HON. JAMES A. TRAFICANT, JR.

                                of ohio

                    in the house of representatives

                       Monday, February 10, 1997

  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, in April 1994, an immense multibillion 
dollar class action suit was filed against the silicone breast implant 
manufacturers, possibly the largest in American history. Since the 
1980s, about 400,000 cases have been filed in Federal court against 40 
makers of breast implants and their components. Thousands of cases have 
been filed in State courts as well.
  A $4.2 billion compensation fund was established by Dow Corning, 
Baxter Healthcare Corp., Bristol Myers, and several other corporations. 
The settlement distributes compensation money to several designated 
funds: A general compensation program, a medical diagnostic fund to pay 
unreimbursed costs of exams for women with implants, and an explanation 
fund to cover unreimbursed costs associated with removal of implants. 
There is also a rupture fund to compensate women whose implants have 
broken as well as a fund to cover administration and attorney's fees.
  At the time the settlement was negotiated, Dow Corning denied rumors 
of a bankruptcy filing. The women coplaintiffs agreed to bypass the 
court system and entered into the settlement in good faith, under the 
impression that Dow Corning would fully honor the agreement. In May 
1995, Dow Corning reversed its position and filed bankruptcy under 
chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.
  Dow Chemical, the parent company of Dow Corning, may be held directly 
liable for breast implant claims under a recent ruling by a Federal 
district court. In May 1995, Dow Chemical filed a cross-claim against 
Dow Corning. One week later Dow Corning--which is 50 percent owned by 
Dow Chemical and has interlocking boards of directors with Dow 
Chemical--filed for bankruptcy. Dow Chemical then claimed that, under 
an April 19, 1995 Supreme Court ruling, all litigation against them 
should be put on hold because of their cross-claim. I find it hard to 
believe that Dow Chemical, as the parent company of Dow Corning, was 
not aware of Dow Corning's pending bankruptcy filing when they filed 
their cross-claim.
  I believe that there is strong evidence that Dow Chemical and Dow 
Corning colluded to manipulate the legal system to avoid the bulk of 
their liability in the $4.2 billion settlement. In addition, there is 
documented evidence that Dow Chemical suppressed information they had 
in their possession from as early as the 1940's that silicone posed 
significant health hazards to humans. Despite knowledge of this 
information, Dow Chemical and its subsidiary, Dow Corning, sold 
hundreds of thousands of silicone breast implants to women.
  On October 10, 1995, the $4.23 billion global breast implant 
settlement collapsed, closing the door on 440,000 women who desperately 
need medical treatment. Of those 440,000 women who qualified for 
funding under the settlement, an estimated 75 percent of the women 
still have ruptured or leaking implants in their bodies with no 
financial means to pay for surgical explanation. While a few women will 
be fortunate enough to win exorbitant law suits, as evidenced by the 
recent $10 billion Nevada case, this practice will eventually bankrupt 
the manufacturers, leaving hundreds of thousands of women with no 
recourse.
  As a result, I have introduced H.R. 366, the Breast Implant 
Accountability Act, to provide a fair solution for all parties 
involved, and I invite you to join me by cosponsoring the legislation. 
The Breast Implant Accountability Act does the following:
  First, requires silicone breast implant manufacturers to notify 
breast implant recipients that funds will be provided for the surgical 
removal of breast implants which were implanted before January 1, 1994. 
Patient participation is completely voluntary; explanation will be 
performed only at the request of the individual.
  Second, allows the notice recipient to select the physician and 
hospital or surgery center for the explanation procedure. The provision 
would prevent manufacturers from forcing women to travel great 
distances or to one central location for the explanation.
  Third, ensures that the explanted breast implants become the property 
of the individual from which it was removed. The implant shall be given 
to the individual in an appropriate condition.
  Fourth, requires further research on the physiological, neurological, 
and immunological effects of silicone on the human body. Individuals in 
the class action suit shall be included in the research, should they 
volunteer.
  Fifth, requires all future implant candidates to be informed of the 
health risks of implants and to sign a consent form stating that she 
has read and understands the risks involved.
  Sixth, prohibits the donation of blood and organs by individuals with 
breast implants.
  As with any faulty product that threatens the health or safety of 
consumers, the manufacturer should issue a recall of the product. The 
fact is, per woman, the cost of explanation provided for under H.R. 366 
is generally far less than the settlement award. If you support a fair 
and equitable solution for your constituents, without bankrupting the 
manufacturers, I urge you to cosponsor H.R. 366.

                          ____________________