Payout final insult to local woman's implant injuries

CLIO - A local woman's share of a gigantic legal settlement over silicone breast implants is far less than the $300,000 women were once promised.

Try $3,000.

That's how much "Suzie," a mother of two who said she was among the first women in the country to question the safety of the once-banned breast implants, received on Dec. 15. She's fuming, not celebrating.

"This is not enough to have the implants taken out or reverse what's going on with my body," she said. "These global settlements are a joke. I almost sent it back."

Suzie, who did not want her real name published, said she spent more than 10 years wrangling with Dow Corning (once the largest maker of silicon for breast implants) and revolving doors of attorneys and doctors treating her muscle aches and arthritis. She was featured in a 1994 Flint Journal article about the implant case.

She's one of an estimated 170,000 women who have filed suit against Dow Corning, which set up a $3.25-billion trust to pay women who say they were harmed by breast implants.

There's no available average for how much women have been paid, said David Austern, claims administrator with SF-DCT, the organization established to handle the payouts.

"It's always hard with class-action work to determine who you've paid and how much," Austern said by phone from Falls Church, Va., outside Washington, D.C.

About $800 million has been paid to women since the first claim checks were mailed out in early 2004. Of those claims, most have been to women whose implants ruptured, and they received $20,000.

Among women with disease claims, such as a diagnosis with lupus or cancer blamed on the implants, payouts have been $10,000 to $250,000, Austern said.

About 55,000 claims have been paid.

"As for who's been paid, ordinarily it's first in, first out," Austern said, adding that payouts are expected to continue through 2019.

Suzie was diagnosed with arthritis at age 28, about six years after she had her breasts enlarged with silicone implants in 1986. She blames the disease and muscle weakness and pain on the implants.

In the late 1980s, consumer advocates began questioning the safety of silicone-gel filled implants, and in 1991 Suzie sued.

She said her recent check falls far short of the $10,000 cost to remove the implants she now wishes she never had.

Still, Suzie said she probably will cash the check - waiving her right to make any further claims. She said her income can be fickle. She cleans houses, her husband is in sales and they have bills to pay while raising two teenagers.

"I talked with two attorneys who said I may as well take the money, because it will be years before any claim, if I could still file one, would be resolved," she said.

Silicone implants are back on the market after a 14-year virtual ban in the U.S. The FDA said studies show silicone is not linked with connective-tissue diseases, lupus or cancer.

The implants are now cleared for women over age 22, but recipients are advised to get regular MRI scans to check for oozing silicone, and to be aware the gel packs do not last a lifetime.

Still, because of their more-natural feel and look compared to implants filled with saltwater, plastic surgeons are seeing a surge in interest.

As implants become available to a new generation, many women are grappling with their past experiences with them.

"I recently told my daughter about the implants and that I regretted it because of all the problems I've endured," she said. "It's important, I told her, to accept your body the way it is."

***