New Terms Offered in Breast Implant Cases : Courts: The settlement, which nullifies a $4.25-billion landmark agreement, covers fewer women and promises less than the old deal.

Three former breast implant manufacturers offered new settlement terms to American women Monday, effectively nullifying a $4.25-billion landmark agreement that was on the verge of falling apart, lawyers said.

The new offer, made during a series of intense negotiations over the weekend, covers far fewer women than the old deal and promises each of them less.

It failed to gain unanimous support among the team of plaintiffs’ lawyers, but the federal judge supervising the talks decided Monday to let each woman decide individually whether to accept or reject it.

The new offer came from Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., Baxter International Inc. and Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co., which, like other implant makers, have long contended that there is no scientific proof that the silicone implants cause health problems.

Two sources who spoke on condition of anonymity said Monday that the offer would pay women who claim that implants have already made them sick a maximum of about $600,000 each, compared to $1.4 million in the original deal. Other women with implants who do not claim current illnesses could file claims in future years.

Women have claimed that the silicone-gel implants cause a variety of health problems when they leak, including lupus and autoimmune disorders. The manufacturers dispute the claims.

The proposal offers two payment methods: The first provides a one-time fixed payment under disease categories outlined in the original settlement; the second allows women to receive payments for 15 years but carries more stringent eligibility standards.

Supporters viewed the offer as the only way to salvage anything from the settlement, which was made final last year, but is near financial collapse because of an overwhelming number of claimants.

“It’s certainly encouraging and it gives a lot of women hope they will have some compensation,” said Gail Armstrong, spokeswoman for the National Breast Implant Coalition, a support group.

However, lawyers for the 70,000 women registered under the original settlement expressed serious concerns about the new proposal, which would exclude foreign women and anyone else whose implants did not come from Baxter, Bristol-Myers or 3M.

One of the women’s lawyers involved in the negotiations called it “woefully inadequate” because of the reduced payments.

“I’m not really sure what [implant makers] are trying to accomplish through this,” attorney Ralph Knowles said.

“We are participating in the plan only because it is a quick, efficient and cost-effective way to resolve a large number of legal claims,” 3M Co. said in a written statement.

The offer only covers women who can show their implants were made by the three companies. The original settlement covered anyone who could document a health claim.

Left out of the new offer are women who got breast implants by Dow Corning Inc., which initially planned to pay about $2 billion into the settlement but filed for bankruptcy protection citing implant litigation.

Women with Dow Corning implants must pursue claims through Bankruptcy Court in Michigan, where the company is headquartered.

Union Carbide Corp., another defendant in the original settlement, declined to take part in the new offer.

Although the new offer has smaller individual payments, it guarantees that each claimant will get their maximum allowable payment regardless of how many women file claims. Because of that provision, it is impossible to calculate the total value of the offer.

That provision is designed to protect women from the financial problems that doomed the original settlement.

In that deal, each participating company agreed to pay only a certain total amount. If claims exceeded estimates, the companies had the option to withdraw from the deal, or the payments could have been reduced to make sure everyone got something.

Earlier this year, a court study found that the number of women filing claims had far exceeded expectations--about 440,000. That meant if all claimants were paid, there would only be enough money to give each 5% of what was originally promised, the study showed.

Based on the study, U.S. District Judge Sam Pointer, who has been overseeing the case from the beginning, asked the parties to return to the bargaining table and gave them until the end of last month to reach a revised deal.

Pointer did not rule Monday on the fairness of the new offer, but said it should be forwarded to women, who can accept it, or reject it and pursue their claims individually. Those who say yes could be receiving money by the end of the year, court officials estimated.

“It’s going to be a unique plan where women have the ultimate choice. There is a guaranteed payment and also a guaranteed right to choose and opt out,” said Stanley Chesley, one of six lawyers representing women.

“The proposed settlement would put money in the hands of the women quickly and provide benefits in various categories,” Bristol-Myers said in a statement. “In light of continuing medical science showing the safety of breast implants, a settlement designed to reduce courtroom uncertainties and bring some closure to the litigation would be in the best interest of all concerned.”