2 Suits Allege Dental Clinics Deliberately Sedated Kids

The owner of a chain of dental clinics where a 4-year-old Santa Ana boy died last year had his staff deliberately sedate and restrain every child who was treated to make it easier to work on the patients and maximize profits, two lawsuits filed Wednesday charge.

The suits came a day after one of the dentists who treated Javier Villa was arrested on suspicion of involuntary manslaughter in connection with the boy’s death, which occurred after a routine visit to a Megdal Dental Care clinic in Santa Ana.

A coroner’s report concluded that Javier died because his airway was not kept open while he was sedated and restrained at the clinic. Medical experts said restraints are commonly used for children who are extremely upset during dental procedures but are not required in all cases.

The suits were filed on behalf of Javier’s parents and a second boy, 6-year-old Ramon Martinez Jr., who allegedly suffered severe spasms and other physical and emotional problems after being sedated and strapped into a papoose board last year at a Megdal clinic in Stanton.

Both lawsuits charge clinic owner Phillip Megdal, his corporation, other dentists and dental staff with gross negligence, fraud, intentional infliction of emotional distress, conspiracy and negligent hiring. They seek unspecified damages.

Megdal “consciously pursued a pattern” of sedating young patients and strapping them to papoose boards to ensure that the dental procedures could be completed without interruption. These practices allowed the clinics to “maximize financial profits,” the suits said.

Neither Megdal nor his attorney could be reached for comment late Wednesday. Megdal and the dentist arrested Tuesday, Gabriella Thanh-Ngoc Pham, in the past have denied any wrongdoing.

One lawsuit paints a grim picture of the events on Aug. 4, 1997, the day of Javier’s death, and what his parents say they saw and heard.

The boy’s mother asked clinic staff if her son was OK as he squirmed after drinking 16 cubic centimeters of chloryl hydrate sedative, the lawsuit states.

Javier’s mother, Yolanda Villa, said in the court papers that office employees assured her everything was “normal” and “fine.”

Javier then lay unconscious for an hour and a half at the dental office before a clinic employee saw the boy and tied him tightly and incorrectly into a papoose board, according to the suit.

When Yolanda Villa heard a scream from the room where her son was being treated and tried to peer in to find out what was wrong, employees said everything was “all right” and shut the door in her face, according to court documents.

“Before the door was closed, Yolanda Villa observed her son unconscious and the defendants [dentists and clinic employees] . . . frantically performing maneuvers on her son, Javier,” the suit says.

While her son was rushed by ambulance to the emergency room of UCI Medical Center, where he was declared dead, dental clinic staffers “insisted” that she be driven home by a clinic employee. The employee knew the boy had died but told the mother “that Javier was fine and there was absolutely nothing to worry about,” the lawsuit charged.

Megdal developed a practice of routinely using 16 to 17 or more cubic centimeters of chloryl hydrate on young patients, according to both lawsuits.

Pediatric dental experts told state investigators probing Javier’s death that 16 cc’s of chloryl hydrate was at the upper end of the recommended amount for a child of Javier’s age and weight.

Megdal’s staff then place “every sedated child . . . on a papoose board and restrained. . . . It has been standard procedure . . . for many years,” according to the suits.

It was also standard procedure not to place any support under children’s necks who were strapped into papoose boards, the court papers allege. Such a support--which papoose board warning labels state must be used--could have saved Javier’s life, according to a pediatric dental expert interviewed by state investigators.

Consumer advocates have in the past criticized low-rate, high-volume clinics like Megdal’s. He has insisted that the clinics provided badly needed, quality care in poor neighborhoods.

The California Board of Dental Examiners is investigating whether Megdal improperly operated more clinics than the law allows.