In just the past three years, Illinois residents have seen and been the victims of an overwhelming number of chemical spills and environmental disasters, raising serious health concerns. Those concerns, though, don’t always result in immediate health effects. After all, some of the most fatal and serious diseases caused by chemical exposures—like cancer—are latent, meaning they take time to develop and should be tested for and monitored for early detection and treatment. While some states’ court systems have allowed for the recovery of the expenses of such testing and monitoring before any physical symptoms or injury, others—like Illinois—have denied it.

But the door isn’t closed yet. Where the courts say no, our elected legislators and governor in Springfield can step in with commonsense laws to protect the health of Illinois residents. Now is the time to do so before another environmental disaster happens, leaving communities bearing the costs of their irresponsible neighbors’ mistakes.

In essence, medical monitoring legislation would allow Illinois courts to establish a program overseen by an administrator and advised by medical professionals. This would allow victims of environmental disasters to obtain testing to track and more effectively treat latent health conditions linked to preventable chemical exposure.

Below are but a few examples of toxic chemical exposure events that have recently occurred in Illinois:

• In 2019, a lawsuit was filed on behalf of a woman from Union, Illinois, after it was discovered that chemical plants near her home had been emitting and contaminating local groundwater with organic compounds like trichloroethylene (TCE) and tetrachloroethylene (PCE) since the 1970s. Other lawsuits, along with hers, allege cancer as a result of exposure to the chemicals.
• In 2019, a spill of anhydrous ammonia in Beach Park resulted in 40 people being hospitalized, with seven in critical condition from breathing in the toxic gas. Since that time, more than 50 people have filed personal injury lawsuits for the immediate health effects, mainly respiratory injuries.
• In June 2021, the Chemtool plant in Rockton, Illinois, exploded, releasing several compounds into the air, including hydrogen cyanide  More concerning was the process used to contain the ensuing fire where private contractors—hired by the owner—used firefighting foam which is known to contain perfluorooctanoic acid (PFAS), also known as a “forever chemical” due to its longevity in the environment and the human body  It has also been linked to cancer  Lawsuits have been filed there for immediate health complications and also for property damage caused by the smoke and chemicals.
• Just weeks after Rockton, a lithium battery factory caught fire in Morris, Illinois, exploding with as many as 200,000 lithium batteries. This forced thousands of nearby residents to evacuate their homes. Governor Pritzker issued a disaster proclamation, and the Illinois EPA is currently monitoring the air quality. Investigation into potential legal claims for residents is ongoing.

All of these incidents raise questions about why these companies have recklessly situated themselves so close to residential communities: homes, schools, daycare centers, churches, and parks. Some companies knew this from the day they opened their doors; they mapped out the distances to neighborhoods in their initial facility plans.

The simple, responsible step for these companies using hazardous chemicals would be to relocate to more remote sites where the threat to human health and life is nonexistent.

But those who insist on operating in such close proximity to their neighbors—many times without ever alerting them to the dangers of their business—take on a certain responsibility. When chemical spills, plant explosions, or other contaminations occur, health and lives are put at risk.

Those at risk who learn of these exposures react predictably. They become fearful. They begin researching. They start seeking out medical opinions. They want testing to ensure they and their loved ones are safe.

But why should those in the community—terrified of cancer and other latent diseases—be the ones bearing the cost for such testing? Shouldn’t it fall on those responsible for the exposure in the first place?

Many states’ courts, including Florida, California, Arizona, and New Jersey, already allow for medical monitoring lawsuits, which grants some form of recovery of the medical expenses related to testing for diseases after exposures to hazardous chemicals and other conditions are met in Illinois’ Supreme Court recently declined to allow the recovery of such expenses in a case involving exposure to lead in city water pipes when there are no physical injuries or symptoms present.

A medical monitoring law in Illinois would allow for the creation of a program that would be funded by companies after they have been found to be negligent (acting unreasonably) or recklessly in their emitting or disposing of hazardous chemicals—as defined by groups like the World Health Organization or the USEPA—like EtO, TCE, or PFAS—and can be shown to have been a cause of elevated exposures.

A notice period would go into effect, and individuals would have a certain amount of time to apply for entry into the program. Entry into the program would not prevent anyone from filing a lawsuit for immediate health concerns or, later, for a latent disease like cancer; rather, the program would solely be in place to provide for the expenses related to monitoring for early signs of those conditions.

The program would be under medical guidance so those monitoring expenses would only be eligible for reimbursement if the medical experts deemed it appropriate.

Medical monitoring would shift the burden and costs of testing from individuals to those responsible. Most importantly, it could help catch deadly diseases at their earliest stages and prevent the devastating consequences so many families have had to endure due to environmental pollution and exposure to hazardous chemicals.