Wednesday, April 23, 2014

Last-minute change in law lets hospitals drop patients


A few weeks before Terry Gordon died, a court-appointed lawyer paid a visit to the 63-year-old homeless man in his seventh-floor hospital room at Saint Thomas Midtown Hospital.

"I explained to him that this was not the Hyatt Regency, but we had to find him another place for him to stay," the lawyer, George Duzane, later reported to the court.

But the visit, which took place in August of last year and led to Gordon's temporary departure from the hospital, had its origin in a last-minute amendment to legislation involving conservatorships approved earlier that year.

The amendment, sponsored by Rep. Andrew Farmer after he was approached by various hospitals, was added to a bill designed to protect those who are placed in the care of conservators. The amendment gave hospitals a way to petition for court approval to discharge patients they say no longer need the costly care of a major health facility.

In Nashville the add-on provision has been used a dozen times to try to discharge people, more than half of them listed on court documents as currently or formerly homeless. In nine of the cases, including Gordon's, the petitions were approved by Davidson Probate Judge David "Randy" Kennedy.

The petition for Gordon's dismissal from the hospital was filed Aug. 8. He died less than a month later, on Sept. 2.

It's not clear from records and interviews who bore ultimate responsibility for the care of the patients involved. No one has alleged that the care they received was substandard. What is known is that the legislation gave hospitals a new way to move patients into other facilities.

Adrienne Newman, associate executive director of FiftyForward, which had been named as Gordon's health care fiduciary under the new law, said Gordon was transferred to a rehabilitation facility but then sent back to Saint Thomas Midtown Hospital on the day he died.

Full Article & Source:
Last-minute change in law lets hospitals drop patients

5 comments:

Thelma said...

Where's the rest of the story?

Finny said...

Hospitals have no business with their noses in conservatorships.

Cheryl said...

Never forget the victims who suffered on Judge Randy Kennedy's watch.

Sylvia Rudek said...

I was concerned about this matter at the time: "The amendment, sponsored by Rep. Andrew Farmer after he was approached by various hospitals, was added to a bill designed to protect those who are placed in the care of conservators. The amendment gave hospitals a way to petition for court approval to discharge patients they say no longer need the costly care of a major health facility."

The title of this article "Last-minute change in law lets hospitals drop patients". I have to wonder about the intentions of the special interest group: hospitals and the timing of this 'last minute change' thereby avoiding debate.

Insurance companies terminating coverage of Patients / Clients of the hospital are part of if not the sole reason of the discharge process, determining the date of discharge, based on a physician's or a hospitalists recommendation or evaluation.

"A patient's insurance or the lack of it bears no weight in deciding whether to seek appointment of an emergency conservator, Howser said."

Any opposition related to premature discharge by the patient or the family or Power of Attorney for health care for that patient can result in a hospital petitioning for guardianship.

See: Dolores Bedin http://stopguardianabuse.org/dolores_bedin.htm

Sylvia Rudek said...

HB5573 State of Illinois 2013 and 2014 98TH GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Introduced by: Rep. David Harris

SYNOPSIS AS INTRODUCED:

Amends the Probate Act of 1975.

Provides that guardianship of a disabled adult may not be used in a retaliatory manner or as a convenience for a health care provider or family member.

Provides that no petition for guardianship shall seek relief that is in conflict with any properly and previously executed will, trust, power of attorney, durable power of attorney, health care directive, advance directive, or other directive unless undue influence is proven in the creation of the document, by clear and convincing evidence, at a hearing conducted under the rules of civil procedure of this State.