In January 2013, 80-year-old Esther Brown was found lying in her bed at a Pennsylvania nursing home with blood covering her hands and her pillowcase.
A nurse’s aide at the home reported that one
of her co-workers had hit Esther and then had thrown a can of shaving
cream in her face, striking the elderly woman above the eye. The
incident was reported to the police, and Esther died several months
later.
Her family sued the nursing home, alleging
negligence and battery. But before the case could proceed to trial, the
judge had to rule on whether the family had the right to file such a
lawsuit. When Esther was admitted to the facility in 2011, she and her
daughter signed a contract that required her, and her family, to submit
any quality-of-care complaints to an arbitrator rather than to a judge
or jury.
Late last year, Judge Jeffrey Sprecher upheld
the family’s right to sue, finding the arbitration agreement
“unconscionable” because it was presented to Brown at emotionally
difficult time; consisted of long, confusing passages; improperly
portrayed the deal as beneficial to all parties; and included a
confidentiality provision that Sprecher said was “designed to bury all
proof of bad things that may be alleged to occur in a nursing home.”
The
sad reality is that these types of arbitration agreements are fairly
common now among nursing homes, and they are often upheld by the courts.
Prospective residents, who may be in the midst of a health care crisis,
are asked to forfeit their right to sue as a condition of admission. As
the judge in the Esther Brown case ruled, these binding arbitration
agreements are sometimes “forced down the throat” of residents.
As
Sprecher pointed out, these agreements also attempt to “inject fear in
the patient by suggesting that a court action takes so much longer than
arbitration, so that unless you select arbitration, the patient may die
before his court case could be finished.”
At first
glance, arbitration might sound like a reasonable, effective way to
address complaints without resorting to litigation. The problem is that
through litigation, complainants have the ability to use the discovery
process to procure documents that speak to patterns of abuse or neglect.
They can also subpoena witnesses for depositions, and secure sworn
testimony as to the facts of the case. And all of that is handled
through a public proceeding before a judge or a jury of one’s peers.
Many
of the arbitration agreements restrict a complainant’s access to
records, as well as the number of depositions and witnesses. Some place
limits on how much a party can recover in damages.
The
federal government could easily bar these types of mandatory agreements
as a condition of a home’s participation in the Medicaid program — but
it has repeatedly refused to do so. In fact, the federal Centers for
Medicare and Medicaid Services is considering major changes in nursing
home regulations, but under the proposed new rules, homes will only be
required to “explain” arbitration agreements to residents.
Of
course, many individuals are placed in nursing homes precisely because
their cognitive abilities are greatly diminished. How many of them are
in a position to understand the legal rights they are forfeiting by
signing these agreements?
Fortunately, CMS says it is
still considering whether it should simply prohibit binding arbitration
agreements altogether, noting that residents who depend on nursing homes
for urgently needed care may feel pressured to sign the contracts even
when they’re not required as a condition of admission.
It’s
time for CMS to ban arbitration agreements in nursing homes. If care
facilities feel that’s an intrusion on their right to dictate the terms
of admission, they’re free to bow out of the Medicaid program and accept
only private-pay residents.
But as long as public money
is paying for the care provided in these homes, the regulation of these
facilities should be designed to protect the public and not to appease
the industry.
Voice your opinion
CMS
is accepting public comments through Sept. 14 on the proposed new
nursing home regulations. To voice your opinion, go to regulations.gov,
and enter “CMS-3260-P,” with the quotation marks, in the search engine.
That will direct you to a link to the proposed regulations, labeled as
Medicare and Medicaid Programs: Reform of Requirements for Long-Term
Care Facilities. Through that link, you can submit your written
comments.
Full Article & Source:
1 comment:
This is the most comprehensive explanation I have seen explaining arbitration. Thank you whoever wrote it and thank you NASGA. I have a new understanding.
Post a Comment