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:
EDITORIAL | Nursing Homes Take Away Right to Sue
1 comment:
Thank you. I appreciate NASGA's diligence in reporting this valuable information.
Post a Comment