by Maria Dinzeo
OAKLAND, Calif. (CN) — A federal judge ruled Wednesday that California’s byzantine public health bureaucracy must face a lawsuit
by elderly Medi-Cal patients claiming it fails to enforce laws
prohibiting nursing homes from dumping them into hospitals to free up
space for more profitable residents.
Bruce Anderson languished for over a year in Sutter General Hospital
after he was sent there by Norwood Pines Care Center. Anderson’s
traumatic brain injury and resulting behavioral issues put him at
greater risk for falls. Anthony Chicotel, an attorney with California
Advocates for Nursing Home Reform, said Norwood Pines saw an opportunity
to unload him.
“Bruce literally just sat in bed. He never went outside. He was
drugged and it was a really sad situation,” Chicotel said in a phone
interview Wednesday evening.
Though Anderson appealed his involuntary hospital transfer under the
Nursing Home Reform Act and won, the state refuses to enforce its own
readmission orders, creating a system that incentivizes nursing homes to
break the law and ignore hearing decisions without consequences.
Anderson was finally sent to a nursing home, but only after Chicotel
asked a friend who works in nursing home administration to accept him.
Anderson was one of three men who sued the California Health
Department in 2015 alongside California Advocates for Nursing Home
Reform.
On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Haywood Gilliam ruled that Anderson
and his co-plaintiffs had alleged a concrete injury and could proceed
with their lawsuit, which has been stuck in legal limbo while the Ninth
Circuit sorted out whether they had the right to sue.
Last year, the appellate court sent the case back to Gilliam, who
dismissed it in 2016, overturning his decision that the Federal Nursing
Home Reform Act does not give individuals the right to sue states for
failing to enforce the law.
Attorney Matthew Borden of Braun Hagey & Borden, who represents
the three patients and CANHR, said Wednesday that Gilliam’s order
recognized the “Kafkaesque nightmare” his clients have been through.
“I have clients who are actually worse off having gone and availed
themselves of the process they have the right under federal law to use
to get readmitted after they’ve been unjustly kicked out,” Borden said.
“That piece of paper is worth nothing because of the way the state has
orchestrated itself. I think the ruling today is good because it
vindicates our legal theory that the processes that the state has are
just simply not effective. They’re tantamount to nothing.”
Essentially, the California California Department of Health Care
Services says that once it issues an order for nursing home readmission,
it no longer has jurisdiction and “has no authority to enforce its own
orders.”
For Borden and his clients, the red tape is maddening.
“This is an easy problem to solve. All you have to do is commit to
enforcing the orders. It’s just that they don’t want to enforce these
orders,” Borden said, listing a half-dozen ways the state could
intervene; by cutting of Midi-Cal funding or imposing fines that
eliminate the financial incentive for nursing facilities to dump their
neediest patients.
Chicotel said he believes that most of the time, nursing homes
initiate hospital transfers for legitimate medical reasons, though he
has seen some cases of transfers made for phony reasons.
“But once they’re in the hospital, they see their opportunity to permanently get rid of them,” he said.
Chicotel said he would hope that even if Gilliam dismissed the case
again, that health and human services secretary Mark Gahly would want to
resolve the issue.
“I would think the people who run these state agencies, Dr. Gahly in
particular, would see this is a terrible outcome for nursing home
residents and want to do something regardless,” Chicotel said.
While he is happy about Gilliam’s ruling, he knows the case faces a tough slog through the court system.
“We went to state multiple times and tried to work with them to find
solutions and were basically told to get lost,” Chicotel said. “We’ve
wasted four plus years on this litigation when the solutions are pretty
simple. I’m hoping the state doesn’t want to wait that long. I’m hopeful
the new leadership will be more amenable.”
Borden said plaintiff John Wilson, who had ALS, died while the case
was on appeal. Plaintiff Robert Austin has accepted a temporary transfer
to a nursing home, but it is located 400 miles away from his sister.
“He would very much like to return back to the Sacramento area to the
facility near his sister,” Borden said. “There are a whole litany of
people who could step in as additional plaintiffs because it’s a
recurring story. It’s happening over and over again. Which is why we’re
trying to get the state to do something or take the case to trial and
get a judgment against them where there’s an injunction.”
California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform is exploring the option
of legislation in 2020 that could force the state into compliance
sooner.
A California’s Health and Human Services Agency spokesperson said in an email the agency doesn’t comment on pending litigation.
Full Article & Source:
California Public Health Agency Can’t Duck Federal Lawsuit
Showing posts with label California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform. Show all posts
Showing posts with label California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform. Show all posts
Friday, January 24, 2020
Monday, September 2, 2019
Many view assisted living as just housing, not health care. That’s dangerous
By Ed Dudensing and Anthony Chicotel
A new therapeutic and healing garden was opened at the Eskaton Care Center Greenhaven for residents to use.
California’s rapidly aging population, and the challenges posed by this so-called “gray wave,” have sparked much discussion among health care experts and policymakers. Gov. Gavin Newsom’s Master Plan for Aging, scheduled to be unveiled next year, affirms the need for decisive and strategic action. Reforming the assisted living industry must be a part of this strategy.
The graying of California has been a boon for assisted living programs, as families look for alternatives to traditional nursing homes for loved ones who are living longer. Assisted living centers appear attractive because they more closely resemble homes than hospitals, with comfortable living spaces, social programs and other amenities.
But as the popularity of assisted living continues to grow – and with it the economic clout of corporate owners – oversight and sound health care standards and practices have lagged, imperiling vulnerable people. We can attest to this firsthand: Recently, one of us represented the family of a 77-year-old resident of the long-term care mega-provider Eskaton, who choked to death after she was given powerful sedatives to chemically restrain her.
The tragedy, which resulted in a record $42.5 million verdict against Eskaton by a Sacramento jury, raised questions that go to the heart of assisted living policy in California: Why was a powerful psychotropic drug, in this case Ativan, improperly administered? Why were staffing levels and training inadequate to ensure safe and effective care? Why was oversight lacking, both inside the facility and on the part of regulators?
The answer lies in our dangerous tendency to view assisted living as housing, rather than health care. The level of care required by some assisted living residents can be indistinguishable from the level of care required by some patients in skilled nursing facilities.
Yet staffing and training requirements are far lower for assisted living programs, which, for example, don’t require a physician or nurse on-site, and do not have any minimum staff-to-resident ratios. Rising demand has only intensified the workload for assisted living staff. And the drive for profits creates an incentive to keep staffing levels lean and training minimal.
Powerful psychotropic drugs of such as Ativan may in some cases have therapeutic benefits, but they also are potentially dangerous and must be used judiciously under a physician’s order and supervision. Even though assisted living programs are required to have a medical doctor sign off on a particular medication’s use, undertrained and overworked staff often are left to make real-time decisions, especially when a resident is expressing discomfort through unruly behavior or not following instructions. This has become an issue particularly in popular memory care units, where Alzheimer and other dementia patients reside.
Since the Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly Act was passed in 1985, there have been numerous efforts to bolster oversight. Unfortunately, most reforms have focused on industry issues such as licensing and liability, and less on quality of care. While there have been additions to the state Health and Safety Code to include tiered “levels of care,” implementation has not followed.
Assisted living has many advantages. But if we are to be successful in caring for our growing ranks of elderly citizens, California needs to reset how it regulates the industry, increasing training, staffing levels and physician and nursing involvement.
This may impact the bottom line, but business priorities can’t supersede delivering responsible long-term care. This is a challenge we all – the governor, Legislature, industry and individual citizens – must confront head-on.
Full Article & Source:
Many view assisted living as just housing, not health care. That’s dangerous
See also:
Eskaton Verdict (based on original trial briefs)
The graying of California has been a boon for assisted living programs, as families look for alternatives to traditional nursing homes for loved ones who are living longer. Assisted living centers appear attractive because they more closely resemble homes than hospitals, with comfortable living spaces, social programs and other amenities.
But as the popularity of assisted living continues to grow – and with it the economic clout of corporate owners – oversight and sound health care standards and practices have lagged, imperiling vulnerable people. We can attest to this firsthand: Recently, one of us represented the family of a 77-year-old resident of the long-term care mega-provider Eskaton, who choked to death after she was given powerful sedatives to chemically restrain her.
The tragedy, which resulted in a record $42.5 million verdict against Eskaton by a Sacramento jury, raised questions that go to the heart of assisted living policy in California: Why was a powerful psychotropic drug, in this case Ativan, improperly administered? Why were staffing levels and training inadequate to ensure safe and effective care? Why was oversight lacking, both inside the facility and on the part of regulators?
The answer lies in our dangerous tendency to view assisted living as housing, rather than health care. The level of care required by some assisted living residents can be indistinguishable from the level of care required by some patients in skilled nursing facilities.
Yet staffing and training requirements are far lower for assisted living programs, which, for example, don’t require a physician or nurse on-site, and do not have any minimum staff-to-resident ratios. Rising demand has only intensified the workload for assisted living staff. And the drive for profits creates an incentive to keep staffing levels lean and training minimal.
Powerful psychotropic drugs of such as Ativan may in some cases have therapeutic benefits, but they also are potentially dangerous and must be used judiciously under a physician’s order and supervision. Even though assisted living programs are required to have a medical doctor sign off on a particular medication’s use, undertrained and overworked staff often are left to make real-time decisions, especially when a resident is expressing discomfort through unruly behavior or not following instructions. This has become an issue particularly in popular memory care units, where Alzheimer and other dementia patients reside.
Since the Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly Act was passed in 1985, there have been numerous efforts to bolster oversight. Unfortunately, most reforms have focused on industry issues such as licensing and liability, and less on quality of care. While there have been additions to the state Health and Safety Code to include tiered “levels of care,” implementation has not followed.
Assisted living has many advantages. But if we are to be successful in caring for our growing ranks of elderly citizens, California needs to reset how it regulates the industry, increasing training, staffing levels and physician and nursing involvement.
This may impact the bottom line, but business priorities can’t supersede delivering responsible long-term care. This is a challenge we all – the governor, Legislature, industry and individual citizens – must confront head-on.
Ed Dudensing is a
former deputy district attorney for Sacramento County who represents
victims of nursing home and assisted living facility neglect and abuse.
Anthony Chicotel is a staff attorney for California Advocates for
Nursing Home Reform.
Full Article & Source:
Many view assisted living as just housing, not health care. That’s dangerous
See also:
Eskaton Verdict (based on original trial briefs)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
