Sunday, April 11, 2021

New Mexico legalizes assisted suicide

Oleksandr Lysenko/Shutterstock

New Mexico’s governor on Thursday signed a bill legalizing assisted suicide in the state.

Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) signed the “Elizabeth Whitefield End of Life Options Act,” named for a late state district court judge who died of cancer in 2018, and who became an advocate for assisted-suicide in her final years.

The bill allows licensed physicians, osteopathic physicians, nurses, and physician assistants to prescribe a lethal dose of medication for terminally-ill patients who are deemed capable of self-administering the dose.

New Mexico is now the eighth state to have legalized physician-assisted suicide, along with California, Colorado, Hawaii, Montana, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington. The District of Columbia has also legalized the practice.

The state’s Catholic bishops had strongly opposed the bill, which was passed by the House in February and by the Senate in March, largely along a party-line vote.

Archbishop John Wester of Santa Fe stated on March 3 that the legislation was “the worst in the nation.”

“God’s law calls us all to recognize and protect the life and dignity of each and every human being, especially the most vulnerable. This includes unborn children and those at the end of life,” he stated. “We are promised that God’s law will ultimately bring peace and new life, especially to those who are suffering.”

The bill requires two licensed health care providers, one of them a doctor, to determine a patient’s terminal illness. Patients in hospice do not require a second confirmation.

If the patient has a history of a mental health disorder or intellectual disability – or if the providers believe they have a disorder – they must be referred for a mental health assessment before a prescription is filled.

For the request for a lethal dose of medication, two witnesses must be present, and only one may be a relative of the patient. The bill requires a 48-hour waiting period between the prescription being written and it being filed.

Some amendments in the bill were struck before it passed the state Senate. Amendments allowing for insurance collection and waiving liability for health care providers were removed, AP reported.

The bill still contains a state residency requirement, which a 2019 version of the legislation did not include. Some critics warned that the previous bill would have enabled “suicide tourism” where patients would travel from out-of-state to receive a lethal prescription. That bill also allowed for lethal prescriptions to be issued remotely through telemedicine.

The 2021 bill does include a conscience exemption for health care providers who refuse to provide a lethal prescription, but it requires them to inform the patient and refer them to another provider who will provide the prescription.

Full Article & Source:

LA judge disciplined a third time for bad behavior on bench

By BRIAN MELLEY

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A Los Angeles County judge with a history of bad behavior has been disciplined for being irritable with defense lawyers and telling an acquitted man that “there’s no question in my mind that you’re guilty.”

Judge Patrick Connolly was publicly admonished for displaying improper demeanor toward two criminal defense lawyers and for an inappropriate remark after a jury verdict, the Commission on Judicial Performance said Friday.

It was the third time Connolly has been disciplined since he became a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge in 2009. He was admonished in 2016 for abusing his authority by conducting a hearing to determine if a defense lawyer should face contempt charges. He was privately admonished in 2010 for using profanity with lawyers. 

Connolly, a former gang prosecutor who presides in the Compton courthouse, told a man acquitted in a shooting case in 2018 that he was lucky.

“Let me tell you, you’ve been given a gift from God,” Connolly told Eugene Germany. “Because there’s no question in my mind that you’re guilty of this crime.”

Germany and a co-defendant had been charged with opening fire at a fleeing vehicle after the driver had stabbed one of their friends.

Connolly appeared to chastise Germany, for not accepting a plea deal that would have sent him and a co-defendant, Dalisha Monique Jordan, to prison for six years if they both agreed to plead guilty.

Jordan wanted to accept the plea offer, but it was relinquished when Germany rejected it.

“I’ll tell you, chivalry is not dead,” Connolly told Germany. “If you’d taken the deal, Ms. Jordan would have had that six-year deal. She’s going to get a lot more time than that. So, you know, take that into consideration.”

Jordan was sentenced to 14 years in prison.

In another instance last year, Connolly was irritable with defense lawyers who had requested to appear at an arraignment by telephone because they feared they had been exposed to COVID-19. Connolly had agreed to the telephone hearing but then appeared to hold it against the lawyers and their clients.

The attorneys for brothers Jorge and Felipe Ramirez, who were charged with assaulting a police officer, asked that their clients be released without bail because of concerns they could be susceptible to coronavirus in jail.

Defense lawyer Martin Lijtmaer said he had letters attesting to his client’s health and the judge repeatedly snapped: “How am I going to see that letter, if you’re not in my courtroom?”

Lijtmaer tried to respond, saying, “Your honor, respectfully, the reason I didn’t ... ” before being cut off.

“Respectfully?” Connolly said. “You have not come to the courtroom.”

Connolly refused to release either man without bail.

Lijtmaer said his client and brother had to post “ridiculously high bail” that has nearly bankrupted their family. He said the cases both ended without prison time and the charges will ultimately be dismissed.

Connolly acknowledged he “spoke too sharply” to the lawyers and asked the commission to consider “the highly unusual circumstances” that the hearing was just a day after Gov. Gavin Newsom issued a stay-home order.

The commission said Connolly did not acknowledge his misconduct or show contrition.

Connolly did not immediately return a message seeking comment left with his courtroom clerk.

Full Article & Source: 

Many long-term care staffers refused the vaccine. Now they have more infections than residents.

By Cindy Krischer Goodman, Kate Santich and Adelaide Chen

Nurse Eva Diaz administers the Pfizer vaccine to Pam Peters a nurse practitioner at John Knox Village, Wednesday, Dec. 16, 2020, in Pompano Beach, Fla. Many long term care workers have declined the COVID vaccine. (Marta Lavandier/AP)

At Florida’s long-term care facilities, more workers are now infected with COVID-19 than elderly residents, a dramatic shift from earlier in the pandemic.

Despite state and federal attempts to offer vaccinations at all nursing homes and assisted-living centers in the state, 62% of staffers have declined — posing the single biggest threat to the more than 25,000 elderly people in those facilities who are also unvaccinated.

“These are the folks from the beginning that were bringing it in,” said Mary Daniel of Jacksonville, a caregiver and advocate for families of residents. “It’s frustrating. Staff members are choosing not to get the vaccine and it’s the residents who are getting punished because their families are getting locked out again.”

As of April 9, 344 of Florida’s long-term care workers tested positive for COVID, compared to 276 residents. The good news is overall cases are down — only a tenth of what they were in January, according to state data.

But while infections in residents continue to decline, cases among workers have plateaued, or in some instances, begun to tick upward in recent days. These are mostly low-paid workers who are in close contact with elderly residents.

Nursing homes are mandated to test their workers regularly for COVID-19 but assisted living facilities are not. So it’s possible not all cases are reported. Most homes continue to require masks and check the temperatures of staff daily to spot symptomatic workers with COVID before they expose others.

But mandating vaccination is highly controversial.

“Some workers are totally against it,” said Pascal Bergeron, chairman of North Lake Assisted Living in Hollywood and CEO of ALF BOSS, an assisting living resource agency. “They are scared to death of it, and forcing it on them would probably cause some to quit.”

The low vaccination rate is worrisome in workers who care for the group most vulnerable to COVID-19, particularly when some residents did not get vaccinated either. The Agency for Health Care Administration reports that 82% of residents are vaccinated.

Kristen Knapp, communications director for the Florida Health Care Association, which represents nursing homes, said a combination of factors exists for why some of these vulnerable residents still aren’t fully vaccinated: Some are new admissions, others declined as a personal choice or their family declined for them. And some have underlying conditions that put them at risk.

But the effort to inoculate both residents and staff isn’t over, Knapp said. (Click to continue reading)

Full Article & Source:

Saturday, April 10, 2021

Governor Authorizes Measure Strengthening Guardian Oversight To Protect Vulnerable Adults In New Mexico

Submitted by Carol A. Clark
 
STATE News:

SANTA FE — Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham on Thursday signed into law extensive guardianship reform legislation, creating much-needed oversight of legal guardians and conservators that control medical, financial, residential and other major life decisions of more than 6,000 New Mexicans who are aging or living with disabilities.

Inadequate oversight of guardianship and conservatorship cases have left many of the most at-risk adults in this state susceptible to abuse, neglect or exploitation.

Sponsored by Rep. Marian Matthews and co-sponsored by Rep. Joanne Ferrary, Sen. Jerry Ortiz y Pino, Sen. Linda Lopez and Sen. Katy Duhigg, House Bill 234 establishes a court visitor pilot project, a partnership between the courts and the Developmental Disabilities Council’s Office of Guardianship to provide eyes and ears on the ground for judges to monitor guardianship cases.

The goal of the pilot project is to build a program that will allow judges to assign volunteer court visitors to meet with and submit a report about every person under guardianship in New Mexico at least once a year.

The bill also establishes the Working Interdisciplinary Network of Guardianship Stakeholders program, or WINGS, based on a national model that studies and implements best practices in guardianship and alternatives to guardianship.

“This legislation will help ensure that our guardianship system provides adults with the least restrictive alternatives to managing and living their lives,” Gov. Lujan Grisham said. “We must commit to the ongoing work of reforming and evolving beyond guardianship. Through the WINGS program, we will bring to New Mexico the most innovative ideas from around the country on how to best protect the rights of people who are subject to guardianship and ensure that they and their families have a voice.”

House Bill 234 requires the Office of Guardianship, Administrative Office of the Courts and Office of the State Auditor to oversee and monitor guardians and conservators in meaningful ways. Specifically, the bill requires the Office of Guardianship to conduct annual comprehensive reviews of state-funded guardianship services, as well as welfare visits of protected persons receiving those services.

Additionally, the bill requires the Administrative Office of the Courts to establish a guardianship annual report review division and authorizes the Office of the State Auditor to review annual conservator’s reports, access financial records in conservatorship cases, and conduct full audits, if necessary.

“For too long, the guardianship system in New Mexico has been paternalistic, overly restrictive, and unexamined,” said Executive Director Alice Liu McCoy of the New Mexico Developmental Disabilities Council. “HB 234 will hold everyone in the guardianship system accountable – which include not only guardians and conservators, but legal professionals, state agencies, and the courts. Most importantly, it requires everyone in the guardianship system to continually seek the least restrictive options to meet the protected person’s needs.”

The bill requires the Office of Guardianship to publish an annual report about publicly funded guardianship services in New Mexico, which will increase transparency and support evidence-based policy recommendations to improve the guardianship system. The bill also requires the head of the Office of Guardianship to be an attorney licensed in New Mexico.

The number of guardianship cases is expected to increase significantly, as pandemic complications arise and the state’s population ages rapidly. The Office of Guardianship’s wait lists have dramatically increased in the past year.

Full Article & Source:

Wyoming Supreme Court disbar former tribal court judge sentenced for drug trafficking on Wind River Reservation

By Brendan LaChance 

(File photo, Trevor T. Trujillo; Oil City)

CASPER, Wyo. — The Wyoming Supreme Court has disbarred attorney Terri V. Smith of Arapaho, Wyoming, the Wyoming State Bar said on Wednesday.

“The order of disbarment stemmed from a 2019 felony drug arrest which ended with Smith pleading guilty to two felonies and being sentenced to six months in prison, to be followed by six months of home confinement, to be followed by three years of supervised release,” the Wyoming State Bar said. “Smith stipulated to the disbarment, which was presented to the Board of Professional Responsibility (BPR).”

“In approving the BPR’s recommendation for an order of disbarment, the Wyoming Supreme Court ordered Smith to pay an administrative fee in the amount of $750.00 and costs of $50.00 to the Wyoming State Bar.”

T order of disbarment is available online.

Smith, 35, was sentenced by Federal District Court Judge Alan B. Johnson on Oct. 6, 2020 for “conspiracy to distribute oxycodone and distribution of cocaine,” according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Wyoming.

“She received six months of imprisonment, to be followed by thirty-six months of supervised release, and ordered to pay community restitution in the amount of $500.00 and a $200.00 special assessment,” the release from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Wyoming states.

She was sentenced to six months imprisonment to be followed by 36 months of supervised release. She was formerly a Wind River Indian Reservation Chief Tribal Court judge.

Smith’s sister, Jerri Lee Smith, 35, was sentenced for “conspiracy to distribute oxycodone, conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine and cocaine, and possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine.”

“She received fifty-one months of imprisonment, to be followed by forty-eight months of supervised release, and ordered to pay community restitution in the amount of $400.00 and a $300.00 special assessment,” the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Wyoming said.

The investigation into suspected drug activity and trafficking in Fremont County and the Wind River Reservation began in 2018 “after several traffic stops by the Wyoming Highway Patrol led to the discovery of quantities of methamphetamine, oxycodone, and cocaine,” according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Wyoming.

Agents with the FBI, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the Wyoming Division of Criminal Investigation participated in the investigation.

“A variety of investigative resources were used to determine that Jerri Smith and Terri Smith had been obtaining oxycodone in Utah and were selling them in Fremont County and on the Wind River Indian Reservation,” the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Wyoming said. “Additionally the investigation uncovered that Jerri Smith was also obtaining methamphetamine and cocaine in Utah then distributing and selling it in Wyoming.  At the time of the investigation, Terri Smith was the Chief Tribal Judge on the Wind River Indian Reservation. She later resigned from her position.”

When the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Wyoming announced the sentencings in Oct. 2020, FBI Denver Special Agent in Charge Michael Schneider said: “Today’s sentencing of Tribal Judge Terri Smith and her sister is a step forward in identifying public officials and private citizens who commit federal crimes and victimize the community members of the Wind River Indian Reservation. Public officials who engage in violations of federal law, to include drug trafficking, erodes the public’s confidence in government. Investigating these individuals is one of the FBI’s top criminal priorities. The FBI Denver Division would like to extend its appreciation to the Rocky Mountain Safe Trails Task Force, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Wyoming Division of Criminal Investigation, and U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Wyoming for their invaluable assistance in this investigation.”

Full Article & Source:

ALERT: Connecticut considers bill to legalize doctor-assisted suicide

Adult residents who are deemed mentally competent and have been diagnosed by their attending physician with a terminal illness ‘may request aid in dying by making two oral requests and one written request to such patient's attending physician.’
 

By Calvin Freiburger
 

CONTACT YOUR CT LEGISLATORS: Oppose legalized euthanasia and HB 6425!nbsp;Click to contact your Legislators, now.

HARTFORD, April 8, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Medically-assisted suicide could become legal in Connecticut if the state legislature approves a Democrat-backed bill that would allow adults suffering from a terminal illness to take lethal medication to end their lives.

House Bill 6425 says that adult residents who are deemed mentally competent and have been diagnosed by their attending physician with a terminal illness “may request aid in dying by making two oral requests and one written request to such patient’s attending physician.” The two oral requests must be made at least fifteen days apart, and the written request must be made in the presence of at least two witnesses attesting to the patient’s soundness of mind and that he or she is acting voluntarily. The request may be rescinded at any time.

Notably, the bill says that the “person signing the qualified patient’s death certificate shall list the underlying terminal illness as the cause of death,” rather than the lethal drug.

If signed into law, it would take effect starting in October 2021, but many are speaking out in hopes of preventing that from happening. Hartford area disability-rights advocate Lisa Blumberg said it “defies imagination that Connecticut is contemplating legalizing assisted suicide when COVID-19 deaths have exceeded 500,000 nationwide,” and that enacting the bill “would increase the shredding of the social fabric” by offering death as a solution to depression.

Calling HB 6424 “nothing more than a license to kill,” the Connecticut Freedom Alliance submitted written testimony warning that the bill “allows only the patient’s health care providers to make the determination as to the patient’s mental competency to take his or her life, without any input from the ones who know the patient best — close family members”; and noting that “where assisted suicide (the more accurate title for this legislation) has been legalized, unimaginable horrors have ensued.”

“The Netherlands allows children as young as 12 to end their lives through euthanasia, and in 2017 alone, 6,585 people legally died this way in the country,” the group continued. “In 2014, Belgium became the first country to remove any age restriction on assisted suicide, so that children of all ages may now elect to end their own lives. And just two years after Canada legalized assisted suicide for adults, doctors at the world-renowned Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto are now calling for legislation that would allow children to end their lives without parental knowledge or consent.”

LifeSiteNews is currently running a Voter Voice campaign in hopes of making the public’s opposition to HB 6424 clear to Connecticut lawmakers. Readers can click on this link to easily send their elected representatives a pre-written message or write their own.

Full Article & Source:

Friday, April 9, 2021

Guardianship: It’s an Emergency and I Care a Lot…About Your Assets

by Stephanie Henrick

I recently watched the 2020 Netflix film “I Care a Lot”, the story of a professional court-appointed guardian (played by actress Rosamund Pike) who bilks the assets of dozens of elderly wards. As a Pennsylvania estate planning attorney, I regularly represent family members, alleged incapacitated individuals (AIPs), and guardians. And nothing makes my blood boil more than discovering someone has taken advantage of an elderly or disabled individual via guardianship.

Pike’s character, Marla Grayson along with the help of a crooked doctor, has elderly individuals declared incapacitated, that is, unable to take care of themselves. Grayson is appointed as legal guardian and subsequently drains her wards’ assets for her own personal gain. Unfortunately, the exploitation of the vulnerable occurs more than we care to admit.

Does Guardianship Fraud Happen a Lot?

Well, it doesn’t quite happen according to the film. Director/writer J Blakeson took liberties with the legal requirements, but this isn’t a courtroom drama. Plus, Blakeson needed to make room for the sub-plot of the retired Russian Mafioso (played by my favorite Game of Thrones actor, Peter Dinklage). I’ll leave it at that before I give away any spoilers.

So then how is one appointed a legal guardian In Pennsylvania?

A petition must be filed for adjudication of incapacity and for the appointment of a guardian. Under Pennsylvania law, the petitioner “may be any person interested in the alleged incapacitated person’s (“AIP”) welfare”. This is a fairly broad definition and may include family, neighbors, area agency on aging, healthcare provider or other professional with a relationship to the AIP.

Here, Grayson’s relationship to Dianne Wiest’s AIP character, Jennifer Peterson, is unclear. Marla doesn’t appear to be representing anyone (agency or otherwise) interested in Jennifer’s welfare. As an aside, I would challenge standing, but where is the entertainment value in that?

In a real life situation, the petitioner must prove by clear and convincing evidence to a Judge that the AIP is incapacitated to become a guardian. There need to be specific findings of cognitive incapacity that has impaired the person’s ability to understand information, to make reasoned decisions, to effectively manage their financial resources or assure their own physical health and safety.

In the movie, Grayson submits a report by the crooked doctor (Dr. Amos, played by Alicia Witt) to prove incapacity. While this is permissible under Pennsylvania law, the “clear and convincing” part is skipped over in the film. The judge states the court would “let it slide” because it was an emergency hearing without questioning why the matter was an emergency. In PA, an emergency hearing is proper where it is apparent that the AIP is at imminent risk of irreparable harm, including severe financial exploitation, medical risk or risk of homelessness.

In Pennsylvania, Grayson would also be required to show that there is no less restrictive alternative to the guardianship. For instance, does the AIP have a Power of Attorney? If not, is she able to execute a Power of Attorney? Does she have support in the community?

Certainly, Ms. Peterson would argue she has the support of the Russian mafia to handle her affairs, and she appears quite capable of executing a Power of Attorney. In reality, a guardianships is a last resort because it deprives a person of his/her legal rights and restricts their rights to autonomy and self-determination.

In Pennsylvania, there are two types of guardians:

  • a guardian of the person is responsible for making personal, residential and medical decisions for the AIP.
  • a guardian of the estate is responsible for financial decisions, managing income and property.

So how does a person get deemed incapacitated and appointed a guardian against his or her wishes, without even being present in court? Fiction aside, in an emergency hearing, the 20-day notice period is typically waived, but required for the plenary hearing. The AIP has a right to counsel and if they can’t afford one, counsel will be appointed by the court. In an emergency hearing, there usually isn’t time to appoint counsel until the plenary hearing. The AIP is also required to attend the hearing unless there is a sworn statement by a physician that the AIP’s physical or mental health would be harmed by attending.

In this movie, all of this plays perfectly to Pike’s game. While we don’t get to the plenary hearing in the movie, one can assume that Pike’s character would manipulate a loophole in the law, and have the crooked doctor friend testify that the AIP would be mentally harmed, legally excusing her from participating at the hearing.

One would hope that this Judge would follow suit with Montgomery County Pennsylvania’s Orphans’ Court, and appoint a well-vetted experienced Orphans’ Court attorney to represent the AIP. That is the only way to ensure that their voice will be heard by the Judge.

How can you avoid guardianship scams like the ones in “I Care A Lot”?

Have a current complete well-drafted estate plan, with financial and healthcare Powers of Attorney. Choose your agent under Power of Attorney wisely. Make sure it is someone you trust implicitly and then name a backup agent, just in case. While I can’t promise that you won’t end up in a guardianship proceeding if you have a POA (your agent could go rogue, fail to act, or die and there is no backup named), the chances are extremely low if you have the proper documents in place.

You can find “I Care a Lot” on Netflix now.

Full Article & Source:

Orleans magistrate commissioner disciplined by Supreme Court for forging client’s signature

by Nicholas Chrastil
 

Orleans Magistrate Commissioner Albert Thibodeaux was formally disciplined by the Louisiana Supreme Court following an investigation into allegations that, while working in private practice, he forged a legal client’s signature on a court pleading, notarized it, and filed it into the court record, according to a ruling handed down on Wednesday. 

Thibodeaux — who admitted that he violated legal ethics rules, according to the Wednesday ruling — was given a six-month suspension from practicing law, but that suspension was deferred “in its entirety” unless Thibodeaux engages in any further misconduct during that period. One of the justices, Jefferson D. Hughes III, thought the deferred suspension was not a harsh enough measure, and in a dissent said that he would have imposed a period of actual suspension.

It is unclear whether or how the disciplinary action will affect Thibodeaux’s role as commissioner in Orleans Parish Magistrate Court, where once a week he presides over first appearances and makes bail determinations for criminal defendants, among other duties. Commissioners are allowed to continue to practice civil law while presiding, but are barred from practicing criminal law. 

Reached on Wednesday, Thibodeaux said he was unable to discuss the court’s decision, and directed inquiries to his attorney, Harry Rosenberg. 

Rosenberg was not immediately able to be reached. Rob Kazik, the judicial administrator, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

The ruling says that following an investigation into the allegations, Thibodeaux and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel — which serves as the investigative and prosecutorial arm of the Louisiana Attorney Disciplinary Board — filed a “joint petition for consent discipline” in which Thibodeaux admitted he violated two Rules of Professional Conduct.

One of the rules states that “a lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client” which “requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation.” The other makes it misconduct for a lawyer to “engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.”

Thibodeaux is one of four magistrate commissioners, and was appointed by the 12 criminal court judges and the magistrate judge in 2014. 

Full Article & Source:

Florida long-term care residents can enjoy family visits, complete with hugs

Federal and state restrictions loosened this month to allow more normal visitation after more than a year of pandemic-induced lockdowns  

On July 17, 2020, Margaret Choinacki, 87, who has no other family members left because her husband and daughter have died, blows kisses to her friend Frances Reaves during a drive-by visit at Miami Jewish Health in Miami. [ WILFREDO LEE | AP ]
By Bailey LeFever

The state Agency for Health Care Administration announced on Tuesday that it was removing restrictions on residents of long-term care who want to visit with their loved ones.

The move came more than a year after the coronavirus pandemic forced nursing homes and assisted-living facilities to close their doors to the outside world. The state restrictions were put in place in March 2020, with the goal of keeping the disease out of care centers, and were loosened later in the year to allow socially distant visits from loved ones.

For many residents and their families, this news means everything, said Louise Merrick, administrator of Gulf Shore Care Center, a nursing home in Pinellas Park. Residents had been making the best of the pandemic-induced lockdown with window visits, phone calls and FaceTime.

“None of that is the same as holding the hand of your loved one,” Merrick said.

Limiting visitation has helped keep residents safe, but isolation has left its toll on residents and their families, the state health care agency said in the release. “Moving forward, all long-term care facilities should strive to help alleviate the burden caused by separation of residents from their loved ones.”

Nursing homes must adhere to revised federal visitation guidelines and “core principles of infection prevention,” according to the release. Other long-term care centers must follow state and federal recommendations and “industry best practices for visitation, infection prevention and the screening and triage of everyone entering a facility for signs and symptoms of COVID-19.”

This week’s changes follow guidance issued March 10 by the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services that nursing homes should permit “responsible indoor visitation at all times for all residents,” the Tampa Bay Times previously reported. The move comes after millions of coronavirus vaccines have been administered to residents and staff of these facilities.

The federal guidance still limits visitation for the following nursing home residents: those who are unvaccinated and live in a county with a coronavirus positivity rate greater than 10 percent or in a home where less than 70 percent of residents are fully vaccinated; those who are infected with COVID-19, regardless of vaccination status; and those who are in quarantine, regardless of vaccination status.

The guidance also states that “compassionate care” visits for those whose health has declined should always be allowed, regardless of vaccination status.

The state Agency for Health Care Administration cited a 90 percent decline in coronavirus cases among residents and staff in the past 60 days. In addition, “current COVID-19 long-term care cases represent less than 1 percent of residents and staff,” according to the release.

Coronavirus cases have dropped in Florida’s long-term care centers since a peak in January, with 358 resident cases out of 138,806 residents as of March 23, down from 3,651 cases on Jan. 17, according to the Florida Department of Health.

Florida’s long-term care centers have been waiting to welcome residents’ families and friends back into facilities, said Kristen Knapp, spokeswoman for the Florida Health Care Association, an industry group representing nursing homes.

Rolling back visitation restrictions is a large step toward normalcy for facilities, said Brian Lee, director of Families for Better Care, which advocates for long-term care residents.

Full Article & Source: