One of the rules they created after years of discussion looked especially prescient in light of the tragic deaths on Wednesday of eight nursing home residents in Florida’s post-hurricane heat. But the rule, regarding power supplies and temperature control, does not take effect until November, and even then, some patient advocates are concerned that it does not go far enough.
The debate shows how challenging it has been to overhaul health care rules even after repeated instances of power failures and flooding, from Katrina to Hurricane Sandy in 2012, to Hurricane Harvey last month and now Hurricane Irma. Hospitals and nursing homes have pushed back against some requirements, arguing that they are costly and unnecessary.
The new federal rule will require that nursing homes have “alternate sources of energy to maintain temperatures to protect resident health and safety.”
But the rule does not specifically require backup generators for air-conditioning systems — the nursing home in Florida, Rehabilitation Center at Hollywood Hills, did not have such a generator — and now some are questioning whether the rule should.
Friday, October 13, 2017
The National Guardianship Association takes the understandable position that "guardians are entitled to reasonable compensation for their services," while bearing in mind "at all times the responsibility to conserve the person's estate when making decisions regarding providing guardianship services" and in setting their fees. See NGA Standard 22 on Guardianship Service Fees.
Should there be "schedules" for fees, such as hourly fees, or maximum fees? Modern courts often struggle with questions about how to determine fees, and some states, such as Pennsylvania, have a fairly flexible list of common law (not statutory) factors for the court to consider.
In a April 2017 trial court opinion in Chester County, PA, for example, the court reviewed $54k in fees for the lawyer appointed to serve as guardian, and another $13k in fees for an attorney the guardians had hired. According to the court, "Neither had sought leave of court prior to paying these sums out of the principal of the estate; the court learned of this when its auditor reviewed the annual report wherein these payments were disclosed." The ward in question was 87-years old and a resident in a skilled nursing faciility, with dementia and other health issues. The court struggled with the bills, commenting the format used was "inordinately difficult to follow" and at least on first review seemed "high for ten (10) months." For guidance in evaluating the bills, the court did "two things. It first searched the dearth of cases available for any guidance." It also called the individuals to discuss the billing formats and learn more about the work completed.
The Pennsylvania precedent was almost exclusively unpublished opinions, often from trial courts. The Chester County court recounted some of the history of guardianships, from English times to colonial courts to the present, concluding, "In any event, no reported decisions have been located concerning professional compensation of guardians of the persons. Apparently, society had no need of their services until more recent times."
Ultimately, Chester County Court of Common Pleas's Judge Tunnell approved the fees, finding "a number of untoward events which transpired during the year in question," including a serious injury the ward sustained from a fall in the nursing home, additional health related concerns, the decision to relocate her to a different nursing home, and difficulties in selling the home that had remained empty for more than year. The case had a history of accounting disputes, as evidenced by a 2013 decision by the same judge, although it did not appear anyone had challenged the latest fees reviewed sua sponte by the court in the 2017 decision.
In another Pennsylvania opinion, this time from an appellate court but also unpublished, the court observed, apparently with approval, that in Allegheny County, the Guardianship Department in the Orphan's Court uses "court investigators" to review guardians' requests for payment of fees from the incapacitated person's estate. See e.g., In re Long, Superior Court of Pennsylvania, February 14, 2017 (not officially reported).
I'm curious whether our readers have thoughts on "scheduled" fees for guardians?
Thursday, October 12, 2017
The Robert Matava Elder Abuse Prosecution Act of 2017, Senate Bill 178, has been sent to the President for signature. Here's the summary of the act:
Elder Abuse Prevention and Prosecution Act
TITLE I--SUPPORTING FEDERAL CASES INVOLVING ELDER JUSTICE
(Sec. 101) This bill establishes requirements for the Department of Justice (DOJ) with respect to investigating and prosecuting elder abuse crimes and enforcing elder abuse laws. Specifically, DOJ must:
- designate Elder Justice Coordinators in federal judicial districts and at DOJ,
- implement comprehensive training for Federal Bureau of Investigation agents, and
- establish a working group to provide policy advice.
The Executive Office for United States Attorneys must operate a resource group to assist prosecutors in pursuing elder abuse cases.
The Federal Trade Commission must designate an Elder Justice Coordinator within its Bureau of Consumer Protection.
TITLE II--IMPROVED DATA COLLECTION AND FEDERAL COORDINATION
(Sec. 201) DOJ must establish best practices for data collection on elder abuse.
(Sec. 202) DOJ must collect and publish data on elder abuse cases and investigations. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) must provide for publication data on elder abuse cases referred to adult protective services.
TITLE III--ENHANCED VICTIM ASSISTANCE TO ELDER ABUSE SURVIVORS
(Sec. 301) This section expresses the sense of the Senate that: (1) elder abuse involves exploitation of potentially vulnerable individuals; (2) combatting elder abuse requires support for victims and prevention; and (3) the Senate supports a multipronged approach to prevent elder abuse, protect victims, and prosecute perpetrators of elder abuse crimes.
(Sec. 302) DOJ's Office for Victims of Crime must report to Congress on the nature, extent, and amount of funding under the Victims of Crime Act of 1984 for victims of crime who are elders.
TITLE IV--ROBERT MATAVA ELDER ABUSE PROSECUTION ACT OF 2017
Robert Matava Elder Abuse Prosecution Act of 2017
This bill amends the federal criminal code to expand prohibited telemarketing fraud to include "telemarketing or email marketing" fraud. It expands the definition of telemarketing or email marketing to include measures to induce investment for financial profit, participation in a business opportunity, or commitment to a loan.
A defendant convicted of telemarketing or email marketing fraud that targets or victimizes a person over age 55 is subject to an enhanced criminal penalty and mandatory forfeiture.
The bill adds health care fraud to the list of fraud offenses subject to enhanced penalties.
(Sec. 403) DOJ, in coordination with the Elder Justice Coordinating Council, must provide information, training, and technical assistance to help states and local governments investigate, prosecute, prevent, and mitigate the impact of elder abuse, exploitation, and neglect.
(Sec. 404) It grants congressional consent to states to enter into cooperative agreements or compacts to promote and to enforce elder abuse laws. The State Justice Institute must submit legislative proposals to Congress to facilitate such agreements and compacts.
(Sec. 501) This section amends title XX (Block Grants to States for Social Services and Elder Justice) of the Social Security Act to specify that HHS may award adult protective services demonstration grants to the highest courts of states to assess adult guardianship and conservatorship proceedings and to implement necessary changes. The highest court of a state that receives a demonstration grant must collaborate with the state's unit on aging and adult protective services agency.
(Sec. 502) The Government Accountability Office (GAO) must review and report on elder justice programs and initiatives in the federal criminal justice system. The GAO must also report on: (1) federal government efforts to monitor the exploitation of older adults in global drug trafficking schemes and criminal enterprises, the incarceration of exploited older adults who are U.S. citizens in foreign court systems, and the total number of elder abuse cases pending in the United States; and (2) the results of federal government intervention with foreign officials on behalf of U.S. citizens who are elder abuse victims in international criminal enterprises.
(Sec. 503) DOJ must report to Congress on its outreach to state and local law enforcement agencies on the process for collaborating with the federal government to investigate and prosecute interstate and international elder financial exploitation cases.
(Sec. 504) DOJ must publish model power of attorney legislation for the purpose of preventing elder abuse.
(Sec. 505) DOJ must publish best practices for improving guardianship proceedings and model legislation related to guardianship proceedings for the purpose of preventing elder abuse.
Note specifically sections 504 and 505. The text of the enrolled bill can be found here as a pdf.
Daughters' Hidden Video Camera In Mother's Nursing Home Documents Caregiver Abuse; 10th Circuit Affirms $1.2 Million Damage Award
The 10th Circuit in Racher v. Westlake Nursing Home Limited Partnership, d/b/a/ Quail Creek Nursing & Rehab Center, affirmed an award of $1.2 million in compensatory damages to the estate of Mrs. Mayberry, a 90+ year old resident. Key evidence included five video recordings, from a camera hidden in the resident's nursing home room by her daughters, that showed:
... [Employee] Gakunga slapping Mrs. Mayberry in the face with latex gloves, wadding up the gloves, stuffing them in Mrs. Mayberry's mouth, and forcibly holding them there as Mrs. Mayberry attempts to push Gakunga's hand away. . . . . [A second employee] Kaseke is seen in the videos watching this take place. . . . . The videos then show Gakunga and Kaseke roughly lifting Mrs. Mayberry from her wheelchair into bed and Gakunga pushing on Mrs. Mayberry's face in what appears to be an attempt to make her lie down. . . . One clip shows Gakunga pointing her finger at Mrs. Mayberry and apparently scolding her or perhaps threatening her. . . . Finally, the video clips show Gakunga “performing some sort of compressions with both hands to [Mrs. Mayberry's] torso.” . . . . Plaintiffs assert that this action was intended to force Mrs. Mayberry to empty her bladder so the caretakers would not have to change her diaper as often. . . . . Quail Creek and the caretakers denied any knowledge of this practice, but acknowledged that there was no medical justification for the action.
The daughters testified their mother went downhill as a result of the incidents that occurred between February and early April 2012 and that Mrs. Mayberry died in July 2012 "just three months after the abuse was discovered."
One issue on appeal was whether Oklahoma's "statutory limitation on noneconomic damages" of $350,000 was mandatory. Apparently the statutory cap was raised for the first time in a motion to "alter or amend the judgment," 28 days after the judgment was entered in the case and more than a month after the jury trial concluded. In its September 28, 2017 opinion, the 10th Circuit had an interesting analysis of the interplay between federal rules of civil procedure and the need to "predict" state substantive law in a diversity case, and "agreed with the plaintiffs that the cap is an affirmative defense that [defendant nursing home] waived."
October 12, 2017 in Consumer Information, Current Affairs, Elder Abuse/Guardianship/Conservatorship, Ethical Issues, Health Care/Long Term Care, State Cases, State Statutes/Regulations | Permalink | Comments (0)
Wednesday, October 11, 2017
During the last several years, I've received calls from around the country about possible guardianship "oversight" concerns. And since The New Yorker article came out last week focusing on guardianship issues in Las Vegas Nevada, I've been getting more calls. The question arises: Is there a pervasive problem with court-appointed guardians for older adults in the United States?
In my opinion, the answer is "no, not pervasive." At least, that's my answer if the definition of pervasive is "universal," or omnipresent, or rife, or widespread. In the 20+ years I've been working in elder law, I've unfortunately reviewed a lot of cases of exploitation, but it is comparatively rare that I've been asked to examine a court-monitored guardianship where there was a problem created by inadequate attention by the courts, much less active misconduct by the court or agency. Granted, that is just one law professor's experience.
Still, in my opinion, the oversight problems that do exist within the U.S. are significant, periodic, sometimes recurring or persistent, and often have common elements. The issues can exist in any county court or fiduciary administrative system. Historically, these courts -- sometimes called probate courts, fiduciary courts, surrogate courts, or orphans courts -- depended on the guardians for management of all issues, once the appointments were made. The judges trusted their appointees to take their fiduciary responsibilities seriously. But, as is sometimes said in international relations, the problem can be how best to "trust, but verify" proper behavior. With more elder boomers, there can be increased need for guardians, and thus more potential for guardians to be monitored.
- For example, in Maricopa County, Arizona, an investigative news series, that began in 2008 with the reporting of Laurie Roberts for the Arizona Republic, described a number of mishandled older adult guardianships. In some instances, the family members were so busy arguing about money, that the incapacitated elder was ignored, while his or her estate was diminished to pay fees. Sometimes the question was whether a "full" guardianship was even necessary. The problems, once investigated not just by journalists but by the courts, resulted in changes in Arizona guardianship law.
- In Palm Beach County, Florida, complaints about appointment of a particular individual as guardian in a large number of cases, focused on conflict of interest and claims of favoritism by the court, complaints that came from a number of families. Eventually, in one case challenging the system, a jury reportedly awarded more than $16 million against two West Palm Beach attorneys for "breach of fiduciary duties." The complaints also led to state investigations of Florida's entire oversight systems, and brought three years of legislative changes to Florida guardianship laws.
- Most recently, two co-founders of a nonprofit guardianship company, Ayudando Guardianship, in Bernalillo County, New Mexico were indicted in federal court in July 2017 with criminal charges including conspiracy, mail fraud, aggravated identity theft, and money laundering. The company was the appointed fiduciary in hundreds of cases.
Especially when the Clark County, Nevada cases are included in this list of recent challenges to guardianship oversight systems, concerns about proper and objective oversight are real; without a equally real commitment to more careful selection, training, monitoring and accountability for guardians, the problems can be predicted to increase as the baby boomer generation of seniors get to their 70s, 80s, or 90s. In 2016, the GAO for the United States responded to a U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging's request for data on "the extent of abuse by guardians," and concluded that "courts lack comprehensive data on older adults in guardianships and elder abuse by guardians, but some courts have limited information." Unreliable data certainly leaves open the potential for the occasional problems to become pervasive problems.
October 11, 2017 in Consumer Information, Current Affairs, Elder Abuse/Guardianship/Conservatorship, Estates and Trusts, Ethical Issues, State Cases, State Statutes/Regulations, Statistics | Permalink | Comments (2)
Tuesday, October 10, 2017
Effective October 26, 2017, another set of requirements comes into play for notaries public in Pennsylvania. The changes, which became effective in stages over the course of many months, responded to reports of abuses. Indeed, when I was supervising our Elder Protection Clinic at Dickinson Law, we would occasionally come into contact with powers of attorney or deed transfers that were allegedly signed in from of a notary as a witness, but which clearly were not.
On one occasion, we learned that another law office "routinely" had the in-office notary using her official power for documents signed in the home of the attorney's clients. She was following her boss's direction. Sadly, our law students had an extra lesson that day on potential obligations to report such violations to the State Bar.
The most recent changes to Pennsylvania's law include a notary's mandated attendance at training classes. The notary was, even before the latest changes, required to have "personal knowledge" or "satisfactory evidence" of the identity of the individual whose signature was to be notarized, but the most recent changes specified documents that can be used as satisfactory evidence: "a passport, driver's license or government-issued nondriver identification card, which is current and unexpired," or another form of government identification which is current and "contains the signature or photograph of the individual, and is satisfactory to the notarial officer." 57 Pa.C.S.A. Section 307. A third alternative is documenting identity through "verification on oath . . . of a credible witness," a vague process that seems to raise more red flags than it eliminates.
Overall, the changes are a sad reflection of the times, not the least of which are the extraordinary opportunities for identity theft triggered by data hackers. Some Pennsylvania elder law attorneys, however, are wondering whether the requirement of current, unexpired government i.d. cards will make it more difficult to meet the needs of disabled, older clients.
Wednesday, October 4, 2017
New Yorker: Article Focuses on Clark County Nevada to Demonstrate Systemic Failures under State Guardianships
The New Yorker Magazine offers "Reporter at Large" Rachel Aviv's feature in its October 9, 2017 issue, where she digs deeply into concerns raised by multiple cases in Clark County, Nevada where a court-favored, appointed guardian, April Parks, was often involved:
Parks drove a Pontiac G-6 convertible with a license plate that read “crtgrdn,” for “court guardian.” In the past twelve years, she had been a guardian for some four hundred wards of the court. Owing to age or disability, they had been deemed incompetent, a legal term that describes those who are unable to make reasoned choices about their lives or their property. As their guardian, Parks had the authority to manage their assets, and to choose where they lived, whom they associated with, and what medical treatment they received. They lost nearly all their civil rights.
Parks and other individuals, including her husband, were eventually indicted on criminal charges including perjury and theft, "narrowly focused on their double billing and their sloppy accounting," but as The New Yorker piece suggests, the court system itself shares blame for years of failing to impose effective and appropriate oversight over the guardians.
In the wake of Parks’s indictment, no judges have lost their jobs. Norheim was transferred from guardianship court to dependency court, where he now oversees cases involving abused and neglected children. Shafer is still listed in the Clark County court system as a trustee and as an administrator in several open cases. He did not respond to multiple e-mails and messages left with his bookkeeper, who answered his office phone but would not say whether he was still in practice. He did appear at one of the public meetings for the commission appointed to analyze flaws in the guardianship system. “What started all of this was me,” he said. Then he criticized local media coverage of the issue and said that a television reporter, whom he’d talked to briefly, didn’t know the facts. “The system works,” Shafer went on. “It’s not the guardians you have to be aware of, it’s more family members.” He wore a blue polo shirt, untucked, and his head was shaved. He looked aged, his arms dotted with sun spots, but he spoke confidently and casually. “The only person you folks should be thinking about when you change things is the ward. It’s their money, it’s their life, it’s their time. The family members don’t count.”
There are fundamental issues at the heart of this kind of history. Necessary and well-managed guardianships, under the best of circumstances, change the lives of individuals in ways that no person would want for him or herself. But when a guardianship system itself breaks down -- especially where judges or other administrators are unwilling or unable to be self-critical -- the confidence of the public in "the rule of law" is destroyed.
My thanks to Karen Miller (Florida), Jack Cumming (California), Richard Black (Nevada -- who is also quoted in The New Yorker piece), and Dick Kaplan (University of Illinois Law) for bringing The New Yorker piece to our attention quickly.
October 4, 2017 in Cognitive Impairment, Consumer Information, Current Affairs, Dementia/Alzheimer’s, Elder Abuse/Guardianship/Conservatorship, Estates and Trusts, Ethical Issues, State Cases, State Statutes/Regulations | Permalink | Comments (0)
Tuesday, October 3, 2017
The Canadian Elder Law Conference is again hosting a two-day program on the law and policy issues impacting older adults, in Vancouver, British Columbia on November 2-3, 2017.
After taking this course, you will:
be better able to identify and address the legal issues that impact your older client
be familiar with recent trends, developments, and research in the law with respect to elder law topics such as medical assistance in dying, mental capacity, undue influence, independent legal advice, financial abuse, and adult protection
better understand the legal, practical, and ethical issues in relation to older clients with mental capacity and self-neglect issues
The program this year will include a debate on "video surveillance in long-term care," a panel on medically assisted death and advance consent, and a discussion of undue influence and independent legal advice.
For more, see Coming of Age: Elder Law in Canada and Its Future, including registration information.
Monday, October 2, 2017
The case of Fisher v. King, in federal court in Pennsylvania, strikes me as unusual on several grounds. It is a civil rights case, alleging malicious prosecution, arising from an investigation of transferred funds from elderly parents, one of whom was in a nursing home, diagnosed with "dementia and frequent confusion."
Son-in-law John Fisher was financial advisor for his wife's parents, both of whom were in their 80s. He and his wife were charged with "theft by deception, criminal conspiracy, securing execution of documents by deception and deceptive/fraudulent business practices" by Pennsylvania criminal authorities, following an investigation of circumstances under which Fisher's mother-in-law and her husband transferred almost $700k in funds to an account allegedly formed by Fisher with his wife and sister-in-law as the only named account owners. A key allegation was that at the time of the transfer, the father-in-law was in a locked dementia unit, where he allegedly signed a letter authorizing the transfer, prepared by Fisher, but presented to him by his wife, Fisher's mother-in-law. The mother-in-law later challenged the transaction as contrary to her understanding and intention.
Son-in-law Fisher, his wife, and his wife's sister were all charged with the fraud counts. They initially raised as defense that the transactions were part of the mother's larger financial plan, including a gift by the mother to her daughters, but not to her son, their brother.
As described in court documents, shortly before trial on the criminal charges the two sisters apparently agreed to return the funds to their mother, and, with the "aggrieved party" thus made whole, Fisher and his wife entered into a Non-Trial Disposition that resulted in dismissed of all criminal charges. At that point, you might think that everyone in the troubled family would wipe their brows, say "phew," and head back to their respective homes.
Not so fast. Fisher then sued the Assistant District Attorney and the investigating police officer in federal court alleging violations under Section 1983 -- malicious prosecution and abuse of process.
October 2, 2017 in Cognitive Impairment, Crimes, Dementia/Alzheimer’s, Elder Abuse/Guardianship/Conservatorship, Estates and Trusts, Ethical Issues, Federal Cases, Federal Statutes/Regulations, Property Management, State Cases, State Statutes/Regulations | Permalink | Comments (0)
Sunday, October 1, 2017
Eagle Crest, a 126-bed skilled nursing facility in California, once known as Carmichael Care & Rehabilitation Center, is "voluntarily" closing its doors. A major reason for parent corporation Genesis HealthCare's decision appears to be an incident of sexual contact between two aged residents at the facility in February, 2017. Not a violent contact and apparently not one involving physical or mental injury. But clothing was removed and fluids were later documented. Now residents are being transferred and more than 70 employees will reportedly be laid off.
As one of the two residents had Alzheimer's disease, and thereby was deemed unable to consent to sexual relations, the facility "self-reported" the contact as possible abuse to appropriate state authorities. A criminal investigation found no grounds for prosecution. A California Department of Public Health report, however, made the recommendation to federal authorities last summer to "drop the facility from its medicare provider rolls, a drastic action that strips a nursing home of its critical government funding," according to news reports. The actual closure action was made voluntarily by Genesis.
Those are some of the black and white facts reported by the Sacramento Bee, which has published a series of news articles tracking this facility for many months. The "gray" facts are more complicated, and raise questions at the heart of any LTC operation:
- Is it possible the state overreacted and misconstrued a "quasi-consensual" contact between a "lonely man and a confused woman"?
- How far must a LTC provider go to prevent intimate contact between residents?
- After one report of sexual contact between residents, does that mean one or both residents must be treated as a risk that requires special procedures to prevent -- or at least reduce the likelihood -- of them being involved in future sexual contact?
- How does a long-term care facility achieve a restraint-free environment -- a federally sanctioned goal -- while also charged with protecting ambulatory residents from intimate contact?
- Is it possible for residents (and their family members or other health care agents?) to release a facility from liability arising from "un-consented" sexual relations among residents?
October 1, 2017 in Cognitive Impairment, Consumer Information, Crimes, Dementia/Alzheimer’s, Elder Abuse/Guardianship/Conservatorship, Ethical Issues, Federal Statutes/Regulations, Health Care/Long Term Care, Medicare, State Cases, State Statutes/Regulations | Permalink | Comments (0)
Tuesday, September 26, 2017
Check out this updated policy brief, Policy Brief: Requirements for Reporting to Law Enforcement When There is a Suspicion of a Crime Against a Nursing Home Resident. The Long Term Care Community Coalition (as an aside, take a look at their cool url) released this updated brief with information about changes and 2017 updates
1. The potential fines for violations of the law are subject to adjustment for inflation. The fines indicated below are current as of September 2017.
2. New CMS guidelines for these (and other) requirements are in effect as of November 28,
2017. A summary of the guidelines for reporting can be found at the end of this brief. The
full federal Guidance can be found on the CMS website:
The overview explains that
The law broadens and strengthens the requirements for crime reporting in all long term care
facilities (including Nursing Facilities, Skilled Nursing Facilities, LTC Hospices, and Intermediate Care Facilities ...) that receive $10,000 or more in federal funds per year. The facility must inform the individuals covered under the law - its employees, owners,
operators, managers, agents, and contractors - of their duty to report any "reasonable
suspicion" of a crime (as defined by local law) committed against a resident of the facility. After forming the suspicion, covered individuals have twenty-four hours to report the crime to both the State Survey Agency and to a local law enforcement agency. If the suspected crime resulted in physical harm to the resident, the report must be made within two hours.
The brief explains the policy requirements and offers recommendations for consumers, state agency folks and long term care facilities. There is also a summary of the regs as well as definitions of commonly used words.
The brief can be downloaded as a pdf here.
September 26, 2017 in Consumer Information, Crimes, Current Affairs, Elder Abuse/Guardianship/Conservatorship, Federal Statutes/Regulations, Health Care/Long Term Care, Housing, Medicaid, Medicare, State Cases | Permalink | Comments (0)
Tuesday, September 19, 2017
Elder homicides often go undetected, and investigating them requires a multi-pronged approach. In this webinar, learn about the victims, the offenders, and the crime scenes. How does the medical examiner’s information contribute to solving these high-profile, difficult cases? Join the webinar to discover how research has advanced the successful investigations of these crimes.
To register for the webinar, click here
Thursday, September 14, 2017
In the developing story (see here and here) about a reported 8 deaths at a nursing home in Florida following Hurricane Irma, there is a growing debate about what a "new" federal regulation mandating Emergency Preparedness plans in Long-Term Care facilities actually requires. Is it enough to "have a plan" or must the facility actually have back-up generators or other means to "maintain" safe temperatures following an emergency? As New York Times writers Neil Reisner and Sheri Fink report on September 14, 2017:
“It’s vague, but this event is going to highlight the need,” said Dr. David Marcozzi, an associate professor at the University of Maryland School of Medicine and former director of a federal health care preparedness program. “Let me put it this way, if you were in Alaska and what was required to maintain safe temperatures was a heater, you wouldn’t say you don’t need the heater.”
For the full discussion of the Emergency Preparedness regulation, that took 11 years to get into place after the post-Katrina nursing home tragedies, but still gave another year to become mandatory, read Nursing Home Deaths in Florida Heighten Scrutiny of Disaster Planning.
Monday, September 4, 2017
A recent article focuses on what is sometimes called "granny dumping," and the author urges states to examine carefully whether "abandonment" of a care-dependent person is addressed by the state's elder protection laws. Author Stephanie Rzeszut, a recent graduate of Hofstra Law, writes (footnotes omitted):
The only states that currently include elder abandonment as a form of elder abuse in their statutes are Alaska, California, Connecticut, Illinois, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. Although each of these states includes elder abandonment in their statutes, each statute varies as to how they define elder abandonment.[For example, the] state of California lists elder abandonment as a form of elder abuse without defining or describing what elder abandonment actually is. Conversely, the state of Oregon defines what elder abandonment is under their statute as the “desertion or willful forsaking of an elderly person or a person with a disability or the withdrawal or neglect of duties and obligations owed to an elderly person or a person with a disability by a caregiver or other person.”***Not only do a majority of the states not include elder abandonment in their statutes, but there is currently no uniformity among each state's statutes for what constitutes elder abuse in general. This is problematic because in some states a caregiver may not be prosecuted for elder abuse or not prosecuted for committing elder abandonment when it has in fact occurred.
Sunday, September 3, 2017
Here's something to give you pause. The HHS Office of Inspector General has released an early alert. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Has Inadequate Procedures To Ensure That Incidents of Potential Abuse or Neglect at Skilled Nursing Facilities Are Identified and Reported in Accordance With Applicable Requirements (A-01-17-00504) dated August 24, 2017,
alert[s] [the CMS administrator about] ... the preliminary results of our ongoing review of potential abuse or neglect of Medicare beneficiaries in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs). This audit is part of the ongoing efforts of the Office of Inspector General (OIG) to detect and combat elder abuse. The objectives of our audit are to (1) identify incidents of potential1 abuse or neglect of Medicare beneficiaries residing in SNFs and (2) determine whether these incidents were reported and investigated in accordance with applicable requirements.
The 14 page letter provides a lot of detail about the situation and offers a number of recommendations, including immediate action: "implement procedures to compare Medicare claims for [ER] treatment with claims for SNF services to identify incidents of potential abuse or neglect of Medicare beneficiaries residing in SNFs and periodically provide the details of this analysis to the Survey Agencies for further review and ... continue to work with ... HHS ... to receive the delegation of authority to impose the civil monetary penalties and exclusion provisions of section 1150B." Longer term the alert suggests new regulations among other ideas.
September 3, 2017 in Consumer Information, Crimes, Current Affairs, Elder Abuse/Guardianship/Conservatorship, Federal Cases, Federal Statutes/Regulations, Health Care/Long Term Care, Medicare | Permalink | Comments (0)
Wednesday, August 30, 2017
Kaiser Health News ran this story, Elder Abuse: ERs Learn How To Protect A Vulnerable Population, a few days ago.
Because visits to the emergency room may be the only time an older adult leaves the house, staff in the ER can be a first line of defense, said Tony Rosen, founder and lead investigator of the Vulnerable Elder Protection Team (VEPT), a program launched in April at the New York-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center ER.
The most common kinds of elder abuse are emotional and financial, Rosen said, and usually when one form of abuse exists, so do others. According to a New York study, as few as 1 in 24 cases of abuse against residents age 60 and older were reported to authorities.
The project consists of a team of doctors and social workers who rotate being on call, with backup from other professionals when the case so requires. The team trains the entire ER staff about identifying elder abuse. "A doctor interviews the patient and conducts a head-to-toe physical exam looking for bruises, lacerations, abrasions, areas of pain and tenderness. Additional testing is ordered if the doctor suspects abuse."
The team looks for specific injuries. For example, radiographic images show old and new fractures, which suggest a pattern of multiple traumatic events. Specific types of fractures may indicate abuse, such as midshaft fractures in the ulna, a forearm bone that can break when an older adult holds his arm in front of his face to protect himself.
When signs of abuse are found but the elder is not interested in cooperating with finding a safe place or getting help, a psychiatrist is asked to determine if that elder has decision-making capacity. The team offers resources but can do little more if the patient isn’t interested. They would have to allow the patient to return to the potentially unsafe situation.
Patients who are in immediate danger and want help or are found not to have capacity may be admitted to the hospital and placed in the care of a geriatrician until a solution can be found. Unlike with children and Child Protective Services, Adult Protective Services won’t become involved until a patient has been discharged, so hospitalization can play an important role in keeping older adults safe.
There have been a number of cases of suspected abuse identified by the team with a fair percentage of those confirmed as abuse cases. Ultimately, the team wants "to optimize acute care for these vulnerable victims and ensure their safety. They plan to work at continually tweaking VEPT to improve the program and to connect to emergency medical, law enforcement and criminal justice services. Eventually, they hope to help other emergency departments set up similar programs."
Tuesday, August 22, 2017
Mark your calendars for September 6, 2017 at 2:00 p.m. edt. DOJ's Elder Justice Initiative will be hosting another in its series of webinars on elder abuse. More information and registration for Financial Exploitation in the Context of Guardianships and Other Legal Arrangements will be available soon.
Update 8/28/2017: registration is now open!
August 22, 2017 in Cognitive Impairment, Consumer Information, Current Affairs, Elder Abuse/Guardianship/Conservatorship, Programs/CLEs, State Statutes/Regulations, Webinars | Permalink | Comments (0)
Tuesday, August 8, 2017
Recently the U.S. Senate passed S 178, the Elder Abuse Prevention and Prosecution Act which is "[t]o prevent elder abuse and exploitation and improve the justice system’s response to victims in elder abuse and exploitation cases."
Title I is "Supporting Federal Cases Involving Elder Justice", Title II is "Improved Data Collection & Federal Coordination", Title III covers enhanced services to victims of elder abuse, Title IV, the "Robert Matava Elder Abuse Prosecution Act of 2017", includes enhanced penalities for those email & telemarketing schemes targeting elders, as well as interstate initiaties and state training & technical assistance.
In Title V, Miscellaneous, there are sections that deal with GAO reports, "[c]ourt-appointed guardianship oversight activities under the Elder Justice Act...," outreach to both state and local law enforcement and a requirement that the AG "publish model power of attorney legislation for the purpose of preventing elder abuse" (section 504) and "publish best practices for improving guardianship proceedings and model legislation relating to guardianship proceedings for the purpose of preventing elder abuse."
Friday, August 4, 2017
The Uniform Law Commissioners recently approved the new guardianship act. The prior act, the Uniform Guardianship & Protective Proceedings Act was approved in 1997. The new act, the Uniform Guardian, Conservatorship & Other Protective Arrangements Act was approved in mid-July at the ULC's 126th annual meeting. Terminology has changed with this new act, with the use of incapacitated person falling by the wayside. Instead, the act refers to "adult subject to guardianship" or adult subject to conservatorship" both of which are defined in Section 102. Less restrictive alternative now includes supported decision-making, along with other alternatives such as a health care or financial power of attorney or representative payee. More emphasis is put on protective arrangements (Article 5 of the Act) as an alternative to guardianship. Another version of the new act with a prefatory note and commentary will be available on the ULC website soon.
Wednesday, August 2, 2017
Clark County, Nevada has been at the center of serious allegations of abuse by court-appointed guardians, including "public" guardians, as we have reported here in the past. Most recently, the county was the site of a conviction and sentencing of a woman who was charged with theft from her "long-time companion," the incapacitated person she was appointed to protect.
Helen Natko was found guilty by a Las Vegas jury in April of theft and exploitation of a vulnerable person:
Natko raised suspicions when she transferred nearly $200,000 out of a joint account. Natko returned the money but that's when Del's daughter, Terri Black, tried to protect her father leading to a guardianship case.
"That began our 4 year odyssey of pain and sorrow that continues to this day for my family," says Terri. She says the most painful part was not having quality time with her father in his final days.
Although the prosecutor (and the protected person's family members) sought "prison time" following the conviction, ultimately the state court judge sentenced Natko to 5 years probation, a $10,000 fine and a bar on "gambling." Further, according to Las Vegas Contact 13 KTNV news reports, "she's disqualified to be a guardian under new laws passed" since the channel's investigation and news series exposed problems in the county's guardianship system.
For more see Contact 13: Guardian Sentenced to Probation. My thanks for the update from Rick Black, the son-in-law of the victim in this case. It's been a long haul for the family. Mr. Black commented, "We are satisfied with the [July 31, 2017] sentence. Although we wanted prison time, it wasn't in the statutes. Thanks to the many victim family members and advocates who came to support Terri [Rick's wife]."
Mr. Black is a volunteer with Americans Against Abusive Probate Guardianship (AAAPG), which was founded in Florida in 2013 by Sam J Sugar, M.D., in response to his own experiences in the Miami-Dade probate court.
My thanks to those who wrote to correct my earlier mistake in describing the history of AAAPG.
August 2, 2017 in Cognitive Impairment, Crimes, Current Affairs, Dementia/Alzheimer’s, Elder Abuse/Guardianship/Conservatorship, Ethical Issues, Health Care/Long Term Care, State Cases, State Statutes/Regulations | Permalink | Comments (1)
Wednesday, July 26, 2017
The National Adult Protective Services Association (NAPSA) and the National Council on Crime and Delinquency announce a free upcoming webinar, The Abuse Intervention Model: A Pragmatic Approach to Intervention for Elder Mistreatment. Set for August 9, 2017 at 2 p.m. edt, the "webinar will present the Abuse Intervention Model (AIM), which is a simple, coherent framework of known risk factors of the victim, perpetrator, and environment that applies to all types of abuse. Dr. Laura Mosqueda will discuss the details of the AIM, and present case studies on how the AIM can be applied to APS work." Click here to register. To read more about the intervention model, click here.