Elder Law Prof Blog

Nursing Home Staffing and Finances and the Industry's Response to "Historic" CMS Mandates

One of the longest running issues in the operation of nursing homes is adequacy of staffing to provide safe care.  The staffing issues intensified with the COVID pandemic but have not truly eased over the last two years, especially as the constant search for qualified workers is up against immigration restrictions, wage competition in health care, lack of reality-based public funding support, and the "drift" away from personal services in almost all employment sectors.  

Nonetheless, the current Administration and  CMS are not accepting "crisis" arguments as an automatic excuse for inadequate staffing.  In April 2024, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) issued final rules for "Minimum Staffing Standards for Long-Term Care Facilities" and "Medicaid Institutional Payments Transparency Reporting."  An April 24, 2024 CMS "Fact Sheet" summarizes the mandates which include phased implementation dates:

Central to this final rule are new comprehensive minimum nurse staffing requirements, which aim to significantly reduce the risk of residents receiving unsafe and low-quality care within LTC facilities. CMS is finalizing a total nurse staffing standard of 3.48 hours per resident day (HPRD), which must include at least 0.55 HPRD of direct registered nurse (RN) care and 2.45 HPRD of direct nurse aide care.  . . . 

 

CMS is also finalizing enhanced facility assessment requirements and a requirement to have an RN onsite 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to provide skilled nursing care. . . . 

 

The Medicaid Institutional Payment Transparency Reporting provisions, finalized in this rule, are designed to promote public transparency related to the percentage of Medicaid payments for services in nursing facilities and ICFs/IID that is spent on compensation to direct care workers and support staff. . . . 

 

Highlights from the Medicaid Institutional Payment Transparency Reporting provisions include: 

• New institutional payment reporting requirements requiring states to report to CMS on the percentage of Medicaid payments for services in nursing facilities and ICFs/IID that is spent on compensation for direct care workers (such as nursing and therapy staff) and support staff (such as housekeepers and drivers providing transportation for residents). These requirements apply regardless of whether a state’s LTSS delivery system is fee-for-service or managed care. . . . 
• Support for quality care and worker safety by excluding costs of travel, training, and personal protective equipment (PPE) from the calculation of the percent of Medicaid payments going to compensation. . . . 
• Promoting the public availability of Medicaid institutional payment information, by requiring that both states and CMS make the institutional payment information reported by states available on public-facing websites."

I turned to the latest issue (June 2024) of McKnights Long-Term Care News to see industry-friendly viewpoints.  The public website often includes select articles from the subscription-based News.  I was especially struck by a new Opinion piece by the Executive Editor of this industry-focused media source.  Under the headline for the article that seems still to be behind a paywall, "A Dangerous Game of Chicken for Nursing Homes," James Berklan begins:

The federal government's first-ever nursing home staffing mandate can be a very dangerous thing  Just maybe not for the reason that many have been portraying. 

 

The administration has stuck its neck out to do what no other had done before it.

 

At the same time, providers are sticking their necks out by doubling down on their poor-mouthing platform.  The one-size-fits-all, unfunded mandate will put countless operators out of business, is the party line. . . .

 

Will enough skilled nursing operators actually start to go belly-up or leave the business and not get replaced by some other operator?

 

In brief, if the final rule's main staffing provisions go fully into effect in a few years and there's not enough loss of skilled nursing capacity, this turns from being a dangerous game of chicken into more like a reputation-killing case of crying wolf.  

 

So, now the intrigue builds.  What happens if the free-market forces continue, as they are wont to do in this country, and investors keep acquiring facilities?

 

Given the billions of dollars currently in play in US long-term care, it would be foolish to think there won't be certain players still looking to make a buck on this business. . . . . 

 

It seems that the government, or at least the current administration (hint) is fully in the consumer-worker camp that believes providers are simply hoarding their reserves, and are able to save their own hides.

 

Clearly, the feds believe they have the upper hand in calling operators' bluff."

 

In my Elder Law Prof Blog post from earlier this week, focusing on private equity investment in nursing homes, I quoted the title from a newspaper's op-ed, using the phrase "tipping point."  It does seem that the feds and the industry agree that somehow the issue of adequate staffing -- with qualified workers -- who expect appropriate pay -- is indeed a key "tipping point" for care-connected senior living.

Lucidity for Persons Living with Advanced Dementia, from the Perspective of Caregivers

I've been working on an article examining lucidity in persons diagnosed as having some form of dementia.  My analysis has been largely focusing on the implications of lucid intervals for attorneys, including those involved in advising on estate planning and care-related needs.  This has helped me to tap into other ways of thinking about lucidity and most recently I read an article in The Gerontologist, titled "Caregiver Accounts of Lucid Episodes in Persons with Advanced Dementia," published in June 2024, by a research team lead by Jason Karlawish, M.D. at the University of Pennsylvania.  

The article begins with careful look at definitions used in a research study that relied in major part on telephone interviews with caregivers.  For example, threshold questions for the caregivers were whether they had observed or were aware of "any unusually lucid moments" during the most recent four months (or during the final for months of a person's life if they were no longer alive). This approach was to isolate a concept known to the researchers as "paradoxical lucidity."  The working definition for paradoxical lucidity, from a 2019 National Institute on Aging Study, was "unexpected, spontaneous, meaningful, and relevant communication or connectedness in a patient who is assumed to have permanently lost the capacity for coherent verbal or behavioral interaction due to a progressive and pathophysiologic dementing process."  Eventually the study focused on 30 caregivers (and a corresponding 29 individuals with advanced dementia).  All of the final participants were "family caregivers."

There is a lot to unpack in the findings.  Although the length of the lucid moments for a given individual were usually very short -- and the longest was just 45 minutes -- the incidence of such moments across the study population was  frequent.  The findings combined with other empirical studies, lead the researchers to "question the 'paradoxical' in 'paradoxical lucidity.' Here, 'paradoxical' denotes an observation that is inconsistent with disease theory."  The researchers suggested there may be a need to "modify the theory of disease" for "severe-stage dementia."  

The study's caregiver-participants uniformly reported that "witnessing a lucid episode did not influence decisions about medical care."  However, these researchers "found that lucid episodes affected approaches to daily care, shaping, for example how often they brought the person living with dementia into social situations, diet, and sleep schedules."  The article continued:

"Such changes are substantive and important but not framed by caregivers as critical decisions  They are alterations in what might be called the 'ordinary ethics' [citation] of caregiving, evincing shifted understandings of what constitute good care."  

Certainly this study is not being used to talk about legal implications of lucid moments.  That is important too.  

Case Western Reserve Hosts Law-Med Conference on Diminished Capacity and the Law

Law and Bioethics Professor Sharona Hoffman, Co-Director of the Law-Medicine Center at Case Western Reserve University organized a terrific symposium on Cognitive Decline and the Law, held on March 1, 2024.  Thank you, Sharona, for inviting me to participate!   

In my talk, I  suggested that the time has come for clearer thinking on a long-standing legal standard, known in many jurisdictions as the "Lucid Moment" or the "Lucid Interval Doctrine," that has permitted attorneys' testimony on clients' orientation in time, place and person to suffice as evidence of sufficient capacity in legal transactions, even in the face of expert medical testimony about Alzheimer's Disease or other advanced dementias. Research demonstrates that Canadian academics have been  questioning reliance on "lucid intervals in dementia" as early as 2015.  My additional thanks to Penn State Dickinson Law student and research assistant extraordinaire, Noah Yeagley, for joining us at the conference and who was especially enjoying this conference opportunity to revisit his pre-law school graduate work in neuroscience.

The day began with a keynote presentation by Dr. Carol Barnes, University of Arizona, addressing "Brain Mechanisms Responsible for Cognitive Decline in Aging."  One key takeaway for me from her presentation was that while physical exercise is important for overall health, "learning new things" is probably even more important in maintaining cognitive function over time.  

The first set of panelists dug deeply into the roles of people supporting others in decision-making, whether with the aid of formal "supported decision-making agreements" and use of powers of attorney or different forms of substituted judgment.  Rebekah Diller, Clinical Professor at Cardozo Law, Megan Wright, Professor of Law and Medicine at Penn State Law, and James Toomey, Assistant Professor of Law at Pace University were the presenters on cutting-edge issues.

In the second panel, Neurology Professor Mark Fisher from the University of California Irvine was very timely in his focus on the potential for cognitive decline in both voters and candidates in politics, discussing a wide range of possible examples across history in the U.S. and Israel.  Associate Professor Jalayne Arias from Georgia State University School of Public Health demonstrated significant concerns in the overlap between criminality and dementia, whether from the standpoint of arrest, conviction, incarceration, or release of persons with cognitive declines.

Sharona Hoffman did double duty during the packed day, presenting issues of cognitive declines both in the workplace and on our roads.   She used humor to soften some of the tough news on the lack accountability for risk in either domain.  It was clear from the audience response -- in both the sold-out auditorium and on-line -- that everyone has a story about dementia and drivers, often from our own families.

My long-time friend working specifically in the "elder law" space, Nina Kohn, Professor of Law at Syracuse and now also a Distinguished Scholar in Elder Law at Yale Law School, gave the latest on proposed -- and much needed -- reforms in court-appointed guardianships, highlighting key concerns addressed in the Uniform Guardianship, Conservatorship, and Other Protective Arrangements Act,  adopted as of today in two states, Maine and Washington, and introduced or pending in at least four more states.

The speakers in the important last panel of the day were clearly looking to the future on research and developments in the diagnosis, care and community response needed for "healthier" approaches to problem-solving.  Dr. Jonathan Haines, a genetic epidemiologist at Case Western Reserve University, surveyed the advances and challenges in attempting to build a deep bank of genetic information on Alzheimer's Disease. Law Professor Emily Murphy at UC Law San Francisco outlined the emerging theory of "collective cognitive capacity" as an approach to the challenges posed by social, environmental, and economic factors that may be impacted by brain health and cognitive decline.  Tara Sklar, the Director of the Health Law and Policy Program for the University of Arizona College of Law spoke on the potentials and challenges for telemedicine in treating patients with cognitive declines. Professor Sklar is also the new chair of the AALS Section on Aging and the Law.  

A packed day, for sure, with support from Virginia Lefever, Editor for CWLR's journal of law and medicine, Health Matrix, who was receiving formal drafts of papers 
from presenters for a future issue.

And for those of us who were determined to follow Dr. Barnes' encouragement to "keep learning," the evening did not end early, as we continued with a tour of the University's wonderful public art spaces and then on to the world-renowned art collections at the Cleveland Museum of Art -- including a "First Friday" party that had lots of people dressed up and dancing!  "Hands"-Down, it was a great conference!

Washington Continuing Care (CCRC) Residents Present Specific "Asks" for Consumer Protections to State Officials

On February 5, 2024, residents of "continuing care retirement communities" (CCRCs), also known as "life plan communities" (LPCs), made a formal presentation to officials from several departments of Washington State government, specifying key regulatory priorities when considering "financial solvency" for this segment of the "senior living industries."  I was able to sit in on the meeting, as someone who has worked with Washington residents about their concerns.

CCRCs are a relatively new focus for legislators in the state of Washington, with "registration" of CCRCs becoming an option in 2017.  But examples of concerns offered by residents demonstrated their concern that a clear state system of  regulation is overdue.  The spokespeople for WACCRA, the state organizations of CCRC Residents in Washington, were organized, detailed and offered precedents from other states. They requested legislation that:

• Provides formal "licensure" by the state
• Provides key Resident Rights, including Ombuds' support for dispute resolution
• Requires facilities to participate in periodic financial reviews, including actuarial reports, in order for the State to better ascertain the ongoing ability of the CCRC to meet both short- and long-term commitments
• Mandates limitations or prohibitions on facilities' use of residents' payments for services not directly related to resident needs
• Some method by which residents' contracts and entrance fees are prioritized in the event of a bankruptcy
• CCRCs be required to fulfill promises of "refundable entrance fees," in a timely and fair manner, such as a system of "first out/first repaid"
• Adopts stronger safeguards for funding of "life time care," perhaps through guarantee or surety bonds
• Permits residents to participate as voting members of each CCRC's Board of Directors
• Assures "meaningful and effective enforcement" of CCRC's obligations to residents, including financial solvency

Additional stakeholders in CCRCs and LPCs including LeadingAge Washington and, of course, operators of any of these enterprises.  A series of similar meetings are to take place from February through April of 2024.  The goal is a final State report to the Legislature no later than July 16, 2024.

An Analysis of States with Best Elder-Abuse Protections

Recently I was one of several academics invited to provide short commentary on state efforts to provide older adults and their families with protection against elder abuse.  I was interested to read the final on-line article, which offers a comparative approach, analyzing 50 state systems plus Washington D.C.,  for reporting, investigating and taking action where abuse of older adults is suspected or reported.  The site used what are described as "16 key indicators of elder abuse protection in three overall categories."   

Here is a ink to the article, "States with the Best Elder-Abuse Protections."

The article is by Adam McCann, WalletHub Financial Writer, and is published online on December 13, 2023.  There are several drop-down menus for additional information, including the interviews with academics speaking from a variety of perspectives, including  Sharona Hoffman, Professor of Law and Bioethics at Case Western Reserve University School of Law.  

 

Pennsylvania Law Schools Jointly Report Their Support for Elder Justice to State Supreme Court

The Elder Justice Consortium, with representatives appearing on behalf of each of the 9 law schools in Pennsylvania, made their second "in person" report to the Justices of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, with the event this year taking place on October 16, 2023 in Pittsburgh.   The Elder Justice Consortium, or EJC for short, is unique, as it brings together all of the law schools in a single state to advocate on a topic of common concern.  EJC meets regularly to consider how to meet the need for effective representation, which requires effective education of law  students about issues that directly impact older adults.  

Among the activities reported this year include an Elder Justice Day program to introduce the public to available services, and regular meetings and forum events to highlight ongoing services, including the Elder Law Clinic at Widener University  Commonwealth Law School, the Sikov Elder Law Clinic at University of Pittsburgh Law, and the most recent matters for older people handled by students at the Gittis Legal Clinics at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School.  Deans from all of Pennsylvania's law schools were also in attendance for the oral presentation and discussion, demonstrating the high level of committment to enhanced education addressing the needs of older people.   

The Consortium initiative began during the summer of 2022 in response to Chief Justice Deborah Todd's concerns about inadequate efforts within the state to represent older adults.  Professor Kate Norton from Duquesne University Thomas R. Kline School of Law delivered the written report, and opened the discussion session with the Justices.   My thanks to Tom Lee, Penn State Dickinson Law's Director of Career Services, for his ongoing interest in elder law, and for supporting placement of our students in Legal Service positions, including in programs directly serving older persons in Central and rural areas of Pennsylvania.  Tom provided the photo used here! 

Arizona Feature: "Arizona Seniors At Risk of Harm"

Appearing on the front page of the Sunday edition of the Arizona Republic (5.21.23),  the first paragraphs of an extended feature article point to the potential for harm to residents and the consequences of staff shortages or inattention at Arizona facilicities caring for residents with dementia. Two women in their 90s  are residents of an elegantly appointed assisted living facility-- but as the article begins they are covered in blood -- and the investigation of what happened there is hampered by the inability of anyone to give clear explanations. 

The feature, based on the newspaper's review of "thousands of pages of police and state regulatory reports," offers multiple reasons for such injuries in "senior living" facilities, including a lack of clear reporting rules and the absence of investigation by state agencies, especially for facilities licsenced for "assisted living" as opposed to "nursing home" care.  From the  feature:

In memory care units, anything can become a weapon -- toilet plungers, shoehorns, electric razors, TV remotes, metal trash grabbers and walking canes. Hundreds of vulnerable seniors, particularly those with dementia, contend with violence at the end of their lives in the very places that promise to keep them safe. 

 

Shortages of staff-- brought on by companies looking to maximize profits or stave off financial losses -- lead to more harm. Assisted living facilities can keep resident clashes underwraps [in Arizona] because regulartors don't make facilities report incidents to their state licensing agency.  Federally regulated nursing homes have to report but little attention is paid to the problem.

 

The Arizona Republic combed through thousands of pages of policce and state regulatory reports to find more than 200 clashes at senior living facilities from mid-2019 to mid-2022. Residents punched, hit, pushed, kicked, poked scratched, bit, elbowed or spat on other residents or employees.

Experts consulted by the Arizona Republic noted that one "key [to reducing problems] is tailoring a [resident's] care plan to each resident's needs, equipped with activities that bring their lives a sense of purpose."  Further, "[a]ssisted living facilities commonly get in trouble for having inadequate, delayed or out-of-date plans for residents that outline their need or for failing to follow those plans."

The article cautions that if a problem is not tracked, "it doesn't exist":

The Arizona Department of Health Services licenses facilities and is responsible for investigating complaints but assisted living centers don't have to report nonfatal injuries to the agency.  

 

That's not normal.  Most states require facilities to report to their licensing agency when residents get hurt, according to The Republic's review of state laws.

The feature suggests that "Arizona lawmakers and regulators have prioritized the needs of assisted living and nursing home companies over their residents," comparizing Arizona to  "[a]t least 17 states [that] require assisted living facilities to get inspected about once a year, with a few even requiring two inspections per year. " 

For the full Arizona Republic feature published in its print version on May 21, 2023, look for  "Arizona seniors at risk of harm: Facilities experiencing staff shortage, residents with dementia enable violence," by reporters Caitlin McGlade, Melina Walling and Sahana Jayaraman. The extended Sunday feature appears to follow several shorter articles available online in May from the same reporting team. 

Undocumented Workers in the Caregiving World

Los Angeles Times journalist Steve Lopez has been writing recently on the financial costs of long-term care, whether in the home or a "senior living" setting.  It is part of his series of  "Golden State" columns on California's aging population.   Today, however, he has reversed the lens, and talks about the impact of the need for care on low-wage workers.  He writes: 

I’ve been in homes where the caregivers are U.S. citizens with decent wages and benefits, and I’ve been in homes where the workers are undocumented and paid less than the minimum wage  ($16.04  an hour in the city of Los Angeles)  in cash. It’s a wink-and-nod system, much like farm labor, in which cheap labor is prized over any other consideration.

 

“It’s very much a legacy of slavery and a history in this country of not valuing the work done by … people of color,” said attorney Yvonne Medrano, who heads the employee rights program at Bet Tzedek Legal Services.

 

Several weeks ago I reached out to the the Pilipino Workers Center, a Los Angeles nonprofit that has been educating domestic workers on their rights and leading a fight against a system in which labor laws are often ignored and workers — many of them old enough to be receiving elder care themselves — are cheated and exploited.

Aquilina Soriano Versoza, the center’s director, said research indicates a majority of clients appreciate the care they get and would be willing to pay more for it, but many can’t afford to.

For  a more complete picture, read They Take Care of Aging Adults, Live in Cramped Quarters, and Make Less than MInimum Wage from the Los Angeles Times.

San Diego Expands its Pilot Program for Alzheimer's Response

As described in The San Diego Union-Tribune, San Diego's Alzheimer' Response pilot program, launched in 2018  for the "East County," is a success, helping the public in better addressing people coping with Alzheiemer's Disease or other dementias.  The Alzheimer's Response Team (or ART) now covers the full San Diego region, with help from $1.5 milliion in funding and a staff of  10.5 full time employees.   Originally the program collaborated with an outside nonprofit organization, but "the county now provides its dementia training in-house."

Concerned family members have the option of asking for ART services, often as a way to avoid having problematic episodes escalate.  The article, published online on 3/27/2023 explains: 

ART focuses on two aspects of dementia care: crisis response and crisis prevention. To better respond to emergency calls related to dementia, law enforcement agents, first responders, social workers and mental health clinicians receive training on how neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer’s impact someone’s behavior.

 

That training helps first responders better recognize the symptoms of dementia during emergency calls. They can then call in the ART specialists to work with the person in distress and provide in-home services for clients living with dementia and their family caregivers.

 

Eugenia Welch — president and CEO for Alzheimer’s San Diego, which helped develop the initial programming — said the first responder training and specialized ART staff are key to the program’s success. Interacting with someone diagnosed with dementia, she added, is different than working with people who don’t have neurodegenerative disorders and “takes a unique skill.”

 

“I think by having the specialized team going out, they’re able to be more in tune to the services that are available for people living at home with dementia and able to more quickly connect people with those services to get them the support they need,” Welch said.

 

The ART staff may follow clients to provide support in order to prevent new crises, and to connect the families with local dementia care resources.  According to the article, while "Adult Protective Services Cases" are usually closed in a month, ART support services can continue for six months or longer.  "Staff check in with the client and their family regularly until ths situation is stablized before closing the case."

 

Family members or other concerned people can call 911 in the event of a serious situation developing and should "let disptachers know somoene in the home has either been diagnosed with dementia or is supsected to be living with the condition undiagnosed."  The article says that services can also be requested through the countys's Adult Protect Services Call number directly, rather than through 911.  

USA's Fastest-Growing Demographic Group? Consider the Implications of People Age 50+ Who Live Alone

The New York Times Sunday edition includes a feature article about a trend, "more older Americans living by themselves than ever before."  

Using graphs, interviews and research results, the article makes a clear argument, that "'while many people in their 50s and 60s thrive living solo, research is unequivocal that people aging alone experience worse physical and mental health outcomes and shorter life spans." 

Plus, the article implies that evidence that shows a growing share of older adults (age 55 plus) do not have children, means there is a public policy concern "about how elder care will be managed in the coming decades." 

For me, this article crystalizes two legal concepts I write about frequently:  "filial support" laws that can be used to compel adult children to care for or maintain their elders, and "continuing care retirement communities," that permit people with sufficient -- make that significantly sufficient -- financial resources to plan for how their care needs may be handled in a planned community.  

Law professors can probably use the article to stimulate waves of student projects about personal and collective responsibilities in American societies and beyond.  

For more, see  "As Gen X and Boomers Age, They Confront Living Alone," by Dana Goldstein and Robert Gebeloff. 

 

Another Article on the Impact of Family Caregiving

On several occassions we've pointed out issues surrounding the need for caregiving and families stepping up to fill the role.  Add this article from the New York Times to the library of articles on the topic. The Quiet Cost of Family Caregiving focuses on the impact on the individuals providing care, especially if they are working. For example, "Caregivers who are employed often reduce their work hours or leave the workplace altogether, research has shown. Several recent studies, however, reveal the impact of these decisions in more detail, not only on working caregivers but on employers and the general economy." The article looks at the data on those who reduce hours or leave the workforce and the gender differences on those leaving the work force.  This is an important article-read it!

A Model for Other States? Pennsylvania's Law Schools form Consortium in Active Support of Elder Justice

Faculty members representing all nine law schools in Pennsylvania have joined together in a unique effort.  The inspiration was communications initiated by jurists in the Pennsylvania Courts, especially Supreme Court Justice Debra Todd, promoting the need for sound legal advice and representation for older persons. The purpose of Pennsylvania academics' new Elder Justice Consortium is to identify, examine, and seek to alleviate challenges and difficulties facing diverse older populations across the Commonwealth. 

This mission will include support for direct legal services for older adults, sometimes through law school clinics or service projects, as well as "pop-up" outreach and educational modules that focus on older adults in underserved communities and regions.  

Duquesne University School of Law Assistant Professor Katherine L.W. Norton, who also serves as the director of clinical legal education programs at her school, is serving as the inaugural chair of the Consortium.  During the summer of 2022,  more than fourteen faculty members met regularly to identify ways that law schools can effectively increase our support and commitment to "elder justice."  Professor Norton reports the group invited guest speakers from IOLTA (Interest on Lawyer's Trust Accounts) and the SeniorLAW Center in Philadelphia to share their ideas on funding and needs, as well as seeking a legislative update on guardianship law reforms from Patrick Cawley, an Elder Law attorney from central Pennsylvania who earlier served as counsel for an influential committee in the Pennsylvania Senate.  Members of the consortium also exploring joining an amicus team in a case to be argued before the United States Supreme Court in November. The case addresses whether residents of nursing homes have the right to enforce key provisions of the federal Nursing Home Reform Amendments (OBRA 1987) via direct suit under Title 42, United States Code, Section 1983.  

The Consortium's next step will be for the Deans of the nine law schools to meet in September 2022 in Philadelphia with representatives of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and other interested parties to discuss programming options and priorities for action with the support of our law schools.  Stay tuned, and let us know whether Law Schools in your state have similar teams on behalf of older people.

Hearing Loss, Cataracts, and Dementia

There seem to be a lot of articles in the media currently discussing the statistical relationship between hearing loss and dementia.  Of course, we need to remember the axiom that "correlation does not necessarily mean causation."  Still, recent studies and informed observations are intriguing.  For example one study underway is looking at whether treating hearing loss can reduce the risk of cognitive decline.  

Johns Hopkins is leading a large National Institute on Aging study to see if hearing aids can safeguard seniors’ mental processes. The study has multiple locations and has recruited nearly 1,000 people ages 70–84 with hearing loss. One group is provided hearing aids, while another group receives aging education. By early 2023, the study should provide definitive results on whether treating hearing loss will reduce the risk of cognitive decline. In essence, we’ll know whether the use of hearing aids can potentially reduce brain aging and the risk of dementia.

Some of this research is going beyond examining the potential for common causes for the two processes (such as poor diet and inadequate exercise, as well as uncontrolled blood pressure or weight).  Researchers are asking whether a failure to hear clearly can actually damage the brain's function.  NPR's Sunday Edition (8.21.2022) includes  a five minute interview with Dr. Frank Lin, at John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, who addresses three "major brain mechanisms" that may be affected by untreated hearing impairments: (1) the potential impact of the load on a brain from having to work harder; (2) the potential for hearing loss to actually affect the integrity of the brain's structure  because of atrophy of an essential function, and (3) the potential for loss of hearing to contribute to social isolation, further reducing engagement that keeps people (and their brains) interacting with the world around them. 

Dr. Lin is also pleased about the FDA finally opening access for Americans to purchase over-the-counter hearing aids, a change he's worked on and supported for some eight years.  He points out that currently only some 15 to 20% of Americans who could benefit from hearing assistance are getting the help they need, probably because of high costs and reluctance to see doctors. Dr. Lin says that any theoretical risks from over-the-counter sales (such as over- or under-amplification) is significantly outweighed by the benefits. 

Oh, and while I'm at this, the research suggesting that older people who have cataracts removed may be "nearly 30% less likely to develop dementia" is also interesting.

Hearing Loss, Cataracts, and Dementia

There seem to be a lot of articles in the media currently discussing the statistical relationship between hearing loss and dementia.  Of course, we need to remember the axiom that "correlation does not necessarily mean causation."  Still, recent studies and informed observations are intriguing.  For example one study underway is looking at whether treating hearing loss can reduce the risk of cognitive decline.  

Johns Hopkins is leading a large National Institute on Aging study to see if hearing aids can safeguard seniors’ mental processes. The study has multiple locations and has recruited nearly 1,000 people ages 70–84 with hearing loss. One group is provided hearing aids, while another group receives aging education. By early 2023, the study should provide definitive results on whether treating hearing loss will reduce the risk of cognitive decline. In essence, we’ll know whether the use of hearing aids can potentially reduce brain aging and the risk of dementia.

Some of this research is going beyond examining the potential for common causes for the two processes (such as poor diet and inadequate exercise, as well as uncontrolled blood pressure or weight).  Researchers are asking whether a failure to hear clearly can actually damage the brain's function.  NPR's Sunday Edition (8.21.2022) includes  a five minute interview with Dr. Frank Lin, at John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, who addresses three "major brain mechanisms" that may be affected by untreated hearing impairments: (1) the potential impact of the load on a brain from having to work harder; (2) the potential for hearing loss to actually affect the integrity of the brain's structure  because of atrophy of an essential function, and (3) the potential for loss of hearing to contribute to social isolation, further reducing engagement that keeps people (and their brains) interacting with the world around them. 

Dr. Lin is also pleased about the FDA finally opening access for Americans to purchase over-the-counter hearing aids, a change he's worked on and supported for some eight years.  He points out that currently only some 15 to 20% of Americans who could benefit from hearing assistance are getting the help they need, probably because of high costs and reluctance to see doctors. Dr. Lin says that any theoretical risks from over-the-counter sales (such as over- or under-amplification) is significantly outweighed by the benefits. 

Oh, and while I'm at this, the research suggesting that older people who have cataracts removed may be "nearly 30% less likely to develop dementia" is also interesting.

No Victim Blaming in Financial Fraud

A recent report from AARP and FINRA reminds us to not blame victims of financial frauds. The new report, Blame and Shame in the Context of Financial Fraud points out that "[t]The practice of victim blaming—assigning responsibility to the targets of a crime rather than to the perpetrators—is not a new practice in American society. But this project unearthed ample evidence that victim-blaming practices can shift, and that although often our words blame fraud victims, it isn’t necessarily our intent to hold them accountable." The report discusses why we blame victims, examined the "dimensions of victim blaming", and "reframing" our habit of blaming the victim.  The report gives 5 suggestions for shifting the focus of the conversation and concludes with opportunities for changing the focus.

Questions Arise About Validity of 2006 Alzheimer's Study?

Last month, Science magazine published an article, BLOTS ON A FIELD? A neuroscience image sleuth finds signs of fabrication in scores of Alzheimer’s articles, threatening a reigning theory of the disease.   One researcher recently noted that there were concerns about the 2006 study, including concerns about "image tampering"  There is no smoking gun and the article explains how this one expert became concerned. The article has technical materials in it, so read it and form your own opinion.

More from Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court on Charitable Tax Exemption for CCRC

On August 3, 2022, the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court issued its latest ruling in the long-running case of Friends Boarding Home of Western Quarterly v. Commonwealth,  with an en banc opinion rejecting Friends Home's exceptions to the appellate court's earlier three-judge panel ruling.  The full court focuses closely on the use of residents' fees to operate the Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC) and the argument that because "some" residents receive subsidized care the facility is donating the necessary "substantial" portion of its services.  For example:  

Between 2014 and 2017, Friends incurred annual operating losses between $386,620-$542,652. In 2018, Friends had an operating deficit of $265,569 and for 2019, $790,069. Friends maintains that these deficits lend additional support that Friends’ rates contain substantial subsidies that benefit all residents, such that it satisfied the requirement that it donates or renders gratuitously a substantial portion of its services.

 

We recognize that Friends incurs operating deficits that it covers with funds generated from investments and contributions. However, Friends’ argument that its operating deficits prove that it donates a substantial portion of its services by subsidizing all rates is once again refuted by the fact that there are for-profit facilities in the vicinity of Friends Home providing similar services at comparable rates. Even though Friends may incur operating deficits, it has not demonstrated that it donates “a substantial portion of its services” “to those who cannot afford the ‘usual fee.’” HUP, 487 A.2d at 1315 n.9. Thus, we discern no error in the conclusion reached [by the Panel] in Friends Boarding Home in this regard.

My Pennsylvania colleague Douglas Roeder and I recently co-authored an article about the ongoing challenges for nonprofit organizations, especially those who offer fee-based services.  The latest ruling from the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court would seem to deepen the need for certain nonprofits who seek "purely charitable" tax exemptions to carefully consider their charitable mission.  I'm also thinking that nonprofit CCRCs would also be well advised to have candid discussions of their charitable missions with both potential residents and current residents.  Ultimately,  it will be the more solvent residents who make up the difference in support of the charitable mission.  

Population Continues to Age

That title sounds like a no-brainer, doesn't it? A recent Washington Post story, U.S. continues to get older and more diverse, new estimates show, is about the recently released Census report.

Since 2000, the national median age has increased by 3.4 years to 38.8, with the largest single-year gain of 0.3 years coming in 2021, the year after the coronavirus pandemic hit, according to the bureau’s new 2021 population estimates, an annual data set that is used to fine-tune and update existing statistics.

The birthrate nationwide has been declining, and decreased immigration levels have accelerated the decline.

Between 2020 and 2021, 47 states and the D.C. saw an increase in median age; only Montana, New Hampshire, and West Virginia had no change in median age.

The Northeast was the oldest region in 2021, with a median age of 40.4, followed by the Midwest (39.0), the South (38.6) and the West, which saw the largest increase, up 0.3 years to 37.7, the bureau said.

The full Census report is available here.

Two Hundred Years of Guns.... What if you knew the outcome when you were writing the Second Amendment?

Alexander Merezhko, a good friend since he was a visiting Fulbright Scholar at Dickinson Law from his home country of Ukraine, is now a member of Ukraine's parliament and a senior legal advisor to President Zelenskyy.  We email regularly about events in our respective countries; of course, there is a lot for us to discuss.  Recently, Alexander mentioned that discussions were underway about legalizing individual gun ownership in his country.  Suffice it to say, Professor Merezhko is worried about what happens after the war.  It seems likely the assault by Russian forces motivates those debates in Ukraine, but what about the future?  A similar struggle, America's own then-recent war for independence, was part of the context for the language of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, beginning with the words, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State...."  

Could America's Founding Fathers have dreamed that the contextual phrase would be dismissed as significant and the remaining words of the Second Amendment would be treated as a mandate that permits unrestricted sales of weapons to individuals who are not part of any well-regulated system?  There is a very interesting article with historical  details I've never considered in The New Yorker, titled How Did Guns Get So Powerful?From the article by Phil Klay:

We wonder how we got here. How did guns grow so powerful—both technically and culturally? Like automobiles, firearms have grown increasingly advanced while becoming more than machines; they are both devices and symbols, possessing a cultural magnetism that makes them, for many people, the cornerstone of a way of life. They’re tools that kill efficiently while also promising power, respect, and equality—liberation from tyranny, from crime, from weakness. They’re a heritage from an imagined past, and a fantasy about protecting our future. It’s taken nearly two hundred years for guns to become the problem they are today. The story of how they acquired their power explains why, now, they are so hard to stop.

Why am I writing about guns (again) in the Elder Law Prof Blog?  The need for better support for mental health for youth and elders is part of what needs to be addressed.  Sadly, guns are part of a larger story not just for 18 year-olds in New York or Texas, but also for older Americans, as "firearm suicides are one of the leading causes of death for older Americans."  See Firearm Suicides in the Elderly: A Narrative Review and Call for Action, published in 2021 in the Journal of Community Health.  

Call for Papers: Journal of Elder Policy Issue on Technology as an Underutilized Late-Life Resource

Distinguished Professor and Editor-in-Chief Eva Kahana at Case Western University has advised us of the the most recent "call for papers" for her Journal of Elder Policy.  As most of us who work in law and aging recognize, our field is inherently cross-disciplinary and that is why it is so nice to hear from the sociology field when it is seeking new articles.  The focus for the upcoming issue is Technology: An Underutilized Late-Life Resource.  

The journal, which is peer reviewed, is seeking papers that address policy challenges and implications related to technology use and older adults. They welcome both empirical and conceptual papers from diverse disciplines and have a preference for pieces that employ policy approaches. 

Topics may include but are not limited to:

• Internet use/access
• Digital exclusion/inclusiveness
• Interventions using digital platforms
• Intergenerational learning
• E-Health Literacy
• Cultural influences on technology use in later life
• Digital monitoring of frail older adults
• Digital data collection
• Scams/Fraud

Now the important part: 

Abstracts due by August 15, 2022 (500 words)
Full papers due by October 31, 2022 (8,000-10,000 words)