July 9, 2011

Nursing Home Attorneys File Suit Against Understaffed Facilities

All across the country, nursing homes are being run with less than the optimum number of staff. They are being understaffed in a hope to cut costs and increase profits. When nursing homes fail to properly staff their facilities, the chance of accidents and mistakes greatly increases. State and Federal laws set a minimum standard that nursing homes must comply with. The problems arise when facilities choose to ignore these government regulations.

People choose to go to nursing homes not because they want to, but because they are at a point in their lives where they need more care and attention than can otherwise be provdided to them. Many nursing home residents have been finding out that the nursing homes promise to provide them the care and treatment they need is often a fabrication. The nursing homes that choose to understaff their facilities have been rewarded with large profits by failing to provide the required number of nursing hours and as a result, patients of these homes have not received adequate care.

Some problems that can occur when a facility is understaffed are falls, pressure sores, dehydration and malnutrition, all of which stem from an overall lack of quality care and attention. It is easy to blame the staff of the nursing home when problems arise, but in reality the staff is often doing the best it can with the resources it is provided. If there are not enough staff members to provide supervision for the residents who are at risk for falls then it is likely a resident will fall, and it is no stretch of the imagination to assume that if there are not enough staff members to turn and reposition residents who are at risk for the development of pressure sores, that a resident will eventually develop pressure sores.

It is not the nurse’s fault that these injuries are occurring; a nurse can only care for so many residents at once. The facilities are setting their staff up for failure. Without adequate staffing, it is impossible for any resident to truly get the care and treatment they need. Owners of the nursing homes need to stop choosing profits over people and people need to start demanding better nursing home care.

The nursing home attorneys at Levin and Perconti have been fighting against facilities that understaff their Illinois nursing homes. Many residents of nursing homes have come to Levin and Perconti after suffering an injury, only to find out that one of the main reasons that the injury occurred was because the facility they were at was understaffed. Hopefully, the civil liability that these homes are opening themselves up to by understaffing will be enough of a deterrent to stop them from doing so in the future.

June 30, 2011

PPACA – What Does it Mean for Nursing Home Abuse Victims in Illinois?

Lately health care has been a hot topic of discussion. But beyond having effects on the private health insurance market, it has far-reaching consequences that could potentially affect you or a loved one if you are planning to file an Illinois nursing home negligence lawsuit.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) is part of the 2010 health care reform signed into law by President Barack Obama, and with the rise in nursing home abuse cases in Illinois it could not have come at a better time.

Recent federal reports show that more than 30% of Illinois nursing homes have been cited for abuse. The scariest part is that nursing home abuse statistics show that most cases of nursing home abuse are never even reported. Although many nursing homes do better than others to ensure the well-being of their residents, the truth is that our Chicago nursing home neglect attorneys see hundreds of cases a year involving death, sepsis, malnutrition, dehydration, and other potentially avoidable injuries resulting from improper medical care.

Because there are so many horrifying and devastating cases of nursing home negligence in Illinois and all over the country, recent health care reforms had to take a stand. PPACA put into law a number of rules that nursing homes that have been forced to close must follow, and they may affect your rights as a victim.

As per PPACA, if a nursing home is forced to close:
1. The Administrator must notify legal representatives (and other responsible parties) of the residents of the facility’s closure, in writing.
2. After the notification deadline, the nursing home may not accept any new residents or patients.
3. The nursing home must take steps to review each resident’s file, and included with the written notification of the facility’s closure must be an individualized appropriate plan for transfer and relocation of each resident.
4. Finally, if the nursing home administrator does not fulfill the terms of the transfer plan and notification, he or she may be fined up to $100,000, and be banned from participation in Medicare and Medicaid programs.

So what does this mean to you?

If you or a loved one are or have been a resident of a facility that has been forced to close and you have not been appropriately notified or given a plan for relocation to another care facility, you may have a valid claim. A Chicago nursing home attorney may be able to help you.

The elderly are a cherished and valued part of our community. Fortunately the laws are taking steps to protect their health and dignity.

February 8, 2011

Trial Begins in Federal Lawsuit Similar to Recent Illinois Nursing Home Settlement

TampaBay.com published a story this morning on a high profile federal nursing home lawsuit that questions state practices overemphasizing the use of nursing homes for injured and debilitated citizens.

Specifically, advocacy groups, including the AARP, filed suit alleging a state Medicaid program was in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. They claim that state practices force certain injured people into nursing homes instead of providing services at the individual’s home. The federal act mandates that states integrate people into their communities—a duty that advocates claim is being ignored by the state.

Blog readers will recall that a settlement was reached in our state following a similar Illinois nursing home lawsuit. Disability rights activists had sought changes in the way certain disabled nursing home members were treated, and the group filed a class action lawsuit against the state in 2005 claiming that the state care of these individuals was lacking. The basis of the charge was the then inability of residents to live in an integrated living environment. The claim was rooted in the American with Disabilities Act and its rejection of undue segregation.

If approved by a judge, the agreement decree will allow much greater flexibility of living conditions for developmentally disabled residents. According to the agreement, all 6,000 residents of these special facilities are able to move out of the nursing home and into a small group home.

The agreement remains flexible in that only those individuals who chose to leave the larger facilities are able—instead of forcing all in the group to move to smaller group homes.

Continue reading "Trial Begins in Federal Lawsuit Similar to Recent Illinois Nursing Home Settlement " »

February 5, 2011

Conservative Reasons to Oppose Medical Malpractice “Reform”

Earlier this week we shared information from the 7th Amendment Advocate that put the debate about tort reform into a constitutional context. Respect for the Bill of Right demands that all of the guarantees promised by our Founders be understood and protected. That includes the 7th Amendment right to a jury trial in civil matters. Doing otherwise would undermine the important Constitutional mandate, increase the scope of the federal government power, and limit the rights of individual citizens—all things most conservatives work to reject.

The 7th Amendment Advocate created a laundry list of specific reasons that all constitutional conservatives should stand arm in arm against so-called malpractice reforms (like the recently introduced bill in Congress, H.R. 5). This legislation may prove to have troubling effects on Illinois nursing home lawsuits.

For example, the 10th Amendment specifically protects states’ rights. But that federalism principle is destroyed with blanket rules forced upon all states and individuals by Congress. In addition, the passage of this “reform” would simply require more government spending, because victims would be forced to seek public assistance to recover their losses. If the doctors and other professionals who negligently cause mistakes are not forced to pay for the losses caused than that duty will fall to the public at large through increased Medicare and Medicaid payments.

The fact remains that the undermining of victims rights provides a stepping stone to the curtailing of many other rights. Freedoms for religion, gun owners, and the like are all up for grabs if the guarantees of our Founders are treated as little more than suggestions to be taken away upon the whim of certain powerful interests.

Continue reading "Conservative Reasons to Oppose Medical Malpractice “Reform”" »

February 4, 2011

The Importance of Enforcing Illinois Nursing Home Laws

Laws requiring that nursing homes ensure that their facility is safe and secure are only of any worth if those laws are enforced. It isn’t the act of passing a law that improves resident lives, it is the actual steps then taken by the facilities to comply that improve the well-being of the elderly resident.

That is why we applaud efforts like Operation Guardian in Illinois that conducts surprise investigations at Illinois nursing homes to check the facility’s compliance with state law. In that way, facilities are further pushed to ensure that proper requirements are met. However, with thousands of nursing homes in Illinois, it is impossible for the state sweep to check on even a fraction of the facilities in the state. That is why the eyes and ears of residents and their families are important parts of the enforcement process.

An article published in the Des Moines Register explains how our neighbor state to the north is grappling with the same issues. The author calls on that state to step up the enforcement of law to ensure that nursing home care is at the level reasonable society members deem necessary.

The enforcement call stems from the non-existent care provided to one local nursing home resident. The 89-year old victim entered a nursing home only to recover from a broken leg suffered in a car accident. She planned to go back to her home after recouping. However, she continued to suffer excruciating pain and her leg never healed.

One day a physical-therapy aide who visited the facility noted that her leg smelled like “rotting meat” and noticed blood seeping through her stocking. The victim was rushed to a local hospital. Doctors there discovered that the woman’s bandages hadn’t been changed in a month. Literally no care was provided. The woman’s leg had to be amputated, and she died a few months later.

Amazingly, the owner of the for-profit facility that failed to provide even a modicum of care believes that the nursing home shouldn’t have been held responsible. Instead, the owner claims that “rouge” nursing home inspectors are at fault for “flogging” nursing home workers.

Continue reading "The Importance of Enforcing Illinois Nursing Home Laws" »

February 3, 2011

Documentary “Hot Coffee” Sets the Record Straight on Tort Reform Debate

Misinformation abounds when it comes to tort reform. Public relations teams with insurance companies and other big business have been working for years to manufacture the idea that “frivolous” lawsuits are causing nationwide problems. As we have pointed out repeatedly, the assertions made by proponents of this “reform” are often completely wrong and virtually always overblown.

One filmmaker took to the screen to set the record straight about tort reform with stories about the real lives involved in these lawsuits. Reuters recently discussed the wide support the film—known as “Hot Coffee”—has received from those who’ve seen it. Audiences continue to give it great reviews since its premiere at the Sundance Film Festival.

In it the filmmaker takes a look at the actual individuals behind many of the cases that would be affected by laws limiting victim rights. She explores the infamous McDonalds coffee case, showing the horrific pelvic injuries the elderly victim suffered when a cup of nearly boiling coffee was spilled into her lap. The document reveals how the victim initially only asked the mega-company to pay for her medical bills but was rebuffed by the arrogant corporate giant.

The movie also examines a problem that our Illinois nursing home lawyers know well—the widespread use of mandated arbitration clauses. These legal requirements are buried in the fine print of all sorts of agreements (from nursing home admissions to employment contracts). These clauses are used to take away a victim’s right to sue, forcing all disagreement into arbitration hearings. Those hearings are typically skewed toward the big interests, with unique rules and requirements that often work against the victim.

Continue reading "Documentary “Hot Coffee” Sets the Record Straight on Tort Reform Debate" »

February 1, 2011

The Conservative Case Against Malpractice "Reform"

Many nursing home residents and their advocates may not be aware that discussion about medical malpractice rules often affects nursing home lawsuits. The limits imposed by these proposals often include cases against negligent nursing home employees. For example, last week we discussed proposed Illinois nursing home law changes that would weaken the rights of residents and their families to hold a bad nursing home accountable for conduct that injured residents.

Because of the connection, it is important for all those who care about the treatment of our vulnerable seniors to work to stop all government efforts to "reform" malpractice rules.

The 7th Amendment Advocate recently explained an overlooked concept in the debate about medical malpractice “reform.” Self-defined “conservatives” are usually the ones calling the loudest for rule changes that would cut away at victim’s right to a jury trial. These same individuals often extol the virtue of limited government, promoting policy concepts that keep decision-making power with states and individuals.

Baffling is how these same conservatives fail to recognize the hypocrisy of advocating for medical malpractice “reform” that does nothing more than create blanket rules at the federal life at the expense of states and individual citizens.

As we have repeatedly emphasized on this blog, the 7th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is clear in enshrining the unfettered guarantee of a jury trial in essentially all civil trials. It would be logical for all those who respect the freedoms guaranteed by our Founders to fight against any erosion of those freedoms.

The inconsistent principles advocated by these “reformers” are disturbing, suggesting ulterior motives are behind the claims. The situation is all the more unfortunate because the practical consequences of most malpractice legislation is little more than a money grab by the big medical lobby and insurance interests. For example, the current proposal known as H.R. 5 would do nothing to limit medical malpractice; it would impose arbitrary damage awards, change liability rules, and make it much more difficult for injured victims to seek redress from those who harm them carelessly.

Continue reading "The Conservative Case Against Malpractice "Reform"" »

January 29, 2011

Calls for Tort Reform Ignore the Constitution

Lawyer bashing and jury ridicule have been commonplace in the recent public discussion about the civil justice system. Certain special interests continue to propagate the belief that “reforms” need to be enacted to improve the system of justice across the country. Most perplexingly, this call for action is done in the name of the Constitution—a perversion of the document at direct odds with the clear intention of our Founders.

Ken Connor, the President of the Center for Just Society eloquently explained how these political calls for malpractice reform seemingly ignore the 7th Amendment to the Constitution which protects the rights of citizens to jury trials in civil cases. On top of that, the proponents of this “reform” view apparently find little stock in the 9th and 10th Amendment protections that limit federal power and ensure that individual citizen rights and state control are preserved and respected.

Of course the rejection of Constitutional principles is even more disappointing in that it is motivated by efforts to protect wrongdoers from accountability at the expense of the injured victims and their families. Recently introduced legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives, known as the HEALTH Act (H.R. 5) is the latest incarnation of this problem.

Ken Connor summarizes the bill as “a federally imposed, top down, one-size-fits-all, special-interest driven emasculation of fundamental constitutional rights, turning victims of medical malpractice and dangerous drugs into constitutional eunuchs.”

The new proposal has a large scope—it applies to nursing home claims, medical malpractice claims, and suits against insurance companies. It includes arbitrary caps on non-economic damages, and shortens the statute of limitations on many acts of negligence. It also eliminates joint and several liability and raises pleading standards. These changes would essentially make it harder for victims to win cases and, even if they are won, harder to collect the entire damage award reached by the jury. Many of these changes preempt state law, overriding the will of state legislators and voters.

Continue reading "Calls for Tort Reform Ignore the Constitution" »

January 27, 2011

Illinois Nursing Home Lawsuits May Be Unfairly Limited By New Legislation

Yet again new federal legislation is attempting to “reform” the parts of the legal system in a way that will do nothing but insulate big business at the expense of nursing home victims. The latest attempt takes the form of H.R. 5—legislation identical to a proposed bill from the last Congress. If passed it would have severe consequences on all Illinois nursing home lawsuits.

The same debunked claims about “cost savings” are being put forward by proponents of the legislation. However, as the American Association for Justice pointed out, the money spent on legal defense in nursing home suits is drastically exaggerated. In addition, all reasonable estimates reveal little to no actual savings can be created by limiting victims’ legal rights. Those arguments act as nothing more than a smokescreen, raising false concerns in order to benefit big insurance and nursing home conglomerates at the expense of regular community members.

This latest bill is particularly troubling because of its large scope—it applies to medical malpractice claims, nursing home claims, and suits against insurance companies. It includes arbitrary caps on non-economic damages, and shortens the statute of limitations on many acts of negligence. It also eliminates joint and several liability and raises pleading standards.

These changes would essentially make it harder for victims to win cases and, even once they’ve been won, harder to collect the entire damage award reached by the jury. Many of these changes preempt state law, meaning that the federal government would be overriding the will of many states, forcing these unfair rules upon them.

Continue reading "Illinois Nursing Home Lawsuits May Be Unfairly Limited By New Legislation" »

January 20, 2011

Advocates Explain Problems with Nursing Home Liability Limits

Each day brings news of more nursing home residents harmed and sometimes killed because of poor oversight provided by their caregivers. When that happens, the law provides a method of redress that allows the victims to hold the negligent nursing home accountable for their mistakes. This basic process is one of the most effective ways of ensuring the proper treatment of our vulnerable elders.

However, some groups are seeking to erode the rights of nursing home victims. The Journal-Sentinel Online reported this week on proposed legislation that would impose arbitrary caps on jury decisions following nursing home lawsuits. The law would add malpractice cases against nursing homes, hospices, and assisted living facilities to the list of suits that have a cap on the award a jury can reach for certain damages. Many advocates argue that the new law will only insulate bad nursing homes from liability and will serve as a disincentive to necessary improvements.

The mother of a 26-year old nursing home resident who died because of her caregiver’s negligence explained, “The idea that our lawmakers now want to shield nursing homes from full responsibility for their neglect is the worst kind of public policy at the worst of times.”

Continue reading "Advocates Explain Problems with Nursing Home Liability Limits" »

January 18, 2011

Health Care Law Includes Important Provisions for Nursing Home Residents

Earlier this year we reported on the widely discussed national health care reform law. The landmark legislation provides for a wide array of important, necessary changes in our nation’s healthcare system for all citizens, including many vulnerable elderly Americans.

However, the House of Representatives is planning to vote on repeal the important legislation in business on the house floor today. The Consumer Voice, an advocacy group for long-term care recipients and their families, published a letter this weekend that rejects the misguided repeal effort.

The organization explains the many positive provisions in the bill that must be preserved. For example, the bill ensured that nursing home owners and operators will be publically disclosed so that everyone can make educated choices about where to seek the long-term care they need. The legislation also strengthened the consumer complaint system, assured adequate disclosure of the need for relocation with nursing home closure, guarantees more training for nursing home assistants, ensures national background checks for employees, and many other vital actions.

If the repeal effort passes through the U.S. House it would still require similar action in the Senate and signature of the President before taking effect—both highly unlikely. Yet, all those who stand in support of fair-mindedness and reasonable care for our vulnerable seniors should stand in opposition to this symbolic attack on health care reform. Please contact your representative and urge a No vote.

Continue reading "Health Care Law Includes Important Provisions for Nursing Home Residents" »

January 16, 2011

More Funding To Help Improve Illinois Nursing Home Care

Our state legislature was very busy last week as several major policy proposals were heatedly debate in Springfield. Friday marked the official end of the last General Assembly. The last-minute business was the last effort involving many retiring legislators before a swath of new members were sworn into office.

Part of the effort involved passage of a plan that will increase state revenues significantly over the next several years. The result will mean that hundreds of millions more dollars will be given to Illinois nursing homes, according to Behavioral Health Central. Few people would question the benefit of devoting more resources to improving the quality of care at local nursing homes. However, it is important to remain aware of the potential pitfalls of the specific legislation passed by state leaders.

Of particular note, there is concern that the funding will provide a windfall to profit-making facilities that typically provide substandard care. It is of the utmost importance that the influx of money provided by the state not be used in a way that provides benefit to poor care-givers and impedes transfers of residents out of poor facilities.

The legislation was motivated in part by efforts to reduce violence and abuse at Illinois nursing homes. Recent investigations have shown the problem to be much more widespread that many imagined.

Continue reading "More Funding To Help Improve Illinois Nursing Home Care" »

January 15, 2011

Political Interests Seek to Take Away Rights From Nursing Home Victims

The Wisconsin State-Journal reports that the legislature in our neighbor to the north is considering a bill that will make it more difficult for victims of nursing home negligence to seek redress following their loss.

Lawmakers in the state are debating legislation that would change the information that juries would be able to see in cases regarding nursing homes. For example, reviews and reports about health care providers would be deemed inadmissible evidence under the bill’s provisions. What that means, of course, is that a jury’s will have less information to determine exactly what happened in each situation.

Little can be gained from barring valuable information about the care provided to patients at nursing homes charged with committing deadly acts of negligence. One advocate fighting against the legislation is a victim of just such negligence. The man’s mother died following her nursing home’s inability to prevent and treat pressure sores. A jury of his peers heard the evidence and returned a verdict in his favor. Had the victim not be able to use official documents explaining the conduct of the facility, they may have a reached a different result.

Continue reading "Political Interests Seek to Take Away Rights From Nursing Home Victims" »

January 10, 2011

Tragic Stories At Forefront of Illinois Nursing Home Reform

Lawyers and Settlements published a story last week explaining the recently passed reform measures that will apply to all Illinois nursing homes. The publication particularly focuses on the stories of nursing home abuse and neglect that spurred the new legislation.

Illinois Governor Pat Quinn signed the reform laws in late July last year. At the signing ceremony he announced that the legislation was a product of a comprehensive examination of problems with nursing home care in the state. A 2009 Nursing Home Safety Task Force took account of the many allegations of abuse at the facilities in the state.

A large component of the new reforms related to the ability of many nursing homes to force residents to live with other residents suspected of having dangerous backgrounds and dispositions. This problem was exposed in large part by efforts from the Attorney General’s office which has conducted surprise raids on facilities looking for residents with outstanding arrest warrants. Many sex offenders and other criminals have been found living in these homes.

As a result, many residents have been victimized by their fellow residents. For example, one schizophrenic woman living at the Monroe Pavilion Health and Treatment Center strangely became pregnant while at the facility. The facility informed the resident’s daughter that the sexual intercourse leading to the pregnancy was consensual. However, the woman’s mental condition is so severe that she is unable to make decisions for herself and therefore unable to consent to sex.

Continue reading "Tragic Stories At Forefront of Illinois Nursing Home Reform" »

December 17, 2010

Big Business Attempt to Take Away Legal Rights

Many victims of nursing home abuse may not fully understand that meaning of buzz phrases like "tort reform," or the fact that it may have implications for their own legal rights. But any attempt to limit access to the justice system may affect victims of all kinds, including nursing home residents.

The war to take away victim rights continued today with the release of a “judicial hellhole” report by a front group for big business. The American Tort Reform Association is an organization propped up by corporate interests like Dow Chemical, Exxon, Pfizer, and others. Their goal is to influence the passage of legislation that will ensure that people who fall victim to their negligence will have less ability to seek justice in the court system.

In a response president of the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association explains that the latest report is nothing more than a stunt to further the corporate “tort reform” agenda. The fact remains that both victims and potential tortfeasors deserve a fair hearing in the civil justice system. Instead, the big businesses want to stack the deck so that they do not even have to present their case in court. They’d prefer a “free pass” any time that they injure consumers and engage in dangerous or unfair practices.

No community is improved when corporate interests are allowed to meddle with the justice system for its own gain. It is imperative that the common sense political forces stand up to this blatant misuse of business power and influence. Major CEOs and small-town working people deserve the same legal rights. It’s a simple principle that must be preserved.

Continue reading "Big Business Attempt to Take Away Legal Rights" »

December 3, 2010

$50 Million Nursing Home Settlement Approved By Judge

This blog has frequently reported on the progress of a large nursing home lawsuit against the Skilled HealthCare Group. The genesis of the class-action lawsuit was the nursing home chain’s inadequate staffing levels at many of its facilities. The law in the state required 3.2 hours of nursing care per patient and the facilities were falling far below that amount, according to the suit.

A jury trial on that issue resulted in a mind-numbing $670 million verdict against the negligent nursing home chain to make-up the difference in lost care provided to thousands of victims. Before an appeal of that jury decision, the company agreed to settle the matter for $50 million—with most of those funds to be set aside in an escrow account to help support victims of the nursing home chain’s negligence. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, this week a judge officially approved that settlement.

Specifically, Skilled Healthcare will pay $50 million to around 32,000 patients living at the facilities where care was found to be lacking. In addition, the chain will pay around $12.8 million to ensure future compliance with the 3.2 hour nursing requirement in state law.

Continue reading "$50 Million Nursing Home Settlement Approved By Judge" »

November 18, 2010

New Nationwide Survey Available On State Assisted Living Regulations

In many ways, it is difficult for a consumer to easily find much of the important information related to nursing home and assisted living care in their area. For example, it can be tricky to clearly discover information about past instances of bad conduct at a facility. Also, there is no uniform standard to which each state holds its assisted living facilities. Laws and rules surrounding quality of care, resident rights, minimum safety standards, medication control, and other matters are all different depending on location.

However, the LongTerm Community Care Coalition has compiled the various rules and regulations into a new overview compiled from the results of a new 50 state survey of assisted living laws. The project focuses specifically on the ways in which individual states monitor the facilities within their borders. This new report helps fill the current void for this particular type of information—it has never previously been captured in this manner. The information is shared in detailed charts that outline state requirements like licensure, government inspections, availability of inspection findings, remedies available for violated residents, and related requirements.

In that way, this new report provides critical information for anyone interested in ensuring that seniors and other assisted living facility residents are safe, treated with dignity, and maintain a reasonable quality of life.

Continue reading "New Nationwide Survey Available On State Assisted Living Regulations" »

October 29, 2010

Federal Lawmakers Urge Increased Transparency From Nursing Home Conglomerates

The Hill, the news group that follows legislative developments out of Washington D.C., recently explained an effort by a few lawmakers to provide consumers with more information about who is actually running their local nursing home.

A bipartisan mix of legislators, Senators Max Baucus, Chick Grassley, and Rep. Pete Stark explained this week that it remains a challenge for anyone to understand the true leaders of a nursing facility, because the ownership information is hidden in layers of deceiving information. The information is further complicated by private firm investments, making it very difficult for victims of nursing home abuse advocates to determine who is actually responsible for improving care at negligent facilities.

The need for changes is growing as reports have found increased private investment in nursing homes, with private firms buying over 1,800 facilities in the last decade. Only 10 firms are responsible for nearly 90% of the growth—meaning the care of hundreds of thousands of seniors is in the hands of a select few firms. The specific ownership information tracked by Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in its tracking system known as PECOS. Unfortunately, the PECOS information is difficult to understand and occasionally incomplete. In that way it is difficult to understand the size and scope of many nursing home chains.

To improve the situation, the lawmakers are advocating a new law that would require these nursing facilities to provide more detailed and consistent ownership information. The required reporting would include a description of the nursing chain’s governing body, organizational structure, and information about other connected parties.

As Sen. Baucus explains, “Federal health care officials need full and detailed information so they can properly oversee these nursing homes and hold the correct parties accountable for keeping patients safe and well-cared for.”

Our team of Chicago nursing home lawyers at Levin & Perconti well understands the challenges of holding nursing homes accountable for their care when the ownership information is buried in bureaucracy. We believe that the best nursing home care will only be provided when there is no hidden information or deceptive practices where chains seek to avoid being held responsible for their operations.

October 2, 2010

Settlement Reached In Illinois Nursing Home Challenge

The Daily Herald recently reported on a class action settlement that may affect the lives of thousands of patients in nursing homes and other facilities for the mentally ill.

A civil rights lawsuit had previously been filed by the American Civil Liberties Union challenging Illinois’ segregation of mentally ill patients. As it stood before the settlement, the state had two types of long-term care facilities: regular nursing homes and specialized homes known as institutions for mental disease. There are 25 of those facilities in Illinois, which are run for profit using federal government aid to care for the mentally ill patients.

A settlement was recently reached that will give the mentally ill patients additional living options. Specifically, those patients will now have the right to move to apartments or small homes. A court-appointed monitor will facilitate the five year transition.

Some disagreement existed over the settlement and its possible ramifications. No resident will be forced to leave the facility in which they currently live. However, the change may ultimately force many of these specialized nursing homes to close because they would not have enough patients to sustain the for-profit costs. This fact caused concern to many family members who feared that their loved ones would not be able to live healthily outside of the institutions. However, ACLU experts claimed that many residents would be able to live successfully with state support services like cooking, shopping, and medication management. Ultimately the judge approved the settlement notwithstanding the objections.

Our Chicago nursing home attorneys at Levin & Perconti support all changes that ensure that these vulnerable Illinois residents are given the care that they deserve. Also, we strongly believe that all applicable nursing home laws and constitutional guarantees should be honored at all times.

August 20, 2010

State Pays $16 Million in Nursing Home Lawsuit

The Washington Post published a story yesterday on the latest development in a large class-action nursing home lawsuit out of Maryland. On Wednesday the state began paying $16 million to various nursing homes and their residents as part of a settlement from a nursing home lawsuit filed in 2005.

The lawsuit involved the improper methods that the state used to gauge the ability of nursing home residents to pay for their own care without government assistance. According to the lawsuit, state officials erroneously inflated the income of certain nursing home residents. The state consequently used that inflation to refuse to provide supplemental financial support to offset the cost of their medical care at nursing homes.

Specifically, both state law and federal law required the state to consider the debt that a resident accrues while awaiting approval for Medicaid coverage as part of the calculation into their ability to pay for their own care without government support. Yet, officials did not factor this adverse financial burden into assessing resident finances. As a result of their mistake, many nursing home residents were left in severe financial straits—needing nursing home care but unable to pay for all of those services without some assistance from state welfare agencies.

In total almost 12,000 current and former residents were affected by the violation of nursing home law. The settlement will attempt to provide relief to those victimized by the legal wrong. Besides that basic fair compensation the resolution of the case also shone a light on the problem, ensuring that from now on the state will make changes to its calculation of funding. In that way, future nursing home residents are spared the stress and heartache of trying to survive while being denied legally obligated medical funds.

As this case demonstrates, and as our Chicago nursing home lawyers at Levin & Perconti have learned, lawsuits can serve an important social function. Besides attempting to correct a wrong to a particular resident, these lawsuits often serve as wake-up calls to extremely negligent conduct. In that way, future harm is prevented and the system of care is improved for all.