The Des Moines Register. Aug. 20, 2015
Nursing homes take away right to sue.
In January 2013, 80-year-old Esther Brown was found lying in her bed at a Pennsylvania nursing home with blood covering her hands and her pillowcase.
A nurse’s aide at the home reported that one of her co-workers had hit Esther and then had thrown a can of shaving cream in her face, striking the elderly woman above the eye. The incident was reported to the police, and Esther died several months later.
Her family sued the nursing home, alleging negligence and battery. But before the case could proceed to trial, the judge had to rule on whether the family had the right to file such a lawsuit. When Esther was admitted to the facility in 2011, she and her daughter signed a contract that required her, and her family, to submit any quality-of-care complaints to an arbitrator rather than to a judge or jury.
Late last year, Judge Jeffrey Sprecher upheld the family’s right to sue, finding the arbitration agreement “unconscionable” because it was presented to Brown at emotionally difficult time; consisted of long, confusing passages; improperly portrayed the deal as beneficial to all parties; and included a confidentiality provision that Sprecher said was “designed to bury all proof of bad things that may be alleged to occur in a nursing home.”
The sad reality is that these types of arbitration agreements are fairly common now among nursing homes, and they are often upheld by the courts. Prospective residents, who may be in the midst of a health care crisis, are asked to forfeit their right to sue as a condition of admission. As the judge in the Esther Brown case ruled, these binding arbitration agreements are sometimes “forced down the throat” of residents.
As Sprecher pointed out, these agreements also attempt to “inject fear in the patient by suggesting that a court action takes so much longer than arbitration, so that unless you select arbitration, the patient may die before his court case could be finished.”
At first glance, arbitration might sound like a reasonable, effective way to address complaints without resorting to litigation. The problem is that through litigation, complainants have the ability to use the discovery process to procure documents that speak to patterns of abuse or neglect. They can also subpoena witnesses for depositions, and secure sworn testimony as to the facts of the case. And all of that is handled through a public proceeding before a judge or a jury of one’s peers.
Many of the arbitration agreements restrict a complainant’s access to records, as well as the number of depositions and witnesses. Some place limits on how much a party can recover in damages.
The federal government could easily bar these types of mandatory agreements as a condition of a home’s participation in the Medicaid program - but it has repeatedly refused to do so. In fact, the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is considering major changes in nursing home regulations, but under the proposed new rules, homes will only be required to “explain” arbitration agreements to residents.
Of course, many individuals are placed in nursing homes precisely because their cognitive abilities are greatly diminished. How many of them are in a position to understand the legal rights they are forfeiting by signing these agreements?
Fortunately, CMS says it is still considering whether it should simply prohibit binding arbitration agreements altogether, noting that residents who depend on nursing homes for urgently needed care may feel pressured to sign the contracts even when they’re not required as a condition of admission.
It’s time for CMS to ban arbitration agreements in nursing homes. If care facilities feel that’s an intrusion on their right to dictate the terms of admission, they’re free to bow out of the Medicaid program and accept only private-pay residents.
But as long as public money is paying for the care provided in these homes, the regulation of these facilities should be designed to protect the public and not to appease the industry.
___
Quad-City Times. Aug. 20, 2015
Put WWII veterans in the spotlight.
John Adams of Davenport has played taps at the funerals of 1,134 veterans.
And that number doesn’t count the ceremonies at which the 91-year-old World War II Army veteran has put his bugle to his lips to play the mournful song, events like Sunday’s “Keep the Spirit of ’45 Alive” at the Rock Island National Cemetery.
That event, as well as Monday’s “flightless” Honor Flight, are important reminders to cherish the veterans of World War II still in our midst and remember the sacrifices of the thousands of their comrades no longer with us.
Ceremonies this month here and throughout the world to mark the 70th anniversary of the end of World War II were somber and reflective, much different from the raucous celebrations that accompanied President Harry S. Truman’s announcement in 1945 that the war was over.
The jubilance and hope on the faces of the military men and women of the time as they reunited with family, sweethearts and children born after they went overseas have given way to the veterans who remember with sadness the buddies they lost and the spouses who have passed away.
Sunday’s “Keep the Spirit of ’45 Alive” service on Arsenal Island brought tears to Adams’ eyes.
“I have to concentrate on what I am doing. I did fine,” he told reporter Doug Schorpp.
“But I sometimes question if young people realize how important this country is,” Adams said. “I lost some good friends. There really was a close friend that I lost in the war and I think of him a lot. I really feel blessed to do this. I am 91. Most of my friends are gone.”
On Monday, almost two dozen veterans were at the National Cemetery as participants of the local Honor Flight tour. The event, which included stops at sites honoring veterans such as Hero Street in Silvis and Davenport Memorial Park, was meant to include veterans for whom the traditional Honor Flight to Washington, D.C. is too taxing.
We commend the Honor Flight organizers for adding this element to a program that has brought remembrance and honor to so many local veterans.
More than 16 million Americans served their country during World War II. Today, fewer than 855,000 remain, according to the National WWII Museum.
Don’t wait until Veterans Day to thank a veteran.
Thank you, John Adams. And thank you to all our veterans.
___
Dubuque Telegraph Herald. August 17, 2015
Barber promoting reading setting a great example.
You might have seen a story from the Aug. 9 TH shared by people across the country on Facebook last week.
It was the story of the Dubuque barber who offered free haircuts while kids read aloud to him, went out on The Associated Press wire, was published in multiple newspapers and went wild on social media.
When TH reporter Stacey Becker, who wrote the story, heard from a reader in New York who wanted to give the barber a donation, we knew the story had taken on a life of its own.
Indeed, barber Courtney Holmes heard from “The Rachael Ray Show” and has been interviewed by national news outlets, including People magazine and USA Today.
The Little Free Library reached out to Spark Family Hair Salon, where Holmes works, and wants to establish a free micro-library there. That group’s Facebook page was “shared” more than 4,000 times and had 300,000 impressions.
It’s encouraging to know that Holmes’ simple gesture has resonated with so many. Encouragement from adults can be a huge push to get kids reading. The salon is prepared to turn a one-time thing into a trend by offering once-per-month free haircuts for kids while they read.
That effort will be possible with support from local groups, including My Brother’s Keeper and the Community Foundation of Greater Dubuque.
Three cheers for Courtney Holmes for finding another way to make reading fun. And extra cheers for all those who have helped keep the momentum going.
___
Iowa City Press-Citizen. August 21, 2015
Grant Wood deserves permanent place on campus
Perhaps the most recognized artist to ever have spent time at the University of Iowa, we think Grant Wood deserves a permanent place on the University of Iowa campus.
In fact, we’re a bit puzzled by the fact that a campus building has yet to be named in his honor.
Grant Wood’s “American Gothic” is one of the three most recognized paintings in the world, alongside Edvard Munch’s “The Scream” and Leonardo da Vinci’s “Mona Lisa.”
That’s why we fully support a movement to name the salvaged portion of the former Museum of Art along the west bank of the Iowa River the Grant Wood Art Building.
Wood taught painting at UI in that very building from 1934 to 1942, and also supervised the federally-funded New Deal mural painting projects and pursued his own works.
Through partnerships like the Grant Wood Art Colony, the university has taken some important steps recently toward resurrecting its connections to Wood. And still more steps are likely to be taken once the university eventually inherits Wood’s former home at 1142 E. Court St.
But we wonder just how many UI students are aware Wood ever spent time on campus, or taught in that building.
Wood was born in Anamosa and trained at the Art Institute of Chicago and the Academie Julian in Paris, France. He taught in Cedar Rapids public schools in the early 1920s before coming to UI. He is known is a major figure in American Regionalism, along with John Steuart Curry and Thomas Hart Benton. Regionalism refers to having a specific style or point of view. In particular, these artists were known for depicting everyday life and rural scenes.
Artists of this style were said to be rebelling against Modernist art, which was viewed as elitist and unrepresentative of the American experience.
But therein lies what continues to overshadow Wood’s time at the university. Wood was considered to be an arch Modernist, a liberal. His viewpoints conflicted with conservatives within the department, creating quite a bit of controversy and turmoil. When Dr. Lester Longman was hired as the head of the art department in 1936, he was charged with rebuilding the department and he objected to Wood’s methods and viewpoints.
Some contend Longman made it his mission to tarnish Wood’s artistic achievements and legacy, and many reports note the two had a mutual hatred for each other.
The result was an attempt to write Wood out of any contribution he made while at UI. It appears to have been at least somewhat successful.
You don’t have to be an artist or an “art person” to know who Grant Wood is. We thinking naming a UI building in his honor will help bring him to the forefront and give him the recognition he deserves.
___
Please read our comment policy before commenting.