Obviously someone is listening and the flying monkeys better take notice to either leave or dip deeper in those pockets for bribes (and maybe it isn’t worth is any longer?) because the ALJ’s in Medicare complaints are cracking down.
April 10, 2015 case of sykesblog-081015-NMSHealthcarev.CMS-nursinghomerights
the ALJ Kessel made it clear that he would not tolerate violations of Medicare regulations and he fined the facility thousands of dollars for isolating an elderly woman from one daughter based upon a POA from another daughter that the facility enforced.
However, she eventually cooperated and returned. Id.
The resident was moved to the locked unit of Petitioner’s facility upon her return on January 22, 2014. From that date and thereafter, the resident was confined behind a locked door that denied her egress from the wing on which she was confined and from the facility itself. Petitioner not only confined Resident # 4, it restricted her access to members of her immediate family and to other individuals, including an attorney who sought to provide her with legal counsel. ……………. In November and December of 2013 members of Petitioner’s staff confronted an attorney with whom Resident # 4 was consulting and ordered him to leave Petitioner’s premises. CMS Ex. 67 at 2–3, 38–39. After being confined Resident # 4 complained that she wanted to speak with an attorney but that Petitioner would not allow her to. Id. at 9. Beginning in at least 2012 Petitioner’s staff restricted one of the resident’s daughters from visiting the resident. CMS Ex. 9 at 17, 23, 115.
When interviewed, Resident # 4 expressed a desire to leave the facility and complained about the restrictions on her freedom of movement. CMS Ex. 67 at 40. The resident’s desire to leave was known to Petitioner’s staff. Id. at 13.
The only reference in the resident’s treatment record to the decision to confine her is a social services note dated January 22 that says, laconically: “Resident moved to room 418B.” CMS Ex. 9 at 132. The clinical record suggests no basis for confining Resident # 4 against her will or for restricting her access to family members and an attorney. Nothing whatsoever in the record suggests a change in the resident’s medical or psychiatric condition prior to or on January 22, 2014 that would support confining her. To the contrary, the record of the resident’s mental status shows her to be calm and cooperative and not to be deteriorating in the nearly three years prior to her being confined. CMS. Ex. 9 at 52–110. There is no physician’s report supporting confining the resident or restricting her access to visitors. There is no comprehensive assessment suggesting a need to change her status. Nor is there anything in the resident’s care plan that either records the change in status or addresses how it is to be managed.
Similarly, there is no explanation in the resident’s treatment records as to why the particular restrictions employed by the facility were clinically necessary. Why, for example, were certain individuals excluded from the facility? Petitioner has no assessments or explanations of the medical or clinical reasons for this decision.
There is, however, a reason for Petitioner’s actions and it stands without rebuttal. Petitioner confined Resident # 4 and restricted her access to visitors at least in part because Petitioner’s daughter, (“JF”), who held a power of attorney (POA), wanted her mother to be confined and the restrictions to be imposed. Petitioner took the actions it took in part because JF requested that it take them. The only reasonable conclusion that I can draw from the undisputed facts of this case is that Petitioner acted on JF’s desire that her mother be confined without making any determination as to whether confinement and visitor restrictions were clinically justified or whether seclusion and restrictions were the least restrictive and most reasonable means of protecting Resident # 4. CMS Ex. 9 at 17, 23, 115; CMS Ex. 82.
Let’s give a hand to Judge Kessell for being honest about what happens in nursing homes on a day to day basis and how the probate courts across the nation support the isolation and human rights violations of nursing homes on a day to day basis, merely because many nursing homes allow both the judges and the probate attorneys to “invest” in the homes–and not always by means of public stock certificates, and there are kickbacks paid (according to Brightstar owner) of $2,000 to $3,000 per month for any relative who participates in keeping a resident there and isolated against his or her will.
Jerome Larkin knows this and does nothing. He has $1.2 million in unexplained mortgage payoffs on his public records. He has been challenged to release bank records showing who paid his mortgages off. He does nothing. Same for my prosecutor, Sharon Opryszek. Not only was she caught witness tampering in the Hogan case and the witness still wants to testify against her (Justine McGinty), but she also has an unexplained $250k mortgage payoff.
None of this is every investigated by the state authorities and Diane Saltoun says she won’t investigate state corruption, but as the Inspector General, she is bound to investigate bribes of state employees and kickbacks.
Read the case, the language is a bright shining star in a sea of depravity at the nursing homes and in our 18th floor probate court and probate courts across the nations.