Nursing Home Arbitration Clauses May Limit Residents’ Rights, Following Trump Admin. Policy Change

In an apparent effort to prioritize the interests of nursing home companies ahead of consumer protections, the Trump Administration has proposed withdrawing a ban on nursing home forced arbitration clauses, which was designed to protect the elderly from exploitation. 

In the last months of the Obama administration, the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) issued new reform requirements for nursing homes, determining that forced arbitration clauses contained in many nursing home contracts were often signed under duress, by families desperate to place their loved ones in a care facility. However, on June 6, CMS issued proposed revisions to the reforms, indicating that the new administration is pulling back from the rule, saying that the ban would cost nursing homes too much in legal expenses.

The walk-back of the prohibition also comes after a federal judge placed a hold on the regulations in November, saying that CMS may have overstepped its authority. However, in a federal register notice (PDF) posted by CMS, the agency said the ban on forced arbitration placed undue burden on nursing homes.

Did You Know?

AT&T Data Breach Impacts Millions of Customers

More than 73 million customers of AT&T may have had their names, addresses, phone numbers, Social Security numbers and other information released on the dark web due to a massive AT&T data breach. Lawsuits are being pursued to obtain financial compensation.

Learn More

“We believe that a ban on pre-dispute arbitration agreements would likely impose unnecessary or excessive costs on providers,” CMS said in the notice.

Instead of a ban, the new rule requires that the clause be written in plain language, and that if agreeing is a condition of admission to a nursing home, it must be written in the admissions contract and must be explained to the resident in a manner the resident or their representative can understand, and they must confirm that they understand the agreement.

The new Reform Requirements for Long-Term Care Facilities rule, announced in late September, would impact more than 1.5 million residents at 15,000 nursing home and long-term care facilities nationwide. One of the major provisions of the new rule gets rid of forced arbitration clauses in nursing home contracts. The rule was slated to go into effect on November 29, 2016, but was blocked by a federal judge following industry lawsuit filings.

The nursing home reform requirements included a host of new requirements, ranging from a prohibition on hiring employees with a disciplinary action on their license as a result of nursing home abuse, to a host of new quality of care provisions. However, the focus of the lawsuit was on a rule that targets pre-dispute arbitration clauses found in many contracts, which require residents and families to waive their ability to pursue a lawsuit for nursing home neglect injuries through the court system.

The other aspects of the reform rule have been placed on hold for review.

Forced arbitration, also known as pre-dispute arbitration clauses, are commonly found in credit card agreements, loan paperwork, mobile wireless contracts, nursing home entrance agreements and other circumstances, often placing consumers are placed in a position where they have no alternative but to waive their right to go to court in order to obtain services.

Critics have long opposed forced arbitration clauses, indicating that they place consumers in a position where they are unable to negotiate and must sign the agreement to obtain critical services. Forced arbitration is generally found to favor nursing homes, powerful financial firms and other industries that require the clauses.

Image Credit: |

0 Comments

Share Your Comments

I authorize the above comments be posted on this page*

Want your comments reviewed by a lawyer?

To have an attorney review your comments and contact you about a potential case, provide your contact information below. This will not be published.

NOTE: Providing information for review by an attorney does not form an attorney-client relationship.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

More Top Stories

AT&T Data Breach Class Action Claims Telecom Giant
AT&T Data Breach Class Action Claims Telecom Giant "Disregarded" Customer Financial Safety (Posted yesterday)

A Missouri woman is one of the latest person to file an class action claim over the AT&T data breach, after the telecom company admitted that hackers stole millions of customers' personal information and sold it on the internet.

Plaintiffs Oppose Phased Discovery Over Suboxone Tooth Decay Risks in MDL
Plaintiffs Oppose Phased Discovery Over Suboxone Tooth Decay Risks in MDL (Posted 2 days ago)

Plaintiffs say a federal judge should not waste time on a phased discovery plan requiring them to first prove Suboxone strips can cause tooth decay, saying the science is obvious and such a plan could delay resolution of hundreds of product liability lawsuits.