As an attorney with an elder law practice who is married to a woman who ran nursing home regulation in two states, I can say with absolute confidence that the most important thing you could do to benefit elders who are facing the need to enter long-term care facilities is PROHIBIT any predispute arbitration clauses in these facilities.

In the long-term care setting, predispute arbitration clauses are always substantively unconscionable, but they are also extracted from prospective residents in ways that make them procedurally unconscionable as well.

First, all elders are entering a long-term care facility under duress. There's simply no market for life in a long-term care facility except among those forced into them by chance and circumstance -- duress, in other words.

Second, everyone forced to enter a long-term care facility is suffering tremendous losses -- of their homes, friends, possessions, and often while still mourning the loss of a life partner. Depression is epidemic among those entering these facilities, and we know that depression impairs cognitive function. This is on top of the impairments that plague the pool of people entering long-term care facilities anyway.

Third, there is every reason to doubt that any resident makes a knowing, intelligent or voluntary waiver of their right to bring their disputes with the long-term care facility operator before a jury. Most of the people admitted to these facilities are completely unaware that the courts have allowed corporations to privatize the justice system to ensure that their misdeeds are kept hidden from the public. We have recently seen studies of young, healthy adults who were tested to see if they understood the arbitration clauses they had signed, and the overwhelming majority did not understand them and were often surprised to know that they had signed them. If this is true for young, healthy folks, it is 1000 times more true for elders and the physically challenged. 

Recently a friend got taken for $8000 because one of his "grandsons" got in trouble and needed help.

If the caller doesn't  use his name but makes the grandparent guess which one of the kids is in trouble, then you are in trouble. These are very clever people and they fooled a very smart couple of grandparents into borrowing money from their Visa and converting it to useable debit cards by the scammer.

So, be careful, people, if the grandchild doesn't identify him or herself by first and last name when calling for any reason, don't be fooled!

Just because you're old doesn't mean you get stupid.
Mary

Time for a quick update on the corporate lawsuit to silence Public Citizen.

You’ll want to read this — it involves Citizens United and corporate “feelings” that we supposedly hurt.

To recap what’s happened so far:

Last summer, a powerful corporation called Murray Energy — the largest private coal company in the country — sued us after we ran radio ads pointing out the FACT that it opposed new regulations designed to improve worker safety and protect clean air.
We tried to have the suit dismissed or at least heard in a neutrally located federal court. But earlier this year, a judge ordered us to proceed with the case in a state court that is literally in the SAME SMALL TOWN where Murray Energy is headquartered.
In June, Murray Energy even DEMANDED that we cover legal expenses the company incurred to keep the case in its backyard.
As if that’s all not bizarre enough, get this:

When Murray Energy initially filed its lawsuit against us, the company contended that U.S. Supreme Court rulings like Citizens United mean it has privacy rights meant for living, breathing human beings — and that our ads violated those alleged rights.

In one of the few positive developments so far in the case, that claim was thrown out.

But Murray Energy is now appealing on that outlandish point.

Here are actual quotes from earlier court documents Murray Energy filed in this lawsuit:

In Citizens United, “the U.S. Supreme Court showed a willingness to determine that corporations possess the same rights as individuals.”

“A decade ago, no one would have foreseen that corporations would enjoy many of the same rights as individuals.”

“Yet, in recent years, the courts have shown an increasing willingness to extend rights commonly held only by individuals to corporations.”

“Murray Energy should have the opportunity to assert that [Public Citizen] invaded its privacy ....”

Murray Energy — a corporation — suffered “mental anguish and emotional distress” as a result of our ads.

In other words, Murray Energy — citing Supreme Court travesties such as Citizens United — has claimed that we invaded its privacy and hurt its feelings.

And even though that absurd claim was dismissed by the court, the company won’t let it go.

Murray Energy’s appeal brief is due later this month. I’ll let you know how the company contorts Citizens United to bolster its attack on Public Citizen.