Clay Greene, the gay elder who was forcibly separated
from Harold Scull, his partner of 20 years, has obtained a settlement of his elder abuse lawsuit against defendant County of Sonoma, for six hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($650,000). The case, which was filed in Sonoma County Superior Court more than a year ago, was scheduled to go to jury trial this month. The timing of the settlement, right up against the trial date, indicates that the County only settled due to the pressure of the looming trial date.
The National Center for Lesbian Rights, which brought the lawsuit on Clay's behalf (together with The Law Office of Anne N. Dennis, and Stephen O'Neill and Margaret Flynn of Tarkington, O'Neill, Barrack & Chong) issued a press release that struck a cautionary note:
"What Clay and Harold lost can never be replaced, but this settlement brings a measure of justice to their story," said Amy Todd-Gher, Senior Staff Attorney for the National Center for Lesbian Rights,.... This victory sends an unmistakable message that all elders must be treated with respect and dignity, regardless of their sexual orientation, and that those who mistreat elders must be held accountable. Even as we celebrate this victory, however, we are deeply troubled that the County of Sonoma continues to refuse to take responsibility for their egregious misconduct and violations of the law in this case. We urge every citizen of Sonoma County to demand more oversight of the Public Guardian’s office. They need to be watched."
They need to be watched indeed. If you read the County of Sonoma's website, it says that the reason it settled the lawsuit was "to avoid costs associated with a lengthy trial." They added, "The County must manage taxpayer money prudently." Did they forget about justice and doing the right thing? The only errors that the County acknowledges relate to Clay Greene and Harold Stull's property:
"The County acknowledges that some administrative errors occurred in the handling and disposition of the plaintiffs’ property, which led to improvements in Public Guardian policies with respect to procedures for property disposition and case management. The County remains confident in its position that there was no discrimination in this case....."
They apologize for violating property rights but can't bring themselves to acknowledge they violated Clay's civil rights, as an elder, to be free from elder abuse, and as a gay man, to be free from discrimination. Sonoma County could have brought this episode to a more satisfactory resolution by admitting its mistake and promising it won't happen again. Instead, this case concludes with Sonoma County, which used to known just for fine wine, taking its place in the history of civil rights violators, alongside places such as Little Rock, Arkansas and Birmingham, Alabama.
By the terms of the settlement, only $25,000 of it relates to "property damage." By paying Clay Greene a very large settlement, that is as close as they come to admitting the magnitude of their mistakes. A large settlement for a huge injustice.
To read the press release by the National Center for Lesbian Rights, click here.
To read the press release by Sonoma County, click here.
Felicia Curran
www.ElderAdvocacyLaw.com
www.ElderAdvocacyBlog.com
The National Center for Lesbian Rights, which brought the lawsuit on Clay's behalf (together with The Law Office of Anne N. Dennis, and Stephen O'Neill and Margaret Flynn of Tarkington, O'Neill, Barrack & Chong) issued a press release that struck a cautionary note:
"What Clay and Harold lost can never be replaced, but this settlement brings a measure of justice to their story," said Amy Todd-Gher, Senior Staff Attorney for the National Center for Lesbian Rights,.... This victory sends an unmistakable message that all elders must be treated with respect and dignity, regardless of their sexual orientation, and that those who mistreat elders must be held accountable. Even as we celebrate this victory, however, we are deeply troubled that the County of Sonoma continues to refuse to take responsibility for their egregious misconduct and violations of the law in this case. We urge every citizen of Sonoma County to demand more oversight of the Public Guardian’s office. They need to be watched."
They need to be watched indeed. If you read the County of Sonoma's website, it says that the reason it settled the lawsuit was "to avoid costs associated with a lengthy trial." They added, "The County must manage taxpayer money prudently." Did they forget about justice and doing the right thing? The only errors that the County acknowledges relate to Clay Greene and Harold Stull's property:
"The County acknowledges that some administrative errors occurred in the handling and disposition of the plaintiffs’ property, which led to improvements in Public Guardian policies with respect to procedures for property disposition and case management. The County remains confident in its position that there was no discrimination in this case....."
They apologize for violating property rights but can't bring themselves to acknowledge they violated Clay's civil rights, as an elder, to be free from elder abuse, and as a gay man, to be free from discrimination. Sonoma County could have brought this episode to a more satisfactory resolution by admitting its mistake and promising it won't happen again. Instead, this case concludes with Sonoma County, which used to known just for fine wine, taking its place in the history of civil rights violators, alongside places such as Little Rock, Arkansas and Birmingham, Alabama.By the terms of the settlement, only $25,000 of it relates to "property damage." By paying Clay Greene a very large settlement, that is as close as they come to admitting the magnitude of their mistakes. A large settlement for a huge injustice.
To read the press release by the National Center for Lesbian Rights, click here.
To read the press release by Sonoma County, click here.
Felicia Curran
www.ElderAdvocacyLaw.com
www.ElderAdvocacyBlog.com
| 0 trackbacks
| permalink
| related link
New Brain Scans for Alzheimer's Disease Are Forcing A Change in What It Takes to Be Diagnosed With Alzheimer's
Thursday, July 15, 2010, 05:15 PM - Medical Issues, Memory Loss
Based on new biomarker tests that allow the
diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease some ten years before symptoms begin to appear, the National Institute of Health (NIH) is proposing to change the diagnostic criteria of Alzheimer’s disease, to permit diagnosis of the disease before a patient has started to exhibit the telltale signs of memory loss that are the hallmark of the disease. Scientists believe that the brain of patients who will go on to develop Alzheimer’s disease start to exhibit detectable changes in the brain (such as plaque or amyloid) some 10 years before the patient exhibits symptoms such as memory loss and confusion. Recent scientific advances, such as a PET scan of the brain developed by Dr. Daniel Skovronsky M.D. (recently reported on in The New York Times) allow
scientists to detect these changes in the brain that are the precursors of Alzheimer’s disease. The NIH is proposing that doctors be able to diagnosis Alzheimer’s disease when these biomarker tests show the brain changes associated with Alzheimer, even if the person has not yet exhibited clinical symptoms. Within the next few years, it is expected that these tests will be available to the general public. That means that you or your family members will be able to be tested before you have become impaired. Right now, the prospect of being tested when there is no cure seems like a scary one. But doctor’s ability to diagnose Alzheimer’s disease before a patient has started to exhibit memory loss carries with it the promise of being able to treat the disease and prevent it from progressing to the stage where memory loss is present. Scientists are optimistic for the first time that treatment will be available in the coming years to diagnose and treat Alzheimer’s disease before impairment sets in.
What the NIH is doing is important, to assure that patients receive early treatment for the disease. Insurance companies are not big on paying for preventive treatment, and by labeling certain persons as having Alzheimer’s, before memory loss appears, it will be easier for such persons to qualify for insurance coverage for whatever pre-memory loss treatment that becomes available.
To read the New York Times article (Promise Seen For Detection of Alzheimer's) about Dr. Skovronsky’s test for Alzheimer’s disease, click here.
To read the Times article ("Rules Seek to Expand Diagnosis of Alzheimer's) about the proposed change in diagnostic criteria for Alzheimer’s disease, click here.
Felicia Curran
www.ElderAdvocacyLaw.com
www.ElderAdvocacyBlog.com
Friday, June 18, 2010, 02:14 PM - Nursing Homes
Wonder what it is like to be an elderly resident of a nursing home and totally dependent on your care givers for help? A security videotape taken at a nursing home in Queens, New York, which forms the basis for a criminal elder abuse prosecution, can give you an idea. The nursing home care giver is shown to walk away as an elderly lady falls to the floor out of her wheelchair, after the care giver jerked the chair forward. In the process the lady breaks her hip. The care giver then walks away and leaves the elderly lady struggling on the floor. Click below to see the tape: Why would a care giver walk away like that? As part of a cover up of her own involvement in the lady's fall. She hopes that someone else at the nursing home will "find her on the floor" and it will get reported as an "unwitnessed fall." The elderly victim herself will often be too impaired to speak for herself and tell what happened.
This scenario is repeated every day in nursing homes across the country, but this time it was caught on tape. Does the tape force this nursing home to take responsibility? You'd think, but instead the clip shows how the nursing home tries to use the "blame the victim" approach so typical in these cases. The nursing home lawyer (the guy in the suit) is quoted as saying that the elderly 85 year old lady -- who had dementia -- "caused her own fall." Is it also her fault that she can't get up from the floor or that she is old and frail?
Felicia Curran
www.ElderAdvocacyBlog.com
www.ElderAdvocacyLaw.com
Ask President Obama Your Questions At June 8 Tele-Town Hall On The New Health Care Law's Effect on Medicare
Saturday, June 5, 2010, 12:23 PM - Healthcare Insurance, Medicare
The National Assocaition of Elder Law Attorneys (NAELA.org) has announced "Next Tuesday, June 8, at 11:15 a.m. EDT, President Obama and Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services, will host a "tele-town hall" event with older adults in Wheaton, MD. The purpose of the event is to
answer questions from older adults in person and by phone about how the Affordable Care Act will affect Medicare. NAELA is co-sponsoring the event along with other national organizations which represent older adults.Individuals interested in viewing the town hall may do so through the White House website or at a regional viewing events. The town hall will also likely be broadcast on C-SPAN. Obama Administration officials will be present at some of the regional viewing events in order to answer questions from participants. The list of regional events includes some private events highlighted in yellow. The rest of the events on the list are open to the public and include the location and contact information for the person organizing the event.
Individuals interested in asking a question of President Obama or Secretary Sebelius can call in during Tuesday's town hall at 1-800-837-1935, pass code: 80272058."
Felicia Curran
www.ElderAdvocacyBlog.com
www.ElderAdvocacyLaw.com
Saturday, May 8, 2010, 04:29 PM - Lawsuits, Elder Abuse Laws, Heros & Heroines, If You're Not Outraged . . .
If there was a contest for "Worst Place For (Gay)Elderly to Live," Sonoma County, California would have to be on the short list, based on what they did to two elderly gay Although Clay and Harold had wills, powers of attorney, and medical directives, all naming each other as their responsible persons, the County even obtained court orders preventing Clay and Harold from seeing each other. The County sold their belongings at auction, and as reported by Scott James of the New York Times, removed the men’s cats from their home, right in front of Clay Green. Clay is still haunted by the scene. “When Clay M. Greene remembered the events of June 2008, he clenched his teeth, his hands tightened into fists and his body shook. They grabbed them by their necks and tossed them in a car,’ he said last week, recalling the fate of his beloved cats, Sassy and Tiger. He never saw them again.” Harold died in the nursing home, a few months later. With the assistance of a court-appointed attorney, Anne Dennis, of Santa Rosa, Clay was finally released from the nursing home
According to Kay Kendall of the Bilerico Project, all Clay has left from his life together with Harold is a photograph. The rest was destroyed by the County.
Clay Greene has decided to strike back against this despicable and egregious conduct, and is suing Sonoma County for violation of his civil rights – as an elder and as a gay man – in a lawsuit that will go to trial in July. Clay is from a generation that was forced to live their lives behind closed doors, so he does not use the term “gay” to describe himself, or the term “same sex partner” to describe his relationship with Harold. By standing up for himself, though, he will vindicate the rights of senior citizens in general and gay senior citizens in particular who live in fear that the same thing could happen to themselves. To read the New York Times article about Clay Greene, click here. To read Kay Kendall’s article in Bilerico, click here.
You can learn more about the lawsuit, by visiting a Facebook page set up by Clay's supporters: www.facebook.com/JusticeForClay?v=app_2347471856
Felicia Curran
www.ElderAdvocacyLaw.com
Next

Categories




