|
| |
Community Grievance Decision Digest
SAFETY, RIGHT TO
The decision summaries regarding this law may be found in the document:
Community Grievance Decision
Digest: Decisions. (PDF, 512KB)
THE LAW:
"...[Hospital] facilities shall be designed to afford patients with ..safety..." ss. 51.61(1)(m), Wis.
Stats. [Emphasis added.] "Staff shall take reasonable steps to ensure the physical safety of all patients." DHS
94.24(2)(a), Wis. Admin. Code [Emphasis added.]
DECISIONS
- A woman complained about her doctor, alleging that the medications he prescribed for her may have caused an adverse heart
reaction leading to an emergency visit to the hospital. This allegation was reviewed by the Bureau of Regulation and Licensing (BRL), which reviews medical allegations of malpractice or injury to others. BRL did
not find that the heart reaction and emergency room visit was necessarily caused by the medication. The grievance process defers to BRL’s
medical expertise on such issues and thus there was no finding of any rights violation. (Level III decision in Case No. 00-SGE-03 on
9/12/01.)
The
county is ultimately responsible for the health and safety of a client to whom they provide services.
Even though they have a contract for an independent service provider to do the hands-on services, the contracted
agency’s failure to perform its duties is also the county’s failure. The county must monitor the providers it contracts
with in order to ensure that vital services are provided for their clients. (Level III Decision in Case No. 03-SGE-04 on 6/15/04.) The sister/guardian of a woman filed a grievance about the care the woman had received while she was living in her
own apartment. She had been receiving supportive home care services from an independent service provider under a general contract with the
county. The guardian alleged lack of care causing deterioration in health to the point of needing
immediate medical attention. Staff’s tasks included providing “acu-checks,” monitoring her bathing three times a week and providing
medical treatment for her hands and legs with sores. It was found that the woman’s rights were
violated when the contract agency did not complete the assigned tasks during a period of time and the woman’s health
deteriorated as a result. (Level III Decision in Case No. 03-SGE-04 on 6/15/04.)
Last Updated: June 18, 2009
|
