Community Grievance Decision Digest

BURDEN OF PROOF

NOTE: "Burden of proof" is a legal term used in court to determine who has the responsibility for proving facts through testimony and other evidence and the amount of evidence that must be proven in order for that party to prevail.

Continuum of evidence presented:

0%---------------PC-------------------50%------------------BYRD---------------100%
     >50% = MPTN

PC = Probable Cause.
MPTN = More Probable Than Not (any amount of evidence over 50%)
BYRD = Beyond a Reasonable Doubt

The burden of proof in situations for a service provider:

There needs only to be a showing of a "significant risk" (probable cause) for staff to take a "risk-reduction" measure. However, the risk should be more than remote or speculative to take a security measure such as denying a patient certain property. See Risk Reduction Measures section of this digest.

Where a patient is sanctioned for a rule violation, the staff must show that it is More Probable Than Not (any amount of proof over 50%) that the patient violated the rule. See Rules and Sanctions section of this digest.

Where a patient claims wrongdoing on the staff’s part, the burden is on the patient to show that it is More Probable Than Not that the staff acted as alleged.

The standard of "Beyond a Reasonable Doubt" is the one the state must meet to show that a crime has been committed by a particular person. It only applies to criminal court charges.

 -- Client Rights Office training materials

DECISIONS

1. There must be sufficient evidence to show it was more probable than not that a doctor departed from professional judgment in his prescribing medication to a patient after a phone call with her. Such evidence would have to come in the form of a second opinion from a professional of equal or greater standing than the doctor. Where there was no such evidence presented, the finding of a rights violation will be overturned. (Level IV decision in Case No. 02-SGE-04 on 9/19/03, overturning the Level III.)

2. 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 abuse and neglect because of failure to report theft of monies and possessions and fraud and/or misrepresentation of funds. These issues were properly referred to other authorities. To criminally convict a person of abuse, neglect, or criminal misconduct, there must be proof beyond a reasonable doubt. A patient rights violation only requires a finding that the allegations are proved "more probable than not" true. (Level III Decision in Case No. 03-SGE-04 on 6/15/04.)

Last Updated: October 30, 2006