Community Grievance Decision Digest

DUE PROCESS OF LAW

THE LAW:

Each patient shall... "Have a right to a humane psychological... environment within the hospital facilities..."

§ 51.61(1)(m), Wis. Stats. [Emphasis added.]

"Each patient shall be given an opportunity to refute any accusations prior to initiation of disciplinary action."

HFS 94.24(2)(g), Wis. Admin. Code [Emphasis added.]

"No patient may be disciplined for a violation of a treatment facility rule unless the patient has had prior notice of the rule."

HFS 94.24(2)(h), Wis. Admin. Code [Emphasis added.]

[NOTE: See also Rules & Sanctions section of this digest.]

DECISIONS

1. A hospital noted on appeal of findings of rights violations that the State Grievance Examiner (SGE) had not contacted the patient’s doctor directly during the Level III review.  The hospital asserted that this evinced a lack of professional courtesy and constituted a violation of due process.  The SGE should probably have contacted the doctor to provide him with a sense of fairness.  But the SGE has broad discretion in how to conduct Level III reviews.  Where the SGE felt he could rely on the written records available to him, failure to contact the doctor was not an abuse of that discretion or a violation of due process.  (Level IV decision in Case No. 02-SGE-04 on 9/19/03)

2. There is nothing inherently wrong with a facility Client Rights Specialist (CRS) conferring with the facility’s attorneys on issues pertaining to patient rights.  The patient rights laws and rules are complex.  Seeking the advice of counsel is often a good way to ensure that the facility is in full compliance with those rights.  The decision of the CRS, even if that decision is not to accept a complaint, is still appealable.  The four-stage grievance process ensures due process of law for persons seeking to file complaints.  (Level IV decision in Case No. 06-SGE-04 on 8/18/06)

Last Updated: November 07, 2006