Find Bill
Find Your Legislator
Legislative Deadlines
Dec. 27, 2024
RSS Feed Permanent URL -A +A

Minutes for HB2246 - Committee on Judiciary

Short Title

Establishing requirements for the involuntary discharge or transfer of a resident in an adult residential care facility, the right to appeal such discharge or transfer and a process for such appeal.

Minutes Content for Thu, Feb 9, 2023

Chairperson Patton opened the hearing on HB2246. Jessie Pringle (Attachment 1) provided an overview of the bill. Ms. Pringle stood for questions.

Proponent

Jamie Gideon (Attachment 2) asked the committee membership to support HB2246 because it will enhance the quality of care in residential settings and protect persons with dementia.

Rachel Imthurn (Attachment 4) is the Kansas Citizen behind HB2246, sometimes referred to as Charlie's Bill.  Her personal experience is explained in detail in the attached testimony. Ms. Imthurn explained HB2246 will enhance the quality of care in residential settings and protect persons with dementia. She asked for the membership's support of HB2246.

Dan Goodman (Attachment 3) explained there are currently no provisions for an independent, third-party entity to review an eviction even though Kansas regulations for ALL adult care homes are otherwise the same. State regulations give residents 30 days to find a safe, appropriate place to live and requires the facility to provide the family with the reasons for the discharge and a doctor’s approval. HB2246 reflects the Judicial Council’s recommendations which provide a strong framework for an appeals process that balances the residents’ rights to due process and the health and safety of the residents and facility staff. Mr. Goodman urged the membership to pass HB2246 out of committee.

Camille Russell (Attachment 5) explained there are many homes that rarely find reason to issue a notice of involuntary discharge. There are also facilities that are “serial offenders,” some that fail to provide the required written notice at all, while others do not provide an appropriate reason or rationale. In many cases, the underlying problem is a symptom of other issues: lack of staff or other capacity to care for people with complex behavior or mental health needs. Providers often lack appropriate training and education in person-centered practices to support “a person who is experiencing difficulty.” Instead, they apply an improper label of “a difficult person.” Some facilities, even those that advertise as memory care providers, attempt to assert common behaviors associated with dementia as a reason for discharge. Ms. Russell explained while, her office is a proponent of this legislation, they request amendments to provide clarity and consistency by aligning with nursing home involuntary discharge requirements. These amendments are spelled out in her attached testimony.

Linda Morse (Attachment 6) stated HB2246 will correct the serious lack of protection for Assisted Living Facility residents to be upheld by licensing requirements set by the State of Kansas. It will provide a guarantee of due process for Assisted Living residents and their caregivers. HB2246 provides adequate protections to safeguard vulnerable adults from a wrongful discharge or transfer.

Glenda Duboise (Attachment 7) stated most people would be shocked to know that right now, Kansas law does not provide fundamental rights and legal discharge protections for so many seniors and people with disabilities in assisted living facilities and other adult residential care facility settings. American Association of Retired People of Kansas supports HB2246 which would provide discharge protections and rights to appeal involuntary discharges to residents in all Kansas adult residential care facilities.

Alexandra R. English (Attachment 8) explained opponents of this bill will likely argue that the current regulations are sufficient to deal with discharges. That is simply not the case from the lens of assisted living residents. Kansas’ regulations require that the resident receive notice, but do not provide any sort of appeal process for residents of assisted living facilities. After having compared the laws in other states, Kansas is one of just a few states in the country that fails to provide these residents with any right to appeal an involuntary discharge. For these residents, this is their home!

Mike Burgess (Attachment 9) explained at the recommendation of Representative Canannon, the Kansas Judicial Council appointed an ad hoc advisory committee to study this issue. Mr. Burgess stated he very much appreciated the time and attention that went into the recommendations from the ad hoc committee and as others have said, HB2246 reflects the Judicial Council’s recommendations which provide a strong framework for an appeals process that balances the residents’ rights to due process and the health and safety of the residents and facility staff.

All proponents stood for questions from the membership.

Written Proponent

Written Neutral

Opponent

Mark Schulte (Attachment 14) explained it is understandable why some families resist a move to higher care. Long Term Care is significantly more expensive than Assisted Living, but regardless of the cost of care, no resident should ever remain in a level of care that is not appropriate for the healthcare needs they have. Forcing a provider to care for a resident that they are not equipped or trained to do is analogous to walking into a minor emergency clinic with chest pains and telling them you are not leaving until they provide bypass surgery. Mr. Schulte opposes HB2246.

Linda MowBray (Attachment 15)  Ms. MowBray is here today to present testimony opposing HB2246. It will require the secretary for aging and disability services to review notices and preside over appeals. Many of the protections in HB2246 are already in K.A.R. 26-39-102 Admission, transfer and discharge rights of residents in adult care homes. This bill delays and prolongs the process to discharge to a more appropriate level of care during which time, a resident’s needs may not be met. Ms. MowBray went on to explain the appeal process itself: by forcing the community to retain or readmit a resident that they can no longer care for, is not only against the regulations but the wrong thing to do for the resident, the staff and potentially for the other residents.

Shelley Gromer (Attachment 16) presented data, that is in her written testimony, explaining the financial burden and emotional difficultly that HB2246 will cause small facilities like those she is representing.

Lori Owen (Attachment 17) explained her organizations are a state licensed, not for profit, home-plus facility located in Emporia with additional facilities in Baldwin City. They currently care for a maximum of 12 residents in each one of their homes and specialize in memory impairment care. They run on minimal staff to promote a home environment for our residents. Ms. Owen was here to speak in opposition to the proposed HB2246.

Rachel Monger (Attachment 18) spoke to the differences is an assisted living home and a nursing home. Residents are discharged because their health requirements are such they can no longer be provided for in an assisted living residence. HB2246 creates many concerns for facilities not equipped to care for particular residents.

Written Opponent