THE LETTER
RECAP OF THE JULY 02, 2018 ARTICLE:
As discussed, when I was hospitalized at the Montana State Hospital (MSH) in late spring, 2015, I filed several good faith grievances about a rogue staff psychiatrist named Dr. Colby Wang, on the basis of his abusive use of language, his threat to keep me hospitalized there at his leisure regardless of my state of health, and other such features to his behavior and conduct.
As discussed, when I was hospitalized at the Montana State Hospital (MSH) in late spring, 2015, I filed several good faith grievances about a rogue staff psychiatrist named Dr. Colby Wang, on the basis of his abusive use of language, his threat to keep me hospitalized there at his leisure regardless of my state of health, and other such features to his behavior and conduct.
Upon being readmitted to MSH for the 2nd time in late August, 2016, Wang willfully, directly and personally interfered with my admission in direct response to the grievances that I had filed in 2015, which I deduced to be retaliative in nature. Retaliation of any kind is patently forbidden by my protections specific to the Americans With Disabilities Act. I thus filed a grievance about the issue immediately after this act was imposed upon me.
In subsequent weeks, MSH administrators refused to acknowledge my grievance as having any merit. This refusal was shared by the Hospital's own in-house "patient's lawyer", Craig Fitch.
In subsequent weeks, MSH administrators refused to acknowledge my grievance as having any merit. This refusal was shared by the Hospital's own in-house "patient's lawyer", Craig Fitch.
(Colby Wang was summarily fired in early October, 2016)
I thus took it upon myself to take close note of any issues occurring at MSH that I felt to be wrongful, unlawful, or otherwise harmful to the wellbeing of the MSH patient community; and went so far, in fact, as to give Fitch fair warning as to this intent.
In October, 2016, during my second month of being readmitted to MSH, it became readily apparent to me that the Hospital was experiencing graphic staff shortages, an issue that I knew to be in violation of the federal standards that all such state mental hospitals are required to adhere to, and which I also knew posed grave risk of harm to patients and staff alike.
I initially suggested to my patient-peers on the MSH Resident Advisory Committee (RAC) that we as a group submit a report of this issue to the governor of Montana. During the RAC meeting where I brought this up, an administrative staff person wrongfully interfered (RAC is supposed to function with no direct intrusion of MSH staff) with this suggeston and insisted that we take the issue to the Hospital CEO, Jay Pottenger.
 | |
Jay Pottenger
|
At a subsequent RAC meeting, Pottenger refused to acknowledge the significance of this issue, effectively declaring that the matter was out of his control.
I was thus compelled to send a personal reporting of the matter to Montana Senators Ron Lehi (R-Hamilton) and Debbie Barrett (R-Dillon). I did so in a handwritten two page letter, shown below.
I was thus compelled to send a personal reporting of the matter to Montana Senators Ron Lehi (R-Hamilton) and Debbie Barrett (R-Dillon). I did so in a handwritten two page letter, shown below.
In late November, 2016, not long before my pending discharge, the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS)- which licenses the operation of MSH- initiated a drawn out formal investigation of all aspects of the MSH operation. This investigation culminated in a final report that identified over one hundred eleven (111) violations of the standards by which MSH is licensed.
After giving MSH administrators a period of time to correct these concerns, CMS was forced to issue a Notice of Jeopardy on the basis of these concerns not being addressed. (This is precisely what happened at the Arizona State Hospital.)
As stated, I am not able right now to enlarge the images above, but will be able to in short order. For now, suffice it to say that this letter included all details specific to the process by which I was compelled to draft it, as well the significance of the issue of staff shortages, which I knew not only were occurring in violation of federal standards, but which also poses grave risk of harm to staff and patients alike. Low ranking staff, that is, and not the fat-cat bureaucrats like Jay Pottenger, who traditionally are so disconnected to the realities of what really goes on in these places, that they hardy really give a damn when information of this sort is provided to them.
But they do this at their own risk. As proven by the most recent trouble that Arizona State Hospital experienced (emphasis here on most recent, because it sure as hell isn't the first time), and by the ongoing developments at Montana State Hospital, which is even today- more then eighteen months after they were sanctioned by the federal government- yet to be resolved.
So be it.
IN CLOSING: There is no just cause for any administrative member of state managed mental hospitals to ignore well intentioned efforts of patients who express concern about their experiences. But just as with my time at the Arizona State Hospital, where none of my good faith, well drafted as per protocol grievances found any degree of resolution, these patterns of abject negligence occur away up in Montana, too. And very likely, throughout the nation. This is wrong, wrong, wrong.
It is clear to me by now, as a man affected and disabled by serious mental illness who has accrued three full years in more then one state managed mental hospital, that the sole reason for why this occurs has to do with my status as a man affected and disabled by serious mental illness. Were such issues to be raised in a non-mental health care facility, private, county, whatever, there is no way in hell that hospital administrators would risk ignoring such matters, on the basis of liability, if nothing else.
But in state managed hospitals, where a pervasive attitude of "What happens in (Vegas) stays in (Vegas)" exists as a matter of standard practice, such issues are swept under the rug, with no regard for the rights or care needs of the involved patient, etc. Virtually all individuals hospitalized in these places are disabled under state and federal law. It follows, thus, that this is patent discrimination on the basis of disability, and nothing less.
Even in this day in age, it is that bad. I attest to it, and have only one choice: To continue reporting it all in my writing and reporting in this blog, and elsewhere. I and my staff refuse to relent until reform oriented towards addressing these issues meets our satisfaction, most specifically in a context of getting state managed mental hospitals out of the habit of defying medical standards once and for all.
MORE LATER. AS ALWAYS.
paoloreed@gmail.com
But they do this at their own risk. As proven by the most recent trouble that Arizona State Hospital experienced (emphasis here on most recent, because it sure as hell isn't the first time), and by the ongoing developments at Montana State Hospital, which is even today- more then eighteen months after they were sanctioned by the federal government- yet to be resolved.
So be it.
IN CLOSING: There is no just cause for any administrative member of state managed mental hospitals to ignore well intentioned efforts of patients who express concern about their experiences. But just as with my time at the Arizona State Hospital, where none of my good faith, well drafted as per protocol grievances found any degree of resolution, these patterns of abject negligence occur away up in Montana, too. And very likely, throughout the nation. This is wrong, wrong, wrong.
It is clear to me by now, as a man affected and disabled by serious mental illness who has accrued three full years in more then one state managed mental hospital, that the sole reason for why this occurs has to do with my status as a man affected and disabled by serious mental illness. Were such issues to be raised in a non-mental health care facility, private, county, whatever, there is no way in hell that hospital administrators would risk ignoring such matters, on the basis of liability, if nothing else.
But in state managed hospitals, where a pervasive attitude of "What happens in (Vegas) stays in (Vegas)" exists as a matter of standard practice, such issues are swept under the rug, with no regard for the rights or care needs of the involved patient, etc. Virtually all individuals hospitalized in these places are disabled under state and federal law. It follows, thus, that this is patent discrimination on the basis of disability, and nothing less.
Even in this day in age, it is that bad. I attest to it, and have only one choice: To continue reporting it all in my writing and reporting in this blog, and elsewhere. I and my staff refuse to relent until reform oriented towards addressing these issues meets our satisfaction, most specifically in a context of getting state managed mental hospitals out of the habit of defying medical standards once and for all.
MORE LATER. AS ALWAYS.
paoloreed@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment
I would really love input of any kind from anybody with any interest whatsoever in the issues that I am sharing in this blog. I mean it, anybody, for I will be the first one to admit that I may be inaccurately depicting certain aspects of the conditions
at ASH, and anonymous comments are fine. In any case, I am more than willing to value anybody's feelings about my writing, and I assure you that I will not intentionally exploit or otherwise abuse your right to express yourself as you deem fit. This topic is far, far too important for anything less. Thank you, whoever you are. Peace and Frogs.