The Role Of Hospital Chief Executive Officers In Perpetuating Wrongdoing. Wherein, no one employee of state managed mental hospitals has more influence over the flow of patient abuses and staff misconduct then any given hospital CEO. (Hello, Dr. Bowen.)

From yesterday: "In the year 1997-98 or thereabout, Arizona State Hospital was formally stripped of its license to operate due to the exposure of substandard care practices and conditions. Following reacquiring the trust of federal regulators in 2000, the Hospital again all but lost its license in 2004, again due to violations of law and policy. In 2013-14, following the (then) two year history of this blog publication, issues of serious concern to the welfare of ASH's patient community yet again led to significant federal intervention, wherein the Hospital's license was almost stripped- yet again. 

History does not have to repeat itself, must not repeat itself, and it is up to us, the people, to make this so. Are the current administrators of ASH up to the task? Does the current director of ADHS have the right stuff?

Only time will tell. But it's running out. Fast."

"You, Dr. Cara Christ , are 100% responsible for doing the right thing today. So do it, already."

Dr. Cara Christ.
Director, Arizona Dept. of Health Services
2015-the present. 

Since her appointment to the highest ranking position in Arizona’s public health care system in 2015, Arizona Department of Health Director Dr. Cara Christ has repeatedly stated that there have been “great improvements” in the state’s sole long term public mental health care facility, Arizona State Hospital (ASH). To date however, January 2018, Dr. Christ has never provided any evidence or information about just what these “improvements” at ASH are, in fact. This is of very real concern to the staff of this publication, given that Dr. Christ’s immediate predecessor (Will Humble ADHS Director 2009-2015) willfully relied upon producing a pattern of overt and untruthful propaganda that served to delay a subsequent process of critically needed oversight and accountability at ASH. Propaganda that defied the realities specific to the ASH operation, including but not limited to preventable patient deaths, the tragic murder of a young Phoenix woman, and a wide range of patient generated concerns expressed in grievance submissions; and as such, granted the former administrators of ASH further opportunity to continue operating ASH in a manner deeply harmful to the welfare of the Hospital’s patient community. These issues have been exemplified by the information provided in this blog since 2012, as well as in a number of scathing investigative findings of the staff of ABC Ch15 circa 2013-2015; (As reported previously in this publication, at least three preventable deaths occurred due to this fact). 

The following article was originally published sometime in the first twelve months of the life of this blog, PJ Reed The Arizona State Hospital Patient Abuse. We are republishing this information as one means to remind our readers of how dismally substandard the operation at ASH was circa 2010-2012, and in order to raise consideration as to whether in fact any legitimate improvements have in fact come about since Dr. Christ was granted directorship over Arizona’s public health care system. 

Cory Nelson's Ongoing Lies: Herein, a good hard look at the state of Arizona's statutory provision(s) underlying voluntary versus involuntary status in the context of hospitalized mental patients, with specific respect for ASH' CEO's untruthfulness in relation to the letter of law specific to the topic.  

(Originally published April 10, 2013)

RE: ARS Title 36- 531:The Public Health and Safety; possible disposition; release. This statute dictates the required conduct of any Arizona hospital in specific relation to any voluntary mental health patient's request or action relative to discharge. ASH, meanwhile, is a public mental hospital/entity, funded by the citizens of Arizona, and subject to state (and federal) law specific to the public trust and safety. No hospital has the authority to deviate from the requirements of this statute; as per strictly regulated licensure, all hospitals are required to abide by the full language of this statute. Any deviation by an administrative state employee from these requirements is prosecutable under civil and criminal law.  

I am getting sick and tired of hearing the supervisor of the Arizona State Hospital (ASH), Cory "meathead" Nelson's gross misinterpretation(s) and/or mischaracterization(s) of  very clear language afforded by Arizona Revised Statutes- 36 Public Health and Safety- Section 531; possible disposition; release, wherein, and as per express language therein, no hospitalized mental health patient has the "right" or "privilege" to simply "walk away" from any hospital in Arizona until they have been granted that option via a very specific and strictly required process, including the fundamental application of medical clearance that may only be granted following a formal mental evaluation.

It does not matter whatsoever if the given patient is there under the status of involuntary or not, for if the hospital's chief medical officer (Dr. Steven Dingle), as per the formal opinion of the patient's primary treating physician (Dr. Steven Morris), has reason to believe that the patient poses a danger to himself or to others, as a baseline matter of concern in this context, than the director is bound by law to initiate a petition for continued involuntary inpatient treatment.

This applies across the board in each and every form of hospital operating in the state of Arizona, including ASH, and equally applies in varied language in every state in the country today. While it is within any voluntary mental patient's right to request discharge, a health care facility must first determine that the patient is stable enough (safe) for said discharge as per both the treating physician's opinion, and the associated confirmation of the facility's chief medical officer. If, in evaluating a voluntary mental patient's state of mind, the facility determines the patient to be a danger to his/her self or to others, the facility can- and in fact must, under the applicable statute(s)- hold the patient for up to 72 hours, during which time the director is afforded the opportunity to seek a judge's authority (court order) to extend the given patients' treatment under the status of involuntary for periods up to 180 days. 

   

I have included below, the entire Arizona revised statue applicable to this subject at the end of this article. But at the moment, I want to draw your attention to the primary section(s) (A., B., C.) of the statute:

          Arizona Revised Statutes 36-531. Evaluation; possible dispositions; release.

A. A person being evaluated on an inpatient basis in an evaluation agency shall be released if, in the opinion of the medical director of the agency, further evaluation is not appropriate unless the person makes application for further care and treatment on a voluntary basis. 

B. If it is determined upon an evaluation of the patient's condition that he is, as a result of a mental disorder, a danger to self or to others, is persistently or acutely disabled or is gravely disabled, the medical director in charge of the agency which provided the evaluation shall, unless the person makes application for further care and treatment on a voluntary basis, prepare, sign and file a petition for court-ordered treatment unless the county attorney performs the functions of preparing, signing or filing the petition as provided in subsection C of this section.

C.The agency may contact the county attorney to obtain his assistance in preparing the petition for court-ordered treatment, and the agency may request the advice and judgment of the county attorney in reaching a decision as to whether court-ordered treatment is justified.

(FOR COMPLETE DOCUMENT, GO TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS ARTICLE).

In late May, 2011, a patient (Jesus Rincon Murietta) undergoing treatment at The Arizona State Hospital, in Phoenix, AZ, on a “voluntary” basis, managed to violently steal an ASH staff member’s electronic pass card and identification, which Murietta then used to pass through several electronically secured doors; after gaining access to the exterior area of the main ASH facility (the main parking lot), Murietta evaded ASH security staff who were attempting to apprehend him, including by throwing several large stones at them, and thus placing them in enough jeopardy for that those security staff terminated the attempt to catch Murietta.

Subsequent to Murietta’s escape, in early June, 2011, ASH administrators refused to release any information whatsoever about the escape to at least one journalist (JJ Hensely, The Arizona Republic, Phoenix, AZ) who had directly inquired about Murietta’s reported (by me) escape, and in fact, went so far as to patently deny that their had been any escapes within the last 6 months, or longer.

Consequently, approximately 90 days later, in late August 2011, Murietta beat and then cut the throat of a young woman named April Mott, killing her. Once again, the same journalist who attempted to acquire information about Murietta's escape in May, 2011, again attempted to acquire information from ASH administrators specific to the history of this tragedy, most specifically in a phone conversation ASH’s chief executive officer, Cory Nelson, who therein stated that ASH had no obligation to report Murietta's escape due to the fact that, at the time of his escape, Murietta was being provided treatment at ASH on a voluntary basis.

In the September, 2012, news article entitled "Victim's Family Questions Why Man Was Free" (JJ Hensley, AZ Republic Sept. 29, 2011), Nelson willfully misrepresented the associated law and policy specific to patient discharges from ASH.   

“State hospital CEO Cory Nelson, who started Aug. 1, said he could not talk specifically about the Murrieta case. But in general, Nelson said, the hospital's obligation to report patients who leave against the advice of doctors extends only to those who are involuntarily committed.

  ‘If they (voluntary patients) choose to leave their treatment environment, that would be their choice,’ Nelson said. ‘If someone leaves the facility and they don't really have another attachment to another person . . . we contact law enforcement and let them know that the individual has left the hospital.’ ” 

I contend that Nelson knowingly and willfully misrepresented the provisions underlying applicable law in this matter as a strategical pretense for excusing the Hospital's overall unlawful conduct. The fact is that, by concealing the fact that Jesus Rincon Murietta had escaped ASH in late May, 2012, and was at large in the greater Phoenix metro area, this deceitful misconduct ultimately led to the brutal slaying of April Mott, in late August, 2011. 

It is also imperative to realize that by declaring he could not talk specifically about the Murietta case”, Nelson willfully violated the provisions of the Hospital Information Portability and Protection Act, which only requires health care providers- referred to in HIPAA as “covered entities” (ASH is a converted entity in this regard)- to protect such patient/case information if there is no risk of harm to the greater public. Conversely, in accordance with precedent and reasonable balance specific to the privacy protections afforded by HIPAA, if is known that public safety is at stake, those protections have no bearing on the need to warn the public about such risks to safety. The fact is, no health care provider including hospital CEOs are permitted to deny public knowledge of the danger posed by persons such as Murietta, a diagnosed psychotic with known violent behavioral tendencies, who did escape ASH to the full awareness of all ASH staff including and foremost Cory Nelson and the Hospital’s chief medical officer, Dr. Steven Dingle, on the basis of the provisions of HIPAA.

I specifically mention Dr. Steven Dingle’s role in this tragedy with direct respect for his obligated Duty to Warn, which is a very well recognize feature to the responsibilities of any licensed medical practitioner. By participating in the cover up of Murietta’s escape from ASH, Dingle was willfully complicit in posing grave risk to the public safety- and he knows it.

Now, let's take another look at Arizona law (shown above) specific to a mental health care's facilities obligations to the public. 

     

Piece by piece: ARS 36 (A) and (B): This is an excerpt from the bright line body of law that applies to all aspects of any Arizona hospital's responsibilities with respect  to discharging mentally disabled client-patients on the basis of the patient's request to be discharged. This is how it goes. Period:

36-531. Evaluation; possible dispositions; release.

A) A person being evaluated on an inpatient basis in an evaluation agency shall be released if, in the opinion of the medical director of the agency, further evaluation is not appropriate…

     

It is important to note herein, that only after the "opinion of the medical director of the agency" (the definition(s) of "agency" in this parlance includes hospital facilities, while "director applies most significantly to the chief medical officer, or alternatively, the facility director ) has been been determined in the context of any given voluntary patients' state of mind at that time (as per the required mental evaluation), "shall" the patient be released. (It is critical to note that at the time of Murietta's May 2011 escape, there was no dutifully hired supervisor/director in place at ASH, this following the April 2011 resignation of CEO John Cooper). This belies the incontrovertible (factual)reality that no patient, whether designated as voluntary or involuntary, may be discharged from any hospital facility unless this specific condition has been met. To do poses clear danger to both the patient and the public, and flies in the face of well established mental heath care and policy.  

 B) If it is determined upon an evaluation of the patient's condition that he is, as a result of a mental disorder, a danger to self or to others, is persistently or acutely disabled or is gravely disabled, the medical director in charge of the agency which provided the evaluation shall, unless the person makes application for further care and treatment on a voluntary basis, prepare, sign and file a petition for court-ordered treatment…..

     

Herein, we see that any patient exhibiting the characteristics associated with posing "a danger to self or others…. (or who) is persistently or acutely disabled or is gravely disabled"  is not to be released/discharged, on the basis of fact defining that the given patient is not "safe", "stable", and/or not posing "a danger to self or others" (as per the strict language of this statute). It does not matter one iota if the patient is voluntary, and ASH director Cory Nelson has no excuse whatsoever for not understanding this fundamental fact. The fact being, that anytime an individual known to be mentally ill requests  discharge from a psychiatric ward, there is a very specific process to be followed. Bottom line. The significance of this bright line standard of law and policy is critical in terms of public safety specific to both the patient, as well the greater public, in general. As such, this is precisely the nature of what we the people reasonably expect from any state employee trusted and thus granted the express privilege of caring for Arizona's seriously mentally ill and disabled citizens. People like Dr. Steven Dingle and Cory Nelson are among our state's highest paid employees. Their role in April Mott’s death is ridiculous, unacceptable, and an aberration in terms of contemporary medical standards. 

ASH: It really is that bad.  

In a very recent Question and Answers session with a reporter from Phoenix's main local newspaper, The Arizona Republic (Mary Reinhart, published on September 23, 2012; see Q&A: Arizona State Hospital chief talks security CEO discusses new measures, trainings that were spurred by 2 escapes in 2011 by Mary K. Reinhart - Sept. 22, 2012 08:43 PM The Republic | azcentral.com) Cory "crazycorycorner" Nelson again misrepresented the applicable law specific to the covered up May, 2011, escape of Jesus Rincon Murietta, by characterizing the escape as a legitimate voluntary discharge. 

"We have individuals who are in the facility, very rare but we have them, who are there on a voluntary basis and they can walk out on a voluntary basis. That is one of the privileges that you have when you're voluntarily accessing services. We can't impinge on their civil rights."

     (Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/news/politics/20120921arizona-state-hospital-chief-security.html#ixzz28ACnGkzH)

                                                            

There it is again, in that first sentence: "We have individuals (patients)…. who are there (at ASH) on a voluntary basis and they can walk out on voluntary basis…." 

Simply stated, Nelson's statement is 100% in contradiction to the language and intent of applicable law and policy; and as such, I fully believe that every time he has made statements to this effect, he has willfully and knowingly engaged in something disturbingly consistent with pathological lying, in graphic defiance of the public trust. It is likewise, as equally disturbing that he somehow interprets a seriously mentally ill persons' potential ability (no matter how inaccurate the possibility of that potential is, in fact) to leave the safety and care provided in a level one mental health facility regardless of their actual state of mind (and directly related quality of health) as a "privilege." It is as though the "chief" of Arizona's sole long term public mental health facility views any patients actual disability as a mere byproduct of their presence in ASH, rather than being the primary reason that they are there, in fact. This is as graphic a disconnect from the true purpose and role of ASH as public health care facility as one might find in this day in age. Absolute ineptitude and utter breach of the public trust. In contemporary terms and with direst reference to his status as an executive level state employee, I thus find it shoocking to the conscience to witness a man like Cory Nelson discussing "civil rights."

      

Herein, the man entrusted with overseeing the care needs and rights of the patient community at Arizona State Hospital, where the Arizona's most seriously mentally disabled patients expect and deserve nothing short of competent performance by the one's employed to provide them, as such. Nelson unequivocally states that any voluntary patient, can leave ASH (at any time, in any fashion) as matter of "privilege"; including someone like Jesus Rincon Murietta, according to Nelson's ill-intended logic, who forced his way out of ASH by ripping the electronic pass card off of an ASH staff's neck and proceeding thereafter to run away and escape from pursuing security guards by throwing rocks at them, and then went on to kill April Mott.

I will just say it again. The truth of the matter is that- at a minimum- any voluntary patient desiring to discharge from ASH for any reason must formally request the discharge via a very specific process, involving his or her entire inpatient treatment and discharge planning team (ITDP); as such, all members of the ITDP team are required to provide well founded medical input specific to their knowledge of the given patients' general heath and state of mind at that time. In a mental health facility such as ASH, this process requires a full mental evaluation to be administered by a licensed mental health professional (the primary treating physician, in this case, ASH's Dr. Steven Morris). Short of this required process of evaluation, whereby no patient, rather voluntary or not, is to be released from the given hospital facility in question until these fundamental concerns are addressed, there is (was) no excuse whatsoever to not fully divulge the fact that someone like Jesus Murietta escaped ASH. And yet in spite this fact and the underlying implications (state and federal law and policy), in early June, 2011, ASH's administrators and associated senior clinicians did willfully deny the escape of any patients, this in response to direct inquiries specific to the issue, (posed by JJ Hensley of the AZ Republic); and less then 90 full days later, Cory Nelson knowingly engaged in misrepresenting the provisions specific to a voluntary patient, such as Murietta, obviously in order to compromise the factual information due to the citizens of Arizona, including April Mott's family, and any other concerned citizens (such as myself).

This entire cycle of violence can be directly attributed to the role of Arizona State Hospital’s administrative staff and the facilities overall shortfalls. It is that simple, it is that straight forward, and there is simply no other way to look at it, in my humble opinion.  ASH's administrative staff, including senior counsel (Joel Rudd), and anyone else involved in major decisions in relation to the Hospital's day to day operation(s), misconstrued the underlying truth to Jesus Murietta's escape, and they knew it. 

And as shown in the following passage from a letter written to me by Cory "crazycorycorner" Nelson in late September, 2011, the administrative staff at ASH misinterpret/mischaracterize the specific meaning and intent of this body of Arizona law as an egregious matter of standard practice:

"Patrick I would encourage you to work with your treatment team to address all aspects of your treatment plan while you are still a resident at the hospital. Since your legal status at the hospital is voluntary you may certainly request discharge from your treatment team if you believe that the treatment that you are receiving is ineffective, unnecessary or otherwise not meeting your needs." (ADHS/ASH letter, Cory Nelson to ------- (PJ Reed), September 30, 2011)   

As I have described in previous articles (see: "Why Do we Care?" September 26, 2012), Nelson made this statement to me in direct response to my reports to him about gross violations of law and policy in relation to patient abuse and associated administrative misconduct. As such, rather than offering me a forthright response to my well founded and good faith reports in this matter, the supervisor of Arizona's only long term public mental health facility encouraged me to consider leaving ASH at that time, with no concern or respect whatsoever for my actual state of mind at the time, and despite the fact that I was neither stable/safe and ready for reentry into the community. This is on point with Nelson's graphic untruthfulness in relation to the Jesus Murietta affair. And as pointed out in the material provided above, if I had requested discharge during the period of time that Nelson wrote this letter to me (late summer, early fall, 2011), I would have then been the subject of the required mental health evaluation, and presuming that during the course of that evaluation I was open, honest and forthcoming about my thoughts about suicide and other related elements of my specific diagnosis (as I always have been during the entirety of my experiences since May, 2010, and the earliest stages of my time in the Arizona behavioral health care system), my ASH ITDP team would not have even been allowed, as per the letter of the law, to grant me safe discharge, because the fact is, my state of mind in late summer, 2011, was such that I was definitely still willing to predict suicidal intent and action were I not continually involved in ongoing safe treatment in ASH or some other like facility (of course, ASH is the only long term mental health facility in the state of Arizona, so I would have had no option(s) beyond continuing my treatment there at ASH). Thus and therein, if I were not willing to continue my treatment at ASH on a voluntary basis at that time, my clinicians and the senior conical staff ASH (as stated in the statute, the medical director) would have been required by law to initiate a petition to have my involuntary status reinstated for a period of time not to exceed 180 days. This basic fact proves my contention that Cory "meathead" Nelson and Joel "the mortician" Rudd willfully manipulate the provisions underlying law specific to public safety in the context of both the mental health patients needs as well as that of the greater public, in general. 

Likewise, in the case of Jesus Rincon Murietta, who was indeed receiving his treatment at ASH on a voluntary basis at the time of his late May, 2011, escape, the Hospital could have only lawfully granted him moderately immediate discharge following his having requested such, and then having been subject to the subsequent process of medical clearance only afforded via the requirement of a full mental health evaluation (as laid out in very clear and simple terms in this statute); but given the fact that he never in fact requested discharge from ASH, and that in the 4 weeks prior to that late May, 2011, escape, Murietta had been involved in several unprovoked physical attacks on several persons at ASH (including staff and at at least one female patient), Murietta's primary attending doctor ASH, Dr. Morris, and the rest of Murietta's ITDP team, as well as ASH's medical director at the time, Dr. Steven Dingle, would have been required to meet the specific requirements of this statute, which rule out the release/discharge of patients exhibiting characteristics associated with posing "a danger to self or others" (from subsection B of the statute, shown above). Thus and herein, Murietta's departure from ASH was anything but a legitimate voluntary discharge, and for  Cory "meathead"- Nelson or anybody else to characterize Murietta's as a legitimate discharge falls nothing short of willful and criminal alteration(s) of the truth.  ASH's cover up of the truth at the time Murietta escaped directly led to the horrifically brutal slaying of an innocent woman, who would have had nothing whatsoever to do with ASH, Jesus Murietta, and so on, had the administrative staff at ASH met their clearly established obligations in this context. Systematic, obviously purposeful intent to engage in a criminal action specific to covering up a very serous pattern of unlawful actions in this specific matter. Bottom line. 

     Ding, mother fuckers! Try to lie your way out of this one.

IN CLOSING, PLEASE NOTE: As per the wisdom of ADHS Director Will Humble, there has been a bit of shuffle in agency itself due to staff shortages, and Cory "meathead" Nelson is currently the acting Deputy Director of ADHS sub-agency, Behavioral Health Services. As stated, these people continue to reap the full benefits afforded them through their entrusted positions at the head of Arizona's public heath care system, while the impacts of their ineptitude simultaneously continues to harmfully impact Arizona's collective citizens; and while my anger, as expressed above (please forgive my language), still flows directly from my heartfelt concern relating to the bare boned fact that April Mott did not deserve to be effected by the substandard practices of ASH's administrative staff. Nobody deserves that, including the patients and ASH today. But given these facts, the additional fact cannot be ignored, that Nelson, the chief executive afficer at The Arizona State Hospital and current deputy director of ADHS/BGHS is a bald faced liar through and through. Documented statements that he has made specific to the issue of safe discharges from ASH, including in the case of this most recent Questions and Answers article from the Arizona Republic, clearly illustrate his unbridled willingness to violate his required obligations to the citizens of Arizona simple as a matter of trying to avoid direct accountability in terms of the substandard mental-medical health care and practices at ASH. 

In doing this, Nelson breaches his contract with the citizens of Arizona in every conceivable sense. This is unacceptable. And yet the highest ranking officials in the Arizona Department of Heath Services, including ADHS director, Will Humble, refuse to acknowledge the significance of these matters, which thus allows for the gross violations of patient rights at ASH to continue, including but not limited to physical, verbal, emotional, and psychological abuse. In no uncertain terms, the willful misconduct of ASH's administrative staff in the context that I have laid out in today's article also amounts to explicit abuse of patient's rights, and I find it to be as deplorable an state of corrupt hospital management as I can imagine. Bottom line. Do not let yourselves be fooled by Cory "meathead" Nelson's clumsy avoidance of the reality(s) that underlie this specific body of concern; he truly is not very bright, but I find it hard to believe that his ineptude extends to an inability to even recognize how unlawful his conduct is, at times. 

Nelson got off entirely too easy in this recent, September 23, 2012, Q&A session withe the Arizona Republic newspaper. The reporter, for example, did not ask about the one escape that has already occurred in 2012, not long at all after administrative staff at The Arizona State Hospital began implementing "crazycorycorner's" new safety plan (NOT!); nor was there any mention of staff turnover rates, or of the comments posted in public by current ASH staff who have very, very serious concerns about the out of control conditions at ASH at this time.

I would have appreciated it, too, if there had been any mention at all of my reporting about the substandard mental-medical care and practices at ASH, and the directly associated patient abuse(s) that I am dedicated to exposing, but that okay. That time will come. In the meantime, please do what you can to defend the rights an support the critical need for serious reform at ASH and within the offices of the Arizona Department of Health/Behavioral Health Services, including the Office of Grievances and Appeals, as well. Patient abuse is inhumane and cruel. Let's end the abuse of Arizona's most seriously mentally disabled patients today. 

Arizona Revised Statutes - Title 36 Public Health and Safety - Section 36-531 Evaluation; possible dispositions; release.

A.  A person being evaluated on an inpatient basis in an evaluation agency shall be released if, in the opinion of the medical director of the agency, further evaluation is not appropriate unless the person makes application for further care and treatment on a voluntary basis.                                 

B. If it is determined upon an evaluation of the patient's condition that he is, as a result of a mental disorder, a danger to self or to others, is persistently or acutely disabled or is gravely disabled, the medical director in charge of the agency which provided the evaluation shall, unless the person makes application for further care and treatment on a voluntary basis, prepare, sign and file a petition for court-ordered treatment unless the county attorney performs the functions of preparing, signing or filing the petition as provided in subsection C of this section.                                                                                         

C. The agency may contact the county attorney to obtain his assistance in preparing the petition for court-ordered treatment, and the agency may request the advice and judgment of the county attorney in reaching a decision as to whether court-ordered treatment is justified. 

D. A person being evaluated on an inpatient basis in an evaluation agency shall be released within seventy-two hours, excluding weekends and holidays, from the time that he is hospitalized pursuant to a court order for evaluation, unless the person makes application for further care and treatment on a voluntary basis or unless a petition for court-ordered treatment has been filed pursuant to subsection B of this section. E. The department of health services may conduct jointly with a school district, directly or indirectly, an educational evaluation pursuant to sections 15-765 and 15-766 for nonadjudicated youth. The evaluation information may be shared by and among authorized personnel employed by the department of health services and the department of education, or authorized personnel from the local education agency, for purposes of ensuring the provision of special education and related services as required by the individuals with disabilities education act (20 United States Code sections 1400 through 1415).

DATELINE 2018: Not only did former-since fired ASH CEO Cory Nelson patently lie about the law specific to patient discharges, he also manipulated the provisions of the Hospital Insurance Portability and Protection Act as a means to further the coverup of Jesus Rincon Murietta’s escape from ASH and summer long presence at large in the greater Phoenix community. This is a routine means for such highly entrusted hospital CEO’s to do whatever they have to in order to avoid accountability. I have referred to this seeming phenomena in various articles as “Hiding Behind HIPAA”, and as personified by the brutal slaying of a young woman named April Mott, the willingness of such CEO’s to deny critical information in this manner can and does contribute to grossly undue impacts on the welfare of the great public, and/or that of the patient-clientele in state managed mental health care facilities.

How might it feel to be Aaron Bowen right now?

At last evenings meeting of the ASH Human Rights Committee, a visiting attorney also described how real the threat of misinformation specific is when it comes to hospital administrators; administrators such such as Dr. Aaron Bowen, who only one month ago attempted to berate HRC’s members on a basis of his belief that this body of good faith patient advocacy lacks awareness about HIPPA) engaging in this issue. In listening to Bowen do this at the time, I could not help wondering if he has any idea about the requirement that HRC be able to function independent of influence from any state employee, administrative official, or agency representative. 

Which has led me today to declare that Bowen needs to keep his given duties straight in his head. He needs to do this…. Before he gets himself in some very hot water. 

Notable, too, that Bowen’s effort to cow HRC into something resembling submission is nothing new to those members. Former-since fired ASH CEO Donna Noriega also engaged in lame-ass attempts to intimidate the members of HRC circa 2014, a pattern of unlawful misbehavior that did in time contribute to her being ousted from the ASH/ADHS/BHS construct. Noriega engaged in  this misconduct because HRC was conducting its activities in precisely the way it is required to, by taking into careful and sincere consideration any/all possible issues that pose harm to the welfare of the ASH patient community. 

Much like the findings that underlie the establishment of The Americans With Disabilities Act (Title 42, United States Code), HRC bodies of citizen based advocacy is required in each of Arizona’s public health care districts on the basis of the historical fact that persons affected by mental illness are high risk of negligence, exploitation, and abuse. 

Bowen will do well to keep this in mind. He is neither an attorney, nor a clearly good faith advocate for the care needs and rights of ASH patients. He is nothing more then one more textbook bureaucrat, thus illustrating the risk posed by his documented misconduct in this context. And in recent weeks, a range of other questionable acts by Bowen have arisen under the public light, all of which have been documented, and all of which may be his demise.

I am not surpised. After all, as ASH psychiatrist Laxman Patel stated to me in January, 2011, “This is the state hospital. What do you expect?” I shiver in believing as I do that Bowen has this same attitude in his own right- even if he doesn’t know it, or is incapable of acknowledging it. It takes a very special type of person to misbehave in this way, and I doubt such persons possess the attributes necessary when it comes to such acknowledgement. 

So again, no real surprise to me. 

In this sense, I also contend that these specific issues- negligence, exploitation, abuse- are no more prevalent then in state managed mental hospitals such as ASH. This, too, is a historically known factor to the suffering of such individuals, here in the United States and beyond. Which is- really- no surprise. 

But as stated in yesterday’s article (entitled “Federal Intervention and Decertification”), history in this area of the public interest does not have to repeat itself, must not repeat itself. But so long as state health care departments continue to employ health care “professionals” who lack the requisite character when it comes to caring for vulnerable populations such as the mentally ill (and at-risk children or elderly), these issues will not go away. 

Bowen himself recently hired on Lisa Wynn to function as ASH’s executive quality control officer, this despite her documented violations of law when she acted as the director of Arizona’s Board of Medical Examiners. And while we all know that Bowen will issue any number of justifications for having hired this woman (should he have to), there is no actual evidence to the effect that she should be trusted in this crucially important position at ASH. The fact is, this specific position- quality control office- was previously held by none other then since-fired Donna Noriega, who in her own right had a record of deceit as per the findings of the AZ Board of Behavioral Examiners; and what only further clarifies how twisted the employment process in ASH/ADHS can be, Noriega was subsequently promoted into the position of ASH CEO, circa 2013.

Hello, Dr. Bowen. Lose the ball and chain, already. Do the right thing.

Already. While you still can.

And on the story rolls.

paoloreed@gmail.com