NVR Logo
Local nursing home sued for wrongful death
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Save and Share Share
The family of an elderly woman who died in hospice care is suing a local nursing home, charging that the staff's failure to follow a care plan resulted in acute dehydration that crippled the woman.

According to court papers in the wrongful death suit, Eulalia Grimoldi's final days came quickly. She was admitted to Napa Nursing Center on May 23, 2006, transferred to Queen of the Valley Medical Center by June 15, 2006, and died July 1, 2006. She died under care of Hospice of Napa Valley while at another Napa facility, Choctaw House.
According to the lawsuit, Grimoldi's daughters are seeking unspecified damages for wrongful death, elder abuse, neglect, negligence and violation of rights.

Linda Lutz, director of legal affairs for Napa Nursing Center's Horizon West Healthcare corporate parent, said the company had not yet been served with the lawsuit and could not comment.
Grimoldi had a diagnosis of dementia when she entered hospice care, where disabled elders and terminally ill patients go to die with dignity.

According to the state Department of Public Health, Napa Nursing Center was cited $15,000 in May 2007 for failing to follow a care plan that called for staff to encourage Grimoldi to drink fluids.
"The violation of this regulation ... presented imminent danger that death or serious harm would result or a substantial probability that death or serious harm would result," the citation concluded.

Refusing food, water

Napa Nursing Center staff called for an ambulance on June 15, 2006, because Grimoldi showed "a decreased level of consciousness." Queen of the Valley medical staff noted that Grimoldi had been admitted for acute dehydration.

A later medical discharge notice to Choctaw House noted a primary diagnosis of "debility and decline/failure to thrive" and noted some problems during Grimoldi's hospital stay.

"During the patient's hospital stay she began refusing food, hydration and medication," the report read. "It became clear that the patient seemed not to have much will to live. After prolonged discussions with the patient's daughter, Virginia Loeffler, durable power of attorney for health care, it was decided that the patient should be discharged to Choctaw House with hospice care."

Elizabeth Mautner, Napa County Long-Term Care Ombudsman, said even if Grimoldi refused help with drinking fluids, the state citation showed the home did have a further delicate responsibility. The ombudsman's office is staffed by nursing home resident advocates who both tour facilities and talk with residents to make sure their rights are protected.

"They could also be cited for forcing her to drink against her will, but they at least have to encourage her to drink, they can't just leave her alone and expect her to pick up the glass and drink," she said.

Mautner also said Napa Nursing Center is generally regarded highly by the ombudsman's office, with a track record of good reports from state inspectors.
8 comment(s)

Dirty Napkin wrote on Dec 12, 2007 6:29 AM:

" There is a point where you have to say good bye. And sueing is only goint to help the pockets of the family, not the woman. She refused to thrive. Enough said people. "

Debbie wrote on Dec 12, 2007 8:12 AM:

" Typical double talk. They have to encourage the woman to drink, but they could be cited for forcing her to take fluids. She has the right to refuse, but if you respect that right you could be negligent. It's a catch-22 that the state puts nursing homes in and wonders why it is so difficult to get good people attracted to that environment and keep them there. "

steph wrote on Dec 12, 2007 9:07 AM:

" Suing helps the lawyers, too. They win no matter who loses. Another example of disgusting behavior. "

napareader wrote on Dec 12, 2007 9:18 AM:

" Per the article, Napa Nursing's failure to follow the medical care plan directly led to the patient's refusal to thrive. Yes, everyone dies - but that does not make mistreatment acceptable. Sueing does not only "help the pockets of the family" (Dirty Napkin), it can bring situations like these to the public's attention and perhaps people will think twice before putting their loved ones in that facility. "

NATALIEJ wrote on Dec 12, 2007 9:36 AM:

" WHAT R THEY SUEING FOR? WITH MY OWN EXSPERIENCE YOU CANNOT FORCE SOMEONE TO EAT AND DRINK . YES YOU NEED TO ENCOURAGE IT BUT IF SHE WAS ON HOSPICE HER DAUGHTER WAS FULLY AWARE THAT SHE WAS FAILING. THATS WHAT PATIENTS DO THEY GIVE UP WHEN THEY ARE READY TO GO .ENOUGH ALREADY "

CTN wrote on Dec 12, 2007 11:12 AM:

" Even if someone is dying, they deserve to be treated with dignity and to get proper care. If the care plan required encourangement, and the facility failed to do so, it should be cited, as it was. If, as Debbie suggests, a patient refuses, then that should be documented. A patient has the right to refuse, and a care plan is not violated if a patient refuses the care. DHS would also not cite in that situation. Nursing homes (and their employees) have just as much responsibility to give good care as an OB Nurse in the delivery room. Most are good people and try hard, but are faced with understaffing and under funding, which make it hard for them to do their jobs. Citations and suits are not always the best answer, but in the absence of others, maybe that's the best we can do for now... "

Cyndi wrote on Dec 12, 2007 5:56 PM:

" Dementia is a terminal diagnosis. Most people don't realize that forgeting how to eat or drink or refusing to do so is the expected outcome of this disease process. Additionally, the person has virtually lost control of every aspect of his/her existance. The one last thing which the person can control is what he/she puts in his/her mouth. Hospice has exellent information about the dying process. There is no suffering in lack of food and water. Please educate yourselves before passing judgment. The nursing home industry is extremely battered from every angle. Remember that most nursing homes are owned by large for-profit corporations. Nursing staff are viewed as a liability. The parent company is really to blame when something does go wrong. The nurses and CNAs attempt to do their very best with the limited resources alloted them by administration. This family obviously wants to cash in on the inevidable death of this dear lady. It would be interesting to find out just how many times they went to visit her when she was alive. This type of lawsuit is disgusting. I don't see how lawyers involved with this case can sleep at night. "

hometown wrote on Dec 13, 2007 9:48 AM:

" Cyndi: As a someone who knows these folks, the family was there every day - and it was the family that demanded she be removed from NNC and taken to QVH. The article is rather misleading. Unfortunately it does not mention all of the items NNC was fined for by the state, which were numerous. Nor is the timeline or description of events accurate. "

Comment guidelines
All comments will be screened and may take several hours to be posted.
• Keep comments clear, concise and focused on the topic in the story.
• Comments exceeding 300 words will not be posted.
• Refrain from personal attacks, degrading comments or remarks that do not add to a constructive dialogue.
• Comments implying suspects in crime-related stories are guilty before they have been proven so in a court of law will be deleted.
• Do not post e-mail addresses or links except for pages on Napavalleyregister.com or government Web sites.
• Comments will not be edited - they will be approved or declined.
• Comments may be used in the print edition of the newspaper.
• If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact dross@napanews.com or bkennedy@napanews.com
For further information on the comment guidelines, click here.
Search:
Advanced searchWeb Search Powered By Yahoo! Search
Copyright © 2008 Napa Valley Publishing, a member of Lee Enterprises, Inc.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy