Tired of ads? Subscribers enjoy a distraction-free reading experience.
Click here to subscribe today or Login.

A request by long-term care providers for civil immunity in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic has trial attorneys saying it’s too much to ask of the most vulnerable and their front-line providers.

The Pennsylvania Health Care Association and LeadingAge PA earlier this week sought an executive orderfrom Gov. Tom Wolf that would protect their member nursing homes, long-term care facilities, nonprofits and staffs from lawsuits for their care 0f the elderly and disabled as COVID-19 disrupted nearly all aspects of daily life.

Other states have taken the extraordinary step of granting civil immunity and Pennsylvania should do the same, the organizations said in their April 8 letter to the governor.

“COVID-19 has altered the delivery of healthcare services in Pennsylvania, based on guidance and recommendations from CMS, the CDC, and our Department of Health. Although necessary, these new measures have raised concern about the potential liability of our providers and staff who are caring for their residents,” the letter said.

“Staff are putting themselves at risk every single day. They should not have to worry about the threat of lawsuits as they care for their residents,” the letter added.

As of Friday afternoon the governor’s office said it could comment not on the request.

“We will continue to work with nursing facilities, as well as all other health care providers, to identify their needs and ways the state can assist while weighing the drastic decrease the state has seen in revenues,” the governor’s press office said in a statement.

The federal government allocated $100 billion to health care providers for COVID-19 related expenses. Nursing facilities are eligible, but it’s too early to say how the funding will be distributed, the statement said.

“We are making the shipment of personal protective equipment and other supplies to nursing homes and other long-term care facilities a priority and will continue to make decisions that best protect staff and residents,” the statement said.

Trial attorneys argued the focus should remain on real dangers residents, doctors, nurses and other staff members are facing during the pandemic, instead of the manufactured threat of lawsuits.

Across the country front-line workers are crying out for personal protective equipment, said Sud Patel of Pottsville, president of the state trial attorneys’ association, the Pennsylvania Association for Justice.

“They’re not out there saying we’re worried about lawyers and lawsuits,” Patel said.

Patel labeled the request for institutional immunity across the board “a little off putting” and misdirected.

“Medical malpractice lawsuits are the most costly to bring and the most difficult to win,” Patel said. “I just don’t see colleagues champing at the bit to bring lawsuits against doctors and nurses ” and others on the front line.

There’s no vaccine for this novel coronavirus and health professionals are scrambling to care for infected people as best they can. Establishing a standard of care at this stage that attorneys would base a malpractice case on would be difficult, attorneys said.

Attorney Joseph Quinn of Hourigan, Kluger & Quinn in Kingston said he could not conceive of a significant claim being filed now regarding treatment of someone infected with COVID-19.

“I think we really have to step back here and try to combat the pandemic, then we can sort it through,” Quinn said.

He warned against making decisions “in the panic of the moment,” saying, “We have to listen to the science on this. We can’t over react.”

Immunity would remove a safety net and all the more reason for the governor to deny the request, said Attorney Neil O’Donnell of the O’Donnell Law Offices in Kingston.

The patients in nursing homes are the most dependent on others for care, O’Donnell said, and health experts have identified the elderly and sick as high risk groups to contract the virus.

“In my view blanket immunity is a danger to Pennsylvanians, particularly the most vulnerable Pennsylvanians,” O’Donnell said.

Attorney Jonathan Comitz of the Comitz Law Firm in Wilkes-Barre agreed the safety net should stay in place.

“PA law is pretty clear on the requirements for these facilities and and their residents, including clear safety protocols,” Comitz said in an email. “These protections are necessary of course. The ability to hold people and entities accountable is a great deterrent so any attempt to remove those deterrents should be questioned.”

Comitz questioned whether the governor could act unilaterally on the request and exclude the legislative and judicial branches.

“If he were to act on this recommendation, it would only create further doubt leading to court action challenging the legitimacy and authority of his actions. He should be reminded there are two other branches of government and perhaps those other branches should remember as well,” Comitz said.

Reach Jerry Lynott at 570-991-6120 or on Twitter @TLJerryLynott.