January 24, 2012

VIA FACSIMILE 780 422 8551

Mr. Mike Leathwood. Assistant Deputy Minister

Executive Director of Housing Operations

Housing and Urban Affairs.

Department of Municipal Affairs, Edmonton, AB

Dear Mr. Leathwood,

RE: Alberta Seniors Housing, unmonitored, unsafe.

It has become public knowledge that older Albertans living in what they perceive to be seniors safe housing are at serious risk for neglect, theft and deadly harm.

May 8, 2011, an 84-year-old woman suffered a violent, savage, physical and sexual assault inside her unit at the downtown Chinese Elders’ Mansion Retirement Home, 9550 102 Avenue. She died a week later, May 16, 2011. On September 18, 2011, downtown vagrant, Marvin Witzaney was charged with second-degree murder and aggravated sexual assault.

August 2, 2011, 83-year-old Anna Fedorio burned to death in an explosion and fire at the Bethany Senior Citizens, Strathcona Home, 9920 83 Avenue. The alleged perpetrator of the crime also died. Seven seniors were taken to hospital, six suffering from smoke inhalation and another with chest pains after the fire.

December 27, 2011 Police report that a man broke into a seniors complex, stole jewelry and other valuables. The suspect is believed to be five foot five and is roughly 35 years old and was seen wearing glasses with a dark frame.

January 2, 2012, Police believe that the same man broke into a seniors complex in the downtown core area. It was reported that a man sifted through suites for two hours. But when staff caught him hiding in one of the suites, he claimed he was in the wrong room. He is alleged to be a purse snatching thief who targets seniors.

On January 7, 2012 a resident of of Strathcona Place Seniors Residence at 77 Avenue and 109 Street made the gruesome discovery of a naked body of an elderly woman in the fenced backyard.

January 16, 2012, about 1:00 AM, a resident at Knox Met Manor Seniors Apartments, 10941 83 Avenue, was awakened by noise from the main kitchen. She called police dispatch and then called another resident on the 3rd floor who called 911.

Later that morning, about 6:30 AM, a resident who walked for exercise, who was not aware of the earlier police presence because she saw no signs of broken doors or windows, looked outside to the patio and noticed the Phelps money machine for laundry cards was missing. She walked back to her apt. and phoned the so called after hours emergency number (780) 918-7773 and left a message about the missing Phelps money machine. At about the same time, another resident also called the emergency number.

About 8:10 AM, a 7th floor tenant, overlooking south lane saw two males wearing hoodies leave the back entrance carrying something large covered with a blanket. Later it was discovered that the large wall T.V. had been stolen. One must wonder how many times, Knox Met Manor had been broken into that night?

Though Strathcona Management Agency had been fully alerted to the break in prior to 7:00 AM, CAO / Manager of the Management Agency did not attend on site until 10:00 AM.

Predators who violate senior homes are fully aware that there will be no monitoring or security presence to interrupt their unlawful intrusion.

Safety and security of person should be the right and reality of every Canadian citizen.

Finally, in regard to the noted incidents, this is only the tip of the iceberg.

We respectfully ask that this matter receive your immediate attention.

We would be grateful to be in receipt of a response by the 1st of February, 2012. or earlier. Thank you.

Yours truly,

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

cc.
The Honourable Mr. George VanderBurg, Minister of seniors
Ms. Loretta Bertol, Housing Advisor, North Operations, Municipal Affairs, Alberta Seniors
Ms. Irene Martin, Alberta Senior Citizens Housing Association

Response

HAND DELIVERED

December 20, 2011

The Honourable Mr. Verlyn Olson, QC

Minister of Justice & Attorney General

Alberta Legislature, Edmonton, AB

The Honourable Mr. Fred Horne,

Minister of Health and Wellness,

Alberta Legislature, Edmonton, AB

RE: ALBERTA HOSPITAL EDMONTON / VILLA CARITAS – VIDEO SURVEILLANCE

In the past we have made serious complaints against staff of the geriatric mental hospital, Villa Caritas. We have alleged that abuse and even violence is being perpetrated against very, vulnerable seniors, seniors detained behind locked doors. Our complaints have been summarily dismissed.

Therefore we are respectfully calling on our government to immediately initiate the following:

Cameras (Granny Cams), in every resident’s room, all open areas and especially 24/7 surveillance of the “QUIET” rooms. We also request that all video recordings be carefully saved, identified and stored.

Safety and security should be the right of every Alberta citizen.

Thank you. We shall be awaiting your response and be grateful to be in receipt thereof by the15th of January 2012.

Yours truly,

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

cc.

Mr. George VanderBurg, Minister of Seniors and Community Supports

Edmonton Chief of Police, Mr. Rod Knecht

HAND DELIVERED

May 16, 2011

The Honourable Mr. Verlyn Olson, QC
Minister of Justice and Attorney General
Alberta Legislature,
Edmonton, AB

Dr. Chris. Eagle, CEO, Alberta Health Services
Office of the President & CEO

Manulife Place
700 – 10180 101 Street,
Edmonton, Alberta
T5J 3S4

RE: ALBERTA MENTAL HEALTH REVIEW PANEL TRANSCRIPTION

The perceived intent of an Alberta Mental Health Review Panel hearing is to determine whether the human being before the panel should be given freedom or continue to be detained behind locked doors, stripped of all rights.

We submit that the present protocol of the review panels is unfair and cries out for change.

We are calling on Government to legislate that all Mental Health Review Panel hearings be recorded and transcribed. The proposed legislation should require that, a Certified Realtime Reporter be present in order to transcribe each and every hearing.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the Reporter should make a copy of the certified transcription available to the formal patient, as soon as possible.

Relevant legislation allows review panel decisions to be appealed to the Court of Queen’s Bench. However, if no transcription is available, how can there be an ethical appeal?

Also, there must be an agenda, which outlines matters to be discussed. The agenda to be determined and approved by the formal patient and available to all when the hearing commences.

An agenda is necessary to identify the matter(s) to be dealt with by the panel such as:

1. Cancellation of admission or renewal certificates;
2. Review of a physician’s certificate (of mental incompetence);
3. Orders for treatment to be administered to competent patients who object to treatment;
4. Requests (from forensic patients) to return to a correctional facility.

Presently, this quasi -judicial hearing is not transcribed, no one is directed to take minutes. In their capacity as Officers of the court, the Chairmen of the review panels have a duty to ensure fairness in their perceived administration of justice.  The present protocol is a troubling “he said”, she said” process. There is no prepared agenda or even established direction, the result of which, would never stand up in a court of law.

Alberta citizens are being abused by this inequitable process. Seniors and others are being unlawfully detained. They are being denied freedom by a process that purports to give them a hearing. In fact, far too often, they are denied to participate, denied to address the panel to give testimony and are not being heard.

1998, Dorothy Joudrie, the high profile Calgary socialite detained in the Forensic unit of Alberta Hospital Edmonton reported, that despite having positive assessments by a psychologist, it took $450,000 and a skilled lawyer to get her past the same Mental Health Review Panel to freedom.

Thank you. We shall be awaiting your response and be grateful to be in receipt thereof by the1st of June 2011.

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

cc.

The Honourable Mr. Gene Zwozdesky, Minister of Health & Wellness,

The Honourable Ms. Mary Anne Jablonski, Minister of Seniors and Community Support

Letter

November 23, 2011

Via Facsimile 780 415 0961

Letter to follow.

The Honourable Mr. Fred Horne,

Minister of Health and Wellness,

# 208 Legislature Building,

10800 97 Avenue,

Edmonton, Alberta, T5K 2B6

THE PRESENT PROCESS DOES NOT PROVIDE JUSTICE

RE: ALBERTA MENTAL HEALTH REVIEW PANEL TRANSCRIPTION

The perceived intent of an Alberta Mental Health Review Panel hearing is to determine whether the human being before the panel should be given freedom or continue to be detained behind locked doors, stripped of all rights.

We submit that the present protocol of Review Panels is unfair and cries out for change.

We are calling on Government to legislate that all Mental Health Review Panel hearings be recorded and transcribed. The proposed legislation should require that, a Certified Realtime Reporter be present in order to transcribe each and every hearing.

At the conclusion of the hearing, the Reporter should make a copy of the certified transcription available to the formal patient, as soon as possible.

Relevant legislation allows Review Panel decisions to be appealed to the Court of Queen’s Bench. However, if no transcription is available, how can there be an ethical appeal?

Presently, this quasi -judicial hearing is not transcribed, no one is directed to take minutes. In their capacity as Officers of the court, the Chairmen of the review panels have a duty to ensure fairness in their perceived administration of justice.  The present protocol is a troubling “he said”, she said” process. There is no prepared agenda or even established direction, the result of which, would never stand up in a court of law.

Alberta citizens are being abused by this inequitable process. Seniors and others are being unlawfully detained. They are being denied freedom by a process that purports to give them a hearing. In fact, far too often, they are denied to participate, denied to speak, to address the panel in order to give testimony. They are not being heard. And we have found that on occasion, the decision to detain the person, was made prior to the Hearing.

1998, Dorothy Joudrie, the high profile Calgary socialite detained in the Forensic unit of Alberta Hospital Edmonton reported, that despite having positive assessments by a psychologist, it took $450,000 and a skilled lawyer to get her past the same Mental Health Review Panel to freedom.

It is difficult to believe that this most important hearing is not being transcribed? After all, all court hearings are recorded and transcribed.

We urge you to speak up concerning the rights of these vulnerable, voiceless persons who are being detained behind locked doors.

We anticipate a response from those to whom this correspondence has been copied. We shall be awaiting your response and be grateful to be in receipt thereof by the 5th of December, 2011.

Yours truly,

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

The Honourable Mr. Verlyn Olson, Minister of Justice & Attorney General

The Honourable Mr. George VanderBurg, Minister of Seniors and Community Support

Response

Download PDF

Download PDF

The Adult Guardianship and Trusteeship Act is parallel to the Sexual Sterilization Act of 1928/72. Then, it was the academia who determined who should have their organs removed. Today it is the same academia who determines who should be stripped of rights and personhood.

Some of the more virulent legislative abuses contained within the Act, are as follows:

Under this legislation, you are no longer safe in your own domicile.

Section 104 The court has the ability to compel a senior to undergo a capacity assessment and permits the assessor “to enter the adult’s residence” for the assessment & strip you of rights.

Section 105 The Court may determine your competency in your absence, without an assessment, no matter where you may be. In 2008. the court determined Vera C. was “over the threshold” (incompetent),was apprehended at her home by the police, (where she was functioning and not a cost to taxpayers), taken to the Royal Alex Hosp. & declared a “confidential patient”, (hidden patient).

Section 26(1) Any “interested person” may apply for the guardianship of any resident in Alberta. No senior citizen in Alberta (who has money & estate) can safely assume that they will be able to enjoy retirement, the fruits of their labours in peace & dignity.

Section 40(1) allows Application to the court for a review of any Order. How can one who has been stripped of legal rights & money, retain a lawyer to go to court? 20MM man, Mr. PM, had to rely on a pro bono lawyer. Mr. PM was unjustly locked up for 3 yrs.in an Alzheimer ward.

Section 63, you will not be allowed to view your financial records to see how your money is being spent (or stolen). L.B. found that her daughter, trustee, was unlawfully taking money from her account. The police have yet to lay charges.

Section 67, a trustee can disregard your last wishes, Will & Testament & liquidate property that has been specifically bequeathed in your Will, without notifying you. This is happening.

Section 74 allows ex parte Applications by Office of Public Guardian. On July 2010, Public Guardian & an RCMP Officer apprehended wealthy, 87 yr. old Myrtle Hofer of Lethbridge, stripped her of her cell phone, detained her over 3 mos. in a back, service room of a storage area, Raymond Good Samaritan Care Center. Restricted her visitors, all under the guise of protection.

It must be clearly understood, that to be declared incompetent, a senior is stripped of all rights, access to monies, bank account statements, birth certificate, etc. There are no standardized guidelines/protocol to regulate competency assessments.

1. Call or write your MLA. Tell them that this unjust legislation is offensive and is a human right’s violation
2. Sign a petition. Petition can be downloaded from website. We will present Petition to Legislature.

Report

September 9, 2008

2008 Bill 24
First Session, 27th Legislature, 57 Elizabeth II
THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA
BILL 24
ADULT GUARDIANSHIP AND TRUSTEESHIP ACT

We wish to thank you for allowing us to make this submission to your Committee concerning Bill #24, Adult Guardianship and Trusteeship Act.

We wish to begin by pointing out the sheer folly of attempting to pass legislation that flies in the face of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The abuse of seniors, especially senior’s rights has been a totally hidden issue. Furthermore it is difficult to believe that senior abuse and blatant rights violations are actually happening in our fair, prosperous province. After all this is Alberta, a province built on democratic principles.

We, the Elder Advocates of Alberta Society are an anomaly across this province and probably across Canada in that we accept and investigate complaints of elder mistreatment It is a stressful and labour intensive process. But through this process, much to our shock and often disbelief, we uncovered an unbelievable reality of legislative abuse, human rights violations and charter violations.

We found that in the early seventies, the Alberta Government established a legislative framework intended to deny rights to seniors and legislative protocol designed to allow the seizing of senior’s estates.

We found that age is not included under the Alberta Human Rights legislation. In elder care facilities, seniors can be harmed with impunity, because there is no viable, enforceable, protective legislation.

In Alberta, the rights and final wishes of the maker of a Personal Directive or Power of Attorney, are not protected by the legislation. The Personal Directive or Power of Attorney can be easily overturned by the court thereby disregarding and permanently voiding the wishes of the maker. There is no requirement to register enacted Personal Directives and Powers of Attorney with government. This failure allows estate theft, a hidden crime which can be carried out with impunity. Through the years we have come to personally know the anguish and human devastation resulting from the Dependent Adults Act legislation.

This Act strips vulnerable seniors of all rights, all decision making, right to any monies, bank account, estate, birth certificate, personhood. Vulnerable seniors are denied the right to a fair court hearing. In a criminal court there would be requirement for an expert witness, for verbal testimony, cross examination of witness and documents.

But in a dependent adult hearing, the surrogate court accepts a Form 1, which is a one page form letter, filled out by a physician who may or may not have assessed or even interviewed the proposed Dependent Adult. The decision, too often influenced by those with a vested interest. The surrogate court does not allow the senior, whose total rights are on the block, to address the court, to speak in his own defence. If no one opposes the Application for guardianship or trusteeship, the Application may be carried out in Judge’s Chambers without any hearing. In the court, dependent seniors are referred to as “the estat of”, as if they were already deceased, even if the person is sitting there in the court. The Judge’s Order grants absolute power to the guardian and trustee.

If the senior has owned a home/ house, the trustee changes the locks and denies the owner/dependant adult a key. When the senior may be allowed to enter the home, they are cautioned not to touch anything. They have to pay someone to supervise their visit.The house may be sold without the owner’s permission and often against the senior’s wish. Family properties, land, farm, ranches and other properties built up over a lifetime are liquidated by the Office of the Public Trustee, with disregard for the senior’s last Will & Testament. The Office of the Public Trustee administers the second largest fund in Alberta, folowing the Alberta Heritage Trust Fund. There is no onus of duty of care on the guardian or trustee to act in the dependant adult’s best interests or to spend monies on behalf of the dependent adult or ameliorate his situation. We can give appalling, documented examples of such situations.

One would assume that the intent of guardianship and trusteeship is to keep the senior safe. Why then do we have to spend hours writing letters to government in defence of vulnerable seniors, appealing for their safety? Why did we have to spend several hours with the Edmonton Police Service last week in regard to a man detained at Alberta Hospital Edmonton? This frail, elderly, wheel chair dependent man, who is being physically and chemically restrained has been drugged until he was stuporous, administered a contraindicated medication that could kill him, had an injury to his left hand, wrist and fingers, finger nil picks on his right lower arm and elbow, a gash on his forehead. His wife wishes to have the husband removed from Alberta Hospital, however the court took away her rights as Agent and appointed the Public Guardian giving full rights to the Office of the Public Guardian. The guardians and trustees are untouchable because there is no provision within legislation to hold them accountable or to discipline them except to apply to the court. Who will apply to the court, the dependent senior who now has absolutely no access to monies or lawyer? Furthermore, these legal appointees are immune from liability.

A dependant adult has no right to sue his detainers. A dependant adult is denied the right to review or even see documents/ assessments which declared him incompetent A common criminal, however, has a full right to sue, he also has the right to full disclosure of charges made against them. A senior, who may be in his 70′s or 80′s, may be kept going from one stressful assessment to another. We know of one senior, a multi-millionaire, who is now defenceless, in 15 months was assessed 12 times by physicians, psychologists, geriatric specialists, etc. This could be considered an industry or maybe a feeding frenzy. Thesenior is desperately hopeful that his rights will be restored, when the matter is heard again and again, before the court. The estate is withheld, literally stripping the senior naked, rather than allowing the senior to go forward in his/her life to enjoy the fruits of his/her lifelong labours. Who pays? The senior/ dependant adult pays. In surrogate court matters, the court orders that all lawyers, physicians and the court get paid by the senior’s estate. His hard earned money pays for his keep, for court applications and for all the ongoing assessments which may each cost in the area of $5,000. His carefully earned money pays for the lawyer who is retained to deny him his rights.

Often these dependent adult matters may continue on for years, until the estate is exhausted. We are aware of one such estate matter which has been before the Edmonton Surrogate Court since 1996, which will be heard again this week. Finally, all this is not known to the trusting seniors. How could they know? Most would never believe it until it affects them. Then they are helpless to do anything about it.

Legislators:

The proposed legislation has forgotten that the actual ownership of the wealth of a “dependent senior” actually belongs to the senior That the first priority should be for the well being of the senior himself or herself as the case may be.

We urge you to allow your conscience to guide you, to strongly direct the legislative specialists to go back to the drawing board in order to craft compassionate, equitable legislation. Legislation, that safeguards the well being, the human rights and charter rights of Alberta’s senior citizens.

Press Conference

Monday, November 17, 2008 11:00 AM
Old Timers Cabin
9430 Scona Road, Edmonton, AB

Draconian legislation infringing on privacy rights and the right to safety and security of person.
The facts relating to this legislation will be fully discussed at the Press Conference by Mr. Allan Garber of Parlee McLaws LLP.

Letter

Hand Delivered

December 8, 2008

The Honourable Ms. Alison Redford, QC
Minister of Justice and Attorney General

The Honourable Mr. Ron Liepert,
Minister of Health & Wellness

The Honourable Ms. Mary Anne Jablonski,
Minister of Seniors and Community Support Services

CAPACITY ASSESSMENT TRANSCRIPTION

We are calling on our Government to legislate that all capacity assessments be recorded and transcribed. The proposed legislation should require that, a Certified Realtime Reporter must be present, to transcribe each and every assessment.

When completed, the Reporter should make the certified transcription directly available to the assessed senior, without delay. It is no longer acceptable, that seniors are being stripped of all rights in an unmonitored, secret process.

We further submit, that the trite, meaningless, commonly used phrase, “poor insight and judgment” should no longer be recognized, as a stated reason for incapacity.

We must safeguard senior Alberta citizens from further predation.

Thank you.

We shall be awaiting a response and be grateful to be in receipt of your response by the 20th of December, 2008.

Elder Advocates Of Alberta Society

Responses

Schedule Form I – Assessing Competency

We are calling for a Public Inquiry in regard to the way people, primarily seniors, are being assessed for competency.

We are challenging a severely flawed process that has existed for over 50 yrs.

A physician, has a powerful quasi-judicial position in society by virtue of the reliance on his assessments by the judicial system, in that his assessment can lead to the detaining of lawful citizens behind locked doors and removal of property and human rights.

The current standards required for a physician in the performance of his assessment are not well defined. We believe that if the judiciary is to rely on a physician’s assessment, specific standards and criteria must be developed for the exercise and documentation of a physician’s assessment. These should include cross examination of the physician & documentation/affidavit testimony which outlines the process which was followed as well as practical avenues for appeal and review of that assessment.

THE JUDICIARY, WITH FULL KNOWLEDGE, ARE RELYING ON AN OPINION THAT IS NOT WELL SUPPORTED. Seniors are being abused through the process that declares them incompetent to look after their finances and personal decisions.

We are calling for:

• hearings across the province of persons who have been victimized by a process that has no safe, measurable guidelines to ensure a fair, ethical assessment. Hearings to include those Alberta citizens who are detained behind locked doors who wish to be heard. The public needs to understand the magnitude of this issue.
• establish legislated criteria & standards to govern the assessment protocol, that recognizes constitutional rights and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms
• establish practical avenues of accessible, appeal protocol
• establish penalties for those who are in breach of legislation.
• a definitive time line in regard to these undertakings

Letter

HAND DELIVERED

April 16, 2010

Honourable Ms. M. Jablonski, Minister of Seniors
and Community Supports

Mr. Robert Bhatia BA, Deputy Minister, Seniors
and Community Supports

Dear Ms. Jablonskio, Mr. Bhatia:
Reference – Adult Guardianship and Trusteeship Act

The Adult Guardianship and Trusteeship Act is unjust legislation that disregards citizenship rights and violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

1. Who are the legislative specialists responsible for drafting the legislation?
2. Who initiated and directed the process?
3. Who established the criteria for this legislation?

It is clear that it was not the elected MLA’s. Those whom we met with did not even have name recognition of the Act.

As citizens of this province, we believe this information should be readily available to all.

We would be grateful to be in receipt of such information by the 3rd of May, 2010. Thank you.

Yours truly,

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

cc.
Dr. Kevin Taft, MLA

Response

The Honourable Iris Evans, Minister of Health and Wellness
Room # 107, Alberta Legislature Building,
Edmonton, Alberta.

Dear Ms. Minister:

It is a well established principle of common law that health care providers owe a duty of care to provide a reasonable level of safety to their clients It has become public knowledge that owners, administrators and professionals in continuing care facilities fail to exercise their duty of care.

Alberta facilities are licensed and in large part paid for by Albertan’s tax dollars, therefore it becomes incumbent upon government to assume the duty of care. Government can readily monitor facilities by means of video cameras in every resident’s room. This process is already in place in some child care centers. After all, very elderly, dependant persons are much like frail children.

We urge you to monitor all elder care facilities with cameras and demand ethical care and safety from those who have been entrusted the care of vulnerable Albertans.

Government must be able to assure the safety and protection of all its’ citizens.

This law has been expressed in
Stewart v. Extendicare Ltd.
1986 4 WWR 559
(1986) 38 CCLT67
(1986) 48 Sask R 86
Sask QB. Malone, J.

Thank you. We would be most grateful to be in receipt of a response concerning this long standing and urgent matter by September 10, 2006.

Elder Advocates Of Alberta

CC:

The Honourable Mr.Ron Stevens,Minister of Justice and Attorney General
The Honourable Ms.Yvonne Fritz, Minister of Seniors and Community Support Services
Dr. Kevin Taft, MLA, Leader of the Official Opposition.
Mr.Brian Mason BA, MLA

Response

Click to Enlarge Pages

The Honourable Mr. Gene Zwozdesky
Minister of Community Development
Alberta Legislature Building
Edmonton AB T5K 2B6

Dear Mr. Minister:

Further to our correspondence of January 2, 2001 concerning this matter, our meeting of October 30, 2003, and further correspondence of November 12, 2003. We again appeal to you to include the noted amendments to the said legislation.

Re: Section 1, the following should be added and state by definition the following:

Abuse defined as:
Subsection i. an act of physical mistreatment or injury which harms or threatens a person through action or inaction by another individual. Excessive or inappropriate use of physical or chemical restraints

Subsection ii. violation of personal rights – including but not limited to any deprivation of a person’s right to choose, to privacy, to make decisions. Lack of freedom to keep personal items around the room, the absence of a lockable drawer or closet (if requested) to keep personal items.

- psychosocial intimidation – instilling the fear or denial of care/ and or abandonment, or of violence, a spontaneous or systemic effort to intimidate or dehumanize thus diminishing the vulnerable person’s sense of dignity and self worth.
a. denying persons in care access to visitors such as family members, friends or advocates

b. failure to maintain a written Protocol concerning any imposed restriction of visitors by the institution. If anyone/ institution/guardian restricts visitation, a Report outlining reasons should be prepared and sent to a government agency with copy to restricted visitor/s.

C. failure to provide social and emotional support, necessary to maintain reasonable mental health.

Subsection iii.
-Excessive or inappropriate use of chemicals (medications), use of chemicals as a restraint.

Subsection v.
-Failure to use the monies and assets of the person in care, by the guardian or trustee, in order to ameliorate their needs and for their welfare, care and comfort.

- failure to maintain a comfort fund for the person in care at their care facility.

theft -
a. act of stealing, unlawful taking of the belongings of the person who is in care.

b.. failure to maintain an appropriate Protocol for addressing the matter of “missing” items such as clothing, money or personal items.

“neglect” -
- a pattern of conduct resulting in deprivation of care necessary to maintain minimum physical and mental health such as:
- failure to provide or facilitate adequate nursing care, nursing assistance and or physic-therapy resulting in weight loss, deadly bedsores, over medication, positional deformities and other neglect.

- failure to provide an appropriate physical environment that fosters positive mental and physical health.

Subsection (c) “client” – page 2
means a vulnerable adult who has some functional, mental or physical inability to care for himself / herself therefore requiring services by an agency.

Under Section 1 (b)
We recommend that the Act must include as possible abuser, the guardian, the trustee, family members or anyone who interacts with or has a duty of care to the vulnerable person who is in care.

We recommend that the Act must be crafted in order to provide protection to all vulnerable Albertans who are in care, inclusive of persons living in privately owned facilities.

We recommend that all received complaints be recorded, whether verbal, written or faxed – verbal complaints be recorded, similar to a 911 call.

(Presently, a complainant must repeat their complaint three times. First to the person who attends the abuse line, then again to a person who reviews the complaint and then to the investigator. This is extremely distressing in a situation where the complainant is already distressed by the abuse and must repeat and repeat).

We recommend stronger wording as follows, in place of Section 4, subsections (1), (2) & (3) concerning protection of the complainant. Complainants have been and continue to be harassed, intimidated, staff have lost their jobs and on occasion been sued for thousands of dollars or have incurred costs.

(a). A person participating in good faith in the making of a report pursuant to this Act or testifying as to alleged patient abuse or neglect in a judicial proceeding shall in so doing be immune from any liability, civil or criminal, arising out of such reporting or testifying under any law of this province or its political subdivisions. No action for defamation may be founded on a communication that consists of or pertains to a complaint, notification or disclosure regarding the neglect or abuse of a vulnerable person

(b) If the complainant is an employee of a facility within the Province of Alberta which gives care and services to vulnerable persons, it shall be an unfair practice under this act to dismiss the said employee for such activity. Nor shall they be subjected to suspension, transfer, altered assignment, demotion, reduction in pay or benefits or work privileges, negative work performance evaluation, denial or withholding of benefits or services, or any other detrimental action because of the report.

(c) Conduct conforming with the reporting requirements of this Act shall not be deemed a violation of the signing of a “confidential oath” which may be a requirement for employment in facilities which give care to vulnerable persons.

(d) Complainants who are persons in care, shall not be subject to alteration, interruption or discontinuance of services to which they are normally entitled, because of a report of abuse or neglect.

(e) Complainants are entitled to the right to privacy from interaction with or interference from the alleged abuser.

Re: Section 6(1), We recommend that complaints should be investigated within a defined time limit, depending on the nature of the complaint) rather than, “as soon as possible”. The Complainant shall be promptly informed of the investigating Bureau’s proposed course of action. The investigator shall prepare a report of the investigation within 10 days of receipt of the complaint and every 10 days thereafter until the investigation is complete.

We recommend that the investigative Bureau when receiving a report of an incident of a person in care who has deceased or who has had physical injury or injuries inflicted other than by natural means, or who has suffered severe neglect, shall be immediately directed to a specially trained unit within a law enforcement agency for investigation and immediate appropriate action which may be needed to stop the continuation of the abuse.

We recommend that not only must the abuser be held accountable and disciplined for his/her actions, but the care facility and its officers must be held accountable for the care performance within the facility. Therefore every care facility licensee, or any partner, officer, director, owner of 5% or more of the assets of the care facility, administrator or managing employee, should be held accountable and penalized for both intentional and reckless behavior committed by service provider personnel within its premises.

We recommend that Section 7 of the Act be rewritten to reflect the following: The investigating bureau must be able to investigate at any hour and demand immediate access to all financial and medical records. Failure to grant access to a facility or the withholding of documents should be deemed an offense. Hourly penalties shall be imposed for denial of access or the withholding of documents.
Presently, the investigator is unable to access medical or financial records, without permission, which results in anecdotic, hearsay reporting.

Some persons in care do not have a guardian nor are they able to give permission to access documents. Furthermore, in our experience, Application to the Court for entry to a care facility or access to documents as recommended by the Act, does not necessarily guarantee production of records.

We recommend that Section 7, subsection (5) be deleted.

We recommend that the Act must state proposed penalties such as fines, suspensions of licenses, jail terms.

We recommend annual, published reports, listing all abusing licensees by name and address, indicating -

(1) the number of offences and the nature of each charge issued to each licensee during the previous twelve month period and the status of any action taken pursuant to each violation, including penalties assessed, and

(2) the number of actions, nature, status and action taken with respect to each uncorrected violation for which there is an outstanding charge.

(3). the report shall be available to the public.

(4) the names of duly authorized officers, employees or agents of the Bureau shall also be deemed public.

Presently, investigations are carried out by “contract” persons, many have no health care background. Because the investigator is on contract, he is not a government employee and therefore cannot be held to accountability or even held accountable by the Office of the Ombudsman. Thus any decision or lack of decision on their part cannot be investigated or appealed.

We recommend that the Act be renamed VULNERABLE PERSONS PROTECTION ACT because of the present proliferation of private foster care homes for the frail elderly and vulnerable persons. These homes do not necessarily require a license and therefore extremely vulnerable persons are unprotected.

The Quarterly Report of the Protection For Persons in Care Act, April 1/00 to June 30/00, articulates an interpretation concerning the matter of intent, which we find unacceptable .

We continue to recommend that the Act be totally enforceable.

We continue to recommend a policy of ZERO TOLERANCE regarding elder abuse.

We continue to recommend an Alberta wide Registry which lists abusers. We would like to see this Registry become a Canada wide Registry.

We are persons who work at a grassroots level and understand the need for strong, protective legislation. We ask that we will be consulted when changes are being initiated. If this legislation has been made in good faith, then the legislation will be amended to make it effective and enforceable in order to protect the vulnerable citizens of our province.

Elder Advocates of Alberta

The Honourable Mr. Ron Stevens, QC
Minister of Justice and Attorney General

The Honourable Mr. Greg Melchin,
Minister Seniors and Community Support Services

Dear Sirs:

Personal Directives Act, Powers of Attorney Act

We ask that your government legislate that all enacted Personal Directives and Powers of Attorney be registered with the provincial government.

The present legislation allows estate theft with impunity. We perceive this to be a most serious and even pressing matter. Monies/estates have been stolen by those who were placed in a position of trust by this legislation. Presently, this is a hidden crime.

We must safeguard vulnerable Alberta citizens from predation.

Thank you. We shall be awaiting your reply and be grateful to be in receipt of such reply by the 20th of February, 2008.

Elder Advocates Of Alberta Society

cc:

Honourable Marjory LeBreton, P.C. Leader of the Government in the Senate,
Senate of Canada, Ottawa
Office of the Public Guardian, Alberta
Office of the Public Trustee, Alberta

Response

Click to Enlarge Pages