Latest in hospitals' lawsuit against the state of Oregon on civil commitments
The state of Oregon is taking advantage of health systems’ willingness to play a role in the state’s behavioral health system, hospitals said in a response to the state's motion to dismiss a federal lawsuit.
PeaceHealth, which has hospitals and clinics in Lane County, has joined Legacy Health and Providence Health & Services in alleging the Oregon Health Authority has forced acute-care hospitals to provide long-term care for individuals who are civilly committed even though those facilities are not equipped to provide extended treatment.
What’s the hosptials' lawsuit about?
The three health systems filed a civil lawsuit in U.S. District Court in September, arguing the state violated the civil rights of Oregonians with severe mental illness and is taking hospitals' property without just compensation.
PeaceHealth and other acute-care hospitals are designed to treat and stabilize patients in days, the health systems say. But multiple patients are staying for six to nine months, officials with the hospitals said, while they wait to get into the Oregon State Hospital, which has faced capacity issues for years.
The hospital systems argue the state has known about the problem for years but has "done nothing to fix it."
OHA says hospitals don’t want civilly committed patients in their beds
In a motion to dismiss filed in December, the state argues the hospitals have sought and obtained certifications to admit and treat people who are civilly committed but “do not want those patients in their beds.”
The hospitals claim that isn’t true. They’re proud to provide emergency and acute psychiatric care but “have not voluntarily sought to provide long-term care because Health Systems are not, and have never been, equipped to provide long-term care,” attorneys write in a response to the motion for dismissal filed last week.
Instead, they argue, the state has taken advantage and forced civilly committed patients to stay in acute care settings “long after it is appropriate for them to do so.”
Mosman order:Judge denies requests to change order for release of Oregon State Hospital patients
Minimally adequate vs restorative treatment
OHA and the health systems also disagree over the level of care the state is legally required to provide patients.
Hospitals say “restorative treatment” means long-term treatment, which hospitals are not able to provide. In effect, they argue, the state is abandoning civilly committed patients.
But OHA points to case law that guarantees those patients “minimally adequate care and treatment” and says the hospitals don’t allege they’re unable to provide that level of care.
State of Oregon questions hospitals' legal arguments
OHA’s attorneys also argue the health systems don’t have standing to bring the lawsuit or a solid legal argument.
“At most, Plaintiffs allege that their beds are not as good as beds at the Oregon State Hospital or other placements and that they are not compensated enough for treating civilly committed patients,” the introduction to the motion to dismiss reads.
The health systems argue in return that they’ve tried to work with the state for years but been forced to take legal action and now face a motion to dismiss that mischaracterizes their claims and misrepresents state law.
What's next, read court documents
A federal judge has yet to rule on the motion to dismiss. The hospitals have requested the make oral arguments.
There also is a status conference set for April.
Read the state’s motion to dismiss at bit.ly/legacy-allen-motion-dismiss and the health systems’ response at bit.ly/hospital-response-0123.
The original lawsuit is available at bit.ly/hospitals-v-oha.
Contact city government watchdog Megan Banta at mbanta@registerguard.com. Follow her on Twitter @MeganBanta_1.
This article originally appeared on Register-Guard: OHA, hospital systems civil commitments lawsuit continues
