<!– /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:Verdana; panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:536871559 0 0 0 415 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:””; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} a:link, span.MsoHyperlink {color:blue; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:purple; text-decoration:underline; text-underline:single;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} –>

The Wall Street Journal and Medical News Today recently reported on nursing homes evicting residents because they were costly to handle (e.g. dementia) or had demanding families. The dirty trick is to send such patients to a hospital for psychological observation and then refuse to receive them back at the nursing home. Low Medicaid reimbursements seem to be implicated in this scenario. Federal laws that protect vulnerable patients from eviction are easily evaded by innuendo that a frail resident really ought to find another place to live. Consequently, it’s difficult to determine how many patients were evicted and how many were frightened off. This news builds the ever-compelling case for automated telehealth solutions within the elder’s own home. SEE