[The Brazil Times nameplate] Fair ~ 86°F  
High: 86°F ~ Low: 67°F
Wednesday, July 27, 2016

Motion to dismiss filed in lawsuit

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

Edna Chadwell
A local resident who has been involved in a three-year lawsuit has reason to celebrate.

In 2008, Clay County resident Edna Chadwell, along with seven others, filed suit against the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration (FSSA).

The suit targeted the FSSA's Aged and Disabled Waiver Program.

The program permits Medicaid recipients who "otherwise required institutionalization for their conditions -- whether that be in a nursing home, a hospital or another facility -- to receive services in their homes or a community-based setting," according to American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana Attorney Gavin Rose, who represents the eight.

In March 2010, Clay County Superior Court Judge J. Blaine Akers ruled that caps on services through the program were "permanently enjoined."

Following the court ruling, the state filed an appeal to the ruling, which was then scheduled to go to the Indiana Court of Appeals.

However, Rose recently informed The Brazil Times the state filed a "Voluntary Motion to Dismiss."

"(It's) a motion with the Court of Appeals asking that the appeal be dismissed," Rose told The Brazil Times. "Note that this does not result in the actual dismissal of the appeal unless and until the Court of Appeals grants the motion."

Rose added, however, that he expects the motion to be granted.

"There is virtually no doubt that this will happen," he said, "although it may take a couple of weeks before it does."

Chadwell said she is "very pleased" with the direction of the case.

"I'm hoping that it will help not only myself, but other people in the future when other people are fighting for their care," Chadwell said. "That is the reason that I started (the lawsuit)."

According to Rose, the waiver program had to be renewed by the FSSA every five years and the renewal then goes through an approval process by the United States Department of Health and Human Services.

However, when the renewal process came up in 2008, the FSSA included a limitation on the number of "attendant care" hours that enrollees may receive.

Rose told The Times he is pleased with the direction this suit has taken.

"I am personally thrilled that the state has decided not to continue its appeal," he said. "And I think it likely that at least a portion of the state's decision had to do with their assessment that they were unlikely to prevail on appeal.

"In addition to their pleasure (and relief) at this outcome, I think many of the plaintiffs are happy to put the case behind them at long last."

Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please Login or Create an account first, and then you will be able to flag a comment as objectionable. Please also note that those who post comments on thebraziltimes.com may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.

Bottom-line, if you want the premium 24 hour in-home care, then you should pay for it - either with insurance you bought or with your own savings. If you want tax-payers to pay for your care then don't whine when the premium care is NOT given to you, but satisfactory care in a group setting IS being offered to you. It's an extention of great courtousy that our society will pay for your medical care at all - and now you turn around and complain that the five years of premium might be removed and celebrate that the State has given-up its appeal of this rule? I'm sorry you need the care and I'm sure that you wish that you didn't, but this just exemplifies what is wrong in our "me" society.

-- Posted by brazilian on Tue, Apr 12, 2011, at 11:35 PM

brazilian ...... you're a jackass!!!!!!!!!

-- Posted by Meadow31 on Wed, Apr 13, 2011, at 12:19 AM

There is no easy answer for this situation. Everyone needs to be taken care of when they have trouble doing so themselves but the country [ie you and me and everyone else] is having trouble doing so financially.

I encourage all to read Atlas Shrugged, by Ayn Rand. Unless we get more people contributing to tax revenue and social security account, eventually not only our money, but our line of credit with China will run out.

One thing I know for sure is all need to make sure that their long term care policy [if they do have one] is for their entire life time as many that are associated with their employer is only during the years they are working and not for retirement years when they are likely to need it even more.

brazilian comes on strong but I think he speaks out of frustration and not attacking this group of unfortunate people who need help with daily living. Of course we have no idea whether or not these people ever had the resources to even HAVE long term care insurance in the first place due to preexisting condition etc etc. brazilian needs to remember however that our 'me' society is what gives him/her the many individual rights he/she feels are important that others may not think are necessary...like the right to bear arms. Definitely no longer a benefit to our society for Joe the Plumber to care an armor piercing assault rifle, but our 'me' society allows it as it allows a crazy church in Florida to protest GI's funerals and prevents parents of college students access to their grades even though it's mostly the parents who are paying the tuition...To a student it's an important ME. To a gun collector it's an important ME. If we are to move towards a more socialistic system and take choices away from the disabled, ALL those ME things will have to go as well. Be careful what you wish for.

Maybe since we are a Christian society, we might all take turns and sign up to help one of these people personally instead of taking away their choices. Oh yea...we aren't really a Christian society as we legally kill the unborn and those who kill others. We ignore ethics and morality with legal but clearly wrong loopholes in our civil laws. So since we really aren't out to help our neighbor, we have these ME rules in place to protect our rights. flawed? yes but after all we are human. All we can do is hope that they remain in place so that someday our own important MES are still there when we need them the most. I encourage brazilian to volunteer at soup kitchen, CASA, food pantry, schools, CODA,etc etc so he/she is more aware of the great need locally. If each of us can get help one person, the effect will ripple. There is no easy button.

I don't think that brazilian is a jackass, but don't think he thought the whole thing through. There are SO many possibilities as to why these people are in this situation. Cannot lump them into a group that didn't have forethought to prevent it.

Have a good day.

-- Posted by Jenny Moore on Wed, Apr 13, 2011, at 8:11 AM

Brazilian, how many years did these people work, pay taxes, pay into Medicaid, Medicare, etc. And now that they need these benefits they were denied? How will you feel when it comes time for you to retire (if you're not already), need Medicare, Disability, etc, and after working years and paying into that, you're denied? I agree with there being a LOT of people taking advantage of they system, however, there are also those out there that have paid into it for many many years and deserve those benefits they worked so hard for.

-- Posted by asil on Wed, Apr 13, 2011, at 8:58 AM

"The program permits Medicaid recipients who "otherwise required institutionalization for their conditions -- whether that be in a nursing home, a hospital or another facility -- to receive services in their homes or a community-based setting,". Earlier articles indicated she needs 24 hour care. So, we the tax-payers are paying for 2 or more people full-time to care for ONE patient? Since there were seven others, if they also require 24 hour care then on 12 hour shifts 16 nurses would be needed for 8 patients. In a nursing home setting, just two nurses could care for what 10 or 20 people? The point is simply this: if you have the resources to pay for private duty nursing, either through insurance or savings, then good for you. If you are asking for charity to pay for your care then it's a different story. We are a giving nation, and it's wonderful that care is given to those who need it but can't pay for it. I suppose there will be many "jackasses" in the coming months and years who believe that these govermental excesses as has happened with this program have to be trimmed. You see the difficulty in trying to trim such programs. Someone questions the wisdom of the government paying 2 nurses for one patient and that person is a "jackass." No amount of childish name-calling will change the fact that the country's finances can't support it. It's no offense to this particular person, just an economic reality.

-- Posted by brazilian on Wed, Apr 13, 2011, at 9:20 AM

The squeaky wheel gets the grease.

-- Posted by Jolly on Wed, Apr 13, 2011, at 9:25 AM

After reading all of these comments, I felt the need to comment. While I agree that many people are abusing the system, that does not mean that everyone who gets medicaid, or everyone on WELFARE for that matter are LAZY. If you have never walked a mile in the shoes of a person on WELFARE or MEDICAID, then you truly have no clue how it feels to have to rely on WELFARE and MEDICAID. NOT EVERYONE WHO GETS IT IS LAZY.I speak from experience. I was on WELFARE and MEDICAID along with my child for a while and before anyone comments, I did work, I STILL WORK, I put myself through school, and am now off WELFARE and MEDICAID,but had I NOT had the courage to ask for that help, I truly dont know what would have become of myself or my child. I hope that none of you ever get down on your luck, or are faced with divorce, and homelessness one day, because you just never know when you could be on the other side of the fence wondering where your childs next meal is going to come from or how you are going to get their medication.

-- Posted by churchmouse on Thu, Apr 14, 2011, at 12:00 AM

I'm just sick of people who think that all others on welfare are out there for a free ride. Some need it to survive and they are the ones being looked down on. People need to open their eyes and stop being so judgemental. In this economy there's no guarantee anyone is going to have a job in the next year or so, then what happens when they need it too. Stop and think before you open your mouth next time.

-- Posted by Meadow31 on Fri, Apr 15, 2011, at 7:00 PM

Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: