Elders and dependent adults: abuse or neglect.
If enacted, AB 859 would fundamentally alter how cases of elder abuse and neglect are litigated in California. The new standard would allow claims to be litigated with a lower threshold for evidence, which may facilitate the pursuit of justice for victims of misconduct in care facilities. Additionally, the bill includes provisions that acknowledge circumstances involving spoliation of evidence, thus providing further support for plaintiffs. Importantly, it aims to address the needs of a growing elderly population by streamlining legal recourse against institutions that fail to provide adequate care.
Assembly Bill 859, introduced by Assembly Member Eggman, seeks to amend existing provisions under the Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act. Specifically, it proposes to change the burden of proof in claims brought against residential care facilities for the elderly and skilled nursing facilities. The bill aims to apply a 'preponderance of the evidence' standard for establishing liability in cases of abuse or neglect, diverging from the current 'clear and convincing evidence' requirement. This adjustment would potentially ease the burden on plaintiffs seeking remedies for the mistreatment of vulnerable individuals, thus enhancing protections for elders and dependent adults in California.
The sentiments surrounding AB 859 reflect a positive consensus among advocates for the elderly, who assert that the bill is a necessary step towards better protecting vulnerable populations from abuse. Supporters believe that lowering the evidentiary standard is crucial for empowering victims and their families. Conversely, there are concerns among some stakeholders, particularly from the operators of care facilities, who argue that this change might lead to an influx of frivolous lawsuits, potentially endangering the viability of care services in the state. This tension highlights the ongoing debate over accountability and the welfare of residents in care facilities.
Opposition to AB 859 primarily stems from apprehension regarding the implications of the proposed evidentiary standard for care facilities. Critiques suggest that it may lead to unjust outcomes for healthcare providers who are committed to ethical standards but could become targets for litigation. Facilities fear that reducing the evidentiary threshold may undermine their defense against baseless claims, while proponents of the bill stress that it is essential for safeguarding patient rights. This conflict raises essential questions about the balance between protecting elders and maintaining the integrity of residential care services.