vacationslesno.blogg.se - Dev c 592 free download

Tarwater Developmental Center ("Tarwater"), et al. It is within this broad remedial framework that we analyze whether the injunction was proper. In reauthorizing the Act in 1984, Congress stated its intention that "all developmentally disabled persons who reside in facilities for developmentally disabled persons be eligible for services from the protection and advocacy system." H.Conf.Rep. §(s) 6042(a)(2)(H)), Congress gave substance to its intent to "assure that the most vulnerable individuals who may not be able to contact the P A system will have access to protection and advocacy services." S.Rep. In adopting the provision of the Act mandating P A access to facility residents, 42 U.S.C. 1991) ("The state cannot satisfy the requirements of by establishing a protection and advocacy system which has this authority in theory, but then taking action which prevents the system from exercising that authority."). § 6042(a)(2)(H) and (I) see also Mississippi Protection Advocacy System, Inc.

It is clear that the Act provides express authority for P As to gain broad access to records, facilities, and residents to ensure that the Act's mandates can be effectively pursued.

and M.V.'s records because a complaint had been received and, alternatively, because the phone call established probable cause. We conclude that the district court was correct in finding that the Advocacy Program was entitled to access to G.A. Among the situations in which the Act authorizes a P A to have access to an individual's records are when the incidents are reported to the system or when there is probable cause to believe that neglect or abuse has occurred. An Anonymous Telephone Call Implying that Abuse and/or Neglect May Have Caused Death Both Constitutes a "Complaint" and Establishes "Probable Cause," Either of Which Justifies the P A's Access to the Records of G.A. Moreover, by federal regulation, the Advocacy Program is required to keep all record information, including information about the family, confidential. For example, the Advocacy Program's attempt to obtain the records does not stop the parents from obtaining their children's medical records if they wish, and if they are still entitled to them.

does not weaken the role of the family, nor does it deprive the parents of any rights they may still have after the deaths of their wards. This court recognizes the statute's emphasis on family however, the Advocacy Program's access to the records of G.A. Section(s) 6042 ignores the intent of Congress to enhance the role of the family in providing care to persons with developmental disabilities.

The Defendants urge that this construction of 42 U.S.C.