Nursing home contracts under examination

On March 3, the New Hampshire Senate will vote on SB 428, a bill that forbids nursing homes from requiring patients to sign mandatory arbitration agreements.

Mandatory arbitration agreements require that any legal disputes be resolved through private arbitration rather than through a trial.  In addition to excluding a jury, arbitration has fewer legal rules and typically does not allow an appeal.  Arbitration is generally cheaper and faster than court trials.

At the bill hearing February 2, Attorney David Slawsky from Manchester shared a story about a client who attempted to sue the Bedford Hills nursing home but was blocked by an arbitration agreement.  Upon entering the nursing home, the client’s wife was presented with over ninety pages of admission documents.  A document limiting any legal disputes to arbitration was included in that packet.  A judge ruled that the arbitration document was binding because technically the client’s wife could have gone over the documents with a lawyer or refused to sign the arbitration agreement.

Sen. Donna Soucy is sponsoring SB 428 to protect access to New Hampshire courts for nursing home patients and their families.

Bob Dunn, testifying against SB 428 on behalf of the New Hampshire Health Care Association, argued that there is insufficient evidence that these arbitration agreements are a problem for New Hampshire patients.

Dunn pointed out that even in Slawsky’s lone example, the arbitration agreement was technically optional, so SB 428 would have made no difference.

“We are always concerned about the state deciding to regulate in particular areas where it has not been proven to be an issue, and as we all know, that creates unintended consequences down the road,” said Dunn.

The Senate Health and Human Services Committee recommended killing the bill.

Are you concerned about mandatory arbitration agreements in nursing home contracts?  Comment below.