There are many conversations taking place about recent rulings by the Supreme Court of the United States and how those decisions impact the lives of millions of people. But in a surprising vote not predicted by many legal experts, the nation’s highest court ruled in favor of Medicaid recipients in a case involving Indiana’s own Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County (HHC).
The decision brought a monumental win to vulnerable people throughout the country and solidified the principle that a private right of action is critical for people who rely on safety net programs, including Medicaid.
First, a little background. On November 8, 2022, HHC v. Talevski was heard by the US Supreme Court. A ruling in favor of HHC would have stripped away the legal rights and protections of vulnerable citizens, including those who rely on Medicaid services. HHC operates 78 nursing homes throughout the state of Indiana. They appealed the decision of a lower court regarding the lawsuit brought by the family of a former HHC nursing home resident, Gorgi Talevski.
The stunner was that HHC didn’t just ask the Supreme Court to reconsider whether Talevski’s family can bring a lawsuit, they argued that no one should be able to challenge civil rights violations from providers of safety net programs, period!
This from a public entity, receiving millions in state and federal funds, whose mission is to “promote and protect the health of everyone in the community and provide healthcare to those who are underserved.” This, from an organization that states their values include community, leadership, excellence, accountability and respect. I find this appalling.
Can you imagine service providers not being held accountable for the quality of care they provide in their facilities and people having no retribution when they have been abused, neglected or exploited? The implications of this case would have reached far beyond Talevski’s case and HHC’s nursing homes.
Safety net programs — including Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) — have been a lifeline for millions of people. A negative ruling would have left them without any legal recourse if they faced mistreatment, abuse or have benefits illegally taken away or denied. This happens more often than you think. Accountability is critical.
Private lawsuits filed by recipients of these critical programs have been one of the only ways people can have their right to services enforced. This decision ensures that service providers can be held accountable, which has a direct impact on the quality of services and supports millions rely on.
We need providers, policymakers, and community leaders to embrace this decision and recognize the pivotal role safety net programs play in promoting health equity, community integration, and the well-being of people throughout the country.
I will admit that I have become a realist rather than an optimist. I chalk that up to a lifetime of having high expectations followed by disappointment. I tend to prepare for the worst and create a Plan B and Plan C. I was prepared for the worst in this case and was ready to band together with other advocates to protect the rights of those receiving safety net services.
I am very thankful that the Supreme Court got this decision right. I hope that HHC learned a valuable lesson and decides going forward to not only provide the best of care to those who entrust them with their lives, but also take this time to reflect on their vision and mission. We need providers who seek transparency and accountability, not less oversight. HHC must and should do better.
Kim Dodson is chief executive officer of The Arc of Indiana. This commentary previously appeared at indianacapitalchronicle.com. Send comments to [email protected].
