The move to mandate court adjudicated nursing home cases is nothing more than a bunch of lawyers trying to make a living off of the nursing homes they prey upon. Make no mistake, this is not about "fairness", it's about greedy lawyers. I have personally seen lawyers file totally unfounded cases in an attempt to force an excellent nursing home to "settle". Moreover, it all comes at the expense of the taxpayers because the vast majority of nursing homes are funded by the state and federal government. Arbitration (usually by a panel of three persons) is fair and far less expensive than a jury trial. So, I encourage everyone to look behind the motives of the Plaintiff's bar when they seek to have a trial instead of arbitration. By the way, I would be in favor of the losing party paying the winning party their legal fees. As it presently stands, a Plaintiff can sue anyone and if they lose, so what? That is what is really wrong with our legal system. Try that concept on for "fairness".

RW's comments seem to be coming from the Nursing Home Corporate side of this issue.

Well cared for patients do not seek litigation or arbitration. Using mandatory arbitration as an escape measure to avoid the court system is the shield used by careless corporations.

No one should be forced to give up their 7th Amendment rights, and certainly not the ill and elderly! I am not an attorney. I am a 65 year-old woman with great fear of someday having to endure mistreatment in a nursing home.

Comments like RW's are coming straight out of the national association of nursing homes corporate offices. I never wish anyone bad luck, but RW deserves to learn for himself the truth about the harm these clauses cause. They allow nursing homes to abuse the elderly with impunity. They violate the Constitution and citizens rights. People like RW need to experience for themselves the injustice of these arbitration clauses. Their tune would change immediately.

For what it's worth. I am both an attorney (for 30 years, a former nursing home Administrator and member of the American Arbitration Association.
Therefore, I think I speak with some authority on this issue.

L Etherson would have us believe she has no connection to the legal profession and no personal experience with nursing homes. I don't know many 65 year old (men or women) who have not had legal training, but can tell you the meaning of the 7th Amendment.

I can also tell you from personal experience that lawyers go on TV soliciting cases while they fly around in their personal jet all at the expense of a health care system that desperately needs funding for patient care. Liability insurance premiums can cost one million dollars or more per year. These funds are being diverted from patient care to line the pockets of the members of the Plaintiff bar. Make no mistake, there are lawyers (but not all)who will file a frivolous suit knowing it will have a $50,000 settlement value, just to avoid the cost of litigation. It's a fact.

RW -- I know thousands of people all over this nation who can talk intelligently about our 7th amendment rights, none of whom have any legal training. Guess how they learned how valuable those rights are? They are VICTIMS of predispute binding mandatory arbitration clauses that are found in nearly every contract anyone signs today. I am also aware of highly qualified arbitrators who ruled the wrong way -- against business -- who have testified before Congress that they never got another arbitration assignment. I don't know how you can look yourself in the mirror and continue to do this kind of work.

Arbitration is an atrocity. It is a privatization of the justice system. One more right we the people no longer have.
Part of Testimoney to congressional hearing....
Jordan Fogal told her moving story of being denied access to the courts when her home accrued up to $150,000 worth of repairs. After four years of anguish in two rounds of arbitration, the arbitrator ruled that the builder had committed fraud and awarded Jordan $26,000. However; the arbitration procedure alone cost her $30,000. For too long, corporations have hidden behind arbitration agreements to evade responsibility for negligent actions and abusive practices.

The Arbitration Fairness Act of 2007 will ensure that Americans’ seventh amendment rights to a trial by jury are no longer curtailed. As Jordan Fogal poignantly concluded, “If arbitration is so wonderful…then why is it mandatory?”

Not surprised that RW hasn't responded. He can't rebut posts by victims of arbitration who know the truth about the danger of these clauses for ordinary citizens.

I have no problem with the 1st or 7th Amendment. The problem I have is with attorneys who have alimony, child support or college tuition payments due who choose to file a frivolous suit in hopes of settlement. Loser pays the winning party's fees and expenses, that is "fair" (or an offer of judgment?). People who agree up front (contractually) to arbitration and then lose somehow choose to believe they were cheated or would have prevailed if they could have had a better theatrical/circus type lawyer who could blow smoke to the jury. Each of you know what I mean. It makes me ashamed to be a member of such a disingenuous profession. There is little honor left. It's all about winning at whatever cost. Bury the damaging evidence, let me tell you what to say during your deposition, withhold that report, that never happened etc. etc. --- Please