1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32 | visit at the request of R1’s wife and children. R1 stated that there is a contentious relationship between the wife and the son. R1 further alleged that the wife admitted R1 to the memory care unit in an effort to prevent the son from having access to R1 and for other reasons that R1 did not agree with.
R1 reported that prior to admission, the son communicated with R1 daily; however, since admission, the son had not been able to call or visit. R1 stated that the wife withheld R1’s cellphone, preventing communication. The wife confirmed that R1’s cellphone was not initially provided to R1, which impacted the son’s ability to maintain contact. Although interviews with other residents indicated no general issues with visitation, the wife confirmed during her interview that she requested the facility prohibit visitation between R1 and the son, and that facility staff complied with this request. Based on consistent statements obtained from R1, the RP, and the wife, and interviews by staff, LPA determined that the facility restricted visitation at the request of the wife. Therefore, the allegation that the facility denied visitation to R1 is Substantiated.
Citation issued, appeal rights, exit interview and copy of report provided to Administrator. |