Here are a few other things we do know about Tross and her last 13 months of life:
- Tross, who was blind and had congestive heart failure in her final years, had many friends at Fernald. She was able to speak, and had continued to enjoy going to the campus chapel every Sunday morning. She never went there again after she was transferred to the group home.
- The Department of Mental Retardation was in a major hurry to get Tross out of Fernald. They got the approval to transfer her from her corporate guardian, the Arc of Greater Boston (GBARC), a DMR-funded service provider.
- Linda Curran, Tross's GBARC case manager, had objected to her transfer. GBARC subsequently stripped Curran of her caseload and ultimately replaced her with a new case manager, who went along with the transfer.
- U.S. District Court Judge Joseh Tauro held a day-long hearing on February 26, 2008 on the circumstances surrounding Tross's transfer. Linda Curran testified during that hearing.
- Judge Tauro assigned U.S. Attorney Michael Sullivan to investigate the case. Sullivan never released a report on the matter.
- Secrecy surrounded DMR's and GBARC's handling of Tross's transfer and her care at the Bedford group home. GBARC first told a Fernald League member who tried to visit Tross several times that no visitors would be allowed to see her and later that Tross did not want to see that visitor.
There are a number of questions that remain in this sad case. One is why was the DMR in such a hurry to remove this very elderly woman from her long-time home? As one observer noted: “Fernald is still here. She (Tross) should have been one of the last to go because of her age. If they had left her alone, she might still be alive today.”
Also, why were GBARC and DMR apparently unwilling to allow Tross to see visitors? And what were the conditions under which she lived for the last 13 months of her life?
We may well never know the answers. But we do know that it is Tross's experience that simply adds to the dismay that Fernald families and guardians feel over the Patrick administration's decision to close Fernald. When they see what happened to Tross, how can they trust this administration to do the right thing for them?
Visiting hours for Tross will be on Tuesday, March 24, at the Brasco & Sons Funeral Home at 773 Moody Street in Waltham from 10 a.m. to noon. She will be buried in the Pine Grove Cemetery at 145 Boston Street in Lynn.
…Tross’s death is not just sad, but did not have to happen this way, separated from her friends and the only home she had ever known. If the concept of “Karma” has any meaning at all, then there is surely Karma added to those responsible…and those responsible would serve the Commonwealth better by taking an honest look at this whole situation, not a defensive spin.
<
p>For more about Karma: http://www.buddhanet.net/e-lea…
<
p>In my opinion, not only do the choices and acts of an individual lead to “Karma” – they create the character and life path of that individual.
<
p>Similarly, there is collective Karma – what a society is becoming. What Dave has posted here says sad, and very concerning things about the Karma of certain inviduals, our state government, and all of us.
<
p>If this vulnerable individual was treated so cavalierly, what protects you?
I’m not seeing the link between the transfer and her death.
and it’s not a fallacy, as you seem to imply. People with MR who are deinstitutionalized die at a 72% higher rate than people who either stay in the large facility, or those who live in a community group home. Dr. Straus has had this study peer reviewed and it was published in the AJMR.
<
p>So – here’s the link:
<
p>http://74.125.95.132/search?q=…
<
p>This study has been updated twice since the original was published. The numbers cut across age and gender.
<
p>Although the Fernald families have tried very hard to educate the Governor and his DMR Commissioner of the very real death sentences awaiting their loved ones…and U.S. Attorney Michael Sullivan filed a report in Federal Court, after a year long investigation, which not only supported the claims of the Fernald families, but found an increased risk of abuse and neglect.
<
p>http://74.125.95.132/search?q=…
<
p>Do you really want to continue trying to provide the Governor with cover on this? I’m waiting for Deval MacBeth to start the handwashing…”out, out, damned spot!”
I’m not saying anything one way or another about the Governor’s plans. As I mentioned to the diarist in a comment below I interpreted his message as, “See what happens when you move people out of Fernald – they die!” So my questions are simply along the lines of was her care substandard outside Fernald to the point that the timing of her death would have been radically different had she stayed. I don’t know enough to say the argument is definitely a logical fallacy; I just did not see the connection proven in this case.
“let’s ignore the reams of data on this issue,” and focus on a carefully defined argument (one that can be viewed through a straw) which will allow a complete exoneration of Governor Macbeth.
<
p>Sorry – no. can. do. This is not just a matter of roof, walls, food….this is a matter of moving very fragile people from the only homes many of them have known, away from familiar caregivers and medical personnel into a system where nothing is familiar.
<
p>There was a reason her first corporate guardian said “no” to the move. That’s why GBARC reassigned Anna T to someone else.
<
p>BTW, Chris, the governor and his appointee at the DMR are fully aware of the body count attached to these decisions.
that she was in her 90s, which makes this a little more complex than you suggest.
when you recognize that the DMR officials knew her age, her fragileness, her unwillingness to move, the stats on deinstitutionalization, that her guardian didn’t approve and allowed her case to be transferred to someone else and moved her any way. The fix was in. They didn’t allow her friends and caregivers to visit…so yeah, I’d say it’s not complex at all, isolating an elderly client with MR that way.
<
p>I usually agree with you, CMD. But not this time. The body count that is coming will be an eye-opener for the skeptics.
We have known for years that this place was way too expensive, and the state was moving in a different direction than these big institutional settings.
<
p>Yes, it is a hard choice for people who grew used to it. But there are plenty of people in their 90s who might live longer if the cost of their care were no object. But the cost of care is always an object. Always.
<
p>In any event, I don’t think that it is anywhere as easy as you make it seem to conclude that the death of a 90 year old in fragile health is caused by anything other than being elderly and in fragile health.
but therein lies the rub. Anna T, as a resident of Fernald, is entitled to the “same as or better” level of care for the rest of her life. This is a consent decree thing – a mandate.
<
p>Apart from that, the DMR isolated this this woman away from people who cared for her and love her. Who does that, CMD? People with a clean conscience or what?
<
p>As for the expense – the shills for the vendors have been getting away with inflating the costs for years, aided and abetted by the DMR. No GAAP procedures and disorganization cloud the cost issue, and it still remains to be seen if it’s even true.
Is it necessary to prove that there was a direct link between Anna Tross’s transfer and her death in order to conclude that a great wrong was done to her? She was removed from her home and sent someplace else, against her will and from which she could never return. We’ll probably never know whether or to what extent that removal contributed to her death. But what about the quality of the last year of her life?
I’ll stipulate that moving her was not the wise thing to do, but it sounded to me like you were suggesting the transfer caused her death.
In the field of law, an event may or may not be the legally sufficient “proximate cause” of another event. Given that Dave was not allowed, nor were other direct care providers, to visit Anna for 13 months, and has not been provided her meedical and care records post-Fernald, even an attorney skilled in social worker malpractice and medical malpractice could not answer your question from a legal perspective.
<
p>Hypothetical follows:
<
p>
End hypothetical.
<
p>Christopher, does that make this situation more clear, or easier to access emotionally?
<
p>Whether or not medical or legal causation is ever established as to the relationship between moving Anna Trossel – a real, live breathing human being [once upon a time] and her date of death on 3/21/09 – the facts as stated were that none of those who knew her were allowed to visit. That she thrived in placement A, and died in placement B.
<
p>A friend of mine, a native french speaker, uses a proverb that she translates for me as “The smell of fish gone bad.”
<
p>To me, the facts as available so far have that rotten fish smell.
A year ago January,there was a lot of talk about a resident that was going to moved out of Fernald against her will. She let it be know to all around her that she did not want to leave. It was the talk on grounds that this poor 91 year old woman was being made to move. I heard that she would cry and say she didn’t want to move. I decided to go and visit her and see for my self what was going on. I met the sweetest little lady. I had a conversation with her for about ten minutes. I asked her several times if she wanted to move to the very nice house in Bedford…every answer was no.
I heard for myself …she did not want to move! Didn’t matter to some people what she wanted …she was taken away in February on the pretence of a party…never to return to Fernald. Now if that wasn’t bad enough for poor Anna…for the next year she was denied any visits from her Fernald friends…The final insult to Anna came today even after her death…no Fernald friends are able to visit her in her final resting place. Her funeral services are private! This is one sad farwell to a woman that many of us became to know by her story alone. She has been and will stil be miss by many of the caring people left at Fernald.
I was so sad to hear of the passing of Anna T. It took me all day to think about it and post a comment.
<
p>The “secrecy” surrounding Anna’s life in the community home scares me. I see the state, piece by piece, dismantling the comprehensive treatment system that took decades to build. My greatest fear it that it will gradually slip back to the way it was 35+ years ago. When the mentally retarded were so isolated and completely segregated and no one really knew of the deplorable conditions that existed. I know that I can walk into Fernald anytime of the day or night and visit anyone. There is no better way to assess the quality of care than that.
<
p>We will never know how Anna’s last days were. We do know that she was happy at Fernald and I agree with the previous comment that given her age and medical conditions she should have been one of the last people to leave Fernald. It doesn’t require a lot of intelligence to figure out that moving this 91 year old women against her will was to say the least dangerous to her well being. It must be that you can only come to that logical conclusion if you care about a person’s well-being. That is obviously not the case here.
<
p>If nothing else, I hope that publicity about the uncaring and inhumane treatement of Anna will open some people eyes to what is really going on here and force a re-examination of the states position. At least then her death would have some purpose.
<
p>
One of the many frustrating things about this case is that it has generated so little concern outside of the Fernald families and guardians.
<
p>The mainstream media, which was interested in Anna Tross’s situation when it first came up in February 2008, dropped the issue completely. Not one newspaper ever did a follow-up story after that first month.
<
p>U.S. Attorney Michael Sullivan appeared to be concerned–at first. Judge Tauro asked him to investigate the circumstances surrounding Anna Tross’s transfer. But Sullivan has never released a report, and it’s unclear whether his office ever did investigate this.
<
p>At this point, the only avenue left to possibly shed light on this case is the Legislature. The Children, Families, and Persons with Disabilities Committee could hold a hearing on the matter, as could the House or Senate Post Audit Committees. They could seek testimony from DMR, GBARC, and others involved. Maybe they could get some answers. I would urge people to call the Children and Families Committee at 617-722-2011 (House) and 722-1291 (Senate), and the House Post Audit Committee (722-2575) and Senate Post Audit Committee (722-1551), and ask them about the possibility of holding a joint hearing on this case.
<
p>The Legislature seems to be abdicating its responsibility to oversee the executve branch in its treatment of persons with mental retardation in the Commonwealth.
I agree Dave…but I don’t see it happening which is unfortunate. The state of the State shows all too well the legislature is ineffective. They are probably trying to figure out how they are going to keep their phony bologna jobs considering how angry taxpayers are. I don’t think they are going to stick their necks out at this point in time for a 90+ year old disabled women who the administration clearly considers a “throw away” person. Shame on them–thats their job!
<
p>DMR was well aware of Anna’s medical situation and totally disregarded it. I’m sure the trauma and stress of the move didn’t help her heart condition and loss of contact with her life long friends certainly didn’t help her spirits. SOMEONE should be held accountable for this stupid move but they won’t. They will go merrily on their way and continue to put our family members in jeopardy to achieve the Governors mandate. The way I see it, the only reason the higher up in DMR HAVE a job is because of the disabled. What is their job…the best care for these people or meeting the arbitrary mandate of a bureaucrat. Does anyone in the administration have the moral courage to stand up for what is right? I think we all know the answer to these questions and this case proves it.
<
p>
but it probably ruined the remainder of her life.
<
p>
<
p>it more than likely contributed greatly to it.
It is pretty well known that when treating someone for an illness it’s important to treat the “whole” person, not just the physiological aspect, but also the emotional aspect.
Watching my grandmother be pushed from her home into a senior housing complex was difficult, even at age 12. She was very upset, cried for a long time. She did adjust though finally. I don’t think it is fair to move people against their will, unless it is medically necessary.
What happened to your grandmother was tragic…and sad, and nobody, especially a 12-year-old kid, should have to go through the pain of watching one’s relative(s) go through something like that.
<
p>This:
<
p>
.
<
p>and this:
<
p>
<
p>are things that I totally agree with.