June 2, 2020

June 01, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

May 30, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

HHS Office for Civil Rights Bulletin on Civil Rights Issues During the COVID-19 Crisis

Numerous media reports concern the shortage of medical resources, personal protective equipment, and qualified professionals during the growing COVID-19 medical emergency.  As a result, providers may ultimately have to make choices regarding resource allocation among hospitalized patients suffering from COVID-19.  Disability rights and other advocacy groups have expressed concern about resource allocation from the point of view of how individuals with pre-existing disabilities and other individuals may have been treated in the past by the medical system.  While bioethicists may work to address the ethical issues involved with treating patients under conditions of resource scarcity, providers rightfully may worry about potential legal liability in distributing scarce resources among those in need.  While both the Trump Administration and Congress have acted to allay some of these worries, concerns remain for both individual practitioners and the facilities with which they work.

Enforcement Discretion Will Apply regarding Civil Rights Obligations During COVID-19

The Office for Civil Rights (“OCR”) at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) issued a bulletin on March 28, 2020 to remind entities covered by federal civil rights statutes of their continued obligation to prohibit discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, disability, age, sex, and religion in HHS-funded programs during the COVID-19 pandemic and provide reasonable accommodations to individuals with disabilities.

OCR enforces the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act which prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability in HHS-funded health programs or activities.  Under those protections, OCR states that, regardless of the pandemic, covered entities and healthcare providers should not deny medical care to a person with disabilities based on “stereotypes, assessments of quality of life, or judgments about a person’s relative ‘worth’ based on the presence or absence of disabilities.”  According to OCR, decisions as to whether a patient is a candidate for medical treatment “should be based on an individualized assessment of the patient and the best available objective medical evidence.”  In a footnote, however, OCR notes that, due to the current public health emergency, it is exercising its enforcement discretion with respect to these Civil Rights requirements.  That enforcement discretion, hopefully, should also take account of the fact in the situation of hospitalized patients with COVID-19, all such patients are almost certainly individuals with a disability covered by the ADA.

OCR specifically reminds covered entities, health care providers, and governmental officials, as resources allow, to help ensure all segments of the community are served by:

  • Providing effective communication with individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing, blind and visually impaired through the use of qualified interpreters, picture boards, and other means;

  • Providing meaningful access to programs and information to individuals with limited English proficiency through the use of qualified interpreters and through other means;

  • Making emergency messaging available in plain language and in languages prevalent in the affected area(s) and in multiple formats, such as audio, large print, and captioning, and ensuring that websites providing emergency-related information are accessible;

  • Addressing the needs of individuals with disabilities, including individuals with mobility impairments, individuals who use assistive devices or durable medical equipment, and individuals with immunosuppressed conditions, including HIV/AIDS, in emergency planning;

  • Respecting requests for religious accommodations in treatment and access to clergy or faith practices as practicable.

As circumstances and resources allow, covered entities should also consider:

  • Making use of multiple outlets and resources for messaging to reach individuals with disabilities, individuals with limited English proficiency, and members of diverse faith communities; and

  • Stocking facilities with items that will help people to maintain independence, such as hearing aid batteries, canes, and walkers.

OCR’s notation that the services or accommodations that should be provided “as resources allow” is recognition of the fact that what might be appropriate or required in normal times may not be reasonable or required given limited and strained resources in a pandemic such as COVID-19.

None of the civil rights protections noted in the OCR Bulletin, however, should take precedence over good faith medical determinations, no matter how difficult, as to what is reasonable and appropriate under the particular circumstances and not a fundamental change to the program or activity involved.  As always, caregivers should be encouraged to exercise their best professional judgment under the particular circumstances at the time, and institutions should make available ethical consultations for providers facing such decisions, and the institutions should defend providers’ good faith judgments in such circumstances.

©2020 Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights reserved.

TRENDING LEGAL ANALYSIS


About this Author

Helaine I. Fingold, Epstein Becker Green, Health Care, life sciences
Senior Counsel

HELAINE I. FINGOLD is a Senior Counsel in the Health Care and Life Sciences practice, in the Baltimore office of Epstein Becker Green. She has more than 20 years of broad health law and regulatory experience, including prior government experience in both the legislative and executive branches of the federal government.

Ms. Fingold:

Advises on issues involving the Medicare Program Parts A, B, C, and D, Medicare Innovations, Medicare Dual Eligibles, Medicaid, and Veterans' health care programs

...

443-663-1354
James S. Frank Health Care & Life Sciences Attorney Epstein Becker & Green New York, NY
Member of the Firm

JAMES S. FRANK is a Member of the Firm in the Health Care & Life Sciences, Litigation, and Employment, Labor & Workforce Management practices in the firm's New York office. Mr. Frank is recognized for his knowledge of labor and employment issues affecting the health care industry.

Mr. Frank has served as trial and appellate counsel before state and federal courts, and has appeared before state and federal regulatory agencies, such as the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the New York State Division of Human Rights. He also has represented employers as a chief negotiator in collective bargaining and has defended employers in hundreds of arbitration cases brought by unions.

Mr. Frank:

  • Represents major academic medical centers, community hospitals, nursing homes, home health care agencies and other providers of health care, as well as businesses and corporations in the fashion, manufacturing, retail and banking industries, in both litigation and labor and employment matters
  • Guides employers in representation proceedings before the NLRB
  • Defends employers as lead trial counsel against discrimination claims in federal and state courts
  • Represents management in traditional labor matters, including collective bargaining, arbitrations and strike management, and responses to corporate campaigns
  • Negotiates collective bargaining agreements with unions and represents hospitals in arbitrations
  • Counsels employers on workforce reductions and all facets of their workforce efficiency issues
  • Advises employers in defense of union-initiated "corporate campaigns" and other non-traditional organizing efforts
  • Advises public work contactors regarding compliance with prevailing wage laws, Section 220 of the New York State Labor Law and the Davis Bacon Act
  • Counsels corporate employers regarding successorship liability
212-351-3720
Frank Morris, Health Care Attorney, Epstein Becker Law Firm
Member of the Firm

FRANK C. MORRIS, JR., is a Member of the Firm in the Litigation and Employee Benefits practices, heads the Labor and Employment practice in the Washington, DC, office, and co-chairs the firm's ADA and Public Accommodations Group.

Mr. Morris' experience includes:

  • Advising clients on and litigating employment, labor, disabilities, non-compete, confidentiality, benefits, information access and privacy, wage and hour, and general litigation matters in state and federal courts and administrative agencies...

202-861-1880
Ashley A. Creech Health Care and Life Sciences Attorney Epstein Becker & Green
Associate

Ashley A. Creech is an Associate in the Health Care and Life Sciences practice, in the Washington, DC, office of Epstein Becker Green. She will be focusing her practice on fraud and abuse, value-based payment, transactional, health regulatory due diligence, and compliance matters.

Prior to joining Epstein Becker Green, Ms. Creech served as a Law Clerk at the U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division, where she conducted research on health care mergers and acquisitions, and at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Inspector General, where she analyzed...

202-861-1827
Member of the Firm

TZVIA FEIERTAG is a Member of the Firm in the Employee Benefits & Executive Compensation practice, in the Newark office of Epstein Becker Green. She has worked exclusively in the area of employee benefits for more than 16 years, advising employers of all sizes, including Fortune 500 companies, other public and private companies, and start-ups, on all aspects of ERISA compliance and the day-to-day operation of employee benefit plans.

Specifically, Ms. Feiertag’s experience includes:

  • ...

973-639-8270