| Home Health Agency Liable for Not Doing Background Checks The estate of a 32-year-old man with quadriplegia murdered by his home health aide has settled a lawsuit against the company whose agent assigned the aide. The settlement grew out of a lawsuit charging that the Visiting Nurse Association of Boston (VNA) and its agent, Trusted Health Resources, Inc., had negligently failed to conduct a background check on the aide who had an extensive criminal record. According to the complaint, after the aide assigned to John Ward failed to report to work a few times, Ward requested a replacement. Several weeks later, the aide returned to Ward's home and murdered him and his grandmother. The aide subsequently pleaded guilty to second-degree murder. The aide was hired after completing a job application in which he failed to answer a question asking about prior criminal records. Trusted Health failed to follow up on the question or perform a background check. The suit alleged a simple phone call would have revealed the aide had lied about his qualifications. An expert for the estate testified at trial that criminal background checks have been standard practice since the mid-1980s for companies such as utilities and parcel delivery services that provide in-home services. A more in-depth reference check is required for home health aides than for employees providing other in-home services, the expert told the jury, because the home health care industry services a vulnerable population. The VNA argued that although the aide had a theft record, it was unforeseeable he would commit murder. According to the estate's counsel, however, the VNA's failure to require criminal background checks made it foreseeable that any type of criminal could become a home health aide. "I was able to get even [defendants'] own hiring expert to admit on cross-examination that criminal background checks would have been a good practice," counsel said. The jury's award included punitive damages, and the parties later settled. The estate's counsel hopes the verdict will serve as a warning to employers who serve vulnerable people--such as the sick or elderly, children, and people with disabilities--in their homes that they must make reasonable efforts to adequately screen prospective employees. |
||||