I'll be waiting to see the 500 lb fatso vulture:
The "snappy dress shirt" came from the donation bin but it looks like he wants to make it a "friend" gave it to him.
View attachment 3149150
View attachment 3149147
'He with the snappy dress shirt'
Snappy dress shirt? Even for lucas thats mental. Is he truly that fucked in the head and used to walking around in ninja turtles shirts and batman pjs without showering for weeks that a cheap walmart tier shirt is 'snappy dressing' to him? ffs when they made harry and lloyd stupid enough to show up to a fancy dinner party wearing costume party tier blue and orange tuxedos in dumb and dumber they weren't being half as dense as lucas is here
VoidFace said:
Something quick to annoy Lucas.
At this rate its like he's trying to cosplay an insane, hobo, morbidly obese jackie gleason
One of these days zoomer bae! you're going to the moon! *throws glass at wall*
Da Dude123 said:
Twist ending: he means two at a time
Club Sandwich said:
in CA long term care facilities and nursing homes are two different facilities
Lucas isn't in california so there isn't a point in getting into that. But regardless, as the saying goes there is more than one way to skin a cat. Have a lawyer dig deep enough you'll always be able to get them on something
don't have liability for at-will residents who intentionally undermine their own care, or at-will non-compliant residents
They have liability for every resident who lives at their facility. Thats nonsense. Those places get sued all the time for negligence. It is literally their job and the explicit purpose of such institutions to prevent a resident from harming themselves, especially when it comes to doing anything to undermine their care. Why do you think people live in nursing homes in the first place, because they are at the point they require supervision, support and someone else to ensure they do whats necessary to stay alive. I'll say it again - a condition of being in such a place is compliance and removal from the facility for non compliance. These kinds of places cannot function if people are allowed to undermine care. The entire idea of being able to do that is at best extremely ethically dubious
Club Sandwich said:
but an ICF is under zero obligation to police their residents when they are not in custody, or they are not actually on the care facility premises.
There is plenty they are required to do when someone has been off premises. For example, ensuring a resident has not been eating or taking anything that may interact with a medication and lead to harm for administering anything, ensuring they aren't on anything that could lead to incidents and things of that nature. Whether mallon does anything it is supposed to is another matter
Club Sandwich said:
i'm not aware of any CMS or FNHG regulation (or 1987 NHRA clause) that agrees with your statement that Mallon is violating local, state, or federal law regarding Lucas' food intake or his probable diabetes diagnosis. "duty of care" is a theory of common law, not a hard law outside of fiduciary requirements like an officer toward their coporation or something. "reasonable care" is the actual standard that is applied in court - providing sanitary facilities in good condition suitable for the care of residents with supervision for the purpose of day to day living with medical needs is the typical description. negligence because Mallon is "allowing" Lucas to eat himself into a grave is not outside of reasonable care if Mallon provides suitable food at their dining facility, the facility is in reasonable condition
They're being negligent. He has documented medical problems that require certain medications, restrictions and diet changes. They know that, they know not following those requirements will do him harm, they continue to provide food they know full well will do him harm. Thats negligence and is not following the assigned diabetic diet. If it were that easy to get out of they wouldn't bother having those kinds of requirements in the first place and none would ever be adhered to. That isn't even getting into the obesity side of things. If they knowingly enable him to eat himself to death they're responsible for what happens. They couldn't get away with doing that to a dog, a family member or anybody else. People have been prosecuted for it many times. Hell parents have been prosecuted for enabling their kids eat themselves to death
Club Sandwich said:
unless Mallon has a court order to monitor and keep custody of Lucas for the purpose of medical treatment, they have no obligation to restrict his ability to spend his personal needs allowance however Lucas sees fit
Nobody is saying they do. They do however have the responsibility to restrict what they themselves feed him if he is on a medically assigned diet and not to be an active party in enabling him eating himself to a coronary. Its a fundamental point to being in such a place
Club Sandwich said:
what regulation or law(s), specifically are you referring to that requires Mallon to somehow prevent Lucas from eating DoorDash food or getting seconds?
Those are two separate things. As far as doordash goes if they want him to stop him from getting deliveries thats as easy as telling him he's not permitted to bring them into the building. Its private property and a nursing home, they have every right to tell somebody what they can bring into the building (and do for plenty of things you can be sure, like known allergens and things that cause irritating scents). Hell the only reason i'm allowed to bring a cell phone into mine is because theres a contractual obligation with my employer, as being able to be updated, contact supervisors, etc... and sign in for shifts requires a phone. Even regular staff aren't allowed to have one on them. Something to do with some previous questionable incident a few years back I think. That isn't to say he couldn't get it delivered somewhere else though. That said if he is on a special diet they're supposed to be taking into account what, if anything he eats when he leaves so they can make adjustments to fit with the diet, just like they're supposed to do the same in terms of alcohol, drugs, or medications and any foods that might interfere with medications, so medication can be administered properly without any surprises. If they don't and something happens and a resident OD's cause they took some extra opiates that their buddy outside hooked them up with and nobody asked about it they're in deep shit as they failed to do their job properly. But thats getting off on a tangent. They have the first, last and only say in who gets fed what by the facility itself. They have to adhere to those approved menus and special diets, thats why they exist and why they are mandated by law in the first place. If they don't and let somebody eat themselves into harming themselves its negligence, not to mention a blatantly obvious foreseeable incident the families lawyer would point out when they kept stuffing somebody full of food the institutions records said they weren't supposed to be eating that amount of in the first place
WhiskerBiscuit said:
It’s like meds or showers: required to support, offer, assist, but cannot force.
Define force. Don't confuse 'i'll force you by court order' with 'this is a requirement you have to agree to in order to live here.' Taking your meds is a condition of remaining a resident at all such places. That does not require a court order. Lucas for example, cannot remain at mallon place if he were to suddenly start refusing his psych medications. That makes him a danger to himself and to others. Even moreso by going cold turkey. By law the safety of the residents and staff come before anything else. At that point he would have to leave, no ifs ands or buts about it. It is unsafe to allow him anywhere near residents at that point and given his size it makes him dangerous to staff as well if they have to intervene in an incident. He goes to a hospital for monitoring and safety reasons, he leaves of his own accord or the staff call the cops and paramedics and he is forcibly removed. They have zero choice in the matter. If they failed to do so and he pops off at somebody, assaults a staff member or a resident they are entirely liable for any injury that results. To say nothing of the shitshow any injured staff member could cause, civilly, criminally and for OHS violations for creating an unsafe working environment. Thats why residents choices boil down to 'take your meds or find someplace else to live. As far as denying food goes, they again have a set approved diet in place. They cannot be forced to provide more and explicitly can provide less as a matter of adjusting a meal to take into account what was already eaten that day. They have every right to say 'no' to multiple servings and an obligation to if not doing so puts a resident at risk. You're acting like liability for foreseeable consequences isn't a thing that gets people and companies sued all the time
As for showers, they get forced all the time. If you're talking about somebody acting like lucas and just not showering, residents are never allowed to do that for long. Its basic sanitation and if left too long it'll start becoming an issue for other residents. Both from the smell causing issues and the possibility of said smell leading to confrontations between residents that could end with somebody getting hurt. The moment people start complaining that person will be bathing one way or another. Nor can a resident that shits and pisses themselves refuse to bathe. They'll literally get dragged into the showed and forcibly bathed by several staff members. Thats a health and safety hazard, a disease and infection risk, a potential OHS issue because it creates an unsanitary and unsafe environment (wait until somebody slips on piss cause some idiot didn't get bathed and breaks a hip and you'll see how fast a place like mallon gets sued for it, or better yet, throws shit at one of the staff, gets it in their eyes and causes an infection) and likely would cause more than a few violations if it should be seen during a surprise inspection.
Not that I give a shit what happens to lucas. I don't care if he eats himself into amputations and a coronary, but that doesn't mean that such places are allowed to actively enable it
People are missing a fundamental point in all of this, and that is lucas is a manipulative pos who will do or say whatever he thinks will benefit him. He'll absolutely point to his mental problems and scream he isn't of sound mind and how stuffing him with food when they knew he was diabetic and morbidly obese with all kinds of health problems is abuse as shown by his amputated feet and how they should have known better and ironically would have no issue causing a shitshow for them with the media, which tends to love running stories about abuse in nursing homes and would likely have lawyers calling him to go after them and get a settlement out of it, for the simple fact that the mere appearance of impropriety in a place like that causes them enough problems to make it easy money, and lucas is nothing if not greedy
That said, seeing as we're not at that point yet and what will happen to lucas remains to be seen, there is little point arguing about it until something actually happens. Given his current grumblings about a lack of money and zoomers I wouldn't be surprised if he leaves or deliberately gets himself kicked out sometime during the spring.
The bear that is lucas werner is waking up from his winter hibernation, we could be in for some interesting times before much longer
