Suppose that your kids don’t cooperate. Now on top of that, just suppose the police, the fire department, Amtrac and the grocery stores all decided not to help you to take care of your family. Where would you be? I’ll tell you where you’d be—you would be held responsible anyway.
That’s the way it’s done: The administration would pit the doctors against pharmacists, against nurses, against the MTA’s, and against you. The real culprits are the medical administration, and ultimately the administration of the California Department of Corrections. They want you to fight—with the doctors and with anyone else so that they can hide, as they always do.
You want proof? What has happened since Sillen has taken over? Have things gotten better? No. They are worse. No doctors want to work in the Department when they become aware of what happens to doctors who try to do their job. Doctors are fleeing the department like rats from a sinking ship. Prisoners are dying off right and left, and others were planned for transfer out to other states, in blatant violation of existing rules. Recently, Judge Ohanesian ruled this is illegal. MTA’s were trashed—probably the biggest mistake made to date. The nurses hired in their place won’t put up with the same garbage, and they are more organized than doctors or MTA’s; and the nurses are pushing back.
I cannot tell you the number of times I promised inmates care, and then later had to explain to them that my hands were tied. Sad part of it all is—they understood it all too well.
There is no accountability. The thing that would change this would be to employ a chain of custody. Let me explain to you what this is:
Law enforcement agencies use this procedure to document what they have done, so that if and when charges are brought—either by law enforcement or by defendants—everyone’s responsibility is an open book. Each time someone is responsible for some step in the chain, he or she is required to document that they have completed their part, within the time expected, that they have signed it off to the next person, who now is responsible. .
We all know this. We see this everywhere: When kids receive report cards, they are obligated to bring it to their parents who, in turn, sign it and so show that they are aware. This is in turn returned to the teacher.
Many jobs require that you sign in and sign out. That’s a simple chain, documenting that you were there and can be held accountable for what happened at work.
When a doctor writes an order, it should be clearly defined who is next in line, in the chain of responsibility. The order goes to a Chief Physician. As matters now stand, this person can simply decide he doesn’t agree, and scribble a hasty note and sends it back to the doctor, leaving the doctor stuck with the consequences, which means the patient is stuck.
If an official receives an order, he should be obligated to fulfill it as ordered or to suggest an alternative. He should be obliged to put his decision into writing. Should the doctor disagree, this should go to a subcommittee specifically set up for this purpose, that would decide the matter—and that would hold all parties responsible, including that committee. Should the doctor disagree, his reasons should be listed. If the patient suffers as a consequence, then all those who forced the decision can then be held accountable.
If a patient comes in with an assistive device, like a cane or a wheelchair, this equipment is the responsibility of the Correctional Officer in Receiving, and he should sign off on it, turning it over to the next responsible individual, who, in turn, must sign on and off. If a consult is scheduled, those responsible for the transportation should sign off that they have done what they are supposed to do, such as transporting the patient in a timely manner for an appointment., then either that person or his or her superior—or both—should be held responsible if it is not done. Whoever drops the ball is responsible. After all, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link.
Now follow me here: Can you see that the same standard and technique should and must be applied to those with a public trust? If public records must be available, then those tasked with the responsibility of making them available. And that official responsible to provide it must be compelled to sign off on it. That official has so much time to complete his job. If he doesn’t do his job in the time allotted for it, then he should be held accountable.
If a legislator ignores his responsibility, you good people must force a recall election. It is time that everyone is held responsible for what they do, in a proper manner and in a timely fashion—as defined by law, including you, as citizens. Isn’t that what Cayenne Bird is telling you?
Remember—the issue is not whether an inmate “deserves” a break. The issue is whether that legislator takes care of his constituents, or whether a correctional officer does his duty —or doesn’t do so. In the absence of these chains of custody—of responsibility—no one can be held responsible. But you already know that.
With this set-up, it is a simple matter to define citizen committees to review these documents. I would suggest a designated Grand Jury formed for just such a purpose. Get together with attorneys you trust. Start with the Prison Law Office, which has been totally discarded by your Receiver, Robert Sillen. And stop being in such awe of Sillen. If he doesn’t do his job, you hold him accountable. After all, he goes to the toilet the same way you do.
So what is doing on? Where is all this craziness leading? Let me tell you what I believe is really going on:
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
