Babka v. Iowa Dep't of Inspections
Decision Date | 14 April 2021 |
Docket Number | No. 19-1522,19-1522 |
Citation | 967 N.W.2d 344 |
Parties | Elizabeth BABKA, Petitioner-Appellant, v. IOWA DEPARTMENT OF INSPECTIONS AND APPEALS, Respondent-Appellee. |
Court | Iowa Court of Appeals |
David L. Brown and Tyler R. Smith (until withdrawal) of Hansen, McClintock & Riley, Des Moines, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Anagha Dixit, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Heard by Bower, C.J., and Vaitheswaran and Greer, JJ.
It was alleged registered nurse Elizabeth Babka committed dependent adult abuse. Following a contested hearing, an administrative law judge (ALJ) issued a proposed decision that concluded Babka had not committed abuse. On appeal, the director of the Iowa Department of Inspections and Appeals (DIA) adopted all the facts of the proposed decision but came to the opposite conclusion—that Babka did commit dependent adult abuse. This legal determination came with no reference to relevant legal authority and was silent on how the same facts led to a different legal conclusion. Babka appealed the decision, which the district court affirmed on judicial review.1
As she did at the district court, Babka argues the facts do not support a legal determination she committed dependent adult abuse.2 See Iowa Code § 17A.19(10)(m). She also maintains the director's decision failed to meet the statutory requirements for a final decision under Iowa Code section 17A.16(1). And she argues that, under the circumstances here, the director's failure makes the decision unreasonable, arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion, as it is unclear what legal authority the director relied on, how he interpreted that authority, and to what facts the interpretation was applied to reach the decision. See id . § 17A.19(10)(n).
The DIA received a complaint alleging Babka committed dependent adult abuse against a patient, V.U., during Babka's overnight shift in the psychiatric ward on December 31, 2017.3 Specifically, it was alleged Babka assaulted and unreasonably punished V.U.
Following an investigation, the DIA issued a "founded" report4 of dependent adult abuse in May 2018. It concluded,
Babka appealed, and a contested two-day hearing took place before an ALJ in September 2018. In the November 2018 proposed decision, the ALJ reversed the DIA's determination Babka engaged in dependent adult abuse and the order to put Babka's name on the dependent adult abuse registry. In reaching this conclusion, the ALJ found:
V.U., the alleged dependent adult victim in this case, is a 66-year-old woman who was admitted ... on Friday, December 22, 2017. She has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder
, ... sleep apnea, insomnia, among other conditions....
....
V.U. was in a "manic" state .... Staff nursing notes, called "Progress Notes—Encounter Notes," reflect V.U. was getting very little sleep and her agitation was increasing ....
....
Patient Tech [Sabrina] Barnes had worked with V.U. a few days since V.U.’s admission on Friday, December 22, 2017. Ms. Barnes was aware that V.U. had not slept much on previous nights, and would often wander around the unit. V.U. would walk "laps" around the unit, then sit down and color for a while, or rest in a recliner, then get up back up and sometimes go to her room, and then come out again. Previous night staff had let V.U. sleep in a recliner out in the "dayroom," which is near the nurse's station. The nurse's station is behind glass. Patient Tech Barnes believed that [V.U.] slept maybe "15 minutes here and there."
....
... Babka worked the 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. shift on December 30-31, 2017. Ms. Babka and Registered Nurse Daphne Booth were the license[d] nurses assigned to ... that shift. They divided up responsibility for the 17 patients on the unit, with Babka taking responsibility for V.U. Ms. Barnes was the Patient Tech assigned to work with them.
....
V.U. had been assigned to a room with a roommate, but a private room had been ordered for her beginning that night shift. Babka and Nurse Booth told V.U. at the beginning of their shift that she had a private room now and they wanted her to sleep in her room that night.
....
Staff allow residents to walk around the unit and watch television in the "dayroom," until 11 p.m.—when the television is turned off. Babka and the other staff did not have a problem with V.U. being in the day room after 11 p.m., so long as she was quiet....
that she could give her that day, and all she had left to give was Haldol—and that she could take it by mouth or via a shot. V.U. replied that she would just take the shot. Security Guard Nelson held V.U.’s hand, and she cooperated with the shot. Babka gave V.U. the Haldol shot in her upper left arm.
Babka noted in V.U.’s medication records that she gave her the Haldol injection at 2:46 a.m. Although Babka testified she gave V.U. a choice, she charted that she [g]ave the injection after V.U. "refused" oral medication.
injection. He also gave an oral order for V.U. to be in locked seclusion until [she] could control her behavior.
V.U. cooperated when Babka gave her a shot. She testified that she gave V.U. the...
To continue reading
Request your trial