In the trial at the district court of bamberg concerning several unexplained deaths in the senior citizens' residence schloss gleusdorf (municipality of untermerzbach), the home supervisory authority at the district office of habberge had its say. It turned out that significant deficiencies were reported by staff only with and after the start of media reporting. The home supervisory authority, in any case, was surprised by the serious accusations, according to its own statements.
Why did the employees of the home remain silent for at least five years, even though terrible things are said to have happened right before their eyes?? Why did they not report the incidents to the home supervisor, who then informed the public prosecutor's office?? The first case, which appears in the indictment as negligent homicide by omission, occurred in 2011. But only after some caregivers had been informed, they turned to the home supervisor at the district office habberge. However, they insisted on remaining anonymous: "they told me they were afraid and financially dependent, the court heard from a witness. However, this statement probably did not refer to the fear of losing one's job, since there is a glaring shortage of skilled workers.
This can be seen from the fact that under the new operator, a company based in duisburg, the number of residents has fallen from around 70 to 34 people. Also because they could not find enough qualified staff, according to the employee of the home supervisor. But this also explains why the quota of specialists behind the walls of the castle was constantly undershot. "It was a permanent problem." not even one third of the nursing staff who had been looking after the residents had done so. Most of the tasks had apparently been done by assistants and helpers who had not been trained long enough to do so. At times, they even imposed a ban on admissions.
As one of the home's supervisors testified, no significant deficiencies have been reported or found "affecting life, limb and health" not even one-third of the. Only in a few cases had it been about missing diapers or portions that were too small. At least not before 2016, when the facility near untermerzbach made the headlines. Only after the start of the "gleusdorf affair and the associated weekly inspections, we noticed a lot more, because we talked to more residents. The number and severity of complaints have also increased since then, according to witnesses. As the head of home supervision described, some of the nurses came to the site shortly after being fired to report perceived grievances with their former employer. "This is not the case in any other home that I know of." moreover, it had always been a matter of facts far in the past that could no longer be recalled.
On the other hand, there had been repeated deficiencies in minor matters from 2016 onwards. Emergency call bells that are too short, needles that are not sterile, medications that are lost, or a lack of privacy in the showers, for example. Compared to the 39 other institutions for the dependent and disabled that they have to inspect in the district of habberge, the elimination of the deficiencies is "very tame" had been. One had to order some and "quite a lot of compulsory payments" the court was told that the.
A witness rejected the suspicion that the operators of the gleusdorf senior citizens' residence had known about the annual inspections and had been able to prepare for them, as well as the accusation that they had only had coffee with the home's management. "This is absolute nonsense. We do our work on site very conscientiously." there were many specifications and a tight schedule.