Civita Care Center: Nursing Aide Verbal Abuse - CT
The incident unfolded on July 14 during the evening shift when the resident rang their call bell for assistance. Nursing Assistant #1 responded through the intercom system, telling the resident they would have to wait for their assigned aide.
When the resident called again shortly after, the exchange escalated rapidly.
According to the resident's account to federal inspectors, the nursing assistant said "I'll take your call bell away" and told them to "change myself." The aide continued: "I'm the supervisor, NA, Administrator and this is why your garbage, and you can't walk."
Another resident in a nearby room heard the nursing assistant tell the resident to "go and change yourself" and threaten to take the call bell away. That resident was alert and oriented according to their cognitive assessment scores.
The nursing assistant admitted to investigators that he "lost it" during the confrontation. He acknowledged telling the resident "you can go change yourself" and threatening to remove their call bell if they kept calling. However, he denied making the other comments the resident reported.
The aide claimed the resident had called him names, used profanities, and made racial threats during their exchange. He said the resident told him to "stop playing games" before the situation deteriorated.
A licensed practical nurse witnessed part of the incident from the nurses' station. She heard the nursing assistant say "f*** you, I am not coming" in what she described as a "very harsh and intimidating" tone. Initially thinking he was on his cellphone, she realized he was speaking through the call bell intercom system.
The LPN did not report the incident because she wasn't certain who was on the other end of the conversation.
The allegation surfaced the next day when another resident reported the inappropriate conduct to facility staff. The nursing assistant was immediately removed from the schedule on July 15 while administrators launched an investigation.
During their investigation, facility officials interviewed staff members and residents about the incident. The Director of Nursing concluded that while abuse could not be substantiated, the nursing assistant had shown "a lack of judgement regarding expectations of customer service and the code of conduct when interacting with the resident."
The nursing assistant was terminated from his position.
Federal inspectors found the facility's own policies clearly prohibited such conduct. The center's Abuse, Neglect, and Exploitation Policy defines verbal abuse as "the use of oral, written, or gestured communication or sounds that willfully include disparaging and derogatory terms to residents or their families, or within their hearing distance regardless of their age, ability to comprehend, or disability."
The policy also states the facility must protect residents' "health, welfare and rights" and defines abuse as "willful infliction of injury, unreasonable confinement, intimidation, or punishment with resulting physical harm, pain, or mental anguish."
The incident highlights the vulnerability of nursing home residents who depend on call bell systems to summon help. Federal regulations require facilities to ensure residents can call for assistance and receive prompt responses from staff.
When residents ring their call bells, they may need help with basic functions like using the bathroom, getting water, or addressing pain or discomfort. The call bell serves as their primary lifeline to care, making threats to remove it particularly concerning.
The nursing assistant's claim of authority during the confrontation - stating he was "the supervisor, NA, Administrator" - suggests an attempt to intimidate the resident through perceived power dynamics. Such statements can be especially harmful to elderly residents who may feel defenseless against staff members they depend on for care.
The fact that another resident overheard the exchange demonstrates how verbal abuse in nursing homes can affect multiple people beyond the direct target. Residents in nearby rooms often witness or hear incidents involving their neighbors, potentially creating an atmosphere of fear or anxiety.
The delayed reporting also raises questions about facility culture and staff awareness of their reporting obligations. The LPN who witnessed part of the incident chose not to report it, despite hearing language she described as harsh and intimidating.
Federal inspectors noted that while the facility concluded abuse could not be substantiated, the nursing assistant's own admissions contradicted this finding. He acknowledged making inappropriate statements and threatening to remove the resident's call bell, which aligns with the facility's own definition of verbal abuse.
The investigation revealed conflicting accounts of exactly what was said during the exchange. The resident reported more extensive verbal abuse than the nursing assistant admitted to, while other witnesses heard portions that supported both versions.
The nursing assistant's termination suggests facility leadership recognized the severity of his conduct, even if they stopped short of labeling it substantiated abuse. His admission that he "shouldn't have said what he said" indicates awareness that his response was inappropriate.
The incident occurred during the evening shift when staffing levels are typically lower and oversight may be reduced. The nursing assistant was at the nurses' station rather than directly caring for residents when the call bell rang, suggesting potential staffing or assignment issues.
The resident who made the initial report waited until the next day to come forward, possibly indicating reluctance to report immediately or uncertainty about how to proceed. This delay is common in nursing home abuse cases where residents may fear retaliation or doubt they will be believed.
The case illustrates how quickly routine care situations can escalate when staff lack proper training in de-escalation techniques or lose their composure under pressure. Even if the resident was demanding or used inappropriate language, professional caregivers are expected to maintain appropriate boundaries and responses.
The facility's investigation, while resulting in termination, may have missed opportunities to examine broader systemic issues that contributed to the incident, such as workload pressures, staffing adequacy, or training deficiencies that might prevent similar occurrences.
Full Inspection Report
The details above represent a summary of key findings. View the complete inspection report for Civita Care Center At Milford from 2025-08-19 including all violations, facility responses, and corrective action plans.
Additional Resources
Data source: Official federal inspection data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS).
Editorial process: AI-synthesized regulatory data, reviewed for accuracy by our editorial team.
Professional review: All content reviewed by Christopher F. Nesbitt, Sr., NH EMT & BU-trained Paralegal.
Last verified: June 20, 2026 · Our methodology
CIVITA CARE CENTER AT MILFORD in MILFORD, CT was cited for abuse-related violations during a health inspection on August 19, 2025.
The incident unfolded on July 14 during the evening shift when the resident rang their call bell for assistance.
Health inspections identify deficiencies that facilities must correct. Violations range from minor documentation issues to serious safety concerns. Review the full report below for specific details and facility response.