Dumping dilemma.

WHEN L.A. City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo recently announced he was filing suit against Kaiser Permanente because its Bellflower hospital allegedly dumped a homeless woman in Skid Row, he and the lawsuit got plenty of favorable attention.

Trouble is, his lawsuit could end up doing more harm to the homeless.

That's because he's just given hospitals an incentive to dump homeless patients on the sidewalk in front of the hospital.

Think about it. If you ran a hospital, what would you do when you're finished treating a homeless person? By definition, the homeless don't have a home to send them to, so you could either show them the front door or you could transport them to Skid Row. Neither choice is a good one.

But at least the Skid Row option seems far more humane.

Some three dozen agencies in that concentrated zone serve the homeless. Presumably, that would be the best place for a homeless person just dismissed from an emergency room to get a bed, a meal and some attention.

But sending homeless people to Skid Row just got far more perilous, thanks to the lawsuit.

If you're a hospital administrator who gets caught sending a homeless person to the one place he's most likely to get help, you might not only get sued but you'll probably be excoriated in the press as a "homeless dumper."

So, you're more likely now to escort them to the door, pat them on the back and send them out with your good wishes.

Once outside the hospital, the homeless person, who may still be sick or injured, may have no place to go and no way to get there, and perhaps would curl up on the sidewalk or in the bushes.

That's why the lawsuit--like many lawsuits, I might add--may do more harm than good.

Charles Crumpley is the editor of the Business Journal. He can be reached at [e-mail].