Saturday, March 28, 2026

New program expands in­de­pen­dence for New Yorkers with dis­abil­ities

New strides are being made to help New Yorkers with disabilities live more independently and make more of their own choices.

For Keith Knox, that starts with something as simple as checking the mail. The routine walk to his mailbox is easy. Reading what is inside is not.

“I’m visually impaired,” Knox said in an interview. Once a month, he brings his mail to the Capital District Center for Independence, where staff read it with him, help him fill out food stamp and Medicaid forms, and navigate paperwork that has become harder to see as his vision declines.

Knox has hydrocephalus, a condition that can cause blurry, impaired vision. As his sight worsened over the years, he turned to the center for help staying in his own home.

“They call me frequently to check on me,” he said. “I told them I needed housing, and then they referred me.”

Beyond regular check-ins with Knox, the Capital District Center for Independence serves people of all ages with all types of disabilities from across the region and partners with organizations around New York state.

“People with disabilities are people first,” said Laurel Kelley, executive director of the center. “So everyone wants to live in the community. I mean, I think it’s a human need.”

Kelley said the organization follows the independent living philosophy, the idea that people with disabilities should have the same rights and choices as anyone else about where and how they live.

That push for independence is increasingly reflected in state policy. On Tuesday, the state Office for People With Developmental Disabilities and AIM Services, a nonprofit that supports people with developmental and other disabilities across New York, announced a new supported decision-making program.

Supported decision-making allows a person with a disability to choose trusted supporters to help them understand options and communicate decisions, instead of handing that authority to a court-appointed guardian. Advocates say it is a less restrictive alternative to guardianship and keeps control in the hands of the person.

“I do my own cooking, do my own meds,” said Dwight Joyner, who receives services through AIM. “When my meds get low, I can call people. I can call the pharmacy [and] tell them I’m low on meds, low on pills [and] low on insulin.”

Christopher Lyons, chief executive officer of AIM Services, said the model is designed to replace “draconian” forms of control.

“This replaces the draconian control of guardianship with the opportunity for people to learn from their choices, with support from those who they identify to impart meaning in their lives, on their terms,” Lyons said. “That’s what supported decision-making is designed to do.”

OPWDD Commissioner Willow Baer said the state’s goal is to expand tools that let people direct their own lives.

“We are putting the right tools in the hands of people with disabilities to make sure they can direct their own decisions about their own lives,” Baer said.

As more programs like this roll out, advocates say the goal is simple: treat everyone equally, and keep supporting independence for people with disabilities, no matter the label.

Full Article & Source:
New program expands in­de­pen­dence for New Yorkers with dis­abil­ities 

The Insider Guide to the New York Power of Attorney 2026: What It Does and Why It Matters

Article source: Burner Prudentilaw PC 


A medical crisis strikes without warning, instantly stripping away your ability to manage your finances or authorize healthcare. Yet, only 24% of U.S. adults possess a designated financial or healthcare power of attorney, leaving a staggering 76% completely unprepared for sudden incapacity. Broadening the scope, research shows that only 36.7% of U.S. adults have finalized some type of advance directive. The New York Power of Attorney acts as an active financial shield against this vulnerability. Without this legal instrument, individuals risk surrendering their personal agency to the courts the moment tragedy occurs.

An Overview of the New York Statutory Short Form Power of Attorney

A Durable Power of Attorney grants a designated agent the legal authority to manage your financial and legal affairs if you become incapacitated. This document ensures your bills get paid, your investments remain managed, and your real estate stays protected while you recover. The state explicitly defines the scope of this power through the Statutory Short Form, a standardized baseline for transferring financial authority.

Strict Execution Requirements in New York

State lawmakers have overhauled the execution requirements to protect vulnerable individuals while streamlining compliance. The updated statute dictates that the document must “substantially conform” to statutory wording and requires the physical presence of two witnesses during execution. Furthermore, the legislature modified default agent permissions regarding asset transfers. Unless otherwise specified, the default amount an agent can gift on behalf of the principal now stands at $5,000 annually. Minor errors no longer automatically invalidate the document, provided the principal strictly follows these updated execution protocols.

The Financial Stakes: POA vs. Court-Appointed Guardianship

Failing to designate an agent forces your family to petition the Surrogate’s Court for control over your assets. Unplanned Article 81 guardianship proceedings in New York rapidly drain estates. Families routinely face legal fees ranging from $3,000 to $10,000 or more just to establish guardianship. The court, rather than your personal preference, ultimately dictates who controls your bank accounts and medical decisions.

FeatureWith a Power of AttorneyWithout a Power of Attorney (Guardianship)
CostMinimal upfront preparation fees.$3,000 to $10,000+ in ongoing court and legal fees.
TimeframeImmediate authority upon execution or incapacity.Months of delayed court hearings and frozen assets.
PrivacyCompletely private family matter.Public court record detailing assets and medical status.
Control Over Agent SelectionPrincipal chooses a trusted individual.A judge appoints a guardian, potentially a stranger.

Selecting an Agent and Executing the Document

Appointing the right individual and formalizing the paperwork demands strategic foresight. Follow these steps to secure your financial continuity:

  1. Assess Financial Acumen: Choose an agent with a proven track record of financial responsibility and strict attention to detail.
  2. Define the Scope of Power: Decide whether to grant sweeping, universal authority or to limit powers specifically to certain accounts and real estate transactions.
  3. Address the Modifications Section: Explicitly detail custom powers, such as creating trusts or making gifts exceeding the $5,000 default, which the standard statutory form ignores.
  4. Execute with Precision: Sign the document before a notary public and two disinterested witnesses to satisfy New York’s rigorous statutory demands.

The Danger of Blank Modifications and Generic Forms

Downloading a generic legal template online severely jeopardizes your estate. These rigid, standardized forms frequently leave the critical “Modifications” section entirely blank. This crucial omission strips your agent of the legal authority to perform vital Medicaid planning, establish protective trusts, or execute complex tax strategies.

To truly safeguard unique assets and prevent catastrophic financial losses, these documents require customized legal drafting. Engaging an experienced estate planning attorney guarantees your documents cover every possible financial contingency.

Their firm ensures your advance directives, including the Power of Attorney, are precisely tailored and fully compliant with New York law. They structure every document to meet the unique statutory requirements of your estate, securing your assets against unpredictable medical crises and strict judicial scrutiny.

Managing Potential Challenges: Exploitation and End-of-Life Authority

Mitigating the Risk of Financial Exploitation

A Power of Attorney transfers immense financial control, inherently carrying a severe risk of abuse if handed to the wrong person. Financial exploitation currently affects 42 out of every 1,000 older New Yorkers, marking it as the most prevalent form of elder mistreatment in the state. The reality is actually far grimmer, as an estimated 44 cases go unreported for every single incident reported to authorities. Principals must institute strict checks and balances, such as naming co-agents or appointing an independent monitor to oversee the primary agent’s transactions.

Navigating New York’s Shifting End-of-Life Directives

Financial continuity means little without a parallel strategy for medical decision-making. Your financial POA must operate in coordination with a legally binding Health Care Proxy and a detailed Living Will. The landscape of medical directives in New York is rapidly shifting, fundamentally altering end-of-life planning.

State lawmakers have expanded these options significantly. The Medical Aid in Dying (MAiD) Act, taking effect in August 2026, establishes new legal end-of-life choices for terminally ill adults. This legislation makes possessing flawlessly executed healthcare directives alongside a financial POA absolutely urgent. Clear, legally sound documents provide the only guarantee that medical professionals will honor a patient’s exact treatment wishes.

Taking Command of Your Financial Continuity

A New York Statutory Short Form Power of Attorney operates as a foundational pillar of modern asset protection, far exceeding a simple contingency plan. It guarantees your financial framework remains intact, and your family avoids the devastating costs of judicial intervention. Act methodically today to secure your legacy, designate a trusted agent, and keep your financial destiny entirely out of the courtroom.

Full Article & Source:
The Insider Guide to the New York Power of Attorney 2026: What It Does and Why It Matters

Friday, March 27, 2026

Judge orders disclosure in dispute over Milford lawyer's estate conservatorship

by Ethan Fry


MILFORD - Probate Judge Ben Gettinger did not exceed his authority by ordering the disclosure of documents related to the estate of a former lawyer whose housekeeper became her new conservator the month she was diagnosed with Alzheimer's, a state Superior Court judge ruled this month.

In a 14-page ruling, Judge Barbara Bellis wrote that the documents requested by a longtime friend and prior conservator of the lawyer, Jackale Williams, "could reasonably lead to the discovery of admissible evidence" related to whether Williams' housekeeper, Sylvia Ponzo, or the housekeeper's mother, Gina McKay, who became conservator of Williams' estate in September 2024, acted in good faith and in accordance with Williams' best interests.

"It is undisputed that after being appointed power of attorney, McKay changed the beneficiary designations of certain financial accounts to the 2024 trust and also transferred over $32,000 from an account outside of the defendants' control," said Bellis' decision. "All these acts occurred in the same month the plaintiff was diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease."

In court filings, Williams' cousin and lifelong friend, Claudia Montecalvo, said she and Williams "had long ago made a pact to take each other 'from cradle to grave'" and that she had been appointed conservator following the death of Williams' husband.

But after Williams began having trouble with her memory three years later, Montecalvo and her daughter alleged in court papers, 18 of "Williams' friends and family began reporting that they were being denied access to Williams by Williams' cleaning person, Sylvia Ponzo."

The Montecalvos alleged that a few months later, Ponzo took Williams' phone away "such that Williams stopped responding to calls and texts, when it had otherwise been normal for her to do so." Later that year, Montecalvo's power of attorney was revoked, and a new power of attorney named Ponzo's daughter, McKay, as her new agent.

Montecalvo alleged Ponzo and McKay told Williams "that Claudia planned to sell Williams' home and commit Williams to a nursing home" before a revocable living trust was set up in Williams' name and her home was transferred into it.

After Gettinger ordered the disclosure of documents related to the setup of Williams' 2024 estate, the estate appealed to Superior Court.

Judge Bellis' decision denying the appeal, dated March 20, noted that the prior conservator will "ultimately have the burden of proving any breaches of an agent's duties."

Bellis wrote that the arguments cited by Williams' current conservator arguing against the documents' disclosure while Williams is alive is not consistent with state law or prior cases.

"Under the plaintiff's interpretation, a power of attorney could act in accordance with estate plans despite possibly knowing that (1) the principal was mentally compromised when making them, and (2) the estate plans were changed to benefit her and her relative," the decision said. "The court cannot hold, as a matter of law, that a breach of duty cannot be found under those circumstances." 

Full Article & Source:
Judge orders disclosure in dispute over Milford lawyer's estate conservatorship 

A New Push to Put Homeless Veterans Under Legal Guardianship

By Lee Pruitt

Takeaways

  • A new federal agreement allows government attorneys to seek legal guardianship over homeless veterans, or those at risk of homelessness, who are deemed unable to make their own health care decisions.
  • Supporters argue this policy is a necessary lifeline to move incapacitated veterans out of hospital limbo, while critics warn it is a serious threat to the veterans civil liberties and autonomy.


A new federal policy raises urgent questions about care, autonomy, and what it means to serve those who have served. Earlier this month, the Trump administration announced a significant action targeting homeless veterans in the form of a formal agreement between the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the Department of Justice (DOJ). The policy gives VA attorneys new legal power to pursue guardianship over veterans who are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless.

The policy has drawn praise from some quarters as a compassionate lifeline for the most vulnerable veterans. Others are calling it a threat to civil liberties that could strip men and women who served their country of their fundamental right to make decisions for themselves.

What exactly is happening and what does it mean?

What the Policy Does

The new initiative gives the DOJ authority to appoint VA lawyers as special assistant U.S. attorneys, allowing them to initiate and participate in state court guardianship cases or conservatorship proceedings. In plain terms, government attorneys can now go to court to ask a judge to appoint a legal guardian – often when a qualified family member is unavailable – over a veteran who is deemed unable to make their own health care decisions.

The stated goal is to help veterans who are stuck in a kind of bureaucratic purgatory. Without a legal decision-maker, some veterans become trapped in limbo. That is, they may be medically stable, but unable to leave a hospital because no one can legally authorize a discharge plan or placement in long-term care. The administration argues that guardianship can break that cycle.

VA officials say the move is intended to help veterans transition from prolonged hospital stays to appropriate care settings. A VA news release states that “the appointment of a legal guardian or conservator can be a lifeline for veterans in this situation.”

Who Could Be Affected by This New Policy

Nearly 33,000 veterans are experiencing homelessness in the U.S. Almost 14,000 of them live on the streets, according to a 2024 report from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

The VA said in a statement that the agency serves hundreds of veterans who cannot make their own health care decisions and don’t have family or legal representation, including those experiencing homelessness. VA press secretary Peter Kasperowicz has emphasized that the policy is not aimed at homeless veterans broadly, but rather at roughly 700 veterans currently in VA facilities who lack the capacity to make decisions for themselves and who don’t have anyone to make legal decisions for them.

Half of the nation’s homeless veterans have a mental illness, and 70 percent struggle with substance use disorders. These conditions can sometimes impair a person’s ability to advocate for their own care.

Why Critics Are Alarmed

While supporters frame this policy as a compassionate intervention, civil rights and advocacy groups are raising serious concerns.

Unlike a civil commitment, which has an expiration date, guardianships are designed to be permanent. These arrangements can be revisited periodically, but the burden falls on the ward (in this case, the veteran) to prove they should get their autonomy back.

Jennifer Mathis, the deputy director at the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, questioned whether guardianship is the right solution. She said that if veterans are in VA hospitals and not discharged, it’s likely because there aren’t enough services or housing for them, not because they don’t have guardians to make decisions for them.

The National Coalition for Homeless Veterans warned that “guardianship and other forms of involuntary intervention are serious legal actions that remove significant personal autonomy. They must be used sparingly, with strong safeguards, and always with the best interests and rights of the veteran at the center of the process.”

Veterans’ advocates also say that the phrase “at risk of homelessness” is vague and undefined in the agreement. They worry the definition could expand, such as applying to a veteran behind on rent or others in precarious but not incapacitated situations.

What Supporters Say

Not everyone opposes the initiative. Michael Figlioli, director of the National Veterans Service for the Veterans of Foreign Wars, applauded the move, telling Newsweek that “some of our nation’s most vulnerable veterans must be approached through a public health and social services framework,” and that guardianships can provide “structured support” for vulnerable veterans.

Stephen Eide, a homelessness expert at the Manhattan Institute, argued in the same Newsweek piece that for some veterans with severe untreated conditions like schizophrenia, “the choices are either no treatment or some kind of involuntary treatment.” He did, however, acknowledge that executing such a policy at the federal level “will require a lot of coordination between police, social workers, state, and local governments.”

What Comes Next

The policy’s real-world effects will depend heavily on how the guardianship powers are used, as well as oversight and accountability of the guardians. Veterans who are deemed in need of a guardian may benefit from being able to choose their guardian.

For now, the agreement is in effect. Veterans’ rights organizations, legal advocates, and members of Congress will likely be watching closely. Veterans themselves will need clear information about this policy, what it means for them, and what resources are available to protect their well-being and autonomy.

Resources for Veterans Experiencing Homelessness

If you are a veteran who is homeless or at imminent risk of homelessness, help is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week: Call the National Call Center for Homeless Veterans at (877) 4AID-VET (877-424-3838).

Here are other key organizations and programs:

Housing Assistance Programs

  • HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (HUD-VASH). This program combines HUD’s Housing Choice Voucher rental assistance for homeless veterans with case management and clinical services provided by the VA. Contact your nearest VA medical center and ask about HUD-VASH.
  • Supportive Services for Veteran Families (SSVF). Through referrals and direct outreach, nonprofit agencies use SSVF funding to quickly house veterans and their families who are homeless and to keep others from slipping into homelessness by providing supportive services that promote housing stability.
  • VA Grant and Per Diem Program. State, local, and tribal governments and nonprofits receive funding to develop and operate transitional housing for veterans who are homeless, with a maximum stay of up to 24 months and a goal of moving veterans into permanent housing.
  • Disabled Veterans National Foundation – Homeless to Housing (H2H). This program provides up to $2,000 to cover essential costs related to securing permanent housing, such as security deposits and initial rent payments, as well as up to $2,000 worth of essential household items.

Mental Health and Crisis Support

Legal Help

  • Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law. The Bazelon Center advocates for the rights of people with mental disabilities.
  • National Homelessness Law Center. NHLC provides legal resources and advocacy for people experiencing homelessness.

Find Local Help

You can also call or visit your local VA Medical Center or Community Resource and Referral Center, where VA staff are ready to help. Use the VA locator tool at va.gov/directory to find the nearest location.

Every veteran deserves a home, health care, and the dignity of making their own choices. If you or someone you know is at risk, please know that help is available.

Additional Reading

For additional reading on topics relevant to veterans, check out the following articles:

Full Article & Source:
A New Push to Put Homeless Veterans Under Legal Guardianship 

Thursday, March 26, 2026

AIM Services will lead Supported Decision Making in New York

By Aaron Shellow-Lavine


A nonprofit based in Saratoga County is set to pioneer the statewide expansion of a program that supports individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Dwight Joyner says supported-decision making has allowed him to live a more independent, fulfilling life.

“It means that I can make my own choices and I can do things I want to do – making my own meals, take a walk down the street, be able to have relationships without somebody telling me I can’t be in a relationship,” said Joiner.

First piloted in New York in 2016, supported decision-making, or SDM, is a process that allows people with intellectual and developmental disabilities to make decisions with the help of a network of trusted individuals. The idea is to promote independence for people with IDD, putting them at the center of their day-to-day management, rather than relying on a singular person – typically a parent – as often happens in a traditional guardianship model.

In 2021, the New York Office for People With Developmental Disabilities expanded the state's pilot SMD program utilizing federal American Rescue Plan Act funds. Now, a nonprofit in Saratoga County — AIM Services — is continuing to expand SDM programming within the state over the next five years with a nearly $8 million contract.

OPWDD Commissioner Willow Baer says with AIM’s guidance, New York could be a model for the rest of the country.

“It's also available in New York State for people without disabilities, other people who are aging, for example, might need a little support in making decisions as they age. And supported decision making is available in New York State for anyone that wants to use it right. The $8 million contract focuses on people with developmental disabilities. We are excited to be the first in the nation to make that available, and to really be a model nationally for this program and for how person-centered it makes services in New York State,” said Baer.

Through SDM, an individual creates and signs an agreement that outlines various people, or supporters, to whom they can turn to help make decisions regarding their health, finances, and living opportunities.

“So, for example, for medical or health decisions, maybe somebody really wants their mom to assist with that. But when it comes to relationships, they actually want their best friend to help,” said Alexis Harrington.

Alexis Harrington is chief of program implementation at AIM, which in 2024 served 4,000 people in nearly 400 supported and independent residential facilities in Saratoga, Washington and Warren counties.

She says individuals participating in SDM are better equipped to lead their own lives.

“We make decisions every single day of our lives, and we don't even think twice about that. So, the fact that we have people with disabilities that are discriminated against for assuming no capacity. Right? We are now flipping that concept on its head. We are aligning with the United Nations perspective that every person is a person and a human being that is able to make their own decisions,” said Harrington.

AIM CEO Christopher Lyons says the organization is well on its way to reaching the roughly 100,000 New Yorkers who live with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

“People are having legal capacity. They're having autonomy. They're making their own choices. It's a beautiful thing to see somebody enjoy the good and the bad of their own choices. That's what makes us human right. It's the mosaic of our choices, our experiences, the good and the bad. You know, we used to keep somebody from dating somebody because they might break their heart who hasn't had their heart broken. So now everything is natural. It's we don't substitute our judgment. We're not in a control model or in a support model. Life is messy, but because of that, it’s beautiful,” said Lyons. 

Full Article & Source:
AIM Services will lead Supported Decision Making in New York 

Former Flagler County home health aide gets 3 years’ probation after no contest plea in senior fraud case

Katie Swain, 32, arrested in late December

Katie Swain (Flagler County Sheriff's Office)

BUNNELL, Fla. – A former home health aid will spend the next three years on probation after pleading no contest to theft and fraud, according to a Flagler County Sheriff’s Office news release.

Investigators say 32-year-old Katie Swain targeted elderly people. She was originally arrested in late December after a month-long investigation found she had stolen cash and used a senior’s debit card for unauthorized purchases totaling more than $660.

Then, management at HarborChase Assisted Living, the same home as the original victim, said a second person had also experienced fraud while Swain worked there.

“Swain abused her position of trust and authority and rightfully cannot be placed in that position for several years,” said Flagler County Sheriff Rick Staly. “We hope she uses this time to reflect on her life choices and avoids returning to the Green Roof Inn in the future.”

Swain is barred from working unsupervised with the elderly and must pay $236 in restitution as part of her probation. 

Full Article & Source:
Former Flagler County home health aide gets 3 years’ probation after no contest plea in senior fraud case 

Wednesday, March 25, 2026

11-minute hearings, hidden conflicts: inside Oklahoma’s broken guardianship system


by By J.C. Hallman, Oklahoma Watch 

On the afternoon of Aug. 26, 2021, Ismail Safi brought his wife and six children to the Abbey Gate of Kabul International Airport. The Americans were leaving Afghanistan. Crowds of individuals who had worked for the Americans and their families lined up, despite threats of violence, to be screened for seats on a flight out of the country.

At approximately 5:50 p.m., as the family approached the gate, a suicide bomber detonated an explosive device. That blast and another nearby killed 13 Americans and hundreds of Afghans; the bombings became a political cudgel and a violent symbol of the messy end of the longest war in American history.

Ismail Safi’s family was separated in the blast, said Ghulam Nabi Safi, Ismail Safi’s brother. Three of the children were initially missing. Two turned up quickly. But S.S., an 8-year-old girl, appeared to have vanished.

She remained missing for several days. Then her family received a call.

S.S. was on her way to Oklahoma.

What happened next — how a traumatized Afghan child ended up in the custody of an evangelical family she had never met, and how a new guardianship judge with a peculiar background handled the fight by her uncle and biological parents to bring her home — is a story that exposes structural weaknesses at the heart of Oklahoma’s guardianship system: sealed records, shortened hearings, conflicts of interest, and judges working without adequate training or oversight.

It is not a story unique to child guardianships. Multiple attorneys, former judges and national experts who spoke with Oklahoma Watch — some on the condition of anonymity — described systemic problems in both the adult and child guardianship systems in Oklahoma. In the former case, the crisis will grow acute as Oklahoma’s population ages.

Attorneys familiar with Oklahoma’s guardianship proceedings lamented a system beholden to money, resulting in a growing avalanche of pro se cases — that is, individuals who had no other choice but to represent themselves in court.

Harvey Brownstone, a jurist and author who served in the Ontario Court of Justice for 26 years, expressed surprise at Oklahoma’s closed system.

“The system was not designed to be navigated by people who didn’t go to law school,” Brownstone said. “Courts should be open. We can still protect the privacy of the people, without sealing files.”

A Child Unaccompanied

Ghulam Nabi Safi was in a secure location when the bombs went off, having worked as a translator for the U.S. government at the U.S. Embassy. His clearance got him onto a plane; he arrived in the United States on Sept. 1, 2021.

S.S.’s parents were sent to Pakistan. Although they had been cleared for visas, administrative delays had prevented them from being admitted to the United States. Meanwhile, eight-year-old S.S., dazed by the blast, made it through the airport gates on her own.

She found the family of distant cousins, Mohammed and Azizah Hashemi, Safi said. The Hashemis were able to use S.S.’s association with someone who had worked for the Americans to board a plane, Safi said. S.S. arrived in the United States as an unaccompanied minor.

Mohammed Hashemi, reached at a home in Oklahoma City, offered a different account. He said that Ghulam Nabi Safi had approached him at the airport and asked the Hashemis to keep S.S. for 15 days, until Safi could arrive in the U.S. and claim her.

The Hashemis were sponsored in Oklahoma by Jason Garner, an oil and gas executive who is also an elder of Memorial Road Church of Christ and chairman of the board of trustees of Oklahoma Christian Academy. In 2025, Garner joined the board of directors of the Oklahoma City branch of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.

Patrick Raglow, executive director of Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City, recalled the shock of Oklahoma’s Afghan refugee crisis in September 2021. In the year prior to the fall of Kabul, Catholic Charities processed 26 total refugee arrivals. Then came a request from Gov. Kevin Stitt to assist 1,000 arrivals in Oklahoma City and 800 in Tulsa.

“Sometimes we got notice of 12 hours, sometimes it was two days,” Raglow said. “Sometimes it was after they arrived and the airport called and said, ‘Hey, who’s got this family?’”

Garner’s Memorial Road Church took on the largest number of Afghan families of any faith organization that partnered with Catholic Charities, according to a 2023 article in the Christian Chronicle, a publication for the worldwide Churches of Christ network. Raglow said he was aware that some partner organizations viewed the refugee influx as an opportunity.

“Some of them thought that this was a great opportunity to Christianize,” Raglow said.

The Christian Chronicle article documented Memorial Road’s outreach to Afghan refugees, including the Hashemis. The piece made clear that conversion was a goal of the church’s engagement.

‘We Are Going to Take Her

Safi spent months in Virginia working as an advisor for the Kuwaiti embassy and a translation services firm before he had the resources to travel to Oklahoma. When he could finally visit, his niece’s reaction was immediate.

“She was flying,” Safi said. “She was very happy.”

That visit brought Safi into direct conflict with Jason Garner. Safi said that S.S.’s biological parents, concerned that their daughter was not being raised in America according to their wishes, asked him to seek custody of S.S. When Garner learned that Safi intended to seek guardianship, the relationship turned hostile. Garner told Safi that he knew Oklahoma’s rules, and that Safi would not win guardianship because he lacked a wife and Oklahoma residency, Safi said.

Safi said he was not deterred, despite a disturbing incident in which Garner showed Safi his gun collection in a way that Safi interpreted as menacing.

Hashemi recalled Garner’s position clearly.

“Garner said that if someone comes from outside, and we don’t know who they are, then we are going to take [S.S.],” Hashemi said.

Hashemi said that he had insisted to Garner that any transfer of custody be handled through legal channels. He said his own knowledge of the subsequent court proceedings was minimal. At a hearing, he said, the judge asked only his name before issuing an order.

“The only thing the judge asked me was ‘What is your name?’” Hashemi said. “That’s it. And then they make an order, and they said that after this day that [S.S.] has to live with the Garner family.”

Janie Tapia, the Oklahoma City attorney who represented Garner, declined to comment. A.J. Ferate, Garner’s appellate attorney with Spencer Fane, also declined an interview request on behalf of his client.

A Chaotic Trial

Safi contacted Dallas-based attorney Sehla Ashai, who previously represented an Afghan couple who said that an American soldier effectively stole their baby after a raid by U.S. forces killed the infant’s family.

To represent S.S.’s biological parents, Dallas-based attorney Sehla Ashai contacted Mikael Bryant, general counsel of National Litigation Law Group and a member of Oklahoma’s Muslim community, for help. Bryant, along with Oklahoma City attorney Rob Hopkins, formed the legal team representing Ghulam Nabi Safi and S.S.’s parents.

Bryant described a custody trial that stretched across six months — a week’s worth of testimony — heard in the courtroom of Oklahoma County Special Judge Michelle “Shel” Harrington, a former divorce attorney who ascended to the bench just months before the fight over S.S. erupted.

Last September, Oklahoma Watch covered another of Harrington’s cases. Matthew Simonton successfully fought for his right to visit his mother, Estelle Simonton, who is under the guardianship of Adult Protective Services.

“I should have some rights as an American citizen,” Estelle Simonton said at the time. “It’s the law that is taking me away from my family, who I dearly love.”

Harrington subsequently issued a restraining order preventing the press from further interviewing Simonton.

For Andy Lester, chair of the Oklahoma Free Speech Committee, Harrington’s order encroached on the First Amendment.

“[This ruling] looks like a restriction on Ms. Simonton, but, as worded, it purports to bar all press,” Lester said at the time. “That is a step too far.”

From S.S.’s guardianship trial, Oklahoma Watch obtained audio recordings made by Azizah Hashemi in which she made graphic allegations about what would happen to S.S. in Garner’s custody. The recordings also included claims about her own role in transferring the child. A translation by Alqalam Nangarhar Translation Center documented the contents, and an independent Pashto translator retained by Oklahoma Watch confirmed the character of the recordings.

“The general tone of the audio recordings is taunting, aggressive, and centered on intimidation and revenge,” the second translator said in an email.

The recordings were one of numerous exhibits presented as evidence in Harrington’s courtroom, Bryant said.

“They had no argument,” Bryant said. “The only thing they ever said about Ghulam Nabi is that when all the families were in this room with Catholic Charities, and there’s a room full of adults arguing, [S.S.] seemed tense. And she was sitting next to her uncle. That was the only argument of substance they ever made.”

Theresa Flannery, senior director of social services at Catholic Charities, who attended the meeting Bryant described, said she recalled nothing that would have indicated S.S.’s preference for anyone. Flannery was called as a witness at trial but said that she could not recall what she had been asked.

The case ended with custody of S.S. awarded to Daniel and Amy Roberts — the youth and family pastor of Memorial Road Church of Christ and a vice president of admissions at Oklahoma Christian Academy, respectively. Neither responded to requests for comment.

Safi was granted limited visitation rights. Bryant said Harrington left open the possibility of returning S.S. to her parents if they arrived in the United States, but until then, S.S. would remain with the Roberts family.

“A full week of trial, and I still don’t understand how they were actually able to win that thing,” Bryant said.

Safi said that as of February, S.S.’s biological parents had relocated from Pakistan to Germany. Attorneys will soon file a motion in Harrington’s courtroom to have S.S. sent to Germany to be reunited with them.

Orders Entered
Without Following Rules

The case of S.S. is not an isolated example. Another case from Harrington’s courtroom in the adult system reveals how Oklahoma guardianship sometimes fails those it is meant to protect.

When she was five years old, Norma June Bowden performed a daring 12-foot ladder dive at the 1938 World’s Fair in Los Angeles.

Nearly a century later in Oklahoma City, 90 years old and widowed, Norma June Harris became the subject of a contentious guardianship battle among four of her children, represented in the main by two sons, Glenn Harris Jr., a wealthy insurance agent, and Hal Harris, a flight instructor.

Norma Harris was a feisty, independent-minded business owner who did not respond docilely when Glenn Harris first sought and was granted temporary guardianship over his mother’s estate, Hal Harris said.

“My brother is very domineering and controlling,” Hal Haris said. “He needs to be in control of everything or everyone will pay like hell.”

Norma Harris marched to the courthouse so she could tell the judge who originally heard the case that she did not need guardianship, Hal Harris said.

The judge revoked the temporary guardianship; no finding of incapacity was entered. Norma Harris promptly rewrote her 2010 will to exclude Glenn Harris.

Glenn Harris appealed, and managed to get the first judge disqualified. Harrington was then assigned to the case.

The first irregularity in the case, Hal Harris said, was Harrington’s order to assign a guardian ad litem, a court-appointed advocate, to Norma Harris’s case in the absence of any finding of incapacity.

“My mom was adamantly opposed to it,” Hal Harris said.

A civil case was filed alongside the guardianship case, making some of the proceedings public and drawing in more attorneys whose fees began to drain the estate over which the battle was being fought.

An attorney who worked on the case was struck by the number of judicial decisions that were made without any finding of incapacity. It was a fundamental denial of due process, the source said.

“All the significant orders just got entered without following the rules,” the source said.

Norma Harris died on May 4, 2025.

Glenn Harris continued the fight. Three sources familiar with the case expressed surprise that, in choosing among Norma Harris’ children for a special administrator of her estate, Harrington chose Glenn Harris, the son that Norma Harris had written out of her will.

After a November 2025 hearing, Glenn Harris called Oklahoma Watch to offer his unvarnished opinion of guardianship judges.

“They don’t know shit,” Glenn Harris said. “They don’t know the law. It’s mind-boggling.”

A dim view of Harrington was a rare point of agreement between the feuding Harris brothers.

“She is inept and incompetent, and she should not be a judge,” Hal Harris said.

Frustrated litigants may or may not be the best source to expound on the performance of guardianship judges. However, Diane Dimond, a seasoned investigative journalist who wrote numerous stories about the guardianship system nationwide before authoring a book on the subject, is highly qualified. Dimond singled out the secrecy of guardianship and conservatorship systems as central to their susceptibility to fraud and abuse.

She also pointed to the role of guardianship judges.

“There are so many threads to abusive and financially exploitative guardianships that it’s hard to grab on to one and say, ‘This is the problem,’” Dimond said. “But after hearing hundreds of stories, I came to realize that none of this would happen except for the judges.”

Dimond offered a singular piece of advice for anyone investigating the system.

“Always look at the background of these judges,” Dimond said.

Oh, For the Love of God

Since issuing her ruling against the press, Harrington’s online presence has begun to evaporate. Her LinkedIn page has been taken down, as has the website for the solo law firm she ran prior to becoming a judge. Harrington advertised herself as a “divorce attorney who doesn’t like divorce.”

By way of contrast, a side hustle as a humorist and public speaker that Harrington has sustained since at least 2016 has not disappeared.

A website, fatbottomfiftiesgetfierce.com, promotes two books that are collections of satiric neologisms. Despite Amazon rankings below 5 million, the website claims that the first book was a bestseller and the second a #1 bestseller. A corresponding Facebook group boasts of 487,000 followers and has continued to feature pithy daily axioms even after Harrington took on the role of special judge in December 2023.

Harrington uses a second Facebook group, Oh, For the Love of God!, with 83,000 followers, to offer similar daily tidbits with an explicit Christian theme.

During the months of the custody fight over Afghan refugee S.S., which resulted in the girl being given to an evangelical family despite the presence of a fit biological relative, Harrington put out hundreds of posts espousing bits of scripture.

An 11-Minute Hearing

A third case of Harrington’s, another child case, reveals that the underlying problems in the Oklahoma guardianship system do not begin or end in a single courtroom.

In 2014, Kristine and Dennis Rice were awarded co-guardianship of Dennis Rice’s granddaughter, K.R., then an infant. K.R.’s biological mother was in prison in Colorado; her biological father was unknown.

Kristine Rice raised K.R. as her own child for more than a decade.

The Rice marriage deteriorated. In 2018, a physical altercation resulted in Dennis Rice’s arrest; a police report photo documents an injury to Kristine Rice’s face. In 2021, K.R., then about 7 years old, wet herself during one of Dennis Rice’s outbursts of anger, Kristine Rice said. Kristine Rice left with K.R. and complex court battles began.

The first guardianship judge assigned to K.R.’s case, Special Judge Allen J. Welch, affirmed supervision orders limiting Dennis Rice’s visitation. Dennis Rice then disappeared from the proceedings from June 2023 to January 2025.

When he returned, Welch had retired. The case was transferred to Harrington, who immediately restored Dennis Rice’s visitation rights.

Oklahoma Watch obtained treatment reports from K.R.’s therapist that were available to Harrington and contained direct statements from the child.

In January 2025, K.R. described home with Kristine Rice as her only refuge: “Well, I feel like I don’t get a break from stuff happening in my life so school, my friends, and being at home helps distract me from everything else but now it’s like I can’t escape it at all.”

In March 2025, K.R. said she did not want overnight visits with Dennis Rice: “I definitely know that I don’t want to do any overnights with him though, unless I was somehow able to trust him again but I know his anger is still there.”

By April 2025, K.R. was expressing fear about the future: “I’m afraid of how he’ll treat me and I’m so scared that he will somehow get all the control and keep me from ever seeing my mom again.”

On Oct. 8, 2025, Kristine Rice filed a motion to have Harrington removed from the case. The following day, because of that motion, Oklahoma County Special Judge Karen Aguilar was brought in to conduct a hearing.

Kristine Rice’s attorney, Rob Hopkins, who was also on the team of attorneys representing the family of S.S., was out of state for medical reasons and participated only by phone. Technical difficulties impaired Hopkins’ ability to follow the proceedings. The hearing lasted 11 minutes. The transcript shows that Hopkins was given only a few minutes to argue his client’s position.

Despite the documented arrest for domestic abuse and the abbreviated hearing, Aguilar awarded sole custody of K.R. to Dennis Rice.

“She wasn’t going to give Ms. Rice a fair shake,” said Hopkins, describing Harrington’s position before the recusal motion was filed.

“Every time I go to court now, I lose more of her,” Kristine Rice said of K.R. “Every hearing strips her of rights. Every ruling pulls her further into a situation she begged me to protect her from.”

The story took another troubling turn in February, when Kristine Rice said she overheard, from outside Aguilar’s chambers, the judge telling Hopkins that she was recusing from the case. The reason: Courtney Schamel, K.R.’s court-appointed guardian ad litem, was also Aguilar’s personal attorney in Aguilar’s own divorce proceeding.

Court documents confirm that Schamel represents Aguilar. There was no explanation for why Aguilar did not disclose the conflict of interest at the time of the 11-minute hearing that determined K.R.’s fate.

In December 2025, Oklahoma County District Court Judge Amy Palumbo separately removed Harrington from K.R.’s case, citing the high probability of bias given the recusal motion Kristine Rice had filed.

The case has now been assigned to yet another judge. Dennis Rice, his attorney Lindsey Sherwood, and Schamel all declined to comment.

A System Under Strain

The systemic shortcomings in these three cases — compressed hearings, undisclosed conflicts of interest, sealed records that make outside scrutiny nearly impossible — reflect problems that experts say are widespread in American guardianship courts, and that Oklahoma is particularly ill-equipped to address.

Furthermore, the law has not kept pace with the scenarios that guardianship courts now encounter. Child guardianship cases in Oklahoma are presumptively closed, making them even harder to investigate than adult guardianship cases.

In adult guardianship cases, the financial stakes compound the problem.

The guardianship industry handles an estimated $50 billion in wards’ assets annually nationwide, according to Rick Black, founder of the Center for Estate Administration Reform, which has investigated more than 5,000 suspect adult guardianships since 2013.

“A system that is incapable of correcting its most outrageous defects is the definition of a broken system,” Black said. “Sadly, due to the influence and independence of this system’s managers and beneficiaries, executive and legislative branch leaders in each state have not taken appropriate action. In this regard, the checks and balances between the judicial, legislative, and executive branches are all failing vulnerable Oklahomans and their loved ones.”

Journalist Dimond continued to hold that the quality of guardianship judges is the linchpin on which all other problems with the guardianship system turn.

“People don’t understand,” Dimond said. “Judges in these cases can erase your will, your power of attorney, your health care proxy — they can even break your irrevocable trust.”

Attorneys familiar with Oklahoma’s guardianship system said the bench is unevenly prepared. Several lawyers said the system could be improved with training for new judges before they take office and continuing education as their careers proceed.

“If you get elevated to special judge and you’ve never practiced in probate or guardianship, it’s gonna be an uphill climb so you don’t get bamboozled by counsel who appear before you,” said one guardianship attorney who practices in multiple states.

Anthony Palmieri, former president of the National Guardianship Association and a long-time fraud investigator in the Florida guardianship system, said that most guardianship judges are sincere professionals but that bad actors exist.

“I’ve found cases in which the professional guardian was engaging in corruption with the judiciary,” Palmieri said.

Cost is its own obstacle. Attorneys said it is nearly impossible to fully litigate a guardianship case in Oklahoma for less than $100,000, a threshold that puts meaningful legal recourse out of reach for most families.

Canadian jurist Brownstone acknowledged the differences between his system and Oklahoma’s, and argued that transparency ought to serve as a form of accountability.

“I do think that would help people come to understand decisions by the same judge that are off the rails,” Brownstone said. “If the documents were public, more people would find out about these decisions and then they could get together and make an effort to get this person removed.”

For Kristine Rice, the system’s failures are not abstract. She found a provision in Title 43 of Oklahoma statutes — the section governing marriage, not guardianship — that appears to directly contradict Aguilar’s order granting sole custody of K.R. to Dennis Rice. Section 109.3 specifies that, absent other evidence, custody should not be granted to anyone who has engaged in abusive or harassing behavior, and establishes a rebuttable presumption against such grants.

Kristine Rice’s fight will continue with another hearing before Oklahoma County Special Judge Martha Oakes on April 7. It has been more than five months since K.R. saw the only woman she ever knew as mother.

Editor’s Note: This story was updated on Mar. 19, 2026, to correct Ghulam Nabi Safi’s job description.  

Full Article & Source:
11-minute hearings, hidden conflicts: inside Oklahoma’s broken guardianship system 

Tuesday, March 24, 2026

California Fiduciary Accused of Stealing from Alzheimer's Patient's Trust

Angelique Friend allegedly used her position to hire her husband's company and pay herself over $165,000 while caring for the incapacitated woman. 


A California fiduciary named Angelique Friend is accused of stealing from the trust of an Alzheimer's patient, Patricia Mettler, whom she was put in charge of overseeing. Friend allegedly hired her husband's company, Towngate In-Home Services, to care for Mettler and paid the company over $1.1 million, while also paying herself over $165,000 from the trust. The lawsuit alleges Friend failed to disclose the conflict of interest to Mettler's attorney.

Why it matters

This case highlights the importance of oversight and accountability for those entrusted with managing the affairs of vulnerable individuals. Fiduciaries have a legal and ethical duty to act in the best interests of their clients, and this alleged abuse of power for personal gain raises concerns about the potential for elder financial exploitation.

The details

According to court documents, Mettler was in poor health with Alzheimer's when Friend was put in charge of her trust in 2021. Friend immediately hired Towngate In-Home Services, a company owned by her husband David Esquibias, to care for Mettler. Over the nearly four-year period, the estate paid Towngate $1.1 million, while Friend also paid herself over $165,000, totaling $1.275 million. The lawsuit alleges Friend failed to disclose the conflict of interest to Mettler's attorney.

  • Friend was put in charge of Mettler's trust in 2021.
  • Towngate In-Home Services cared for Mettler for nearly four years.

The players

Angelique Friend

A California fiduciary accused of stealing from the trust of an Alzheimer's patient, Patricia Mettler, whom she was put in charge of overseeing.

Patricia Mettler

An Alzheimer's patient in Southern California whose trust was allegedly mismanaged by Angelique Friend.

David Esquibias

Angelique Friend's husband, who owns the company Towngate In-Home Services that was paid over $1.1 million to care for Mettler.

What’s next

Relatives are asking for Friend to be removed as trustee and for the return of all assets 'improperly disbursed'. They are also asking for attorney fees to be paid.

The takeaway

This case highlights the need for stronger oversight and accountability measures to protect vulnerable individuals from financial exploitation by those entrusted with managing their affairs. It underscores the importance of fiduciaries upholding their legal and ethical duties to act in the best interests of their clients. 

Full Article & Source:
California Fiduciary Accused of Stealing from Alzheimer's Patient's Trust 

Tommy Hearns Under Conservatorship


A Michigan judge appointed Ronald Hearns as the sole guardian and conservator for his father, Tommy Hearns.

The ruling follows a series of emergency hearings in Oakland County prompted by concerns from Adult Protective Services regarding the 67-year-old’s vulnerability and potential financial exploitation by other family members. This ruling gives Ronald authority over his father’s personal and medical care, including where he lives and his healthcare decisions. Hearns, who was diagnosed with dementia, is currently living with Ronald.

This specifically grants Ronald control over his father’s finances and assets. The move was deemed necessary after reports surfaced of unauthorized GoFundMe campaigns and suspicious real estate transactions involving other relatives while Hearns’ health was in decline.

The Future

The guardianship comes as Hearns continues to navigate a challenging physical and cognitive recovery. In July 2025, Hearns underwent a successful hip replacement surgery to address a long-standing “bone-on-bone” condition. While the surgery was a success, his recovery has been complicated by the ongoing progression of dementia. Despite his health issues, Ronald Hearns noted that his father remains active and is still scheduled to make a public appearance at the Box Fan Expo in Las Vegas on May 2, 2026.

“My job with the conservator and the court is to make sure that nobody takes advantage of him and he is treated with dignity and respect that he so richly deserves,” Wolf Mueller (Ronald’s attorney) 

“Just keep praying for my dad and the family as we move forward in our lives. That’s my main goal, to make sure that he’s enjoying his life and nobody else can hurt him in any kind of way, financially, physically, or mentally,” Ronald

Full Article & Source:
Tommy Hearns Under Conservatorship