Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Waiting for Justice

In 2005, I was granted temporary conservatorship of my Mother and was then able to fire the "agency" and people who, despite my efforts to protect my Mom, had exercised extensive and undue influence over her.

It took over a year to get these characters removed, a year during which they generously helped themselves to her money, household and personal belongings - even her lift chair and electric scooter. During their tenure, they tried very hard to isolate Mom from me. I found checks bearing signatures in no way resembling my Mom’s although a good effort was made to imitate it. Her bank even reported large withdrawals from her account to APS. Despite ongoing reports of my worries and concerns to the appropriate agencies and attorneys, no action was taken or further investigation initiated.

Finally, facts and documents, coupled with a transcript of conversations with one honest caregiver, enabled me to return to court in May 2005 and win the temporary guardianship, which allowed me to hire respectable and reliable caregivers. Mom’s attorney then asserted I could not be Mom’s permanent conservator because I was a direct beneficiary of the trust: a conflict of interest. So, I employed a private dementia- and elder-care management company, and the owner was later appointed as Mom’s conservator of both person and estate in January 2006.

All progressed smoothly for a time. Then, the incredible LVN who was Mom’s care manager resigned and the situation started to deteriorate fast. The conservator makes decisions with limited or no consultation with our family. One of the most damaging was changing Mom’s caregiver routine from three 8-hour shifts to one live-in, purportedly because Mom was "running out of money" - a specious claim. Mom’s social interactions were dramatically reduced, she became progressively withdrawn and depressed, and the caregiver -- a most compassionate and competent woman – became exhausted resulting from the extent of care my Mom needed because she is completely non-ambulatory. It took almost two months to rectify this desperate situation.

Other incidents exacerbated our suspicions: late bill payments, facility care insurance policy allowed to lapse, a life insurance invoice 30-days past due. However, because the conservator changed the billing addresses to the conservator’s office, it is impossible to determine how current the bills may or may not be. The conservator also removed Mom’s medications from her home and stores and dispenses them from the conservator’s office.

Recently, the conservator hired a safe cracker to break into Mom’s jewelry safe and remove it all without notification to the family, let alone having a witness from the family present or asking for the combination. The incident seriously agitated my already-frail mother.

To date, and contrary to requirements mandated by the passage of the Omnibus Conservatorship and Guardianship Reform Act of 2006, the conservator has yet to provide a copy of her first annual accounting to the family, despite repeated requests. The inventory and appraisal is incomplete.

Mom is now under hospice care. Now, more than ever, it is not the time for anyone to be adding more upset and drama to her life or ours. Mom deserves the best and I am doing my utmost to ensure that she has it, all the while praying that somehow, someway, there will be accountability and justice will prevail.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

This tragic account of a guardianship case is another grim statistic of the guardianship system, racket proving it is only about the money.

The summary of incidents are screaming embezzlement, misappropriation of funds, unethical conduct and other criminal activities.

The agents of the courts in this sorrowful situation are not fulfilling their fiduciary duties - they have their eyes only on the Ward's money.

I would hope there is a formal complaint about this case to the appropriate agencies for investigation and prosecution, including the State's Attorney General's Office, with concerns about the statute of limitations issue, which varies from state to state.