Monday, July 7, 2008

The 40/70 Rule

The "40-70 Rule" is based on original research conducted by Home Instead Senior Care, which discovered that nearly one-third of adults in the U.S. have a major communication obstacle with their parents that stems from continuation of the parent-child role. The fact that many seniors may still be dealing with their grown sons or daughters as if they're children rather than adults makes these conversations particularly difficult.

The "40-70 Rule" is designed to help adult children and their aging parents deal with those sensitive topics that often make conversations difficult. The idea is that if you're 40, or your parents are 70, it's time to start talking - at least about certain senior topics.


More Information:
Home Instead - 40/70 Rule

40/70 PDF Booklet

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

40-70 sounds like a good, safe plan but in my opinion it could be too late, especially if the elder is snatched up into the guardianship racket.

The numbers need to be lowered to a minimum of 30-60 giving the parties more time to adjust to discussing sensitive, personal issues.

Anonymous said...

A NASGA member brought our attention to this YouTube video which I believe says it all about the relationship of children to their aging parents:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gxTxHp57WU

"Elderly Father Writes to Son About Aging"

Anonymous said...

On August 7, 2008, the New York Daily News printed a story headling: "Brooklyn lawyer couple eyed in guardian scams"

The article stated in part that Steven Rondos, 43, and his lawyer wife, Camille Raia, 47, are suspected of stealing the money from so-called guardianship accounts set up for victims of medical malpractice and personal injury cases; and that Judges in several boroughs and counties have started removing Rondos and Raia from their positions of authority over the accounts.

The Daily News should be filled with such articles.

In preparation for an upcoming documentary on elder abuse, our research has uncovered corruption at every level in guardianship proceedings and appointments in Brooklyn. Accounts given by the people involved in the experience are shocking and defy common decency.

Anyone can bring a guardianship proceeding seeking to become the guardian of another by claiming that the person is “incapacitated.” The court must hold a hearing within 30 days and the person has the right to be present. However, on many occasions the person is elderly and if in a nursing facility may even be drugged and does not attend. Routinely, healthy seniors are deemed by court appointed medical professionals as being “incapacitated” when it is clear that they are not.

A guardian is then appointed supposedly from a rotating list. However, what we found is that the same people are appointed over and over again as guardians, court evaluators and court examiners (most of them attorneys), making it easy for wrongdoing to be covered up because basically there is little or no accountability. Once a guardian is appointed, it is almost impossible to have him or her removed.


All fees for everyone involved in the guardianship process are paid for out of the elderly person’s assets. So the elderly person pays not only to defend himself, but also pays the fees for the attorney for the person bringing the petition and for the court evaluator, usually an attotney. Fees up to 400 dollars an hour are not unusual.

According to verifiable sources, millions of dollars are stolen each and every year, and it is not just in Brooklyn, but in every state of the country. Wrongdoing is not limited to financial exploitation. Elderly people are actually suffering abuse at the hands of those who have sworn to protect them. Many times they are taken from their homes against their will and forced to live in facilities where they are physically, medically and psychologically restrained. In some instances court orders are issued in which family members are not permitted any contact with their loved ones.

New York law gives broad powers to a guardian including the power to make decisions as to where you can live, who you can see, whether or not you can travel, how your money can be spent. A guardian can sell your home and property without your consent or knowledge, change the beneficiaries on your investments or in your will, and make your end of life decisions contrary to what you might have wanted. All of the powers of attorney, health care proxies or trusts that the elder law attorney created for you, vanish with the stroke of the judge's pen. A person under guardianship has less rights than a death row inmate. To the unscrupulous, being appointed guardian to someone with sizeable assets is like going to heaven, without dying. My question is why isnt something being done to stop this? Keep in mind that each of us is a potential victim.