Friday, April 10, 2009

Guardianship Program Looking for Volunteers

The definition of a “guardian” is a person who guards, protects, or preserves; a protector; a defender.”

The name accurately describes volunteers who serve the Kansas Guardianship Program.

These volunteers accept legal and moral responsibility of the well-being of people who are unable to manage for themselves.

“Our clients are referred from Adult Protective Services or from state psychiatric hospital social workers,” said Del Jacobson, volunteer recruiter.

When a pilot project began 30 years ago, the state-funded program primarily assisted people mostly with developmental disabilities. Today, in addition to adults with developmental disabilities, volunteers also serve those who are mentally ill, elderly, and those with medical conditions or have injuries, which impair their ability to make decisions.

The volunteers sometimes are responsible for making the necessary arrangements for a client when they die. State funds are available to assist those who may not have the financial means to pay for a proper funeral and burial.

A $30 per month stipend is provided to each volunteer for out-of-pocket expenses.

Full Article and Source:
Volunteers needed: A chance to help those who cannot help themselves

12 comments:

StandUp said...

I doubt that the name and defination of "guardian" accurately describes volunteers who serve the KS guardianship program.

Betty said...

People read this and think of guardian angels. What a pretty picture they are painting!

The perception is all wrong.

Anonymous said...

I have mixed feelings.

Anonymous said...

Mixed feelings, Anonymous? I think the stated goal here is noble - just like guardianship laws.

But imagine, people volunteer to "help" people in need and then find themselves in the postion of making life and death decisions for strangers.

I think it's unfair to put that pressure on volunteers and people who don't know the true depth of what they've volunteered for.

Anonymous said...

Every 'program' needs checks and balances especially when 'strangers'; whether professionals or volunteers who are 'fudiciaries' over another human being and their estates. Who or what 'oversight' monitor/agency is reconciling the estates from embezzlement? I'm all for volunteers vs professionals who charge exhorbitant fees for filing paperwork any clerk can do but effective monitoring is essential. Judges should NEVER have the 'authority' to order a 'blank check' as appropriate for guardianship/conservators.
CT State Statutes allow for up to 10% of the value of the estate for these fees. Probate Court Judges have corrupted the credibility of the Probate Court process using their broad discretionary authority like drunken sailors handing out 'wards' of the courts' assets as if they were 'spoils' from conquering their enemies.

ALL courts must operate with TRANSPARENCY as Probate, Family, and Juvenile Court Judges are nothing more than politically appointed, politically approved and politically influenced attorneys. How many Attorneys do YOU know would pass up a Legal License to Steal? In the current economic crisis, the stealing is getting more brazen and even elderly with modest assets are being 'snagged' and plundered.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, watch your backs the big law firms are thinning out their ranks big time many lawyers are OUT OF WORK. My guess is they went directly to their nearest courthouse probate department.

Anonymous said...

The Kansas volunteers receive a $30 per month stipend. I do not understand the condemnation of this program by several commenters here. People who visit the NASGA website have seen the worst of guardianship and may know little about many States'/Court's efforts to correct corruption and manage heavy case loads.

If you find a real problem with the Kansas volunteer guardianship program, please let us know; otherwise, congratulate the appropriate Kansas departments and courts for their efforts.

The article doesn't tell me enough about court oversight of the volunteers and I don't know how past success has been valued. For now, I'm in favor of any efforts to bring the VOLUNTEERING PUBLIC into the courts to review guardianships and conservatorships on a regular basis.

If there are concerns, they would be administrative, in my opinion. Do all the wards really need guardians/conservators? Are the courts making or losing money in these cases? Etc.?

Kalamazoo County, Michigan, has a volunteer Probate Advocate Program. I've never heard of anything like it but I'm sure there are similar programs elsewhere. When I was sworn in as a court officer, the judge said, "You are the eyes and ears of this court." Consider it schmaltzy, but all of the volunteers here take their work extremely seriously. Reports of neglect, financial disparity between means and lifestyle,lack of appropriate medical care, too many meds and so many other things are reported by volunteer advocates - as well as success stories. The court follows up on all recommendations, even so far as hearings to remove guardians and conservators.

LPL

Anonymous said...

Too many people being placed under guardianship. Some probably do not need to be there. Guardianship is too easy to get in, and next to impossible to get out.

wisernow said...

One can be the eyes and ears of the probate system via guardianship case files.

The STATE OF WISCONSIN seals all guardianship case files which are not included in the states circuit court access via the Internet.

In addition, notices of hearings for emergency temporary guardianship sent by the law firm representing the petitioner are received by interested person, family members AFTER the hearing is concluded - it's a done deal.

This particular case turned out 100% failure with closed files with no chance of audit or reivew which is the only way to have eyes.

We need uniformity and consequences for failure to comply with the state laws.

No oversight - closed, sealed files - the lack of uniformity in 50 states is a recipe for.... DISASTER all by design.

Anonymous said...

LPL: volunteering to be a guardian is a serious committment and it's not for everybody. I do not think anyone condems those who have made that committment and a do actually guard, conserve, and protect.

The problem is these strangers are given power over wards while the ward's family is pushed aside.

I would prefer Volunteers visit -- to provide company and socialization but life and death decisions should be made by family instead of strangers.

Anonymous said...

Judges routinely roll over advance directives such as POA, Healthcare Decision Makers etc. in favor of court appointed guardianships. It is a racket - a money making venture - and family members are helpless to stop the exploitation.

Anonymous said...

Location, location, location

Can you imagine for one moment individuals signing up as volunteers for the position of guardians from Chicago, C(r)ook County Illinois?

Background checks at the minimum of every 30 days would be mandatory to begin to weed out the persons who have been convicted of felonies.

What about those who would volunteer for unethical motives; and those who avoided being convicted of crimes?

Turn them loose on the vulnerable making life and death decisions?

In Illinois a person who is mentally incompetent and/or physically disabled is a prime candidate for the guardianship web.

Pysically disabled, please think about this. No disabilities are listed which means this physically disabled label is intentionally worded to be vague and could very well apply to the majority of adults.

A person with limited mobility, arthritis, impaired vision, using a walker or a wheelchair etc is a candidate to become a ward of the state, just like that.

I find this matter to be of paramount importance; very frightening and very wrong. Please consider: who reads the state laws governing guardians and wards until it is too late?The majority of society has no clue what is waiting for them, all of this by design.

Open dialogue, differing opinions from life's experience is a good thing. This forum allows for discussions in a matter that must be addressed before you, me, a loved one, a person alone is declared a ward of the state.