Monday, November 15, 2010

NASGA Press Release

PRESS RELEASE
For Immediate Release
__________________________________________________

GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE (GAO)
September 2010 Report on Guardianships:
Cases of Financial Exploitation, Neglect, and Abuse of Seniors __________________________________________________

In December of 2009, NASGA submitted our white paper “Protecting Our Citizens from Unlawful and Abusive Guardianships and Conservatorships” to several Congressional committees and the White House. Despite numerous studies over the years pointing to the lack of monitoring and oversight of cases, many states continue to permit due process and civil and human rights violations and fail to protect their citizenry from financial exploitation, neglect, and abuse during “protective” proceedings. NASGA provided illustrations of these problems, and specifically requested federal intervention.

The Senate Special Committee on Aging requested the GAO to do a forensic study, instructing them to: (1) verify whether allegations of abuse by guardians are widespread; (2) examine the facts in selected closed cases; and (3) proactively test state guardian certification processes. Numerous NASGA member cases were submitted to the GAO for their review.

The investigators found that within their control study group, guardians stole or otherwise improperly obtained $5.4 million in assets from 158 incapacitated victims, many of whom were seniors. In some instances, guardians also physically neglected and abused their victims.

NASGA welcomes the GAO’s in-depth report as a positive step forward. The report corroborates some of the problems set forth in our white paper. Although the GAO was unable to determine whether “allegations of abuse” by guardians are widespread, NASGA’s continued growth is due specifically to the growing number of complaints of abuse from victim members across the country.

While the GAO was conducting its forensic investigation of closed cases, the House Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security held a hearing on May 25, 2010 on Fraud Against Senior Citizens. At that hearing, Rep. Louie Gohmert requested a model law. In response, retired Wauwatosa, WI police officer John Caravella, author of “Marked for Destruction” (a true story of a guardianship), drafted a proposed model law entitled "The Adele Chris Act." He submitted copies of the Act to Rep. Gohmert and Sen. Kohl, Chairman of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, for review by their respective committees. NASGA applauds the work of John Caravella and supports his proposed law.

Although this issue should be of interest to other committees, NASGA feels the Senate Special Committee on Aging should spearhead the effort to meaningful reform, as it has been addressing the guardianship problem for many years and clearly recognizes the need for reform.

NASGA continues to reiterate the need for federal intervention. We have requested that the Senate Special Committee on Aging hold a series of hearings on this problem – both at the Senate and in the field (for the benefit of victims who are unable to make the trip to Washington D.C.) and look forward to the Senate’s response.

See Also:
GAO Releases Guardianship Study Report

NASGA's White Paper: "An Open Letter to Congress and the White House"

The Adele Chris Act

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

Maybe this time the Aging Committee will take some meaningful action.

jerri said...

if not now when?

Mike said...

The stage is set. Now all we need is a first giant step!

Anonymous said...

Good going, NASGA!

Connie said...

The GAO did a great job with what they were assigned. But, they weren't assigned to really look at the issues and that's too bad.

Anonymous said...

Why did they study closed cases? Most guardianship cases close when the ward dies. Why not study active cases with live victims?

Finny said...

We're counting on you Senate Special Committee on Aging!

Sue said...

What concerns me is this report's findings are on closed cases. Closed cases are closed almost all the time when the ward dies .... case closed.

Deceased wards, deceased people cannot speak. Who will speak for them?

We need living, talking wards to tell their stories to those who can do something about the cases that are problematic, take action against the broken system, now.

We need to hear from the people who are affected.

There is a real need for a national databse; all guardianships and conservatorship cases must be open records. No more hiding what is going on in probate courts.

Of course, this report was not in my local news, if it's not on tv or in the newspaper...it didn't happen.

Mark said...

I think the fact that the GAO did this study is light at the end of the tunnel. More is coming because of this study, I'm sure of it.

Anonymous said...

There are new people coming into Washington DC ~ I hope it's a new beginning that will end the guardianship nightmare.

I am a baby boomer and I see what is laying in wait for me.

The truth is, I would rather burn everything I have while I can than to see hard earned money go to probate mobsters.

One step ahead of the vultures will give me eternal peace.

Anonymous said...

They have done studies every two years for a long time now ........

Anonymous said...

Chelsea - Whaaaa! Whaaa! I went to Stanford so I'm better than everybody else. Daddy and Mommy, I want another secret project to do!

Billary - All right, Chelsea. I'll talk to George W. Bush. We both are Yale classmates.

next day ...

Billary - George says it's ok to use the Secret Service. Your job will be to decide which families and estates get expropriated. There are a lot of them out there. See if you can find any political enemies. The Secret Service will provide background checks to slip into the judges' chambers. Don't tell anyone! By the time they figure out how to do a Freedom of Information Act request, you will be President!

Anonymous said...

All talk and no action = dragging their feet for how many years?

Why?

Many reasons prevent people from doing what is right a few examples:

1) Lazy
2) Do not have the remedy?
3) Could it be the legislators don't want to offend those who contribute big money to keep contributors happy?