“This law is very cruel and unnecessary,” Smith said. “It made no allowances for people who had been married for a lifetime. It has the same regulations as if being a guardian for someone you didn’t even know.”
LB157, also known as the Guardianship Reform Act of 2011, passed unanimously in the Nebraska Legislature. The author of the bill was District 27 Sen. Colby Coash of Lincoln. Gov. Dave Heineman signed the bill in February 2011, and it took effect in January.
At the time of the accident, Margaret already had power of attorney for her husband’s medical care, but because he couldn’t sign his name to grant her power of attorney over his finances, she did the only other thing she could — she got a guardianship of him. With that, she could continue to manage the couple’s business.
In February, when Margaret went to the judge’s office to turn in her annual report regarding her husband’s condition, she was given a large stack of papers containing new regulations and forms she needed to fill out.
“I got as far as the paragraph that said I would need a court order to take any money out of our joint accounts and took it all to my attorney,” Margaret said.
Some of the 16 mandates of LB157 include that funds of the guardian and ward should not be co-mingled. A guardian will take no money out of the shared accounts by any means, for any purpose without a court order, and guardians are required to use specific forms downloaded from the Nebraska Supreme Court’s website. In addition, guardians are required to pay a $5 fee to file required reports.
Until this law passed, Margaret said she didn’t have a problem. Now she said believes she needs a court order to buy a tube of toothpaste from the joint bank account she shares with her incapacitated husband.
Full Article and Source:
Broken Bow Woman Fighting Guardianship Law
4 comments:
I disagree with her. I think there has to monitoring and oversight no matter who the guardian is, period.
Well, it's gratifying to know that the legislature has put the burden of approval on the judges, but yes, in this type of case, all that's needed is monitoring.
Sorry, I agree with her, she has been married to her husband for many years. He would want her to be able to do what is best for her and him, without any court hassle. If he could sign, which I am sure he would have, she would not have to deal with all that guardianship stuff. This lady is the wife, not the guardian, she has a huge responsibility, she does not need it complicated by the courts sticking their nose in her business.
She should have been able to go to an attorney and have a power of attorney drawn up maybe under special circumstances. As an advocate against guardianship abuse, there should be some recourse in terms of reporting for wife and husband if they have been married for many years. This doesn't seem quite right. What do you want to bet that the judge DOESN'T require professional guardians to jump through all of these hoops. Yes, monitoring is needed, but there should be room to really examine individual situations.
Post a Comment