CENTRE COUNTY, Pa. (WTAJ) — PA ADAPT,
an organization advocating for disability rights, is asking for a
review of what they call “Pennsylvania’s broken guardianship system.”
When an individual lacks the capacity to make certain decisions, a
substitute decision-maker, or “guardian”, can act on their behalf,
according to the disability rights of Pennsylvania.
PA ADAPT said they’ve seen too many cases of guardianship
being overused and abused. State and local offices, however, said the
system is highly monitored to reduce risks of neglect or exploitation.
“Everybody to the extent possible should have the right to make a decision for themselves,” Pam Auer, a member of PA ADAPT said.
“In a lot of these cases they’re putting people in long-term care
facilities or congregate setting institutions where they don’t need that
level of care,” Misty Dion, a member of PA ADAPT said.
The group is offering four recommendations, followed by other states:
(1) prohibit guardianships where less restrictive alternatives would meet an adult’s functional needs; (2) require specific court findings before certain critical rights (e.g., to marry, vote, choose visitors) are abridged; (3) require petitioners to state whether less restrictive alternatives have been tried and justify any failure to do so; (4) create mechanisms that adults subject to guardianship and others can use to trigger modification or termination of an order.
The Centre County Office of Aging said promoting the least restrictive care is a priority already in place.
“Any time that we are providing services we’re looking to support the
older adult and eliminate the risk to them and keep them as independent
as possible,” Centre County Office of Aging Director Quentin Burchfield
said. “We really look at what’s the least restrictive, and that’s
required not only by us, by the state, but also by the courts.”
Burchfield said they’re highly regulated by the Pennsylvania Department of Aging.
In early June, PA ADAPT went to Harrisburg, demanding Governor Wolf
take action to end the Department of Aging’s practices and develop an
enforceable bill of rights.
“The Department of
Aging has a responsibility per the Older Adults Protective Services Act
to reduce risks to older adults due to abuse, neglect, abandonment and
exploitation. There are times when guardianship is one of the ways to
reduce that risk; however the Department does not administer or oversee
laws concerning guardianship. The guardianship system and the
application of its respective laws are solely under the authority of the
Orphans Court.”
A Pinellas County taxi
driver is accused of tricking an elderly woman with dementia into
giving him more than $11,000 for taxi repairs.
by D'Ann Lawrence White
A Pinellas County taxi driver is accused of tricking an elderly woman
with dementia into giving him more than $11,000 for taxi repairs. (Renee Schiavone/Patch)
CLEARWATER, FL — A Pinellas
County taxi driver is accused of tricking an elderly woman with dementia
into giving him more than $11,000 for repairs on his taxi that he
wasn't responsible for paying, according to the Pinellas County
Sheriff’s Office.
Deputies
said Elliott James Collins, 64, of Ulmerton Road, Largo, who works as a
taxi driver for United Taxi, offered his telephone number to the
77-year-old woman and said she could call him directly when she needs a
ride.
Police said Collins then told the woman he needed repairs to
his taxi. Deputies said she gave him money totaling $11,000, even
though United Taxi told the sheriff's office that it pays for repairs
and maintenance of all its taxis.
Collins
was charged with exploitation of elderly or disabled adult and scheming
to defraud. He was released from jail on a $10,000 bond.
(WXLV) — The state’s immunity act for nursing homes is still in place two years after the pandemic started.
North
Carolina legislators passed the measure unanimously during the pandemic
to protect nursing homes from being sued for covid deaths. The state
adopted the broadly worded provision in May 2020 to protect companies
and staff from malpractice and negligence lawsuits arising during the
pandemic.
State leaders say it was intended to only protect against covid deaths, but our recent reporting showed it may actually be causing more harm to patients, allowing some homes to shield themselves from neglect cases.
The provision will stay in effect as long as Democratic Gov. Roy
Cooper’s emergency declaration over the health crisis remains in place
or it is amended in the state's short session.
Meanwhile, dozen of families say because the law is still in place,
people in the facilities are still being harmed. One woman says her
father was a victim and the care facility is being protected by the law.
“I'm
not going to let this die," said Trish Willard, daughter of Allen
Willet who died in a Greensboro nursing home, "They wouldn't treat
animals the way they've treated these people in these nursing homes.”
It’s a fight that keeps Willard up at night after she says her father an army veteran died due to neglect.
“When he went in, he was at 204 and he was down to 114 when he died.," said Willard.
Allen developed dementia in his late 70s and went into the care facility in 2019. She says things went downhill quickly.
“It
got to the point where there was no water," said Willard. "I mean, I've
got pictures and video. The dirt all over my father. His toenails
curled in so much where they were claws. I had to beg them to cut his
toenails.”
What really was noticeable, she says was his weight loss.
“It
got really emotional when I saw him losing weight rapidly," said
Willard. "I brought it to their attention when it came to someone coming
in and actually feeding him maybe even a feeding tube anything and they
said, well, we'll see. We'll get a dietitian working with him. It's not
going to help if they're not going to help feed him because he forgot
how to feed himself."
And then Covid hit and nursing home doors across the state were shut to all visitors.
“I
could not explain what that was like to see him in that condition
because they would allow us to come look at him from a distance," said
Willard. "But I did not get to see my father in person until they called
me and said he was ready to die. When I did he had no kind of water or
anything. The moisture his tongue was completely stuck to his lip. Like
it was grown together. It was just sickening that they let a human get
that way. And it's not about the $9000 a month. It's about I'm really
trusting someone to take care of him because I was unable to take care
of him at that point because I was a breast cancer patient.”
Allen died 14 months after going in.
"He died from starvation," said Willard.
Since
her father's death Willard took her story to an attorney, but because
of the immunity law courts are giving full immunity to nursing homes for
any deaths within their walls. It is a law, that advocates across the
state are trying to fight like Lauren Zingraff, executive director of
Friends of Residents.
“I can tell you that Friends of Residents
and other partners of ours have been working behind the scenes directly
since before the session came back," said Zingraff. "We have had
meetings with legislators. I've been on those calls along with lobbyists
and other policy advocates specifically to address amending or changing
Senate Bill 704. Now whether that goes forward, I don't know.”
Zingraff
says the pandemic highlighted a problem that already existed in the
nursing home, a lack of staffing as North Carolina is one of 20 states
in the US that doesn’t have a minimum staffing requirement for the
facilities.
"When you have only a few staff members available for a
lot of residents that need 24-hour care, then their daily needs in some
way, shape or form are going to be neglected," said Zingraff. "That
means they're not getting their meals on time and they're not getting
their medicines on time and they're not having their hygiene taken care
of in a proper manner.”
A majority of nursing homes in the U.S. are facing staffing shortages, according to a recent survey, which can result in unsafe conditions for the nation's elderly.
The
survey, released by the American Health Care Association, found that
98% of nursing home operators are having trouble hiring, 59% said they
are losing money, and 73% said staffing issues could force them to
close.
Attorneys say staffing levels in long-term-care facilities
have been a battleground for years. They say the problem here is North
Carolina’s pandemic immunity law blocked plaintiffs from arguing that
low staff levels were a root cause of negligence. That removed a common
argument plaintiff attorneys typically use in nursing home negligence
cases.
North Carolina isn't the only only one where an immunity
law was enacted. Thirty-eight states have created emergency orders or
laws intended to immunize companies and individuals for care related to
the pandemic, according to a tally compiled by National Consumer Voice, a
nonprofit watchdog organization focused on nursing homes. The public
conversation in most of the states was that hospitals, doctors, and
long-term care facilities should not be held legally responsible for
coronavirus infections and deaths in a viral pandemic that overwhelmed
medical systems and long-term-care centers.
In nursing homes and
assisted-living facilities, at least 185,000 people have died of
covid-19, according to the nonprofit, nonpartisan Kaiser Family
Foundation. What’s new in North Carolina is that it’s the first state
where immunity claims are being cited in court by facilities to defend
themselves against cases that are not related to covid-19 and treatment.
North Carolina’s law says immunity applies to the delivery of care “directly or indirectly” impacted by the pandemic.
Advocates
for residents and their families say these laws have gone too far.
"They contend the industry sought broadly worded immunity laws, as the
families who often serve as the eyes and ears for problems when they
visit their loved ones inside residences were no longer permitted inside
facilities," said am Brooks, program and policy manager for National
Consumer Voice, who has been closely monitoring the spread of immunity
laws. "Without those family members drawing attention to issues on a
frequent basis an escalation in routine neglect cases was bound to
happen."
Until the law is amended or new laws are passed
Willard is concerned other families will have to go through the same
nightmare she did having to say goodbye to a loved one too soon.
"I
was sitting there and I told him I said daddy, I love you and I'm sorry
I have fought to the end to try to help you," said Willard. "It's okay,
you don't need to suffer anymore. I know what they've done to you in
here. And I'm going to speak for you, I'm going be that voice for you
that you didn't have. They made me leave after 30 minutes knowing that
he was going to die alone. I can't explain how that's haunted me every
single day."
Many of the families who have lost loved ones have come together and created a petition to stop the law from continuing.
If you are concerned, advocates say it’s okay to ask questions about your relative’s long-term care facility.
They say to contact the office’s administrator if you have questions about what’s going on behind the scenes.
According
to the Department of Human and Health Services here in North Carolina,
the agency receives thousands of complaints each year. Then regulation
surveyors check for compliance with state and federal laws. If they find
a facility is in violation, the facility has ten days to submit a plan
of correction. If the issues aren’t corrected during a surprise visit,
then DHHS can enforce monetary penalties or terminate their Medicare
programs.
If you have concerns or complaints about a particular place, contact the state.
Former New Orleans Criminal Court Judge Byron C. Williams, who was
accused of groping a courthouse employee in 2017 before resigning from
the bench in 2020, has had his license to practice law in the state
suspended for a year and a day by the Louisiana Supreme Court. (NOLA.com
| The Times-Picayune file)
By Ken Daley
NEW ORLEANS (WVUE) - Former New Orleans
Criminal Court Judge Byron C. Williams, who resigned two years ago while
still under investigation for accusations he groped a courthouse
employee, has had his license to practice law in the state suspended for
a year and a day by the Louisiana Supreme Court.
By a split 4-3 decision, the justices of the state’s highest court accepted the penalty enshrined in a joint petition for consent discipline
agreed upon by Williams and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel.
Justices William Crain, James Genovese and Jay McCallum opposed the
disciplinary settlement.
A courtroom
staffer alleged that in July 2017, as she was on a phone call at her
desk, Williams twice crept up from behind and touched her chest before
scampering out of her office. Female attorneys also accused Williams of
inappropriate behavior and comments from the bench during his five-year
tenure overseeing Section G of the city’s Criminal District Court.
Williams
denied the allegations, but was suspended when the state’s Judiciary
Commission began investigating his alleged conduct. Williams collected
his annual $152,000 paycheck for another 18 months as the investigation
and suspension dragged on, before he finally resigned from the criminal
court bench in February 2020.
Louisiana taxpayers also were on the hook
for a $52,500 settlement the state agreed to pay Williams’ chief
accuser in July 2020, in exchange for her agreement to drop lawsuits she
filed against Williams, the Criminal District Court and the state.
Williams was not required to admit any wrongdoing nor pony up any of the
settlement expenses, according to documents obtained in March 2021 by the Louisiana Illuminator as part of a public records request.
The
financial settlement was the most expensive one related to sexual
misconduct that the state’s Office of Risk Management paid out in 2020,
according to documents the Illuminator received from Louisiana’s
Department of Administration.
The
report said Williams still receives more than $5,300 per month in state
retirement benefits accrued through more than 13 years of public
service. Williams’ previously worked in public education, for the U.S.
Attorney’s Office, and for four years with the Orleans Parish District
Attorney’s office under DA Eddie Jordan and interim DA Keva Landrum.
BOUNTIFUL — A 49-year-old woman has been arrested after police
alleged she stole $6,000 from a disabled man at a care center where she
worked.
Amber E. Miller was booked and released Sunday from the Davis County
Jail in Farmington on suspicion of intentional financial exploitation of
a vulnerable adult, a second-degree felony.
The patient, a quadriplegic, called Bountiful police on June 13 to
report that he had asked a therapist in March to cash a check for him
and bring him the cash. Despite repeated requests to hand over the
money, it had not been delivered, the man said.
Miller told police, according to an arrest affidavit, that she cashed
the check and delivered it to his room in an envelope along with mail
items. The investigating officer said he left the case open for further
follow-up.
The next day, Miller took the cash to the man, apologized, and urged
him not to pursue criminal charges, the affidavit said. She was fired by
the care center that day after managers learned about the theft, the
report said.
The patient told police he wanted to press charges because now that
Miller allegedly admitted to stealing and keeping the money, she may be a
suspect in an earlier theft.
The charging documents said the earlier reported theft of $8,500 from
the man’s safe in his room remains under investigation. Police said
Miller denied taking that money. She said many staff members had access
to the man’s safe.
No formal charges had been filed against Miller by Monday afternoon. She does not yet have an attorney of record.
Homes and businesses damaged after the hurricane tore through Louisiana. Photograph: Adrees Latif/Reuters
A Louisiana nursing home owner who sent more than 800 elderly residents to endure Hurricane Ida in a ramshackle warehouse was charged on Wednesday with neglect and other crimes.
Bob Dean, 68, surrendered to the Louisiana
attorney general’s office and was jailed on eight counts of cruelty to
infirmed people, five counts of healthcare fraud and two counts of
obstruction of justice.
A statement from
Louisiana’s attorney general, Jeff Landry, alleged that Dean had billed
the federal Medicaid program for dates his residents were not receiving
care, refused to move residents out of the warehouse and “engaged in
conduct intended to intimidate or obstruct public health officials and
law enforcement”.
Dean flew in from Georgia to turn himself over to
authorities on an arrest warrant they obtained for him in recent days.
His attorney, John McClindon, told the Associated Press that his client
would be released on a $350,000 bond.
McClindon added: “I don’t think Bob Dean did anything that rose to the level of criminal.”
The
criminal charges mark only the latest set of complications for Dean,
who is facing a mound of unresolved civil litigation over his decision
to send residents to the squalid warehouse in Independence, a town about
70 miles (110km) north-west of New Orleans while Ida caused widespread power outages and other devastation in south-east Louisiana in August 2021.
Besides
losing his licenses and federal funding to operate his seven nursing
homes in Louisiana, his attorneys have said Dean is battling dementia
and other memory problems.
Bob Dean in an image provided by the Tangipahoa parish sheriff’s office. Photograph: AP
He is facing an unrelated reckless conduct
criminal charge in Georgia after he shot his thumb off and Oregon
authorities are investigating him after cattle from his ranch in that
state had to be rescued from a snowstorm, the Baton Rouge Advocate
newspaper reported.
Authorities say some of the
residents Dean’s nursing homes sent to the Independence warehouse were
found sleeping on mattresses atop a wet floor, sobbing and lying in
their own feces.
Some
came without their medicines to endure a Category 4 storm packing winds
of 150 miles an hour. Conditions at the facility devolved rapidly, with
generators used to provide electricity failing, driving indoor
temperatures to dangerously high levels. The ceiling leaked, toilets
overflowed and there was a dearth of food and water for residents who
were packed in so closely it was impossible to follow social distancing
guidelines in place because of the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic.
Five of the 26 deaths
that occurred in Louisiana for reasons related to Ida were linked to
the fetid warehouse, according to officials, who had since launched an
investigation into Dean and his nursing homes.
A
total of more than a dozen others who had been at the facility died in
the aftermath of Ida’s landfall in the state on 29 August, the 16th
anniversary of Hurricane Katrina.
The most
serious charges filed against Dean are the ones alleging cruelty to
people with infirmities. Under Louisiana law, any one of those counts
can carry up to 10 years in prison if he is convicted.
Dean
owns two nursing homes in New Orleans, three in adjacent Jefferson
parish and one each in nearby Lafourche and Terrebonne parishes. All of
those areas directly experienced Ida’s effects.
Former Portland Attorney Pleads Guilty to Embezzling Client Funds
PORTLAND,
Ore.—A former Portland attorney pleaded guilty today to multiple felony
charges after perpetrating a scheme to defraud her clients and use the
proceeds to pay for personal expenses.
Lori E. Deveny, 56, pleaded guilty to mail, bank, and wire fraud;
aggravated identity theft; money laundering; and filing a false tax
return.
According to court documents, between April 2011 and May 2019, Deveny
systematically stole funds she held in trust for her clients. The funds
were derived from insurance proceeds due and payable to her clients.
Deveny is accused of forging client signatures on settlement documents
she sent to various insurance companies, making unauthorized transfers
of funds to personal accounts and falsely telling clients that the
insurance companies were to blame for delays in settling claims. Many of
Deveny’s clients never received the insurance payout they were owed.
Deveny used the proceeds of her scheme to pay for personal credit
card and loan payments, numerous big game hunting trips to Africa and
the resulting taxidermy costs, other vacations, her husband’s
photography business, home remodeling, expensive cigars and other
expenses associated with a lavish lifestyle.
On May 7, 2019, a federal grand jury in Portland returned a 24-count
indictment charging Deveny with mail, bank, and wire fraud; aggravated
identity theft; money laundering; and filing a false tax return.
Deveny will be sentenced on November 23, 2022, before U.S. District Court Judge Michael W. Mosman.
As part of her plea agreement, Deveny has also agreed to pay
restitution in full to her victims as determined by the government and
ordered by the court.
Mail and wire fraud are punishable by up to 20 years in prison and
money laundering is punishable by up to 10 years. All three offenses
carry maximum fines of $250,000 or twice the gross gains or losses
resulting from the offense and three years’ supervised release. Bank
fraud is punishable by up to 30 years in prison, a $1 million fine, and
five years’ supervised release. Filing a false tax return is punishable
by up to three years in prison, a $250,000 fine or twice the gross gains
or losses resulting from the offense, and one year of supervised
released. Aggravated identity theft is punishable by up to two years in
prison running consecutive to any other carceral sentence imposed.
U.S. Attorney Scott Erik Asphaug of the District of Oregon made the announcement.
This case was investigated by IRS-Criminal Investigation and the FBI
and is being prosecuted by Claire M. Fay, Assistant U.S. Attorney for
the District of Oregon.
A woman with ALS says California's aid-in-dying law discriminates against those who need help ingesting life-ending medication.
by Maria Dinzeo
SAN FRANCISCO (CN) — A federal judge said he cannot allow an
Americans with Disabilities Act carveout to California’s assisted
suicide law that would let doctors assist people too weak or disabled to
ingest end-of-life medication, finding that such a provision would
“fundamentally alter” the law from conferring the ability to take your
own life to having a doctor do it for you.
Sandra Morris, a California woman in the final stages of amyotrophic
lateral sclerosis (ALS), wants the option of ending her life in the
future. But the possibility that she’ll be too incapacitated to take her
own life means she may need a doctor’s help when the time comes. She
says no doctor will help her ingest aid-in-dying medication because they
could be criminally prosecuted.
California’s End of Life Option Act, signed into law in 2016, allows a
terminally ill adult to request an end-of-life prescription medication
from a doctor. But physicians are not allowed to step in and help
terminally ill patients too disabled or weak to administer the drugs
themselves.
“The legislation was polarizing, eliciting passionate responses both
in support and opposition from religious groups, medical practitioners,
and activists — including those advocating for disability rights. In the
face of this controversy, policymakers took pains to craft a statutory
framework that would provide choice and peace to many, while
acknowledging the weighty moral issues involved and protecting against
abuse and coercion,” U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria wrote of the
ardent debate behind the law, which ended up being struck down as unconstitutional in state court in 2018 and reinstated by an appellate court a month later. An amended version of the law was enacted in 2021, and the case was dismissed.
The End of Life Option Act limits who is eligible for such
medications and how they can take them. The patient must have an
“incurable and irreversible” disease that is expected to result in death
within six months, and physicians may only prescribe the medications to
those who have the physical and mental capacity to self-administer.
“One of the most difficult questions facing the drafters of the End
of Life Option Act was how to provide people with the option of a
peaceful death without opening the door to abuse or coercion,” Chhabria
wrote. “The Legislature thus included numerous safeguards in the statute
to ensure that, at every stage of the process, a person demonstrates
their voluntary consent.”
Morris, joined by her doctor Lonny Shavelson and other physicians,
sued to challenge the provision barring patients from receiving help
with ingesting aid-in-dying drugs when they are physically unable to do
so on their own.
“It feels so cruel to me that because of the way the EOLOA is
written, that I will have to tell my children that I have to leave them
earlier while I still have the use of my hands, and while I can still
swallow the medication — rather than having the assistance I need with
ingestion so I can stay with them a few extra weeks, or days, or hours,”
Morris said in a declaration. “I should not be asked to die early just
because I’m severely physically disabled.”
At a hearing
on the matter in April, disability rights attorney Cat Cabalo said
disallowing this carveout is a violation of the American With
Disabilities Act, because it disallows physically disabled persons from
participating in a legally sanctioned activity available to their
able-bodied peers.
But Chhabria ruled
the case could not proceed on the theory that it violates the ADA
because the accommodation they seek would cross the boundary created by
the End of Life Option Act, “from the ability to end your own life to
the ability to have someone else end it for you.”
Chhabria wrote, “Such an accommodation would ‘compromise[] the
essential nature of the act, and would therefore fundamentally alter the
program.’”
The judge said the law’s self-administration requirement is the “final safeguard” to ensure the act remains voluntary.
“A person seeking to end their life pursuant to the act can opt out
at any point — after requesting or receiving the prescription, after the
drugs are in their hand, after the feeding tube has been installed,
after saying goodbye,” he wrote. “The accommodation that the plaintiffs
seek would significantly undermine these protections by opening a window
during which there would be no way of knowing whether the patient had
changed their mind.”
After the California Attorney General’s office moved to dismiss the
case, patients and physicians asked Chhabria to narrow the requested
accommodation to allow doctors to help a patient if they begin to
administer the drug but lose the ability to complete the process. But
Chhabria found the proposal that a patient communicate their desire to
continue by blinking at the physician would again fundamentally change
the law’s purpose. “Permitting a physician to assist a patient based
solely on that patient’s communication would fundamentally alter the End
of Life Option Act by legalizing the killing of others — something the
act declines to do,” he wrote.
He also found it inappropriate to consider whether a physician could
intervene if a patient begins the process on their own but cannot
complete the act; for example, if they start to depress a plunger but
lose the strength to finish. Chhabria said this is an entirely new
theory of discrimination that would apply to “a tiny sliver” of the
proposed class. “It is almost as if the plaintiffs have proposed a new
lawsuit in response to the motion to dismiss,” he wrote, adding that it
would be very difficult to articulate a class full of patients who find
themselves in that situation.
Chhabria gave the plaintiffs another shot at amending their case, but said he was skeptical the effort would be worthwhile.
The state attorney general’s office said it was reviewing the
decision. Cabalo, the disability rights attorney, did not respond to
requests for comment on Wednesday. Shavelson said he could not
immediately comment.
LANSING —Members of the state House Judiciary Committee heard
testimony Tuesday on proposed legislation aimed at reforming Michigan’s
guardianship system, voting to approve new versions of bills with
several potent elements removed.
Committee Chair Graham Filler, a DeWitt Republican and bill sponsor, acknowledged the changes during Tuesday’s hearing.
“We’re
definitely doing this with eyes wide open and trying to make a piece of
legislation that actually works in the real world,” Filler said.
The
substitute legislation does not require guardians to be immediately
certified and does not increase the in-person visit requirement from
quarterly to monthly, as was the case in the original version of the
bills.
“That was just viewed as an unrealistic concept so we’ve modified that,” Filler said, of monthly in-person visits.
Guardians
and conservators will be required to secure “some form of
certification,” but not until funds to administer the requirement are
allocated by the legislature.
Additional visits by guardians can
be made virtually, over the telephone or, if that is not convenient, a
guardian can speak with a vulnerable person’s healthcare provider.
Michigan
Attorney General Dana Nessel, who in 2019 drew from a wide swath of
advocacy and legal groups in making appointments to her Elder Abuse Task
Force, also testified about what she described as significant changes
to the legislation.
“We, along with most of the task force
members, believe these changes strike the proper balance,” Nessel said,
adding the package ensures vulnerable people are protected, while
burdens on professional guardians and the court are minimized.
Nessel
credited AARP, the Alzheimer’s Association, probate court judges and
probate court registers, law enforcement, county prosecutors, elder law
attorneys and members of the disability community for their support of
the revised legislation.
Conspicuously absent from this list of
supporters is the Michigan Guardianship Association, some members of
which served on the Elder Abuse Task Force.
Vice President Georgia Callis, of Guardian Care, Inc. did not respond
to a request for comment, though the association previously publicly
opposed the package.
MGA is also not listed in a list of supporters Nessel’s office provided to the committee, records show.
Guardians
and conservators in Michigan are appointed by probate court judges, to
make medical, housing and financial decisions for someone when a judge
decides they can no longer make these decisions for themselves.
Elected officials have been trying to fix guardianship for decades, though each attempt has yielded little real change.
In
1996, the State Supreme Court convened a task force on guardianship
reform that produced 11 recommendations, including that “minimum ethical
standards for professional guardians and professional conservators
should be promulgated and enforced.”
In 2005, then-Governor
Jennifer Granholm established another task force which also recommended
minimum standards for guardians. This task force warned elder abuse
cases would likely to rise significantly, owing to Michigan’s aging
population.
The recommendations led to no new legislation and in
2012, state auditors found court administrators had only complied with a
few of the previous recommendations made in 2003.
Reformers have
urged lawmakers to pass a certification requirement since the 1990s,
which would mandate education, training, background checks and insurance
bonding for guardians and conservators.
Salli Pung, the state’s
long-term care ombudsman, who chairs the task force’s subcommittee on
certification, supports new versions of the legislation, records show,
yet has also been a vocal supporter of requiring Michigan’s guardians to
be certified.
“If we’re going to require certification for a dog
groomer, we should be requiring it for people who are responsible for
every aspect of someone’s life,” Pung previously said.
The bills
were approved for a second reading and no date has been set for a floor
vote; the Michigan Senate is also considering a proposed legislation
package similarly aimed at reforming guardianship and conservatorship.
ALBANY – A Clifton Park attorney has been indefinitely suspended from
practicing law as she faces allegations she stole money from an escrow
account in a real estate transaction.
Kimberly Anne Harp, who became a lawyer in 2000, also sent allegedly
altered bank statements to an attorney watchdog committee investigating
her actions, according to the Appellate Division of state Supreme
Court’s Third Department, which imposed Harp’s suspension Thursday.
Harp is the second local lawyer to be suspended this month.
Robert Morris Cohen, an attorney since 1972, was suspended last week
after failing to respond to allegations that he failed to refund a
client’s retainer fee.
The Third Department’s Attorney Grievance Committee (AGC) began
investigating Harp in June 2020 after learning that a check drawn on
Harp’s business account was dishonored, the decision said.
An audit of the escrow account and business accounts, her
subpoenaed bank records and Harp’s sworn testimony led the committee to
request that Harp be suspended.
Harp, 48, an Albany Law School graduate, did not respond to the the
committee’s motion after being given two adjournment dates, leading the
justices to impose the suspension, the decision said.
The ruling said evidence, including Harp’s testimony, showed she
“misappropriated, for her own use, monies deposited in her attorney
escrow account which were to be held in trust for the sellers in a real
estate transaction.”
The decision said Harp commingled personal funds with
money held in trust “in an attempt to make the sellers whole,” the
decision said. “While these facts have been established, in part, by
(Harp’s) own testimony, we also note that (Harp) concomitantly took
measures to conceal her own misconduct by providing AGC with altered
bank statements.”
Harp could not be immediately reached for comment.
Presiding Justice Elizabeth Garry and Justices John Egan,
Michael Lynch, Sharon Aarons and Molly Reynolds Fitzgerald imposed the
suspension.
Carrie Anne King was known to have warrants with the Scottsboro Police
Department for second-degree financial exploitation of the elderly and
fraudulent use of a debit/credit card.(MGN)
By Charles Montgomery
SCOTTSBORO, Ala. (WAFF) - Officers with
the Scottsboro Police Department conducted a traffic stop on June 23,
resulting in the arrest of a woman on multiple charges.
Carrie
Anne King was known to have warrants with the Scottsboro Police
Department for second-degree financial exploitation of the elderly and
fraudulent use of a debit/credit card. Officers also discovered that
King was in possession of methamphetamine, marijuana, controlled
prescription pills and drug paraphernalia.
King
was arrested and charged for the warrants and also charged with two
counts of possession of a controlled substance, second-degree possession
of marijuana, possession of drug paraphernalia and second-degree
promoting prison contraband.
Dick Van Dyke, 96, looked happier than ever as he left lunch with
friends in Malibu last Thursday, telling well-wishers that he’s “just
glad to still be here.”
The “Chitty Chitty Bang Bang” legend was subsequently seen running
errands after the lunch date, picking up a bottle of Neutrogena
self-tanning spray from a local store.
The spritely star dressed casually for the outing, clad in a light
gray sweater and navy pants. He added a pair of sensible slip-on shoes
and a stylish leather shoulder bag.
Proving he’s still sharp as a tack, Van Dyke got behind the wheel of his Lexus and drove himself home afterward.
The “Mary Poppins” vet is occasionally seen around Malibu, grabbing lunch and hitting the gym with his wife, Arlene Silver, 50.
Van Dyke cut a casual figure for the outing, clad in a light gray sweater and navy pants.Coleman-RaynerProving he’s still mentally sharp, Van Dyke got behind the wheel of his Lexus and drove himself home after the outing. Coleman-Rayner
The age-defying actor is famous for keeping fit and healthy in spite of his advancing age, telling Closer Weekly that he still hits the gym three times a week.
“I’ve always been an exerciser and still am … I get in the pool and
exercise. At my age, they say to keep moving. Put me on solid ground and
I’ll start tapping,” he declared in 2019.
Van Dyke revealed he does water aerobics, lifts weights and walks on a
treadmill. He also credited his fit physique to “good genes.”
Van Dyke was seen telling well-wishers that he’s “just glad to still be here.”Coleman-RaynerSuper-fit Van Dyke is often seen out and about in Malibu. He regularly hits the gym with his wife, Arlene Silver. Coleman-Rayner
Meanwhile, the smitten star said that much-younger Silver also keeps him on his toes.
“I sometimes forget that we’re doing a great experiment here — 46
years’ difference. And we work at it to some extent,” he explained.
“There’s got to be some understanding. Find out what old habits don’t
work anymore. It takes some adjusting and fitting in, but that’s part of
the fun of it.”
Van Dyke first met Silver at the 2007 Screen Actors Guild Awards. At the time, he was 81 and she was just 35.
Silver spoke with Closer in a separate interview earlier this year, recalling the moment she first laid eyes on her now-husband.
The
“Chitty Chitty Bang Bang” legend was seen running errands after his
meal with friends, picking up a bottle of Neutrogena self-tanning spray
from a local store. Coleman-Rayner
Dick Van Dyke, 96, makes rare public appearance after hitting gym with wife
“He said, ‘Hi, I’m Dick.’ The first thing I asked him was, ‘Weren’t
you in “Mary Poppins”?’ We got along immediately as friends, so it
didn’t feel like he was so much older than me,” she told the
publication.
The devoted wife further cooed: “He is the most perfect human being.
I’ve never met anyone so happy, so genuine, so amazing. He’s just like a
happy pill.”
The pair were friends for several years before their relationship turned romantic.
Van Dyke and Silver met in 2007. They were friends for several years before embarking on a relationship. They wed in 2012.
Van Dyke said he was relieved his fans were supportive of the
relationship: “I thought there would be an outcry about a gold digger
marrying an old man, but no one ever took that attitude.”
In their popular anniversary video, the couple showed off their fun-loving relationship by dancing to a cover of the 1958 Doris Day song “Everybody Loves a Lover” performed by Silver’s band, Arlene & the Vantastix.
Silver and Van Dyke on the red carpet at a gala back in April 2016Full Article & Source:
ORANGE COUNTY, Fla.
– A disbarred Winter Park attorney received prison time after agreeing
to a plea deal for stealing $3 million from an elderly client.
The
Orange County Sheriff’s Office said Matthew Roby was arrested in 2021
and agreed to the plea deal Friday for exploitation of an elderly person
and grand theft of more than $100,000.
Deputies said
Roby stole from Helen Kuhn, a client of his, by fraudulently getting a
power of attorney and “draining her accounts.”
The sheriff’s office said more than $2.4 million of the stolen funds were able to be recovered.
Officials said there may be more victims. Anyone with information is asked to call 407-836-4357.
Newton, North Carolina — A majority of nursing homes in the U.S. are facing staffing shortages, according to a recent survey, which can result in unsafe conditions for the nation's elderly.
The
survey, released this month by the American Health Care Association,
found that 98% of nursing home operators are having trouble hiring, 59%
said they are losing money, and 73% said staffing issues could force
them to close.
"I think COVID took it to a different level," said
Amber McIntosh, the executive director of Abernethy Laurels, a senior
living community outside Charlotte, North Carolina.
Jackie Rojo Sanchez, a certified nursing assistant, looks after
eight residents each shift at Abernethy Laurels. But Diondre Clarke, a
traveling certified nursing assistant in the same area, sometimes has to
look after 20 or more.
"I have never been to a place which was fully staffed yet," Clarke said.
The impact the staffing shortages have had on care is "bad," Clarke
said, adding that she will hear residents yelling and "you go in their
room and they're on the floor."
McIntosh calls CNAs the "backbone" of nursing homes. Without them, she says, they cannot function.
Last
January, North Carolina investigated two deaths at Pine Ridge Health
and Rehabilitation Center in the city of Thomasville. Investigators
found that one nurse and two CNAs cared for 98 people. The center was
subsequently sanctioned.
This month, the union representing a quarter-million nursing home workers demonstrated for better pay and staffing.
"The status quo is unsustainable for workers in this industry, for
the residents that are cared for, and for the best employers," said Mary
Kay Henry, president of Service Employees International Union.
To
recruit more CNAs like Sanchez, Abernathy Laurels raised pay to $16 per
hour. It also started paying to train and certify new CNAs.
"It was an investment," McIntosh said.
But most nursing homes remain understaffed, some dangerously so.
"It's just a form of neglect, and I don't want to be part of that," Clarke said.
The system intended to protect vulnerable people can leave them powerless. Advocates are pushing for reform.
by Melissa Hellmann
Supporters of the FreeBritney movement rally in support of Britney
Spears for a conservatorship hearing outside the courthouse in Los
Angeles on Nov. 12, 2021. (Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images)
From Britney Spears to Wendy Williams, financial guardianships and conservatorships have entered the limelight as legal tools with the potential for abuse.
These high-profile cases have led to growing calls for reform. Disability rights organizations also have long advocated
for less restrictive alternatives to guardianship for people with
disabilities. Guardians, in some states called conservators, impact a
large swath of the population: In 2018, there were an estimated 1.3
million active guardianship or conservatorship cases nationwide,
according to a National Council on Disability report.
While the systems vary by state, a guardian or conservator is a
court-ordered representative who makes financial or healthcare decisions
for a person deemed incapable of properly caring for themselves. People
with intellectual and developmental disabilities, the elderly or those
who have experienced traumatic brain injuries are most likely to have
guardians appointed.
A National Center for State Courts study
of Minnesota’s conservatorship system found that women were
disproportionately exploited by their conservators, and that the
majority lived in assisted living, memory care or skilled nursing
facilities. Most of the cases involved people taken advantage of by
their own family, primarily their children, and half the affected people
were under 65, the study found.
Nina Kohn, a Syracuse University law professor and a distinguished
scholar in elder law at Yale Law School, spoke with the Center for
Public Integrity about abuse in conservatorship, reform efforts and how
people can protect themselves.
The interview with Kohn has been edited for length and clarity.
Nina A. Kohn (Syracuse University)
Q: Who is disproportionately impacted by financial guardianships?
We know that some guardianships happened very early in life.
Historically, guardianship has been treated almost like a rite of
passage for young adults with intellectual disabilities, who were
assumed to be incapable of making decisions for themselves.
Increasingly, today there is recognition that that’s not proper and
that even individuals with substantial cognitive and intellectual
disabilities can make decisions for themselves, especially with support.
Another category of people you often see this with are people with
dementia who have progressive cognitive decline that’s making it harder
and harder for them to manage their own affairs. And then a third
primary category is individuals who are experiencing some level of
mental illness or non-progressive cognitive challenge acquired later in
life, and that could be through a traumatic brain injury.
A common pattern you see with petitions for conservatorship or
financial guardianship is that you have an individual who has
substantial funds and other people are expecting to benefit from those
funds. Then the individual does something, which puts those who would be
beneficiaries on edge, and they become concerned that those funds they
were expecting to benefit from won’t be there for them. Often these are
family members expecting to inherit from an older family member.
Legally, nobody has a right to inherit from you, except for some very limited protections for dependent children and spouses.
You also sometimes see that with non-family members outside of an
inheritance concern. That could be business partners, it could be
service providers.
The fact that you’ve been the victim of one thing [like a financial
scam] doesn’t mean that you don’t have the ability to make decisions for
yourself. And when it starts to be treated as enough to show that a
guardianship has to be imposed, you risk double victimization. First the
individual is victimized by being exploited and then they’re victimized
by having their rights removed as a consequence of victimization.
Q: Is there any data that shows the demographics of who’s vulnerable to financial guardianships?
We have woefully inadequate data in the United States on this issue.
There is no national source of guardianship data. Many states are not
keeping data on who’s under guardianship, how many people are under
guardianship or why they’re under guardianship — it’s a major problem in
terms of understanding this issue.
We do know that guardianship is a common intervention offered by
Adult Protective Services. Guardianship is sometimes the right choice.
It’s rarely the right choice, but sometimes it is.
So older people with progressive cognitive decline and individuals who haven’t done advanced planning are at increased risk.
Let’s imagine that I developed dementia in my 60s — will I need a
guardian? That’s going to depend on what else I’ve put in place to
handle my affairs. If I have a power of attorney in place or a trust in
place — things that are adequately taking care of making decisions for
my body and my property — I don’t need a guardian.
Individuals who haven’t done that advanced planning, which is
disproportionately going to be less privileged members of our country —
think about just access to legal services — are more likely to be at
risk of having a guardianship imposed.
Unlike advanced planning tools, in which the person isn’t giving away
the right to make decisions, once a guardian is put in place, the
individual loses the right to make any decision and the only way to
reverse that is to go to court.
And we know that courts are doing, unfortunately, a highly inadequate
job by and large at monitoring these arrangements, making sure the
guardians are making the decisions that are right for the individual,
that are sensitive to that person’s preferences, wishes, values,
culture.
Q: What are some other ways in which a financial guardianship can be abused?
A guardianship being imposed where it is not in fact necessary to
meet the person’s needs or where a guardianship is imposed that is
broader than it needs to be.
Let’s imagine a hypothetical person who has lots and lots of money.
If they are put under a broad financial guardianship, they may lose the
right to manage any money whatsoever. For this individual, $1,000 a week
may be chump change. And thus putting a guardianship into place that
doesn’t even allow them to spend smaller amounts of money, or control
things that don’t put them at risk, should be seen as abusive.
And for your lower-income individual, there may still be an amount of
money that they could manage without any substantial risk of
undermining their ability to meet their own needs.
Then there’s the bad acts by guardians category. For example, laws
will typically require the guardian to make the decision the person
would make if able. If the guardian says, “I’m just going to make the
decision that I think’s best, regardless of what you would have wanted,”
or “I’m going to make whatever decision is easiest for me,” that could
be abuse.
And then another category of abuse is a guardian charging unreasonable fees.
Q: Are there ways in which the laws or the rules of different states exacerbate these abuses?
This is an area where substantial law reform is needed urgently.
One issue where there’s a need for reform is the standard for
appointment of a guardian or conservator in the first place. Every state
in the nation allows for limited guardianship, which is a guardian
appointed to only make some decisions and not all decisions a guardian
could be appointed to make under state law.
But many states don’t prohibit courts from imposing plenary [or
absolute] guardianships, even when a limited guardianship would meet the
person’s needs. So we need to make sure that it is unlawful for courts
to strip more rights than is absolutely needed.
And we need to make sure that, before any rights are stripped, all
less restrictive alternatives have been ruled out as possibilities.
Another thing we need to do is really make sure that there are good due
process protections in place for individuals.
Typically, states will provide a hearing, a notice and evaluation
before a guardian is imposed. But often, a lot of those critically
important civil rights protections can be circumvented by requesting a
temporary guardianship, or sometimes it’s called an emergency
guardianship. And so the individual can be stripped of the right to make
decisions before those important due process protections are provided.
That is especially a problem if the standard for appointing emergency
guardianship is too lax, or the emergency guardianship can trundle along
for a long time.
Court monitoring is a huge issue. What are courts doing to make sure
that guardians are doing the right thing by those that they’ve been
appointed to protect and to make sure that abusive practices aren’t
happening?
Right to counsel is another tremendously important issue and
something I think the Britney Spears case showed people. Some courts are
denying individuals the right to choose their own counsel.
Another problem is around restoration of rights: Once you’ve been
stripped of your right, what do you have to show to get it back?
Q: That leads me into my next question, which is on efforts
to improve the system. Could you talk more about this model legislation
and any other state efforts to try to improve the system?
At least since the early ’80s, we’ve seen efforts in place to try to
improve guardianship. Initially, we saw an effort to try to change the
rules, and increasingly, I think we need to change systems and
incentives within the systems. My work really focuses on trying to
realign incentives so that it’s easier to do the right thing and harder
to do the wrong thing.
The most significant efforts, right now, are around adoption of the
Uniform Act on guardianship, an act that was created with input from all
the major stakeholder groups — entities representing older people,
people with disabilities, judges and state courts, attorneys, family
members aggrieved by guardianship.
The U.S. Senate [Special] Committee on Aging has recommended its
adoption. The barrier to adoption is … that some of the reforms would
take additional money or court time, and courts typically don’t want
anything that’s going to take additional time and money unless they’re
going to get a lot of money to do it. And then I think often people
don’t understand why these changes are necessary.
Because guardianship has gotten, in some cases legitimately, a bad
rap, sometimes the advocates say, “Let’s just get rid of all
guardianship.”
I understand that perspective, but unfortunately sometimes the desire to abolish gets in the way of true reform.
Q: You mentioned that service providers have triggered guardianships. Are there examples of financial institutions doing this?
I teach a case that is really egregious where an attorney petitioned
for guardianship over his own client, and his evidence was that his
client had fired him, and “who could possibly fire me?” Bad
decision-making isn’t a basis for guardianship. We get to make really
bad decisions. Guardianship is only when we’re at real risk because of
those bad decisions and we don’t understand that we’re at risk.
One of the issues here in trying to understand the guardianship system is that many of these cases are under seal.
This can be very stigmatizing and traumatizing, and putting out all
this really private information can benefit fraudsters, who can then use
it to engage in exploitation. But it also makes it really hard to get
visibility and accountability.
If you can’t see what the courts are doing, how do you hold the courts accountable?
As the person on the street, it is really important to put in place
advanced planning documents. The most important one is called a power of
attorney for health care, or sometimes called a health care proxy, that
says who will make health care decisions for you, if you can’t make
them for yourself. It’s a very low risk document because it’s only used
when you lose capacity. Unlike a power of attorney for finances, it
can’t be used until you lack capacity.
There are major racial gaps on who completes advanced directives. In
part, that’s consistent with distrust of health care providers, often
well-founded.
This is one sort of advanced planning tool that has low costs and can
be done by lay people that can avoid guardianship. For older adults, or
people who are anticipating more decline in abilities in the near
future, then a power of attorney for finances may also be a very good
idea. Putting that in place and trusts are good ways to avoid
guardianship. Trusts tend to be for higher-net-worth individuals who are
typically middle class and up.
Q: Is there anything else about financial guardianships that you’d like our readers to know?
If these issues concern you, I really encourage people to reach out to their state legislature.
I think we’ve seen enough problems to know that we need to fix the
systems, and we need to change the incentives so that individuals aren’t
stripped of their basic liberties unnecessarily. To the extent that
seeing some of these horror stories can be a call to action, maybe
there’s a silver lining.
ROSCOMMON COUNTY, Mich. (FOX 2) - A northern Michigan woman is accused of embezzling thousands of dollars from a vulnerable adult relative she had guardianship of.
Kelly Marlynne Haynie-Ulrech, 41, of Saint Helen, is charged with embezzlement from a vulnerable adult $50,000 to $100,000.
Police said Haynie-Ulrech was granted guardianship of the victim in June 2017.
Another relative had concerns about the misuse of money in the
victim's bank account, and petitioned for a reevaluation of the need for
a guardian in December 2021. After a hearing in February of this year,
guardianship was terminated.
After the hearing,
Michigan State Police troopers obtained bank records, credit card
statements, monthly bill statements, copies of checks, deposit slips,
withdrawals, and tax information, and the victim was interviewed.
Troopers
turned their evidence over to the Roscommon County Prosecutor’s Office,
who issued an arrest warrant on June 1. Haynie-Ulrech turned herself in
the next day.
Haynie-Ulrech's bond was set at $25,000, 10% cash/surety. She is due in court July 13.
COVINGTON, Ga. —
A Newton County resident says she was glad to hear about the state
Supreme Court's ruling today, June 22, that a Rockdale County
commissioner can no longer practice law in Georgia because she "failed
to act diligently" for clients in time-sensitive cases.
Tracy Belcher told The Covington News
Wednesday she hoped the Georgia Supreme Court's ruling that
Commissioner Sherri Lin Washington be disbarred and surrender her law
license will lead to her being removed from the Rockdale County Board of
Commissioners.
Belcher said Washington never paid her after a
Rockdale County court ruled in August 2021 after the Covington resident
sued the commissioner for return of the $3,000 fee Washington charged
her for a case on which she took almost no action.
"I am so happy," Belcher said.
Belcher
said she hired Washington after she successfully represented her in a
previous, separate case. She also was told any other attorney would have
needed only a few months to do what it had taken Washington five years
to complete.
Then in 2019, neighbors repeatedly complained to
police that Belcher's mother and father — who both suffered from
dementia — often roamed their neighborhood and sought entrance to
others' houses. She was forced to quit her job as a medical assistant
and move in with her parents to take care of them.
Belcher also
said she needed an attorney quickly to avoid the courts taking action to
take custody of her parents. She paid Washington in 2019 to do the
legal work needed to become her parents' guardians and was told it would
take about 30 days to complete.
Washington
then never returned calls or communicated about the status of the case
and Belcher ultimately was unable to be appointed as custodian, she
said. Luckily, her parents stopped leaving their house and it eventually
was not an issue.
She later sued Washington's Conyers law firm,
The Washington Law Group, for return of her fee. A judge ordered her to
pay Belcher $3,096 in August 2021 during a hearing at which Washington
failed to appear, according to court records.
Washington, however, did not pay as ordered and Belcher said she filed a complaint with the Bar Association.
Her
interactions with her clients — detailed in the Supreme Court's ruling —
correspond to actions Belcher said Washington took in her case.
The
Supreme Court's unanimous ruling upheld a State Disciplinary Review
Board recommendation that Washington be disbarred "for her multiple
violations of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct in connection
with three separate client matters."
The Court said Washington
"failed to abide by her clients’ decisions, desires and directions
regarding the scope and objectives of the representations; she failed to
act diligently in filing, pursuing or responding in any of these
clients’ matters; she failed to communicate or consult with these
clients (or respond to their inquiries) about matters of importance in,
or even the status of, their cases; and she failed to properly and
timely respond to the personally served notices of investigation
relating to each of these matters."
Among
the claims cited by the Disciplinary Review Board in its recommendation
was one from March 2017 in which a woman hired Washington to represent
her in a divorce case. Washington did not file it quickly as requested,
did not file a protective order, failed to keep the client advised about
the case, and other items associated with the case.
The client
said she ultimately lost her health insurance coverage on her husband’s
policy, was denied an equitable division of marital assets, denied
alimony and required to pay her former husband $5,000 in attorney fees.
Other
instances included Washington accepting a $515 fee to appeal a child
molestation case, missing the appeal deadline and not returning the fee;
and the attorney taking a $3,000 fee for a lawsuit against a building
contractor, taking no action and not returning the fee until a Bar
Association investigation began.
Washington finally was served
with a formal complaint and "failed to timely answer or otherwise
respond." That led to the Board's appointed special master finding the
county commissioner was "in default such that the factual allegations
and the disciplinary violations charged in the formal complaint were
deemed admitted," the ruling stated.
Washington was admitted to
the Georgia Bar in 2007. She was elected to an at-large seat on the
three-member Rockdale County Commission in 2016 and reelected in 2020.
