New York's attorney
general is looking into the system of care for the most vulnerable, but
the state needs to do more to expand resources and oversight.
By Times Union Editorial Board, Opinion
The troubled system intended to protect the state’s most vulnerable residents is getting a look from the state attorney general’s office — official attention that’s coming none too soon.
Jake Pearson of the nonprofit newsroom ProPublica has for a year been reporting stories about the guardianship program that described evidence of alleged fraud, abuse and neglect.
Among many other issues raised by ProPublica, their investigation found that there are simply too few “examiners” to monitor the care provided by guardians; only 157 exist for the 17,411 wards in New York City alone.
In the absence of proper oversight, rogue organizations have enriched themselves at their wards’ expense. That’s where Attorney General Letitia James enters to investigate these bad players and, as ProPublica reported, “how they manage the health and financial affairs of hundreds of elderly and infirm New Yorkers deemed incapable of looking after themselves.”
One such outfit is New York Guardianship Services, on which ProPublica has reported extensively, noting that it has — among other outrageous cases — placed a woman in a rat-infested apartment without heat all while the firm collected $450 a month and reported her situation to the courts as “appropriate.” This occurred, according to ProPublica, “even as internal company records and her own emails showed that she’d repeatedly complained about the conditions.”
NYGS, which was ordered by a judge to repay that ward $5,400, is one of about a half-dozen organizations now being investigated by James’ office.
Great news — but what about the guardianship program itself?
Earlier reporting by ProPublica quoted Kristin Booth Glen, a former judge who three decades ago helped craft Article 81 of the state Mental Hygiene Law, the statute that guides guardianship in New York, as acknowledging the system is now “a total and utter disaster.”
The state Office of Court Administration has noted that judges backstopping the system are outmatched by caseloads; it has appointed an advisory committee to suggest fixes. That committee has now called for a $72 million independent statewide agency to serve as a public guardian.
Advocates have called on Gov. Kathy Hochul and legislative leaders to budget $15 million annually for a statewide network of nonprofits that could shore up the system. But the fact that the negotiated budget for the current fiscal year included only $1 million for a statewide guardianship hotline doesn't bode well for either proposal.
The hotline might be a fine tool, but it's the equivalent of a Band-Aid on a sucking chest wound. These are, after all, people who have guardians because they can’t speak for themselves.
They are referred to as the “unbefriended” because they don’t have family or confidants who can represent their best interests. As we speak, the system rarely checks on these people in person and largely relies on financial paperwork to determine a person’s well-being.
The
state needs to step in immediately to consider these proposals and find
ways to address alleged abuses, including improved training
requirements for guardians and examiners; increasing the number of
judges to keep eyes on the system; making reporting requirements more
robust; and establishing caseload limits for everyone involved.
Full Article & Source:
Editorial: Guardianship under the microscope
No comments:
Post a Comment