In Lillie's Voice: Elder Exploitation

Source: 
In Lillie's Voice: Elder Exploitation

Families feel steamrolled as estates disappear

Editor’s note: Investigative journalist Diane Dimond, whose weekly syndicated column on crime and justice appears in the Journal, is preparing a book on the nation’s elder guardianship system. It’s a system designed to protect the elderly from the unscrupulous. But as Dimond discovered, it can be dominated by a core group of court-appointed, for-profit professionals who are accused of isolating family members and draining the elders’ estates. New Mexico is no exception.

---

This is the final installment of a five-part Albuquerque Journal series:  Who Guards The Guardians?

---

Blair Darnell died on Nov. 18, 2015, at the age of 85. After a lifetime spent as a cowgirl and raising champion quarter horses with her husband, Casey, the last five years of her life were spent under a court-ordered guardianship and conservatorship program approved by District Judge Beatrice Brickhouse.

After Blair Darnell’s eldest daughter, Kris Darnell-Kreger, disagreed with her siblings about what was best for their widowed mother and took the matter to court in January 2010, the once close-knit family fractured.

Blair, suffering early stages of dementia, was declared “incapacitated” by Judge Brickhouse, who appointed a team of for-profit professionals to, literally, take over every facet of Blair Darnell’s life. As a “ward” of the court, Mrs. Darnell lost her civil rights to make her own decisions.

The Darnell estate, estimated at $5 million when the court stepped in, dwindled to less than $750,000. The monies were spent to pay for Blair’s simple living expenses – even though she had trust and Social Security income – and for a team of court-appointed guardianship professionals. The finances were administered by a powerful court-appointed conservator named Darryl Millet.

Today, Casey and Blair Darnell’s three youngest children – Cliff, Emily and Mary – continue to seethe about how their parent’s beloved 17-acre ranch was divided up, dismantled and finally sold off without their consent by conservator Millet – even though a family trust was in place. Kris Darnell-Kreger has declined Journal requests to be interviewed.

Millett told the Journal he was faithful in his duties to do what was best for Blair Darnell. Court officials said Judge Brickhouse could not comment on the case.

The Darnells’ cherished childhood ranch was a prime bosque property with an extensive pasture and access to the Rio Grande. It has been described as beautiful, unique and supportive of migratory bird habitat. The events that led to the family’s losing the property can be tracked by court documents and other information uncovered by the Journal during a 10-month investigation. It is a complicated legal trail that, the three Darnell siblings say, was fraught with emotion and frustration and was extremely expensive for them to traverse.

The Darnell property was sold to a buyer in the fall of 2013 in what

the family said was a “sweetheart” deal. The buyer sold it in April 2015

to the New Mexico Game and Fish Department for double the price. 

(Dean Hanson/Albuquerque Journal)

Property sale

On March 20, 2013, Darryl Millet filed a motion with Judge Brickhouse requesting a hearing to approve his plan to sell the bulk of the Darnell ranch, about 15 acres. Under rules of the Uniform Probate Code, all guardian proceedings in New Mexico are strictly sequestered, kept secret, to protect the privacy of the ward.

Despite the secrecy, and the rule that a conservator may act independently of the family and is only required to report to the judge, Cliff, Mary and Emily Darnell learned that Millet had received a $1.54 million offer on the property from a man named Jay Rembe. Mary, who has had her real estate license for 20 years, felt that price was way too low. Through her attorney, Mary let the judge know of her professional opinion and that there was someone ready to offer much more for the ranch.

• On April 8, 2013, a sworn affidavit was filed with the court informing the judge that the Darnells’ longtime neighbor, Denny Gentry, was prepared to offer $1.7 million for the 15-acre plot held in Casey Darnell’s “A” Trust. Gentry told the court he had expressed an interest in buying the property years earlier and that Blair Darnell had “indicated that when the property was listed, we would have first right of refusal against any offer.”

• On April 10, Mary Darnell asked the court to hold a hearing on the matter. The next day, she filed an emergency motion to force the conservator to reveal documents related to his proposed sale.

• On May 13, Judge Brickhouse held a closed hearing on conservator Millet’s motion for approval of sale. Also on this day, Cliff Darnell filed his opposition to the proposed plan.

• On June 25, after a flurry of back-and-forth pleadings and affidavits, Judge Brickhouse approved the $1.54 million offer from Rembe.

Despite that, there was no sale at this point. Because there is no transparency in this process, there is no public information available to explain why a higher offer was not pursued. And there is no way to determine why both the $1.54 million offer and the $1.7 million proposal ultimately fell through.

Mary Darnell with her partner, Dick Churchill, and their son, Casey. Mary

was the primary caregiver for her mother, Blair Darnell, until her mother

was placed under state guardianship. (Courtesy of the Darnell family)

‘Suspect’

On July 31, Mary Darnell, confused and concerned about the process, received an opinion from a real estate lawyer she consulted about the conservator’s fiduciary responsibility to her family. In an email reviewed by the Journal, the Albuquerque attorney wrote that after reviewing all the information Mary had sent, he considered the sale proposal Millett had submitted to the court to be “suspect,” and said Millet should have engaged a Realtor as an independent third party.

In his letter to Mary Darnell, John Lieuwen wrote, “It is blackletter law that a trustee owes a fiduciary duty to both the present income beneficiary (Blair Darnell) and the remaindermen (the heirs). Even if the trustee’s primary charge is the current beneficiary, he cannot do anything which will compromise the remaindermen’s interest.”

On Oct. 29, Mary, with the blessing of brother Cliff and sister Emily, filed a motion asking Judge Brickhouse to require Millet to produce financial information or, in the alternative, to remove him as conservator/trustee.

The next day, before the judge could consider the motion, Millet closed on a deal to sell the Darnell ranch to Tom L. Stromei for the even lower price of $1.4 million.

According to the purchase agreement, the sale included the entire ranch – all 17 acres, including Blair Darnell’s home and the two-acre parcel on which the home still sits. This, even though the two-acre parcel and home were protected separately in the family’s “B” Trust.

Included in the cash deal was a life estate deed allowing Blair to remain in her home on a fenced-in, one-acre parcel until she died. Upon her death, the home and land would automatically pass to Stromei.

The three youngest Darnell children call it “a suspect, sweetheart deal,” but they were powerless to stop it.

When contacted by the Journal, Stromei said he knew nothing about the back story of the land. “The property was put on the market by a real estate broker, and I purchased the property, and that’s the end of it,” he said. Stromei said he had never had any other dealings with conservator Millet, and as the conversation abruptly ended, he added, “I don’t appreciate the accusations those people make around here.”

At the beginning of the Darnell saga, Kris Darnell-Kreger’s attorney, Greg MacKenzie, provided a verified petition to the court saying the Darnell land was worth some $300,000 an acre. That’s about $5.1 million.  (Click to Continue)

Full Article & Source:
Families feel steamrolled as estates disappear

See Also:
Who Guards the Guardians?  Part One

Who Guards the Guardians?  Part Two

 Who Guards the Guardians? Part Three

Who Guards the Guardians?  Part Four

Family members feel helpless when court takes control

Editor’s note: Investigative journalist Diane Dimond, whose weekly syndicated column on crime and justice appears in the Journal, is preparing a book on the nation’s elder guardianship system. It’s a system designed to protect the elderly from the unscrupulous. But as Dimond discovered, it can be dominated by a core group of court-appointed, for-profit professionals who are accused of isolating family members and draining the elders’ estates. New Mexico is no exception.

---

This is the fourth installment of a five-part Albuquerque Journal series:  Who Guards the Guardians?

---

A person might take great care in planning his or her final years. How they want to spend their money, or whom they want to give it to.

But for those elderly who are declared incapacitated and become “wards” of the court under New Mexico’s guardianship system for the elderly, they will have little – if any – say in how their money is spent and whether there is any left for their heirs or others they wanted to give it to.

Set up to protect the most vulnerable elderly citizens, the system has helped countless New Mexico families deal with the care of their aging and mentally challenged loved ones, even in the face of emotional family conflict.

But the system is steeped in secrecy, and the judge who presides over the civil division at state District Court in Albuquerque admits court appointees are allowed to operate on an honor system because of the heavy caseload and lack of court resources.

Once the elderly person is declared incapacitated, the system enlists a group of lawyers, a guardian, conservator, various caretakers, a health care professional and what’s called a court visitor – all paid for out of the elder’s estate. The appointed conservator pays all the bills.

Judge Shannon Bacon

Court appointees have been known to earn well into six-figure salaries, per case, depending on the longevity of the ward.

District Judge Shannon Bacon told the Journal that eight of the 10 judges who hear such cases in Albuquerque currently handle a caseload totaling more than 1,000 cases each.

A 10-month investigation reveals the extraordinary power and control some of these for-profit court appointees exercise over their wards.

Once the elderly people are labeled “incapacitated,” they immediately lose their civil rights. They can no longer travel alone, vote, enter contracts, decide who their doctors will be, who can visit their home or how to spend their own money. All those decisions are made by the guardian and conservator.

Many court appointees are part of a cottage industry of elder care service providers whose names repeatedly cropped up during the Journal’s discussions with unhappy and frustrated family members.

The family members say they have been pushed aside, falsely accused of neglecting or stealing from their loved one, denied the right to defend themselves against false accusations and in some cases barred from seeing their parent during their final stage of life. These family members also say it is painful and gives them a sense of helplessness as they watch their parent’s end-of-life plans being revoked and their estates drained to pay for services they don’t believe are needed.

Under vaguely written sections of the Uniform Probate Code, all proceedings in these elder guardianship cases are sequestered, held in strict secrecy, to protect the privacy of the ward. All involved, from family members and lawyers to guardians and caretakers, are warned they may face fines and/or disciplinary action if they speak about their case to anyone. Despite the restrictions, several families said they felt compelled to come forward to tell their stories.

Controversial conservator

Albuquerque lawyer Darryl Millet is a frequent court appointee serving as both a conservator and a trustee. He is no stranger to controversy. Members of several different families who have had contact with Millet accuse him of sloppy accounting, questionable business and real estate practices, and arrogant and bullying tactics against both the ward and relatives – even threats of arrest.

Darryl Millet

Millet told the Journal the sequestration rule prohibits him from fully discussing most cases. He insists his job is not to focus on what the family wants but, rather, on what is in the best interest of the ward. He said the complaints against him are an “unfair characterization.”

“I have worked very hard all my life as an attorney to be honest and straightforward,” Millet said. “I have a great reputation with the judges and other attorneys in town. When I am appointed as conservator, the reason … is because the family members have shown they are untrustworthy with respect to their parent’s money.”

Millet says there are only four dissatisfied women who don’t like him because he “didn’t give them what they wanted … and now they are smearing me all over the internet.”

Millet has gotten two websites devoted to complaints against him taken down.

Mary Darnell, a daughter of one of his wards, says that a few months after her mother died she was pressured to remove a negative online comment she had posted about Millet’s professional conduct.

On Jan. 12, 2016, Millet wrote an email to her lawyer, Patrick Westerfield, saying, “Here is one … posting from Mary Darnell that must be dealt with.” Fearful that the conservator Millet might hold up final disposition of her mother’s estate, Mary says, she relented and removed the post.

It would take another eight months before the estate was finally settled.

Westerfield has refused several requests for an interview and in a recent email wrote, “The problems with the Guardianship system are prime examples of problems with the entire civil litigation system in New Mexico and beyond. I do believe it is a violation of the rules of ethics for me to discuss with you my representation of any current or former clients.”

In another set of emails obtained by the Albuquerque Journal, dated Oct. 30, 2013, attorney Millet appears annoyed at the daughter of a deceased ward who asked for clarification of her mother’s $5,000 funeral expense. She notes that the $1,000 cremation fee was prepaid and the services were held at her mother’s home, so no extra costs should have been charged. She writes again to say she wants to come by his office to collect a $216 check to cover the cost of printing and mailing out her mother’s memorial service announcement.

Millet’s response to this woman who had recently lost her mother: “As to your argumentative and occasionally insulting emails, if they continue, I will block your incoming emails. If that happens, you will have to rely on the US mail to communicate with me. Further, you are prohibited from coming to my office for any reason without my prior permission. If you disregard this instruction, you will subject yourself to a criminal trespass charge.” (Click to Continue)

Full Article & Source:
Family members feel helpless when court takes control

See Also:
Who Guards the Guardians?  Part One

Who Guards the Guardians?  Part Two

 Who Guards the Guardians? Part Three

Family members say they were shut out

Editor’s note: Investigative journalist Diane Dimond, whose weekly syndicated column on crime and justice appears in the Journal, is preparing a book on the nation’s elder guardianship system. It’s a system designed to protect the elderly from the unscrupulous. But as Dimond discovered, it can be dominated by a core group of court-appointed, for-profit professionals who are accused of isolating family members and draining the elders’ estates. New Mexico is no exception.

---

This is the third installment of a five-part Albuquerque Journal series:  WHO GUARDS THE GUARDIANS?

---

Blair and her husband, Clarence “Casey” Darnell, loved horses. They met in the late 1950s when Blair, a handsome, vibrant transplant from New Orleans, attended the University of New Mexico’s anthropology program.

She and her 2-year-old daughter, Kris, visited the Darnell stables to buy a horse. But after the animal tossed Blair, she took it back, demanding that Casey break the horse or give her a refund.

Casey, a World War II bomber pilot, was smitten by Blair’s spirit. They married at a friend’s North Valley home on Jan. 27, 1958. Casey adopted little Kris, and the couple started their own family on the 17-acre Darnell ranch nestled in the bosque (near what is now Coors and Paseo del Norte), where champion quarter horses were raised and trained. They had three children on that ranch: Cliff, Emily and Mary, in that order.

“My mother was active in 4-H and took in lots of wayward kids to come work the ranch,” Mary Darnell recalls. “My dad was vice president of the American Quarter Horse Association and was inducted into the Quarter Horse Hall of Fame in 2009.” Casey Darnell died in August 2001.

ABOVE RIGHT: Casey Darnell and his children sometime in the 1960s.
Clockwise from right, Mary, Emily, Cliff and Kris Darnell. TOP LEFT:
A few of the trophies and awards the Darnell horses accumulated over
the years. BOTTOM LEFT: Blair Darnell remained active until her later
years. Here, she returned to New Orleans to mark the 50th anniversary of
being crowned “Queen of Proteus.” INSET: Casey Darnell
(Courtesy of the Darnell Family)

Not long after her husband passed away, Blair was kicked by a horse and hit her head on a railroad tie when she fell. She was unconscious for about 30 minutes, but in her tough cowgirl fashion, refused medical treatment. In later years, Mary came to believe their mother’s forgetfulness was a byproduct of a brain bleed suffered during that accident.

Brother Cliff remembers he and his half-sister, Kris Darnell-Kreger, taking their mother to a doctor in 2005 or 2006 and being told she displayed early signs of dementia, not Alzheimer’s. Nevertheless, no one denied Blair was having cognitive difficulties in her later years and needed assistance.

Emily and Mary say they were more than willing to help care for their mother but say they were shut out after Kris got the court involved. Kris Darnell-Kreger has declined several requests to be interviewed for this story.

Under the Uniform Probate Code, proceedings in elder guardianship cases are sequestered, meaning none of the parties is allowed to speak about the case.

But the Journal has learned that on Jan. 6, 2010, a petition was filed in the court of Judge Beatrice Brickhouse by attorney Gregory MacKenzie on behalf of daughter, Kris. In it, he painted a dire picture of 78-year-old Blair Darnell’s situation. The petition accused Mary, her mother’s primary caregiver, of seriously neglecting her mother’s medical needs and “self-dealing” by directing her mother into questionable financial transactions. MacKenzie also accused Emily and Cliff of less serious actions that adversely affected their mother.

The next day, Judge Brickhouse granted the petition, appointed a temporary guardian/conservator, a so-called court visitor and a psychologist to perform a neuropsychological exam of Blair Darnell. She had not appeared before the judge but was immediately referred to in court documents as “an adult incapacitated person.” No hearing was ever held to determine whether any of the allegations against the adult children was true.

By Jan. 7, the system was in full motion and Blair Darnell would lose all ability to control the final years of her life.

In the original petition, Judge Brickhouse was told that Mary lived on the Darnells’ 17-acre ranch free of rent and owed her mother more than $200,000.  (Click to Continue)

Full Article & Source:
Family members say they were shut out

See Also:
Who Guards the Guardians?  Part One

Who Guards the Guardians?  Part Two

Cottage industry of guardians, conservators and caretakers can quickly drain estates

Editor’s note: Investigative journalist Diane Dimond, whose weekly syndicated column on crime and justice appears in the Journal, is preparing a book on the nation’s elder guardianship system. It’s a system designed to protect the elderly from the unscrupulous. But as Dimond discovered, it can be dominated by a core group of court-appointed, for-profit professionals who are accused of isolating family members and draining the elders’ estates. New Mexico is no exception.

---

This is the second installment of a five-part Albuquerque Journal series - Who Guards the Guardians?

When a family dispute over what to do with an elderly parent winds up in a New Mexico court, the lives of all involved can change dramatically.

It begins when a lawyer representing a family member, often a son or daughter, who is seeking the court’s involvement files a petition asking a district judge to appoint a guardian and a conservator to take over the elder person’s affairs.

What many families don’t initially realize is just how much power these court appointees have over the elderly “wards of the court.”

During a 10-month investigation of elder guardianship cases in New Mexico, the Journal heard consistent complaints.

Family members who did not initiate the proceeding said they were shut out of the process and their loved one was almost immediately isolated by court-appointed strangers. These adult children of wards were stunned to learn their parent’s hard-earned estate was used to bankroll the entire process, a cottage industry of for-profit elder care service providers.

Fee after fee

Among the first bills paid for by the incapacitated elder is the hourly fee for those newly appointed to run his or her life. It is routine for a New Mexico attorney associated with this type of case to earn $300 an hour or more, a guardian and conservator about $200 an hour each.

According to lawyers familiar with the system, the elder – frequently pre-diagnosed with some sort of diminished mental capacity – also must pay for his or her own neuropsychological exam by what’s called a qualified health care professional. That routinely costs close to $1,000.

The costs for a court visitor, the court appointee who helps investigate the family dynamic, can run about $2,000 a month. Payments to one court visitor reviewed by the Journal topped more than $14,400. Initial costs for all these professionals add up quickly, and the appointees become inexorably enmeshed in the elder’s care.

Once those for-profit professionals are in place, they communicate with the judge about their findings and ask permission to take certain major actions, such as liquidating the senior’s stocks or moving the ward to a different living arrangement.

In some cases, the elder’s house is sold and the person is moved to a care facility, chosen by the court appointees. If they are allowed to stay in their home, they then must pay the cadre of support personnel the guardian and conservator are allowed to hire: in-home caretakers, personal shoppers, dog walkers, landscapers, pool maintenance companies and messenger or delivery services.

In one case reviewed by the Journal, a daughter of a now-deceased elderly man who became a ward of the court says her father was charged for both a dog walker for his tiny Yorkie and a separate service that picked up the dog’s waste. She says he also paid for pool maintenance for a backyard pool no one used and a messenger service to pick up his prescriptions at a nearby pharmacy that offered free delivery.

Several family members say supervision of the extra personnel is lacking.

“My mother was routinely fed a diet of McDonald’s and Taco Bell,” one woman said about her now-deceased mother. “Where the hundreds of dollars in groceries we paid for went is anyone’s guess.” She also complained that of the dozens of caretakers in and out of her mother’s home, “some fell asleep on the job, items disappeared from the home and some even wore Mom’s clothes. There was no one to complain to because the guardian and the conservator wouldn’t talk to me.”

The conservator handling the estate of a 78-year-old woman who lived on a ranch in Albuquerque’s bosque used her money to install satellite TV after caretakers complained the elderly woman’s television didn’t get enough channels. Conservator records reflect the monthly charge of nearly $90.

Nancy Oriola is the CEO of Decades LLC, an elder care agency that accepts court appointments to act as elder guardians and/or conservators and handled that case. She told the Journal that Decades hires various outside caretaker agencies and admitted that “from time to time, we may encounter a problem with an employee from an agency. But when those problems occur, we try diligently to rectify the issues.”

It is not unusual for in-home care to drain an estate of more than $120,000 a year. One attorney claimed the cost of care for his client’s wealthy parent who had been declared incapacitated topped $600,000 in one calendar year.

“The home care costs were absolutely unconscionable, insane,” according to this Albuquerque lawyer, who is familiar with the process. “The annual cost was in the hundreds of thousands of dollars for this woman to stay in her own home,” he said. An example he offered were the supermarket bills – “$400 worth of groceries a week … for a 98-pound lady,” he said. “That’s $1,600 a month!” (Click to Continue)

Full Article & Source:
Cottage industry of guardians, conservators and caretakers can quickly drain estates

See Also:
Who Guards the Guardians, Part One

Is Elder Guardianship A New Form Of Human Trafficking?

As the 71st session of the General Assembly of the United Nations begins this week to discuss international issues that affect the lives of millions throughout the world, the United States needs to step up its commitment to safeguard human rights and promote the rule of law in its own backyard — specifically, escalating abuse in the U.S. Elder Guardianship system.

It’s legal, but is it right?

Imagine you’ve worked hard all of your life and suddenly you are deemed incapacitated and are stripped of your dignity and basic individual rights. You have been abducted from your home, isolated from your family, and “placed” somewhere to be medicated while your assets are being pillaged. The authorities that should be protecting you are the ones committing these heinous acts. It sounds like Nazi Germany, but this is happening in the United States today.

The victims are seniors. The partners in crime are financial predators and agents of the Elder Guardianship system — attorneys, professional guardians, medical experts, and others who are paid out of the senior’s assets. There are some good judges but many are overworked and some are actively aiding the exploitation. Anyone can file to deem you incapacitated. The entire process from filing an incapacity petition to plenary guardianship where all rights are removed can happen within days. Yet, once you’re caught in the web, it’s almost impossible to break free... AND you are forced to pay your abusers in the process.

A 2013 AARP report gave a “best guess” estimate of the number of adults under guardianship nationally at 1.5 million. Idaho and Minnesota are the only states that track the amount of money being controlled by guardians or conservators; the combined total for just two states is over $1 billion. Guardianship is supposed to protect older citizens. However, what happens when the system is broken? A 2010 federal study by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) identified hundreds of allegations of physical abuse, neglect and financial exploitation by guardians in 45 states and the District of Columbia between 1990 and 2010. In 20 cases, the GAO found that guardians stole or improperly obtained $5.4 million in assets from 158 incapacitated victims.

The Abduction of Lillie

Tuesday, September 6, 2016 was Lillie’s 88th birthday and her family didn’t know where she was. A week earlier, on August 30, the court-appointed Emergency Temporary Guardian abducted her from a doctor’s office while her niece was in the other room filling out papers. Although Lillie was happy and safe in her Palm Coast home of twenty years, the guardian “placed” her into assisted living and refused to tell her family the location. Lillie was not in danger and there was no emergency situation or other credible justification of such extreme and deceptive action. Video of Lillie from July 30, 2016 — just a month before — shows a vibrant African-American woman enjoying her home and family, and vocal about her financial affairs and this case. In fact, she does not seem incapacitated at all.

Since the case started in 2012, three good doctor’s reports that could have given Lillie her rights back went stale through a legal shell game of loopholes, frivolous objections and unethical behavior. Now, while she is sequestered and possibly sedated, they are pushing hard for plenary guardianship, which would take away her last two remaining rights: the right to vote (she is a registered Democrat excited about voting for Hillary Clinton) and the right to choose with whom she socializes. Over a dozen attorneys and others have been invoicing against Lillie’s assets, while the temporary guardian has not paid Lillie’s basic bills or given her a penny of her own money for food or personal living expenses. The temporary guardian has been neglecting her fiduciary responsibilities and violating standards of practice, but Lillie’s sister and over 50 nieces and nephews are the ones being shut out.

The sudden manner by which Lillie was involuntarily placed in an anonymous location and isolated from her family and support system was likely traumatizing to her particularly given her past victimization. The initial evaluation for incapacity happened in 2012 when she was held captive for eight months at the home of a family friend. She eventually called 911 and escaped. Now, after five years of systemic abuse, Lillie is being violated again — this time by the temporary guardian who is supposed to be her advocate. Getting old is not a crime, yet Lillie is being treated like a criminal. Tonight, she is somewhere alone in assisted living probably wondering why her family has abandoned her.

Captors use social isolation to torture prisoners of war. Social isolation of otherwise healthy, well-functioning individuals eventually results in psychological and physical disintegration, and even death. Nevertheless, the Emergency Motions filed in court to get Lillie returned to her home and family have been ignored.

Florida’s “Liquidate, Isolate, Medicate”

In Florida, there are 5 million people age 60 and older and that demographic is expected to account for most of the state’s population growth in the next 15 years. Yet, seniors who have come to this retirement haven are actively being deprived of life, liberty and property without due process of law. The guardianship system oversteps constitutional rights and goes against the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment that forbids states from discriminating invidiously against some of their citizens.

Professional guardianship is considered a “growth business,” with the number increasing from 12 registered professional guardians in 2003 to 456 in 2015, according to the Florida Department of Elder Affairs. The abuse is so rampant that the process itself has been called “Liquidate, Isolate, Medicate.” With 40 hours of training and a modest background check, a professional guardian can start earning $85 an hour and have control over a ward’s property, finances, medical decisions, housing and social relationships. In other words, the guardian has the ability to: liquidate your assets by selling your home, car, etc.; isolate you from your family as guardian of “your person;” and put you in a nursing home to medicate you until you die. All of this is supposed to be in your “best interest.” An ABC13 Investigates report dubbed it “The Grey Prison.”

For example, 89-year-old Marie, featured in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune‘s Elder guardianship: A well-oiled machine, had her rights removed at the request of her stepson-in law. The court ordered a trust company to pay out some $635,000 to attorneys, guardians and other involved in her case. She survived wartime Poland and said even Hitler’s Germany failed to prepare her for this travesty.

Republican member of the Florida House of Representatives Larry Ahern said, “In extreme cases, the wards are sometimes prevented from regaining their competency and remain, in effect, prisoners of guardians.” How many seniors, like Lillie and Marie, are being exploited in this cruel and systemic manner?

Due to a string of horror stories and rising complaints, on March 10, 2016 Governor Rick Scott signed into law Senate Bill 232 creating the Office of Public & Professional Guardians to replace the Statewide Public Guardianship Office within the Florida Department of Elder Affairs. In April, they initiated rule making procedures to address the regulation of professional guardians, including standards of practice and disciplinary guidelines. These are expected to be in place October 2016. While these necessary changes are underway, what happens to seniors, like Lillie and Marie, who are being victimized this moment in Florida? Will they get a pardon and be set free?

A New Form of Human Trafficking?

According to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Article 3, paragraph (a) of the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons defines Trafficking in Persons as the “recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs.”

Trafficking involves psychological coercion to render someone a slave. To do this, perpetrators employ “tactics that can lead to the psychological consequence of learned helplessness for the victims, where they sense that they no longer have any autonomy or control over their lives.

Traffickers may hold their victims captive, expose them to large amounts of alcohol or use drugs, keep them in isolation, or withhold food or sleep. During this time the victim often begins to feel the onset of depression, guilt and self-blame, anger and rage, and sleep disturbances, PTSD, numbing, and extreme stress. Under these pressures, the victim can fall into the hopeless mental state of learned helplessness.”

An argument can be made that the “Liquidate, Isolate, Medicate” Elder Guardianship process in Florida at its worse is a form of human trafficking. On the basis of the definition, it is evident that trafficking in persons has three constituent elements: a) The Act (What is done) — In this case, the transfer and harbouring of a person, b) The Means (How it is done) — Abduction, deception, abuse of power or vulnerability, and c) The Purpose (Why it is done) - In the case of guardianships, the purpose is financial exploitation — a form of servitude. Seniors are sedated in locked assisted living facilities while their assets are spent down.

The Right to be Protected & Respected

Probably the most famous case of financial elder abuse is that of one-time New York socialite Brooke Astor when she was more than 100 years old. Her grandson Philip C. Marshall testified against his father and helped put him in jail. In his 2015 testimony to the Senate’s Special Committee on Aging, Mr. Marshall said, “To be complacent about elder justice is to be complicit in elder abuse.”

Given demographic trends, elder financial abuse is expected to grow dramatically unless we do something. The baby boom generation is reaching retirement age at a rate of 10,000 people per day. Those 65+ will make up 20% of the population by 2050. The 2015 White House Conference on Aging has made “elder justice” one of its four tracks. There is now a federal home for Adult Protective Services and a new Elder Justice website called a “one-stop shopping site for victims, families, prosecutors, researchers and practitioners.” President Barack Obama declared June 15, 2016 as World Elder Abuse Awareness Day.

Awareness is good, but immediate action is needed. If states are not doing their jobs, the federal government needs to step in. It’s time to reform the Elder Guardianship system in the U.S., prosecute predators and hold legal agents — judges, attorneys, evaluators, professional guardians, etc. — to a higher standard. As Vice President Hubert Humphrey said, “The moral test of government is how that government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; those who are in the shadows of life — the sick, the needy and the handicapped.”

Just as we continue to make strides with human rights issues around the world, we need to shine a brighter light on elder abuse on our soil — particularly this type of vicious and systemic financial exploitation. To be an elder is a privilege, not a condition causing you to be tossed aside and abused. Our elders need to be protected and respected. If we’re lucky, we will all get old. Let’s create a society where we can age with grace and dignity.

Teresa Kay-Aba Kennedy is a Harvard Business School-trained strategist and President of Power Living Enterprises, Inc. Her mission is to raise the consciousness of the planet and create a more sustainable world by releasing the potential in individuals. A seasoned life coach/speaker and founder of the first yoga studio in Harlem, she has been featured on the cover of Yoga Journal, in Oprah’s book, Live Your Best Life!, and was selected as a World Economic Forum Young Global Leader. An early Internet pioneer and TV executive, she has advised billion-dollar companies on their multi-platform engagement strategies. Her latest award-winning book — co-authored with her mother Columbia University-trained journalist Janie Sykes-Kennedy — is Dancing Light: The Spiritual Side of Being Through the Eyes of a Modern Yoga Master on her teacher/mentor 98-year-old yoga master Tao Porchon-Lynch.

On June 20, 2016, Kennedy moderated a conversation with Tao Porchon-Lynch at the United Nations for International Day of Yoga on “Yoga for the Achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals.” On October 3, 2016, for International Day of Non-Violence, she will facilitate a conversation with Ms. Porchon-Lynch on Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. hosted by the Indian Consulate in New York. On November 19, 2016, she will moderate another discussion with Ms. Porchon-Lynch at the United Nations for Women’s Entrepreneurship Day.

For inspiration, go to www.IAmPowerLiving.com, subscribe to the weekly Dose of Power Living and the Power Living YouTube channel. Be sure to Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

Note: Kennedy is the niece of Lillie featured in this article. As of September 13, 2016, Lillie’s family still does not know where she is and the temporary guardian refuses to tell them. For more, go to www.elderdignity.org. Watch the video and let us know what you think.

Full Article & Source:
Is Elder Guardianship A New Form Of Human Trafficking?

Diane Dimond: Elder Guardianships a Shameful ‘Racket’ in America

Betty Winstanley

Betty Winstanley is a well-spoken, elegant and wealthy 94-year-old widow, and as she told me from her room at the Masonic Village retirement facility in Elizabethtown, Pa., “I feel like I am in prison. My life is a living hell.”

Welcome to America’s twisted world of court-appointed guardianships for the elderly.

Quick backstory: Betty and her husband, Robert, were married for 72 years. They had three children, Richard, David and Betsy. For nearly seven years, the couple occupied a “lovely” apartment at the Masonic Village retirement home in Elizabethtown.

In early 2014, Betty, who uses a rolling walker to get around, said she felt faint. Seeing no staff nearby she lowered herself to the ground.

“They said I fell,” she told me. “But that is a bad, bad word around here. Once you fall they decide you aren’t capable of taking care of yourself anymore.”

Betty was sent to the medical section of the compound for rehabilitation after a small fracture was found. (Continue Reading)

Full Article & Source:
Diane Dimond: Elder Guardianships a Shameful ‘Racket’ in America

The takeaway lesson on elder guardianship

Since this newspaper published "The Kindness of Strangers: Inside Florida's Elder Guardianship System" in early December, I've been overwhelmed by calls and emails asking for help, or intervention, or just a sympathetic ear.

I'm working my way through the backlog, while trying to farm out cases to journalists in other parts of the state and the nation. It's slow going, because these issues are complicated, and teasing out the truth takes more time than a lot of reporters have these days.

And this week's community forum on the topic, co-sponsored by the Herald-Tribune and Sarasota County Libraries, brought forth even more wrenching testimonials from individuals feeling frustrated by a system that was designed to protect adults no longer able to fend for themselves.

Their stories are sad. But maybe even sadder are the many instances where it turns out that the elder guardianship system is doing its job properly. These are the scenarios where strangers have no choice except to step in and make decisions that families and friends simply cannot.

Take the articulate woman who telephoned me regularly from a Sarasota assisted-living facility, saying she had been incarcerated against her will. She had moved here to be closer to her son, and her daughter in Arizona had placed her under guardianship. Her professional guardian allowed only very limited contact with the Sarasota son.

After speaking with both of them and reading some court filings, it did seem that this woman did not need to be locked away, and might be better off moving in with her Sarasota son and his wife, who said they were willing to care for her. But then I learned that this son had served time in federal prison for securities fraud.

Ah.

I contacted another son, who lived out of town and was caught in his siblings’ crossfire.

"Regarding the public guardianship, it's expensive," he told me. "But when the family is dysfunctional, what choice do we really have? I attempted not to go this route by hiring a care manager. I really believe it would have worked out for some time, had my efforts been embraced by those that had her ear."

Then there was the charming gentleman from Colombia, who told me that when he was a patient at Sarasota Memorial Hospital, an elder law attorney had come into his room and pressured him to buy an annuity. Next thing he knew, he was under guardianship, his house was sold, and he was placed in an expensive facility that was draining his life savings.

I did some checking, and found that he had been taken by sheriff's deputies to Sarasota Memorial's behavioral health unit in November 2013. It was the second time that month they had been called to the home by neighbors, reports said, and they found him "hallucinating that there were people in his car and in his house and he needed help getting them out."

It was not until April the following year that the Department of Children and Families petitioned to place him under guardianship. This followed an incident where deputies reportedly found him in a Target parking lot, claiming that Hispanics had kidnapped him and driven him around all day.
After I asked him about these reports, the poor soul stopped calling me.

Our forum Thursday concentrated on legislative efforts to improve the necessary evil of elder guardianship, to try to make sure it is implemented only in cases like these, where other attempts to help have failed.

Bruce Robinson, MD

But most people in the audience had come to hear how they might avoid such a fate, and they got good advice from Bruce Robinson, chief of geriatrics at Sarasota Memorial: "Knowing that you may have a problem in later life, decide who you trust to tell you that you have a problem, and work with them to design a plan for how you want to be helped."

Hearing and reading all these sad stories has convinced me that the best hedge against having to depend on the kindness of strangers is to try to live your life according to an updated version of the Golden Rule:

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Make sure they clearly understand what you would have them do.

And get it in writing.

Full Article & Source:
The takeaway lesson on elder guardianship