Woman trapped in guardianship for 3 years finally has her rights restored after KIYC investigation

By: Walt Kane

A woman featured in a series of Kane In Your Corner investigations after she was trapped in a guardianship against her will, has finally gotten her rights restored. But the ordeal lasted three years and cost her an estimated $200,000.

Last week, Monmouth County Superior Court Judge Joseph Quinn finally spoke the words Elberta Cohen was longing to hear.

“We’re going to terminate the guardianship,” the judge said.

 

The decision means Cohen, 80, can finally make her own decisions again. Cohen said the ruling made her feel “wonderful, elated, very happy.” But she also called her situation “more than unfortunate.”

 

Kane In Your Corner first investigated Cohen’s situation last year. Her whole life had been put in the hands of a stranger, a guardian appointed by the court. She was left unable to access her own money or make her own legal or medical decisions.

 

Cohen’s youngest son, Robert, filed the guardianship petition. In an interview with Kane In Your Corner last year, he claimed he was concerned because he felt his mother’s thoughts could be “scattered at times.” Cohen and her eldest son, Larry, say Robert is not even on speaking terms with either of them. They say he filed the petition simply to stop her from updating her will, potentially reducing or eliminating his inheritance.

The Cohen case raises questions about New Jersey’s guardianship system. There are no clear diagnostic standards for judges to determine if a person lacks the capacity to make decisions; the judge’s discretion is nearly absolute. Once in a guardianship, it can be next to impossible to get out. More than 40,000 people lived under guardianship between 2018 and 2022, according to the New Jersey Judiciary. Just 73 people have had rights restored.

“It isn’t that common,” says Cohen’s attorney, Lauren Marinaro. “I wish it was more common. It’s difficult to do. I wish it was less difficult to do. But we got it done.”

 

Cohen was placed under guardianship based on evaluations by three doctors. Two found her unable to manage her affairs. But their conclusions were based in part on suspect evidence. One doctor asked Cohen to draw a clock. He admits she accurately depicted the time, which was the purpose of the question. But he chose to treat it like an art project, marking her question wrong because, in his opinion, Cohen did not depict the hands of the clock emanating from the center of the circle.

 

“The guardianship system definitely has a tilt towards getting people into guardianships and it can be very, very difficult for those folks to get restored back to capacity,” says Michael Brower, legal director of Disability Rights New Jersey. Brower says he attributes that in part to judges feeling concerned they could be publicly blamed if a person they rule has capacity is later injured. By contrast, Brower says some judges feel confiscating a person’s rights is the safer choice, even if it leaves them miserable and unable to exercise any control over their own lives. A bill, which would require judges to impose the least restrictive guardianship possible, has been languishing in Trenton for several years.

 

Getting rights restored is also expensive. Cohen had to hire her own attorney and pay for new examinations by her own medical experts. All the while, she also had to pay the guardian and the guardian’s attorney. Cohen is still waiting for a full accounting of her funds, but Marinaro estimates her client is out about $200,000.

 

Cohen’s freedom comes with strings attached. The judge required her to sign a power of attorney, allowing a financial advisor and geriatric care manager to assist her in making decisions. Cohen says she’s OK with the compromise because, in the event of a disagreement, she can still make the final decision, which is what she really wanted.

 

Cohen believes she would not have gotten her freedom back without the help of Kane In Your Corner. “You were kind enough to come to my house,” Cohen says. “You interviewed me. And you’re here in the court now. And I hope this helps everybody, that no one else will have to go through what I’ve just been through."

 

Do you have a story that needs to be investigated? Click HERE to get Kane in Your Corner.  

Full Article & Source:
Woman trapped in guardianship for 3 years finally has her rights restored after KIYC investigation

See Also:
KIYC: Thousands of NJ residents are in court-ordered guardianships. Some fight to get rights back

State working through backlog of care facility investigations

By Brian Tabick

CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa (KCRG) - The Iowa Department of Inspections and Appeals said it was making up for the lost time when it comes to inspecting care facilities.

The DIA said it was not allowed to conduct surveys during the 2020 pandemic so care facilities could learn to navigate COVID-19. The DIA interacts with and investigates care facilities in several different ways. A surveyor can show up unannounced to investigate, or people can fill out a complaint for the state to investigate.

“It’s not uncommon to see these problems,” said Marcia Southwick, a Director with the National Association to Stop Guardian Abuse.

She hears complaints about the DIA year-round but said that number went up since the 2020 pandemic.

“We’re all going to get old; you have to think about what you want for your elders,” she said.

The DIA said it had followed the state’s guidance to start catching back up, but the state’s Long Term Care Ombudsman, Angela Van Pelt, said it had dire consequences.

“We had some sad stories,” she said. “Staffing issues got to a point where sometimes a complaint would come in, and four months later the same administrator wasn’t there.”

Van Pelt said they were seeing more than double the complaints this year as in years prior. She said that was because of a lack of state inspectors, nursing facilities not being able to hire and train staff but also many care facilities closing.

“The system is overwhelmed,” she said. “Because of the closures, there were complaints of people not responding to requests for assistance, maybe that’s call lights, and also personal hygiene issues.”

Van Pelt said they were seeing 2-4 facilities closing each month. A total of 55-closed this year. She said she hopes families do research on nursing facilities before making it their home.

“Look at what kind of facility, she said. Is it privately owned that’s been there for 20 years,” said Van Pelt. Or, is it owned by a corporation?”

Van Pelt said people can file complaints on the state’s website and can use the Medicaid Nursing facilities.

https://dia.iowa.gov/health-facilities

Full Article & Source:
State working through backlog of care facility investigations

KIYC: Advocates say New Jersey needs to reform how its guardianship program functions

By: Walt Kane

More than 36,000 New Jersey residents are living under court-appointed guardianships. They are unable to make decisions or access their money. Some advocates say the system needs to be reformed to make it easier for them to have their rights restored.

Elberta Cohen, 80, has no access to her life savings. Her life is in the hands of a stranger, a guardian appointed by a judge. She says she isn’t happy about it.

 

“What gives them a right to do this to anybody?” Cohen asks rhetorically. “I'm not incapacitated.”

 

In the eyes of the law, she is. Kane In Your Corner first investigated Cohen’s case last month. A judge placed her under the care of a guardian after her youngest son argued she was no longer able to make decisions on her own. She says that she and her son aren’t even on speaking terms, and he was just trying to get her declared incapacitated to prevent her from revising her will. Eldercare attorney Lauren Marinaro is now representing Cohen in her effort to get her rights restored.

 

Terminating a guardianship is no easy task. New Jersey has no clear standard to determine if a person lacks capacity. Judges decide each case individually.

 

Cohen was initially evaluated by three doctors. One said she could make decisions for herself, but the other two disagreed. The judge went along with the majority.

 

But Marinaro has now gotten two more medical experts to weigh in. Both say Cohen is capable of making decisions on her own. Cohen’s personal physician also writes that Cohen’s “memory and judgment are intact.” The majority of experts are now squarely on her side.

 

Cohen’s motion to restore her rights is also unopposed – her son chose not to dispute it and her current guardian says he takes no position as to whether the guardianship should be continued. But ending the guardianship, or even relaxing it, is still not a sure thing. The judge has sole discretion under the law.

 

Marcia Southwick, executive director of the National Association to Stop Guardianship Abuse, says the system needs to be reformed to make terminating a guardianship easier.

 

“They should always have to prove that you're still incapacitated,” she says. “Instead, you have to go to court and you or your lawyer have to prove that you're not. And if you weren't in the first place, that just seems so unfair to me.”

 

Pam Teaster, director of the Center for Gerontology at Virginia Tech, argues courts should always view guardianship as a last resort. “If there's anything else that could be done for that individual, other than a guardianship, that's what should be happening,” she says.

 

New Jersey Assembly Member Carol Murphy (D – Cinnaminson) agrees. She wrote a bill that would require courts that impose guardianships to always use the “least restrictive option.” But two years later, Murphy’s bill has still not come up for a vote.

 

Teaster argues that another reform could help people like Elberta Cohen. While the guardianship process is currently shrouded in confidentiality, she is calling for a public database of guardianship cases that would help evaluate how well or poorly the system is working.

 

Peter McAleer, spokesperson for the New Jersey courts, says the judiciary is constantly trying to improve the system, including making it easier for people to challenge their guardianships.

Full Article & Source:
KIYC: Advocates say New Jersey needs to reform how its guardianship program functions

KIYC: Thousands of NJ residents are in court-ordered guardianships. Some fight to get rights back

By: Walt Kane

 More than 36,000 people in New Jersey live under court-ordered guardianships, essentially losing many or most of their rights, a Kane In Your Corner investigation finds. Some say the guardianships were unnecessary and imposed against their will. But terminating a guardianship can be difficult and costly.

Elberta Cohen, 80, can remember the details of every trip she and her late husband took. Her family room is filled with photos and souvenirs of their travels.

 

“This, of course, is Russia,” Cohen says, gesturing to a framed photo. “That’s St. Petersburg. I loved it, absolutely loved it.”

 

Cohen also enjoys playing Scrabble and can talk at length about current events like the war in Ukraine. But she has no access to her money and can’t make major life decisions. Those are in the hands of a stranger, a guardian appointed after a judge ruled her “totally incapacitated.”

 

“I went to the dentist the other day and I had to explain, ‘The money is there. I'll get it to you.’” Cohen recalls. “Do you know how embarrassing that is?” 

 

New Jersey has no diagnostic standards to determine if a person lacks capacity, according to state judiciary spokesperson, Peter McAleer. Instead, it “requires courts to determine the functional capacity of the individual, regardless of their diagnosis.” In other words, if a judge says someone needs a guardian, then they do.

 

The National Association to Stop Guardianship Abuse says guardianships may be necessary in some cases, but are too easily abused, given the consequences. “The person in a guardianship has no right to choose where to live, who to associate with. They have no control over their money,” says NASGA director Marcia Southwick.

 

Cohen lost her rights after her youngest son, Robert, petitioned for guardianship. She says he did it to stop her from changing her will, after “I told him he wasn't gonna get any money.” Robert Cohen insists the will had nothing to do with it. He says his mother’s “thoughts can be scattered at times. Other times, she can be coherent.”

 

Elberta says she’s “not incapacitated in any way, shape or form,” and that one of New Jersey’s top eldercare attorneys, Lauren Marinaro, has agreed to represent her.

 

“I believe she is competent to make decisions and should be restored to capacity,” Marinaro says.

 

But Southwick says terminating a guardianship can be costly.

 

“The lawyer for the guardian can charge your estate to fight back,” Southwick says. “So basically, you're being held captive while people are just charging your estate. It's as if you’ve become a cash cow.”

 

As in most guardianship cases, Elberta was evaluated by three doctors. One found she could “manage her medical, financial and legal affairs.” But the others disagreed.

 

Faced with the conflicting reports, the judge ordered a full or “plenary” guardianship, covering not just Cohen’s estate but also her “person.” Marinaro has now gotten three more doctors to do evaluations. All found her capable of making decisions on her own. Marinaro says the lack of a diagnostic standard can make evaluations subjective, and “only the people giving the test know how to how to grade the quiz.”

 

The subjectivity also extends to opinions of Cohen’s living conditions. The guardianship petition claimed the house was “very filthy” and so cluttered that it was “unsafe” for Cohen to walk. But Kane In Your Corner visited the house more than once, and never saw that. Footage shows the house is clean, and while there is some clutter, like a dining room table that is largely covered by books and knick-knacks, it does not create an impediment to walking around.

 

“You don't have to have a perfectly clean house every day to be an adult with the ability to do your own thing,” Marinaro says. “You're still an adult, and you still have fundamental rights.”

 

Elberta admits her life isn’t perfect. She lives with her oldest son Larry. She says she and Larry argue at times, sometimes loudly. But she says, “I don‘t want to be taken care of by a stranger” and disputes Robert’s contention that Larry “is controlling her life.” So when the guardian sought to have Larry evicted and replaced by a full-time aide earlier this year, Elberta was furious, especially since the filing openly stated the aide would likely be temporary and serve as a “transition to assisted living.”

 

“He was going to go and make me sell my home and put me in a nursing home,” Elberta says indignantly. “I feel it’s my home. I'm entitled to live where I want to live.”

 

Cohen’s case is scheduled to go to a court hearing next month.

 

If you have a story that needs to be investigated, click HERE to get in touch with Kane In Your Corner.

Full Article & Source:
KIYC: Thousands of NJ residents are in court-ordered guardianships. Some fight to get rights back

WHY STATES SHOULD PASS UGCOPAA

by Marcia Southwick

Encourage your state to adopt the Uniform Guardianship, Conservatorship, and Other Protective Arrangements Act. The Senate Committee on Aging supports this bill, which was created after two years of research into the practices of all 50 states.

Many advocates want the guardianship system to be abolished altogether. If anything this drastic can happen, alternatives that don’t remove fundamental rights would need to be available for those who need aid. UGCOPAA works towards this goal, loosening the grip of the guardianship system. The goal is to create a fairer playing field. The fairer the playing field, the fewer guardianships there will be.

1) UGCOPAA requires Due Process. Emergency petitions must be followed by a hearing within 5 days. If you are subjected to a proceeding, you can hire a defense attorney of choice, or an attorney who must defend your rights will be appointed by the court. (This is a shift away from the “best interest” standard and towards equal rights defense.) If a petition for a permanent guardianship occurs, a hearing is held within 14 days. You and your attorney can cross examine evaluators, the petitioner, and others on the case. Witnesses can be called as well in your defense. If you can’t attend the hearing for reasons beyond your control, the hearing comes to you.

2) UGCOPAA requires the court to consider all possible alternatives to guardianship (such as supported decision-making) before placing a guardianship on someone. UGCOPPA provides guidance as to what the alternatives are in Article 5. With a an attorney to defend you (as was the case for Britney Spears) alternatives can be created that replace the need for guardianship and removal of rights. In most cases, guardianship is unnecessary. (Or conservatorship in California’s case). Alternatives are what allowed the conservatorship to end.

3) A list of people, along with contact info– including family, step-family, close associates, close friends (or anyone who has assisted the person during the past six months), must be provided along with the petition. All of the people on this list are then informed of hearings, the AIP’s rights, and instructions as to how the person under protection can terminate the guardianship. Guardianship is explained in detail to all parties before the hearing.

4) The standard of argument for a petition eliminates hearsay in favor of clear and convincing evidence. This change favors a rights approach over a punitive approach.

5) If a guardianship is absolutely necessary and no other option is available, the guardian must provide a detailed plan for care, along with proposed fees, and this plan is provided to everyone on the list for review and objection. If the guardian strays from the plan, this can serve as a red flag to those who are close to the person under protection. Close associates and family provide more ears and eyes for the court reducing the cost of monitoring, The attorney and person under protection receive all financial accountings and can contest inappropriate charges. Until now, financial accountings have fallen into a black hole, creating secrecy and encouraging fraud.

6) The Guardian cannot restrict visitation for more than 7 days without presenting evidence to the court that the restriction is needed. Presently guardians isolate without reason and they do so of their own accord and for their own convenience.

7) Anyone interested in the welfare of a person under guardianship can petition to terminate the guardianship, or petition for less restrictive alternatives

8)  A system for complaints is set in place, and complaints must be addressed and placed in the guardian’s permanent file to keep track of the guardian’s actions.

9) If a guardian contests a petition for termination, and their effort to keep the guardianship fails, they are responsible for their own legal fees. This disincentivizes guardians from continuing to fight since they are restricted in the use of the protected person’s funds.

10) The court is instructed to issue single orders to solve specific problems. An example might be ordering someone into a care facility, rather than putting a guardianship in place. If a nursing home bill isn’t paid, the court would order that it be paid rather than approve a guardianship simply for that purpose.

The end goal is to use plenary guardianship only when absolutely necessary, to encourage tailored limited guardianships if needed, to use single court orders to solve problems, and to encourage support systems that replace or avoid guardianship and loss of rights. The idea is to respect each person’s fundamental rights to autonomy. UGCOPAA is a living document into which further reforms may be added.

An estimated 1.3 million adults are currently living under guardianship or conservatorship. Courts control roughly $50 billion of their assets.

by Morgan Keith 

 

Britney Spears' newly appointed lawyer Mathew Rosengart leaves the Stanley Mosk Courthouse following a hearing concerning the pop singer's conservatorship, Wednesday, July 14, 2021, in Los Angeles. Spears was granted permission by a judge to hire a lawyer of her own choice.

AP Photo/Chris Pizzello

 

• US Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bob Casey asked for nationwide data on guardianships in early July.
• A National Council on Disability report estimates there are 1.3 million active adult guardianships in the US.
• Abuse by appointed guardians may include financial exploitation, neglect, and physical abuse.

In a July 1 letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra and Attorney General Merrick Garland, US Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bob Casey asked for comprehensive data on guardianships across the country. 

Only a handful of states actually track and report "reasonably reliable" data on guardianships, also referred to as conservatorships in some states, and that data is often hard to sort through, draw conclusions from, or use to inform policy decisions, according to a 2018 National Council on Disability (NCD) report.

"There's no oversight and there really is no data. And if you think about how scary that is, you know, to have people who have no rights, they're in these guardianships that are potentially abusive, and there are no records being turned in, or they're not keeping track of the accounting," Marcia Southwick, director of the National Association to Stop Guardianship Abuse, told Insider. "You know, it's rife with problems and it's ripe for abuse."

One abusive guardian can wreak havoc for many families at once, Southwick told Insider. For example, in 2019, former Nevada guardian April Parks was sentenced to 16 to 40 years in prison for exploitation, theft, and perjury, the Las Vegas Review Journal reported.

"She was not a guardian to me," said Barbara Ann Neely, one of the dozens of individuals in Parks' care, according to the Las Vegas Review Journal. "She did not protect me. As each day passed, I felt like I was in a grave, buried alive." 

Brenda Uekert, a senior research associate for the National Center for State Courts (NCSC), estimated that there are 1.3 million active adult guardianship or conservatorship cases and that courts oversee at least $50 billion of assets under adult conservatorships nationally, according to the NCD report.

In addition, the extent of elder abuse by guardians nationally is unknown due to limited data, according to a 2016 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report. Court officials from six selected states that the agency spoke with could not provide exact numbers of guardianships in their states and none consistently tracked the number of cases of elder abuse by guardians.

By 2034, older adults will outnumber children under the age of 18 for the first time in the US, according to Census Bureau projections. Coupled with the direct care workforce shortage, these factors could contribute to an increase in the number of court-appointed guardianships.

NCD cites several systemic problems embedded in courts' handling of guardianships, including a lack of information about alternatives, insufficient due process, and failure to monitor abuses.

"At the [guardianship] summit that I went to, the focus was really on also diverting it away from courts ... because  they're overloaded with cases, courts can't handle them and that's the reason for the lack of oversight. It's not that all people are bad, it's that the system is so inefficient that it allows the bad people to get away with it," Southwick told Insider.

Britney Spears' conservatorship battle has exposed the public to the array of harmful acts that guardianship encompasses, including its most common form: financial exploitation. 

"Ms. Spears' case has shined a light on longstanding concerns from advocates who have underscored the potential for financial and civil rights abuses of individuals placed under guardianship or conservatorship, typically older Americans and Americans with intellectual, developmental, and mental health disabilities," Warren and Casey said in their letter.

Full Article & Source:

An estimated 1.3 million adults are currently living under guardianship or conservatorship. Courts control roughly $50 billion of their assets.

The reality of guardianship: A family's fight to be together

By: Rob Manch

PORT CHARLOTTE — The “Free Britney” movement is causing people all across the country to take a closer look at legal arrangements that give one person control over another person’s life.

The singer Britney Spears made national headlines this month trying to fight her conservatorship in court, but here in Florida, legal guardianships have been on the books for decades. In some cases, they’re necessary to help people who struggle with disabilities, but in others, people suffer in silence, sometimes isolated from friends and family.

We learned about one case like that when the daughter of a man under a legal guardianship reached out to us, because she didn’t know where else to turn.

Ashley Leathers tells us her father Ken has been under that guardianship for 20 years, and she’s worried he may never get back control of his life ever again.

On a sunny day in mid-April, we joined Leathers on a trip to see her father at his care facility in Sarasota.

“If we want to go walk out there, are you allowed to walk out?" Leathers asked her father.

"I don’t, I don’t think we can walk out. I mean, you can have visitors," said Ken Leathers.

Too often, Leathers said those short talks at the picnic table at Ken's care facility are all the time she gets with her father. That’s because Ken is the legal ward of a professional guardian, and needs approval to meet with family.

We spoke with Leathers back at her home in Port Charlotte about the arrangement.

“If I request to have him come home, I won’t hear anything back. If I do, it’s not for the time that was requested," said Leathers. “When he is home, he is happy he’s content and joking, and when he’s not here, he’s the exact opposite, and it’s really sad."

But you don’t have to take Leather’s word for it. Ken will tell you himself.

“I’ve been here almost 13 years. I want to know what crime I committed, and why am I here?” said Ken Leathers.

It’s not a crime that keeps Ken in Sarasota, it’s a mental illness.

Leathers said, when she was only 13, her father was diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia. He was separated from his wife at the time and needed care, so the court appointed a guardian to manage his life.

That was 20 years ago, but Leathers said she still remembers the old Ken. He was in the Navy, and was a loving father and husband.

“I thought nothing could ever stop my dad, and to see him just kind of give up hope is, I don’t know, there’s no other words for it," said Leathers.

For Leathers, there seems to be only one solution.

“I would like to become the guardian," said Leathers.

But after talking with a member of the Florida Guardianship Association, we learned it’s not that simple.

“When someone has been appointed, unless they’ve done wrong, they either choose to resign or they continue in that role," said Lance McKinney, an attorney at the law firm Osterhout and Mckinney in Fort Myers.

McKinney said, in addition to proving the guardian has done something wrong, Leathers would need expert legal advice.

“To change, it takes lawyers. Even the new family member has to have a lawyer. All people serving in the guardianship arena have to have lawyers, because it has a lot of reporting requirements," said McKinney.

And while Leathers would have to pay for that lawyer herself, the guardian is legally allowed to use her father’s money to hire representation.

“The ward pays for their attorney. The side part is, is that they also will end up paying for the guardian and the guardian’s attorney," said McKinney.

We also brought the Leathers' case to Marcia Southwick, a member of an organization advocating for guardianship reform, called the National Association to Stop Guardian Abuse.

“Somebody shouldn’t have to do all that to get their loved one out of this thing, I mean it’s crazy," said Southwick.

Southwick speaks with people like Ashley Leathers on a daily basis, and she’s advocating for reform. Right now, her group is pushing states to adopt the Uniform Guardianship, Conservatorship, and Other Protective Arrangements Act.

“It says you have to consider all the alternatives first, and judges aren’t really doing that," said Southwick.

Right now only two states, Maine and Washington, have adopted the law, but even if Florida did the same, it would only help people in the future.

Southwick said, for people in Ken’s situation, there aren’t many options.

“The only way that they’ve been able to get people out basically is through the press," said Southwick.

When we were at Ken's care facility, Ashley asked him directly where he would like to live.

“You’d just rather come home right?" said Ashley Leathers to her father.

"I’d rather come home," said Ken Leathers in response.

As Leathers continues to work to try to get her father home for good, she said she’s contacting her legislators, and the Governor’s office.

“There has to be a better way to resolve issues like this and help people that are going through similar situations, or to warn them that this could possibly be you one day," said Leathers.

In reporting on this story, we did speak with Ken’s guardian, Sylvia Winters. She directed us to speak with her attorney, Pamela Keller.

Ms. Keller said they are declining to comment, because they wanted to protect Ken Leathers’ confidential information, but Ashley Leathers submitted a list of complaints to the court, and just this month, she was provided with a response from Ms. Winters and Ms. Keller, and provided us with that document.

In that document, the Ms. Winters and Ms. Keller allege that Ken Leathers went out to lunch with Ashley on one occasion and “Mr. Leathers returned to the facility intoxicated.”

Leathers denies that she ever gave her father alcohol.

Ms. Winters and Ms. Keller said “There have been no infractions by Sylvia Winters” and they went on to request “Should the complaints of Ashley Leathers be (again) unfounded, that the court consider assessing the costs of addressing her recurring complaints upon Ashley Leathers.”

They have asked the court to set up a conference to discuss all of this, and the date for that has not been set.

Full Article & Source:

The reality of guardianship: A family's fight to be together

Britney Spears, and Reforming Guardianship Law

Credit...Mario Anzuoni/Reuters

(By NASGA Director Marcia Southwick)

To the Editor:

Re “Spears’s Case Calls Attention to Wider Questions on Guardianship” (news article, July 11):

There are many questions the public should be asking about a system that removes fundamental rights from American citizens.

Our organization, the National Association to Stop Guardian Abuse, receives stacks of letters from families of elders and others who are stuck in the system. Many have lost their homes, bank accounts, property and even the freedom to leave a facility. Families and friends can be restricted from visiting or associating with a person under a guardianship.

Since a guardian has access to the protected person’s money, the potential for abuse is high. How can this be changed?

Congress needs to reconsider the Guardianship Accountability Act of 2019, which would help states collect data and improve the courts. The states should adopt the 2017 Uniform Guardianship, Conservatorship and Other Protective Arrangements Act. This bill centers on preserving the rights of people under protection and creates a template for judges to consider full (plenary) guardianship as a last resort, not the first and only solution.

Thank you, Britney Spears, for breaking through the barrier of secrecy! We wish you strength in your journey to get your life back.

Marcia Southwick
Santa Fe, N.M.
The writer is a director of the National Association to Stop Guardian Abuse.

 

Full Article & Source:

Britney Spears, and Reforming Guardianship Law

Highlights of the Upcoming Annual WhistleBlower Summit July 29 through August 1, 2019

Monday, July 29;  3:00 - 3:50:  IN DEFENSE OF THE FAMILY
Hart Senate Office Building
120 Constitution Ave, NE
Room SH-902
Washington, DC  20002

Panel participants:
Marti Oakley, Host, TS Radio Network
Marcia Southwick, Boomers Against Elder Abuse
Dr. Zena Crenshaw-Logal, Executive Director, NJCDLP

Description: 
The panel will focus on the disparities in the judicial system, specifically the probate tribunals, which can declare an elderly individual civilly dead in order to exploit the estate.  Once captured in the system, the elderly are most times isolated, medicated and then conveniently die just as their estates are tapped out.  Cremation is the standard for disposing of the body (evidence) before the family can investigate the actual cause of death.    With little to no attention paid to civil or human rights, thousands of elderly individuals are targeted by professional predators each year.

↭↭↭↭↭

Wednesday, July 31: DO NO HARM - WHISTLE-BLOWING IN MEDICINE
The Steward E. Mott House
122 Maryland Ave., NE
Washington, DC  20002

Panel Participants:
Deirdre Gilbert, National Director, National Medical Malpractice Advocacy Association
Chip Wagner,  Attorney at Saw
L. Bradley Swartz, Attorney at Law
Constance Jones, Founder of CRJ Healthcare Credentials and Consulting
Ajshay Jones, Principal, Harpridge, Inc.

Description:
In the real world, how does whistle-blowing happen in medicine?  This is the subject this panel will discuss.  The forms it takes, the ethical issues arising from it, the protections - or lack of them - for whistle-blowers in private employment - hospitals, for example are extremely limited or non-existent in most states.  Furthermore, most of medical malpractice, professional and institutional negligence are often shrouded in secrecy, protected by law from disclosure. ....

↭↭↭↭↭

Wednesday, July 31: DYING FOR DIALYSIS?
The Steward E. Mott House
122 Maryland Ave., NE
Washington, DC  20002

Panel Participants:
Arlene Mullin, Dialysis Advocate
Gregory Coleman, Dialysis Patient/Whistle-blower
Dr. David Moskowitz, Founder, GenaMed., Inc.
Eduard Tayruinykov, MD.

Description:
Dialysis patients don't have the luxury of just coping with the illness itself, because of the way that the Dialysis industry is structured and how it operated in conjunction with the federal government.    Dialysis advocates allege there is no oversight and no control.  Dialysis is the only fully funded medical program in the US, and results in thousands of potential unnecessary deaths each year as patients are subjected to arguably substandard treatment....

For More Information and Source:
The Whistleblower Summit at a Glance

Note:  The EARN Project's documentary "The Unforgivable Truth" will be screened at the Summit, but the date has not been posted yet.  We will update everyone when it's been posted. 

From The Silver Standard’s Elder Abuse Reform Now Project: "YOU HAVE NO MORE AUTHORITY THAN A HORSE'S ASS" - said the guardian with a chuckle

By Marcia Southwick

In most states, if you are deemed incapacitated by a court, it will hand your rights over to a professional or family guardian who then will make all decisions for you.  Given that state courts are backlogged, and judges are faced with stacks of papers, it’s no wonder that a tendency to treat every case with uniformity has developed.   Unfortunately, one size does not fit all, and many elders and persons with disabilities are not being treated as individuals with dignity but rather as second-class citizens without equal protection under the law—as a non-person.  The descriptions of how removal of rights has caused suffering are heartbreaking.

Now that someone (often a complete stranger) has been appointed Dictator over your life and assets, and now that this Dictator has almost no supervision and little accountability for how your assets are spent, how are you feeling about it?  Not too great.   How is the guardian feeling?  Power drunk.

Even though guardians can control every aspect of people’s lives, they aren’t monitored by outsiders.  They pay themselves out of your estate in addition to having the right to claim that anything they do is in your “best interest.”  If that means selling your house and throwing you into a lock-down unit, so be it. If your spouse of 50 years fights for your freedom, they will simply, on your behalf and “in your best interests”, get you a divorce from that pesky spouse.  If your family doesn’t like it and wages a court battle, the guardian can use YOUR money to hire a lawyer to battle back, quickly exhausting your estate. And, what are your families chances of winning if you are in one of the many jurisdictions where the judge, the guardian, who was very possibly appointed by the judge, and the guardian’s lawyer are old pals?

One example out of many in which guardians became increasingly tyrannical can be seen in the case of Evelyn Schwartz.  Evelyn was born in 1916, widowed early, and, having had no children, lived alone for many years.  She had been a secretary to the dean of a local Mayfield Ohio college, and at the time she was deemed “incompetent”,  a very alert 93-year-old woman who had been declared fully capable by her physician. 

For fifteen years, her caretaker, a young man named Dean, had been seeing to her every need.  He had a heart attack, however, which caused Adult Protective Services to come knocking.  At that moment, her life was changed forever.

Evelyn didn’t expect or welcome this intrusion into her life. She was receiving excellent care and had a close-knit group of friends.  She had put a financial Power of Attorney and Health Directive in place, which meant that she was well prepared for the future.  As most of us do, Evelyn desperately wanted to remain in her own home.  Instead, a professional guardian was appointed over Evelyn.

In the documentary The Unforgivable Truth, produced by The Silver Standard for the EARN Project, Evelyn can be seen picking typos out of the court document declaring her to be—in their assessment—incompetent. Can we really trust those who are not educated enough to construct a simple document to assess others’ mental capacity (overriding the judgement of medical professionals)? Do we really want them to have the right to use this assessment to imprison someone for life after having rob them of their entire identity, and given that identity, and all the powers and possessions that come with it, to someone else?

In a YouTube video, Evelyn describes losing her rights: “Everything is turning against me. It’s the most unfair thing I have ever encountered in my life!  I’m in my 90s and should not have to put up with anything like this—

I’m treated like a common criminal.  I have nothing left to live for . . . I don’t deserve this, a prison sentence!” (view article).

Many elders in her situation have compared being forced into nursing facilities as no different than criminal incarceration, yet their only crime is aging and their rights are less than an incarcerated criminal.  The “hearing” was held in front of a magistrate (not a judge) in a civil court.  Those giving testimony did not have to swear under the penalty of perjury.  Evelyn’s Power of Attorney was not allowed to speak (view article).  Often the senior citizen in question is not even allowed to be present at those hearings to determine the direction of their property and their very life.

Evelyn entered a world of psychological and financial devastation in which the guardian stole, destroyed, or sold off many of her and Dean’s belongings.  One of Evelyn’s friends, upon mentioning to the guardian that he could be fined five thousand dollars for removing Dean’s belongings without giving proper thirty-day notice, received this response: “YOU HAVE NO MORE AUTHORITY THAN A HORSE’S ASS”  (view article).

To me, that phrase captures the one-sided power that guardians have over protected persons and anyone who tries to help.  Lord Acton, the 19th century politician, said, “Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely.”  Unfortunately, that is still even more true today.

Full Article & Source:
From The Silver Standard’s Elder Abuse Reform Now Project:  "YOU HAVE NO MORE AUTHORITY THAN A HORSE'S ASS" - said the guardian with a chuckle

See Also:
Evelyn Schwartz, Gone Too Soon

The Elder Abuse Reform Now Project (EARN) Presents: The Unforgivable Truth: How We Have Turned America's Greatest Generation into America's Abused Generation

JOIN The EARN Project

Tonight on Marti Oakley's TS Radio: The Ultimate Scam - Systems Exploiting the Vulnerable for Profit

with Marcia Southwick

5:00pm PST..6:00pm MST..7:00pm CST..8:00pm EST
All around us, private industries, contracted by public agencies, are profiting off the poor, the elderly, the homeless, the mentally ill, prisoners, persons with disabilities, and children.

These people aren’t vulnerable in and of themselves—they simply need assistance– but they are the first in line in terms of being vulnerable to exploitation by public agencies and private companies. In truth, there are accepted institutionalized court practices and revenue maximizing schemes on every level that steal from those who need it most.

In this show, we’ll discuss how the very systems set up to aid those who need help the most have morphed into profiteering industries.

LISTEN to the show live or listen to the archive later

From The Silver Standard’s Elder Abuse Reform Now Project: WHO WILL BE YOUR GUARDIAN?

By Marcia Southwick, NASGA

At last, the abuses within the guardianship system are beginning to come to light!  The mistreatment of elders whose dignity is stripped by removal of rights is tragic and, in this country, it is happening in epidemic proportion.

Nearly every week now, new articles are appearing about professional guardians who financially abuse the people they are supposed to protect.  Both The New Yorker and The New York Times have done excellent articles—we hope other News outlets, especially TV, with 24 hours of air time each day and the myriad talk shows, will follow their lead. This is a subject, and Financial Elder Abuse, which is often achieved through the use of guardianship, must be at the top of the list of subjects that are unquestionably “in the public interest”.

No Adult is more vulnerable than a person held in guardianship. Their entire right to be heard or to fight back has been eradicated by the court. Under current law in many states, a protected person is denied the right to enter into a contract with another person or business, leaving them unable to engage a lawyer to help them seek protection. With a “court-crony” guardian appointed to act "in your best interest," rather than a lawyer of your own choosing by your side, aren't you a sitting duck if something goes wrong? The answer is a resounding YES. What if the guardian assigned to you is a person whose only interest is in exploiting those under his or her control?

In 2013, AARP stated that it's "best guess" estimate was that there were 1.5 million American adults under guardianship—You can be sure that number is much larger in 2019.

The public is beginning to see how dangerous this system of protection can be. Leaving innocent people vulnerable to abuse is inexcusable. What if your guardian isn't a cruel greedy person, just lazy or not very bright? The potential is always there for exploitation of an elder's estate simply by lack of oversight.

No one is looking over the shoulders of these "professionals" who the courts put in control of people’s assets and life altering decisions. Families frequently walk into this situation unintentionally by going to court, thinking that they'll get help for their elder loved one during family conflict.  But once the door closes behind a guardianship proceeding, anything can happen, leaving lives broken and scattered.

The public really has no understanding of the nature of these proceedings--they can, and frequently do, happen without witnesses or testimony—except the testimony of a lawyer who stands to make money if the guardianship is put in place. The guardians charge ridiculous fees ($100 to open the mail) and spend like there is no tomorrow. The elder's assets can be easily depleted by professionals without accountability, a problem that has turned this cottage industry into a shameful money grab. In New Mexico, researchers are just beginning to go through court records to figure out just how many guardianships there really are in that state. There are no systematic, central records.  Can you imagine? Guardians and conservators are let loose with people's money and entire lives without having a degree in finance or any special training in investments or healthcare. In fact, in many states, according to the Center for State Courts, there are no statutes that require real training, and only 13 states require criminal background checks. See http://www.eldersandcourts.org/Guardianship/Qualifications-of-Guardianships.aspx

Frequently the judge will not insist that a guardian account for every penny of the ward’s money spent. The guardians just keeps spending and charging and spending and charging.

Idaho and Minnesota are the only states keeping track of the money that is under the control of guardians or conservators; The combined total is over $1 billion. It is frightening to think how much it is nation wide.

Theoretically (and something like this actually happened to someone I know) you (the ward) might be a PhD who needs a little help, yet you could end up under the thumb of a college dropout with only the assurnce that he or she isn't a convicted felon to protect you. (How would they know if the courts don't perform criminal background checks?) My friend wasn't allowed to look at his own bank statements, even though he was in the business of finance, and, in two years, the guardianship fees and expenses added up to approximately $2 million. Think about it—that's $2,700 a day!  What about the qualifications of those who are handling this money? They were less qualified than he. Instead of being restricted to his house with aides watching his every move and monitoring anyone who visited, he could have been living at the Ritz with room service and fresh sheets every day!  The absurdity of this situation—and it exists in many of these guardianship cases.

THE GUARDIANSHIP SYSTEM HAS BECOME ALL ABOUT MONEY IT'S A RIP-OFF.

Here is one of many cases that breaks my heart.  Every so often, I post a video of New Yorker Dorothy Wilson, in her 80's, trapped by her guardian in a nursing home. The post has gone viral, with over 60,000 views and hundreds of comments expressing sympathy.  She looks directly into the camera and describes her plight as she becomes more and more upset. At the end, she is weeping and begging to go home. Why should an elderly person be removed from her own home by a court professional and thrown into a nursing home she hates?  Dorothy wasn't allowed to leave the facility to see her family. Instead, she was forced to eat Thanksgiving in the dining room, nearly empty because nursing home residents who are not wards of a guardian are perfectly free to spend as much time as they wish to spend with friends and family. Elders in guardianship, by contrast, are often isolated and restricted from all but very limited access to family. Even a Power of Attorney without a guardian can cause a person to lose much of their independence (see note) Dorothy died within three months of forced placement by the guardian.

Dorothy ended up in guardianship due to a family conflict. Her daughter Diane, describes the shock of finding out that a professional guardian has complete and final control over every aspect of her mother's life.  "On August 22, 2011, the guardian, Mary Giordano, along with a caseworker in Plainview, NY, went to my mother’s house and told her they were taking her to the hospital for a problem she had with her recent surgery. That is the only reason she willingly got in the car. Instead, they took her to Meadowbrook Care Nursing Home in Freeport, a sub-standard nursing home with substantiated reports of abuse, and registered her there as a resident. This location isolated Mom from her family, friends,and healthcare providers."  So many seniors don’t know the guardian and the court has prohibited family and friends from visiting. So, they sit all alone in a strange place, their life slipping by, and wondering why their family has abandoned them.

Listen to Dorothy Wilson’s pleas for help at the end of this video and you will weep to see what it is like to be under a guardianship with no control over your life. She feels as if she's in prison without having committed a crime. (In another video, she says that precisely). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhOWppokCrQ

If Dorothy isn't an example of someone who has been abused by this system, no one is.  Something needs to be done for people in this situation, and it needs to be done now!  10,000 Baby Boomers turn 65 every day and every one of them has a target on their back—With a lifetime of hard-earned savings and insurance to plunder, they have exactly what these for-profit professionals want: they only have to ensnare them in the benevolent net of “just wanting to help" or " just wanting to do what's in their best interest". If you are a baby boomer, be aware that you too can easily become a far lesser version of the person you are at this moment—a person with rights to come and go freely, a person entitled to spend your own money as you wish, and a person with the power to live where you want and see who you want.

Educate your children about what family conflict could do to you and their future. Judges have a way of saying, "I don't go out looking for people to put into guardianship. The cases come to ME."  They've got a point—so, for now, the only REAL remedy for Boomers is to stay out of court if at all possible.

Full Article  & Source:
From The Silver Standard’s Elder Abuse Reform Now Project:  WHO WILL BE YOUR GUARDIAN?

Guardianship... Yet Another Hall of Fame Member

From The Elder Abuse Reform Now Project and the Silver Standard News
by Marcia Southwick

MEET JUDITH WIDENER:

Judith has the dubious honor of having been inducted into The Boomers Against Elder Abuse Guardianship Hall of Shame in 2013.

Judith had 660 or more cases during her 17 years as a conservator in Nebraska.

At the time of her arrest, Judith was in charge of 216 wards spread out over 36 counties all over the state.

So how did she manage to visit all of her wards in far-off corners of the state? Who on earth would allow one guardian to handle 216 wards at a time? We are talking about 216 people who have had their fundamental rights and life savings taken away and have been put under the complete charge and control of Judith Widener.

To put this in perspective, imagine someone taking care of 216 dogs. Would not that person land in jail for abuse, negligence, or hoarding? Yet, Judith Widener was given control of 216 human beings with literally no oversight. Apparently, in Nebraska, it is perfectly acceptable to neglect and abuse elders, and others, rendered powerless by the court—human beings who can’t fight back and then use the bank accounts of those human beings for your self-benefit.

Wards of the state are people who have lost all rights and all power of choice to make any decision concerning their own life—even when it comes to choosing the people who can visit them.

A ward is person denied the right to drive a car—denied the right to carry their own personal ID or to even leave a facility without the guardian’s permission.

No one is more vulnerable than a ward of the court.

A ward no longer has equal rights in the eyes of the law.

A ward is even prohibited from signing a contract to hire an attorney to protect themselves.

The charges against Widener involved thefts, uncovered by State Auditor Mike Foley as part of an audit of the state Aid to the Aged, Blind and Disabled program. His staff audited a sample of the accounts connected with Widener’s business, Safe Haven. At that time, Widener controlled 40 bank accounts that held more than $600,000. Mind you, these are only samples of a few cases-- not the final figures.

Widener also allegedly accepted funds on behalf of wards who were no longer living, double-billed for services, and used funds belonging to wards to make personal payments on credit cards and for phone and television services to her home. She had also written checks from guardianship accounts for birthday and Christmas gifts to herself.

Judith Widener was sentenced to only 180 days in jail and instructed to pay restitution.

Full Article & Source:
Guardianship... Yet Another Hall of Fame Member

See Also:
The Elder Abuse Reform Now Project (The EARN Project)
Watch the documentary, "The Unforgivable Truth"

ARE FAMILIES RESPONSIBLE FOR 90% OF ALL ELDER ABUSE?

Marcia Southwick ©9/19/18

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“The false impression out there blaming families and relatives for 90% of elder abuse means that guardians can protect their own paychecks by maligning families in court, which they often do. It also means that the public is distracted away from looking at the larger entities abusing the elderly right under our noses.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Most people believe that elder abuse is all about Granny surrounded by family predators who just want to grab her money and throw her to the wolves. You’ll hear plenty of rumblings claiming that families and people closest to elders are responsible for 90 % of all elder abuse.

The National Care Planning Council is one of many who quote this figure. The article is titled “ Perpetrators of Elder Abuse are Usually Family Members:” . Even AARP claims that “ You’d like to think that elder financial abuse is committed mostly by strangers. You’d be wrong. In reality, it’s more likely to come at the hands of family members and caregivers”

Why does everyone blame families?

The latest 2011 study done by MetLife shows that in terms of dollars stolen from elders, families are not the most likely to steal the most dollars: After examining three months of national news feeds, plus other data, researchers determined that businesses stole $205,243,400; Family members and friends stole $11,515,737, Strangers stole $7,612,513, and Medicaid/Medicare fraud caused the most damage–$306,105,093.)

NAPSA (National Adult Protective Services Association) is another organization that blames families for most of the elder abuse that takes place today. Their figure again is 90%. Adult Protective Services investigates domestic settings. Since most of us don’t have lawyers or financial advisors living with us at home, my guess is that these culprits have been left out of the equation.

Families obviously do financially abuse elders, often by way of Power of Attorney, but few experts really talk about financial abuse by the larger “protection” industries that surround elders. Those systems sometimes exert more leverage against elders than you’d think. How about your state? There are hidden ways in which elders are abused for profit in this country, and you won’t see these described in any MetLife study.

Consider that just in the state of Maryland alone there’s a 6% bed tax that applies to nursing homes. The healthcare provider applies for and is reimbursed by Medicaid for that tax. You’d think those funds would then be matched by the state and used to support the elderly who are IN those beds. Not so. At least 35% of all federal Medicaid funds received in Maryland for the purpose of supporting nursing homes can be diverted for other purposes by using a process called IGTs, or “intergovernmental transfers” which enable this practice. Many states use the same tactics as Maryland, and some states don’t properly match federal Medicaid dollars with state funds. This problem slips by, unnoticed due to the underhanded tactics using Intergovernmental Transfers. California raised 3 billion in hospital bed taxes in 2013, and only 40 million went to hospitals. (Daniel L. Hatcher, The Poverty Industry, p. 140-142, New York University Press, 2016} The sad part is that one of the richest states, Maryland, receives the same score as one of the poorest states—Mississippi–when it comes to Nursing Home Quality of care. That score is a big fat D! (Ibid. p. 140} The strategy used by state IGTs to fill the general state coffers basically steals money from the infirm and elderly, leaving them to suffer, drugged to ease the pain caused by deadly bedsores, broken bones, lack of care, and financial fleecing. This, I’m sure also applies to fleecing the mentally ill, disabled, children in the foster care system, and prisoners.

What’s happening in U.S. nursing homes due to funds not been used as they should be–to increase staffing –is FAR more egregious than kids fleecing Granny, as awful as that situation is. Think BILLIONS of federal dollars being siphoned away from care of the elderly. Yet a Granny at home being fleeced for a few thousand dollars might command far more attention by AARP who targets elders as customers for insurance. I’m not saying family abuse doesn’t exist. Of course it does and it’s a horrific problem.

Families, though, are often considered the enemy by those who are in the protection industry, yet in many of the financial abuse cases involving family, the state courts and the people who systematically work in those courts use family financial abuse cases to “save” elders by deeming them incapacitated, and changing their lives forever—

This process can take place in 15 minutes behind the closed doors without the victim being present.

The elder, declared to be in an “emergency” situation (hearsay is acceptable—there are no high standards for evidence) is officially stripped of fundamental rights then put under the care of a professional for-profit individual guardian or company who then charges outrageous unaudited fees to the elder’s estate. Victims can’t do a thing about it because now have no rights. (If you would like to read how this system works, here are 450 documented cases. ) Without fundamental rights to make decisions (Granny has lost the right to hire an attorney, and her family has “lost legal standing”) she can be held in place like a bug pinned to a wall. She is usually drugged in a nursing facility after the guardian sells her home and belongings to ensure a nice paycheck for “services.” The family is completely shut out in many cases.

For decades, families of victims have complained about this removal of rights for profit. I receive hundreds of complaints on my facebook page, www.facebook.com/boomersbeware. State and county courts are using gag orders to keep families of victims quiet. Meanwhile, guardians and/or conservators with complete control over these elders, fleece their estates without accountability or monitoring. If you still find all of this unbelievable, please read the New Yorker article about it:

The false impression out there blaming families and relatives for 90% of elder abuse means that guardians can protect their own paychecks by maligning families in court, which they often do. It also means that the public is distracted away from looking at the larger entities abusing the elderly right under our noses.

The Government Accountability Office published a shocking report by the “Director of Health Care—Medicaid and Private Health Insurance Issues,” Kathryn Allen, who had this to say about the breadth of state schemes that abuse the elderly:

“For many years states have used varied financing schemes, sometimes involving IGTs (intergovernmental transfers) to inappropriately increase federal Medicaid matching payments. Some states, for example, receive federal matching funds on the basis of large Medicaid payments to certain providers, such as nursing homes operated by local governments, which greatly exceed established Medicaid rates. In reality, the large payments are often temporary, since states can require the local-government providers to return all or most of the money to the states. States can use these funds—which essentially make a round-trip from the states to providers and back to the states—at their own discretion.”

We’re accusing families, friends and neighbors of causing problems for the aging population when there’s a humungous plot out there to use the elderly as cash cows, and it isn’t caused by family dysfunction. In fact, the intention of a lot of these organizations seems to be to separate elders from their families in order to make money.

Full Article & Source:

ARE FAMILIES RESPONSIBLE FOR 90% OF ALL ELDER ABUSE?

From The Silver Standard’s Elder Abuse Reform Now Project: INSIDE THE BELLY OF THE BEAST: GUARDIANSHIP

By Marcia Southwick

A social worker employed by a professional guardianship company contacted me recently on my Facebook page, Boomers Against Elder Abuse. I was surprised because not many insiders are willing to open up when it comes to this secretive cottage industry. This legalized system of theft from elders and persons with disabilities is a secret world operating below the radar. The public is unaware of how this system works against the people it is supposed to protect because the courts involved in these proceedings do their best to keep guardianship matters secret. Records are sealed; gag orders and contempt-of-court charges are leveled against adult children of the victim if they choose to speak out.

The social worker said that at first she admired professional guardians because the guardian’s mission seemed purely to help those who could not care for themselves. Later, though, the social worker began to see gaping cracks in procedure. She didn’t go into details, but my guess is that she witnessed elders and others being snatched up into guardianships they didn’t need or want.

We hear nightmare stories every day at the National Association to Stop Guardian Abuse. One of the top complaints is that courts choose professional guardians over family members who are perfectly able to care for their elderly parents. Attorneys and guardians argue to the court that children of wealthy elders, in particular, have a conflict of interest due to the money they will inherit.

What about the fact that everyone in the courtroom will soon be paid out of the elder’s estate if the elder is deemed incapacitated? Isn’t that a conflict of interest? Every single person working on a guardianship case has a motive to draw a wealthy elder into the system because everybody will be on the payroll, and they get to charge the estate for services with almost no monitoring. The people about to “make bank” include a court visitor, a doctor who makes an assessment of incapacity, the guardian ad litem (an attorney appointed as an arm of the court to decide what’s in the prospective ward’s “best interest”), and anybody the guardian wishes to hire off the elder’s dime.

Another social worker told me that she knew of a guardian who found elderly victims to put into guardianships by investigating property tax records to see if any elders were behind in their payments. If taxes hadn’t been paid, she would approach the elder or others close to them and suggest that the elder needed help with paying bills and care. Then, her attorney would petition for guardianship over the unsuspecting victim.

Guardians and conservators for the elderly control billions, perhaps trillions, of dollars. There is no central database for guardianship registry. Many states don’t have records of all guardianship cases; therefore, there’s no way to really know how many wards are out there with their money being controlled by total strangers who may or may not have their best interests at heart.

Full Article & Source:
From The Silver Standard’s Elder Abuse Reform Now Project: INSIDE THE BELLY OF THE BEAST: GUARDIANSHIP

Parents Are Hard to Raise

LISTEN to Marcia's entire Interview

iHeart Radio Podcasts:

Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/2KXMVTx

Google Podcasts: http://bit.ly/2PoAymS

TuneIn Radio: http://bit.ly/2L3O6Rb