Guardians of the Elderly: An Ailing System Part I: Declared ‘Legally Dead’ by a Troubled System
Undated (AP) _ The nation’s guardianship system, a crucial
last line of protection for the ailing elderly, is failing many of
those it is designed to protect.
A year-long
investigation by The Associated Press of courts in all 50 states and the
District of Columbia found a dangerously burdened and troubled system
that regularly puts elderly lives in the hands of others with little or
no evidence of necessity, then fails to guard against abuse, theft and
neglect.
In thousands of courts around the nation every week, a few
minutes of routine and the stroke of a judge’s pen are all that it takes
to strip an old man or woman of basic rights.
The
300,000 to 400,000 elderly people under guardianship can no longer
receive money or pay their bills. They cannot marry or divorce. The
court entrusts to someone else the power to choose where they will live,
what medical treatment they will get, and, in rare cases, when they
will die.
The AP investigation examined more than
2,200 randomly selected guardianship court files to get a portrait of
wards and of the system that oversees them.
After
giving guardians such great power over elderly people, overworked and
understaffed court systems frequently break down, abandoning those
incapable of caring for themselves, the AP found.
A
legal tool meant to protect the elderly and their property, guardianship
sometimes results instead in financial or physical mistreatment, the AP
found.
″Guardianship is a process that uproots
people, literally ‘unpersons’ them, declares them legally dead,″ said
Dr. Dennis Koson, a law and psychiatry expert in Florida. ″Done badly,
it does more hurting than protecting.″
That danger was confirmed by the AP investigation, which involved staff reporters in every state. The AP found:
- Elderly in guardianship court are often afforded fewer rights than
criminal defendants. In 44 percent of the cases, the proposed ward was
not represented by an attorney. Three out of 10 files contained no
medical evidence. Forty-nine percent of the wards were not present at
their hearings. Twenty-five percent of the files contained no indication
hearings had been held.
Some elderly people discover they are wards of the court only after the fact.
A Bennington, Vt., woman learned she was under guardianship only
when told by her nursing home she could no longer spend money without
the permission of the guardian, her daughter. A Fort Lauderdale, Fla.,
woman found she had a guardian only when she was turned away from the
polling booth.
″Guardianship became a rubber-stamp
procedure over the years,″ said Indianapolis Probate Judge Victor Pfau, a
leader in a judicial reform movement.
- While laws in
44 states require guardians to file regular accountings of the ward’s
money, they were missing or incomplete in 48 percent of the files
examined. Thirteen percent, more than one in 10, of the files were empty
but for the initial granting of guardianship powers.
Such files are critical to the court’s knowledge that wards are being
cared for and that their money is being spent properly. Without the
files, the door is open to abuse.
So a court in
Missoula, Mont., had no record of what happened to the $131,000 estate
of a 92-year-old man found ill and alone in a cabin in 1985 after a
couple described as ″friends″ became his guardians. And a Pittsburgh
court learned of a decade-long misappropriation of $25,000 in Social
Security checks only when a state hospital complained of non-payment for
a ward’s care. The ward’s guardian, an attorney, was disbarred in 1985.
- What reports are filed are rarely audited or even
checked by probate courts, which handle guardianships in most
jurisdictions. One of the last rungs on the courthouse ladder, often
dealing more with affairs of the dead than of the living, probate courts
are swamped. Many can’t even guess how many guardianships they have on
file.
″I don’t know where the wards are, who’s caring
for them, what they’re doing,″ said Probate Judge Anthony Sciarretta of
Providence, R.I. ″I have no support staff, I have no welfare workers, I
have no aides, I have no assistants and I have no money.″
In San Diego, judges routinely signed off on annual accountings
filed by lawyer Robert Kronemyer for the estate of his ward, Joshua
Baily. Not until after Baily’s death did a friend become suspicious.
Kronemyer was convicted in 1983 of theft and perjury for taking hundreds
of thousands of dollars in cash and bonds.
Most
guardians are dedicated, caring people who see that their wards get
proper food, clothing, shelter and medical attention. A good guardian
can protect against greedy relatives and scheming con men.
Yet if the nation’s elderly population jumps 22 percent by century’s
end, to nearly 35 million, as projected, the problems of guardianship
are likely to grow.
While guardianship procedures
vary, even from county to county, the laws follow a pattern: A petition
is filed, usually by a family member, alleging a person is incompetent
and no longer able to care for himself or herself. The person is
evaluated, and the court rules on the petition.
If
granted, guardianship reduces these ″wards of the court″ to the status
of legal infants who may no longer drive a car, vote or, in many states,
hire an attorney. ″A prisoner has more legal rights,″ said Winsor
Schmidt, a Memphis State University professor who has studied
guardianship in 13 states.
- Once shuffled into
guardianship, the elderly have few ways out. Some states bar wards from
hiring attorneys because they have been ruled incompetent. Twenty-four
states require courts to regularly check the status of the wards. Some
judges are reluctant to reopen cases to remove guardianships.
In Grand Junction, Colo., Vivian Steiner, 68, has written to the
judge who placed her under guardianship, contending she has recovered
from medical difficulties and can leave the nursing home where she is
confined. Pitkin County District Judge J.E. DeVilbiss hasn’t answered
her, standing by his 1984 ruling that she is incompetent.
″The guardianship is done and it’s done unless someone calls it to the court’s attention,″ DeVilbiss said.
The AP found institutions are increasingly using guardianship as an
answer to a variety of problems. Hospitals, faced with new Medicare
regulations limiting coverage for extended care, use guardianship to
move patients to nursing homes. Nursing homes require guardianship to
ensure someone will pay the bills.
But critics challenge using such a harsh remedy to guarantee payments.
″You don’t need someone to strip you to the rights of a 5-year-old
to check you into a nursing home,″ said David Grant, director of the
Guardianship Diversion Project, a Los Angeles group promoting less
restrictive alternatives for the elderly.
Baltimore
courts now use an expedited procedure that allows hospitals to file
petitions of guardianship on elderly patients, then move them to nursing
homes before the petitions are approved.
While the
hospitals and the courts say this is simply an efficient way of handling
patients, Jerry Dresner, an attorney with the Maryland Disability Law
Center, calls it ″after-the-fact due process.″
Nursing
homes, hospitals and doctors are also using guardianship as a hedge
against liability in tough decisions such as amputations and
disconnecting life support systems.
″If I ran a
nursing home, I’d insist on it,″ said Pat Graves, a social worker who
runs a senior citizens program at an Albuquerque, N.M., hospital.
Federally mandated adult protective services programs in each state
have created a cadre of social workers vigorously checking reports of
abuse, ″self-neglect″ and irrational behavior among the elderly. But
their eagerness sometimes leads them to file guardianship petitions on
old people who simply may be having trouble keeping house or keeping
track of bills.
″The whole problem with guardianship
as it is practiced today is that they take someone who’s got a bit of a
problem and put them away,″ said Theresa Bertram, director of the
Cathedral Foundation, a Jacksonville, Fla., charity offering support
services to try to keep the elderly out of guardianship.
As America ages, the system faces change. Medical advances have led
to longer lives - and more cases of incompetence. As social services are
pushed to the breaking point, many turn to guardianship. The AP has
even found petitions for guardianship in AIDS cases filtering into
probate court.
To be sure, most guardians are honest
and well-intentioned. Many judges defend the present system as humane
and effective, arguing that guardianship is a family business and not in
need of outside supervision.
But guardians are not
always family members. The AP found one-quarter of today’s guardians are
friends, attorneys, professional guardians or government agencies with
no familial relationship to their wards.
A new
industry has cropped up of professional guardians, who bill their wards’
estates as much as $65 an hour for their services. The AP has found
such entrepreneurs with responsibility for 100, 300, and in one case 400
wards.
″I could start a business, put people on
computer, and business would be booming,″ said Seattle lawyer Kathleen
Moore, who works part-time as guardian for seven elderly wards.
Those who can’t pay are herded into a growing number of state or
county public guardianship offices, with caseloads reaching several
hundred per social worker.
Guardianship’s problems have led to some reform attempts in recent years.
California has overhauled its statutes on guardianship, which for
adults is called conservatorship. In 1981, the state began funding
probate court investigators who now regularly examine guardianship
petitions and check up on guardians. State funds also pay probate
attorneys to review accountings and other filings.
″The Legislature was of the opinion that maybe a lot of people under
conservatorship didn’t need to be,″ said Timothy A. Whitehouse,
assistant supervising probate attorney in Los Angeles.
Last year, a meeting of probate judges sponsored by the American Bar
Association and the National Judicial College drafted a list of reforms,
including recommendations that would require due process rights for the
proposed ward and closer monitoring of guardianships by the courts.
Others look to alternatives. Federal funds support the Guardianship
Diversion Project, which promotes programs to pay bills and manage money
for the elderly without going to the extreme of guardianship.
″Guardianship is an important, useful service that is inappropriate
to almost everybody,″ said Grant. ″There’s going to be a difficult
period in which people learn that guardianship just doesn’t work.″
For whatever reason the guardianship petition is brought, it moves
speedily through overtaxed courts that often sidestep the civil rights
safeguards so zealously protected in other types of courtrooms.
When held, guardianship hearings sometimes last only minutes.
Medical investigators and court-appointed examiners often perform
perfunctory checks of proposed wards to see if guardianship is needed.
Richard Shamel, a Deerfield Beach, Fla., attorney who specializes in
guardianship, said it takes him 10 to 15 minutes to determine if
someone needs a guardian. ″About half of those you see, they’re just
staring at the ceiling,″ he said.
Competency
examinations, when they are done, are performed by people with varying
degrees of expertise, including urologists, osteopaths, social workers,
nursing home employees and retired court clerks. Their decisions may be
based on such tests as the proposed ward’s ability to recall the names
of the last three presidents or perform simple math problems.
The criteria used by these investigators are often sketchy. People
can be placed under guardianship because they are alcoholics or
diabetics. Often, in the eyes of the court, being old and spending money
foolishly is enough.
″You’ve got a fundamental issue
of human rights involved here,″ said Barry Lebowitz, who heads research
on aging for the National Institute of Mental Health. ″People are
protected in their right to make foolish choices.″
Whatever the criteria, and whoever is making the judgment, in 94 percent
of cases examined by the AP the petition for guardianship was approved.
″The system is just completely weighted against the
proposed ward,″ said Elise Donnelly, who studied guardianship in North
Dakota for the state Department of Human Services. ″Once the petition is
brought, you have to go in and prove you’re not incompetent.″
Said Judge Pfau from Indianapolis: ″The attorney (for the guardian)
wants the judge to just sign his name. He doesn’t want notice (to the
proposed ward), he doesn’t want a 14-day wait, or a visitors program.″
But the pressure to approve guardianships is strong. ″If I’m too
tough on attorneys, I’m not going to get elected again,″ Pfau said, ″and
that might sound cowardly to say that.″
Many judges
feel more court oversight would intrude on what they see as a family
affair. Guardianship is generally there, they say, to help sons and
daughters care for their parents.
″My personal feeling
is it’s a family responsibility. Families take better care of people
than government,″ said probate Judge Melvin Rueger of Cincinnati.
″Everyone presupposes that a son or daughter abuses a mother or dad and I
just don’t believe it.″
Yet the AP’s investigation
found example after example of relatives dipping into the ward’s money
for their own use. In most cases, the courts give tacit approval.
In Seattle, two nephews of a wealthy elderly woman now living in a
nursing home have been paying themselves $800 monthly salaries for
guardianship, plus cars, travel and gifts of $20,000. The court has
approved the expenditures.
In Arkansas, a woman who
was named guardian for her father-in-law in 1981 charged expenses that
included $50 for one hour’s work on ″preparation for arrangements″ for
the man’s burial, another $50 for an hour’s work relaying word of the
man’s death to relatives and $71 for mileage to the out-of-town funeral.
In Oklahoma, a state agency discovered that a woman’s
former husband had himself appointed her guardian, discontinued his
alimony payments to her, collected her Social Security payments then
left the state.
San Diego Superior Court Judge Paul
Overton recalls a case where a son took his mother, also his ward, to
Thanksgiving dinner at a relative’s home.
″He charged
her for mileage for coming and going, and charged her $8 and something
for the dinner,″ Overton said. ″One thing that really touches my heart,
or I should say touches the seat of my pants, is to see a child charging
to take care of a parent.″
Whether children or
strangers are the guardians, the end result for many wards is removal
from their homes and confinement to nursing centers, the AP found. More
than one-third of the wards seen in case files lived in their own homes
before guardianship; about the same number was moved sometime during
guardianship. Almost two-thirds of the wards lived in nursing homes at
some time during guardianship.
For the guardian, a
nursing home generally offers the easiest and most efficient way to care
for the ward. Often wards are near death and round-the- clock care in
an institution is needed. But sometimes it’s overused.
″If you run a person through the guardian door into a nursing home,″
said Jim Wade, a former probate judge in Denver who has returned to
private law practice, ″the deprivation of rights is complete,″
---
Next: Due Process - Do Wards Get Their Day in Court?
Full Article & Source:
From the archives: Guardians of the Elderly – An Ailing System - Part I
Showing posts with label ailing system. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ailing system. Show all posts
Friday, October 1, 2010
From the archives: Guardians of the Elderly – An Ailing System - Part II
FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. (AP) _ Billie sat at the table, trying to
joke with the social workers and lawyers sitting around her. ″Are you
talking about me?″ she asked the strangers who said they were there to
help.The man beside her, her lawyer she was told, softly explained she needed a guardian, someone who would handle the everyday worries.
If a person is a fool, let this person and his goods be under the protection of his family or his paternal relatives, if he is not under the care of anyone else.
- Twelve Tables of Rome, 449 B.C.
″Does this mean I won’t be able to go back to where I live?″ the 74-year- old woman asked. ″I still want to get out and take care of my house and do shopping. I feel well enough to be on my own.″
Despite her doubts, Billie was declared incompetent and assigned a guardian: another stranger who would control her life, from where she would live to how her money would be spent. It took only a few minutes.
The informal judicial hearing witnessed by AP reporters in the Fort Lauderdale boarding home was not unusual. An average of 10 people a week are placed under guardianship in this community of retirees. Nationally, 300,000 to 400,000 senior citizens are under guardianship.
What was unusual was that Billie had her ″day in court″ at all.
A year-long investigation by The Associated Press found that senior citizens facing guardianship are often denied courtroom rights considered essential to criminal defendants and those being committed to mental hospitals.
A review of more than 2,200 cases around the country showed 44 percent of the elderly were not represented by attorneys; almost half did not attend their own hearings.
In fact, more than one in four cases had no hearings. And in places such as Cleveland or Charlotte, N.C., a proposed ward may not even get a judge - a court clerk conducts hearings and issues the ruling.
The AP also found laws vague in defining who needs guardianship, lax standards in determining the proposed ward’s medical and psychological status and insensitivity toward the elderly throughout the legal process.
Combined, these factors make it very easy to get a guardianship and hard for the elderly to defend themselves against the process.
″When somebody goes to jail, the court system has bent over backwards with due process. But there is no such thing with a guardian,″ said Ina Katich, a Denver expert on law and the elderly.
But the process of placing someone under guardianship is not just a question of legal rights. It involves issues of medicine, psychiatry, geriatrics and, importantly, society’s attitudes toward the elderly.
D’Jean Testa, a Legal Services attorney in Phoenix, recounts story after story of people who faced guardianship because their actions did not fit what society expects of older people.
In one case, a daughter sought guardianship for her mother because the elderly woman wanted to buy a camper and tour the country with a male friend. In another, a son sought guardianship to stop his father’s plans to remarry.
″If you’re old, you can’t be foolish,″ said Ms. Testa.
This bias is reflected in the wording of guardianship law and the way courts handle their wards.
Guardianship is granted when a court believes a person is incompetent: unable to handle his affairs or care for herself. But a survey by the American Bar Association found that in 25 states ″advanced age″ is enough cause to find someone incompetent. Other reasons are equally vague, from ″improvidence″ in Ohio to ″spendthrift″ in Massachusetts and ″habitual drunkard″ in several states.
″Advanced age just isn’t a good enough reason to appoint a guardian,″ said Gwen Bedford, a national director of the American Association of Retired Persons. ″You’ve got to tell the difference between someone who is just eccentric and someone who really is incapacitated.″
Advanced age was given as the reason for incompetence in 8 percent of the cases the AP studied.
While the competency of the elderly comes under close scrutiny, little is done to tailor the legal process to their special needs and problems.
Notices of guardianship petitions are often printed in hard-to-read legalese. For example, old people facing guardianship in Texas receive this notice calling them to court:
″... at or before 10 a.m. of the Monday next after the expiration of 10 days after the date of service of this citation by filing a written answer to the application of (petitioner) filed in said court on the (date) alleging said ward has no guardian and praying for the appointment of the person and estate of said ward. At said above mentioned time and place, said ward and all other persons may contest said application if they so desire.″
Such warnings, sent by mail or delivered by sheriff’s deputies with no other explanation, do little to inform senior citizens of their rights or the implications of guardianship.
Only 14 states specifically require that the elderly be informed of their rights and what freedoms they would lose under guardianship.
″People have the right to defend themselves and people need to know that,″ said Paul Wharton, an attorney with the Utah Legal Services Senior Law Center. ″What really ought to be considered is providing notice, like a Miranda warning. We give criminals warning, why not our parents?″
While the proposed ward’s medical status is the basis for determining incompetence, at least 11 states require no medical evidence other than the allegations of the petitioner. In fact, 34 percent of the cases examined nationwide by the AP showed no medical evidence supporting petitioners’ claims; in 16 percent, the only evidence came from the petitioners.
Tod Porterfield, an 83-year-old Albion, Ind., farmer was placed under guardianship and forced into a nursing home on the strength of a petition saying he suffered from Alzheimer’s disease. It was later discovered the allegation came from a social worker at a hospital where Porterfield was treated for stomach problems.
″No doctor ever diagnosed me,″ said Porterfield, who eventually had the guardianship overturned. ″I never talked to a doctor or an officer of the court.″
In some states, a simple note or fill-in-the-blank form from a family physician is enough: a Woonsocket, R.I., woman was placed under guardianship on the strength of a scrawled doctor’s note that read, ″She is incompitent (sic) in signing or managing her check.″
Courts in 11 states appoint visitors to examine the ward and report back to the judge. The skill of these visitors and the detail of their reports vary widely.
In California, trained court employees have a checklist of questions they must answer for the court. In Oregon, the AP found instances where the visitor was the secretary for the attorney bringing the petition. A special master in Phoenix said he appointed visitors recommended by the petitioner.
Few states define what doctors or visitors should look for or how they should conduct their examinations. Many diagnoses fail to explore whether the condition is temporary or chronic. In many cases the examining doctors are unfamiliar with the proposed ward’s medical history or what medication they are taking. Some doctors base their decision on non-medical determinations.
″Really, what is most important to me is whether the person could be victimized, whether the guardian will help the person,″ said Dr. Cesar Hernandez, a psychiatrist who performs examinations for the Broward County, Fla., courts.
Hernandez also considers the condition of the person’s home and his appearance.
″You talk to the person,″ he said. ″You see if they are well-groomed, overweight, underweight, antagonistic, depressed. Can they make good conversation?″
Case files reveal brief, often perfunctory medical examinations with even briefer diagnoses: ″forgetful,″ ″diabetes″ and others.
Medical experts note that because the elderly are sensitive to changes in medication, they may seem to be foundering when the condition is actually reversible. A simple vitamin deficency can cause temporary memory lapses.
″What some doctors want to do is have some sort of cookbook form where they could diagnose the patient in five or 10 minutes,″ said Dr. George Grossberg, director of geriatric psychiatry at St. Louis University School of Medicine who is studying guardianship examinations for the National Institute of Mental Health.
During examinations, some doctors assume the role of inquisitor, and elderly patients may react nervously, Grossberg said. ″It’s easy to jump to conclusions when you push people.″
As terrifying as the legal process can be, only 28 states mandate legal representation for people facing guardianship; 12 leave it optional, and 10 require no representation.
Other studies made similar conclusions to the AP’s finding. A look at Los Angeles courts by the National Senior Citizen Law Center found that 96 percent of proposed wards are not represented.
On the other hand the person seeking to become a guardian is nearly always represented by an attorney whose fee, along with that for the proposed ward’s court-appointed attorney, is charged to the elderly person.
″It’s ironic the very person that should be represented at the hearings is not represented by counsel,″ said Paul Zaverella, a Pittsburgh judge.
But when attorneys are appointed, sometimes picked from a courthouse list and paid a limited fee, they often serve only as rubber stamps.
In Fort Lauderdale, court-appointed attorneys receive $125 to conduct a brief interview. The attorneys often waive the entire hearing process when they believe guardianship is best for the person.
″You just talk to them at great lengths for five to 10 minutes and you can tell if they’re competent or not,″ said Victor DeBianchi Jr., a Hollywood, Fla., attorney assigned by the court to represent Billie.
One Fort Lauderdale file contained a medical examination saying an elderly woman was more coherent in the morning than in the evening. Yet the attorney appointed to represent the woman interviewed her at 7:20 p.m., found her incoherent, waived the hearing and, in effect, made the judge’s decision.
Dr. Dennis Koson, a forensic psychiatrist, looked at 200 guardianship cases in the Broward County, Fla., court system as an associate law professor at Nova University. He found that court-appointed attorneys told judges hearings would not be necessary 90 percent of the time.
In 44 percent of the cases, the proposed ward’s attorney served a dual role as a member of the examining committee called upon to determine the person’s competency.
″That was shocking,″ said Koson. ″Their own attorney was making the determination.″
Attorneys in Fort Lauderdale were waiving clients’ rights so often that the state appeals court this summer ruled that hearings must be held in all guardianship cases.
″What the decision says is that an attorney cannot give away a client’s rights, something that was done regularly,″ said Nancy Trease, the Legal Aid attorney who brought the suit that led to the ruling.
Attorneys who want to help clients trying to fight guardianship often find themselves at odds with judges who believe lawyers should do what they think best for the proposed ward.
″The judge wants to know what you’re doing in his courtroom wasting time,″ said Steve Feldman, a Philadelphia lawyer.
Judge Francis Christie, a Miami probate judge, sees no need for an attorney’s advocacy if it is clear the proposed ward needs help.
″I have told the attorneys that they should not formulate and adopt the Clarence Darrow philosophy,″ he said. ″If a person is incompetent they should have a guardian. That should be obvious to the attorney once they meet the client.″
Casual attitudes toward the rights of the elderly are repeatedly reflected in guardianship case files. In Mississippi, the AP found a case in which Lenore Prather, now a state Supreme Court justice, had presided over a guardianship case, her husband had served as the petitioner’s attorney, and the proposed ward was also a relative.
When asked about the case, Prather acknowledged she should have followed state bar association ethics guidelines and noted the family ties in the court record.
″It was a family situation where there was no contest,″ Prather said.
Many of these factors were at work when two attorneys, two social workers and a probate master, an attorney deputized to serve as a judge, held the hearing to determine Billie’s competency.
The hearing came about only because one psychiatrist on the three-person examining committee found her competent. DeBianchi, Billie’s attorney, originally waived the hearing, telling the court his client was ″arrogant″ and ″in my lay opinion she appeared to be in the beginning-to-middle stages of Alzheimer’s disease.″
″She can fool you at the beginning, but after a while you can tell she’s incompetent,″ he said.
Billie was asked a series of questions to test her competency. Bright and quick-witted in conversation, she faltered when asked if she owned her home. She could not remember the name of her bank or the names of the last several presidents.
After a few more casual questions, the special master ruled Billie incompetent and assigned Nathan Sobel, a retired man with several other wards, as her guardian. The court has had no further contact beyond paperwork. She remains in the boarding home, still hoping to return to her small apartment.
Sobel said a return is not likely.
″In talking with the social workers, they don’t think she is on the way to recovery,″ said Sobel. ″Right now she’s being well taken care of and that’s the most important thing.″
---
NEXT: How Courts Fail to Guard Against Guardian Abuse
Full Article & Source:
From the archives: Guardians of the Elderly – An Ailing System - Part II
From the archives: Guardians of the Elderly – An Ailing System - Part IV
---- (AP) _ Five social workers in the public guardian’s office
here control the lives of 1,000 elderly people. The office also controls
$200 million in assets and has run a hardware store, a plant nursery
and an oil drilling operation owned by its wards.It is the largest and one of the oldest public guardianship offices in the country, and its critics say it now turns away cases and favors monied wards over the indigent.
Both criticisms are true to some extent, the public guardian says. His office is swamped, and his budget is constantly under threat.
″We don’t want any more. We have too many,″ said Gordon Treharne, the Los Angeles public guardian. ″Everyone thinks we should expand and we’re not. We’re retrenching.″
And it’s happening all across the country.
Faced with a crush of elderly who either outlive their money or live far from family, states are setting up - and loading up - public guardians as a catchall for those who have no one else.
While numbers remain unclear, an Associated Press study of more than 2,200 guardianship cases around the country shows that 2.3 percent of the 300,000 to 400,000 people under guardianship may be wards of public guardians.
The public guardians take direct control of the lives of old people and make the decisions any guardian makes - where the ward will live, whether to pull the plug on life-support systems, how much money is spent on groceries.
″Public guardianship is brand-new by government definitions,″ said James Scannell, the public guardian in San Francisco. ″We’re in our infancy. We’re really just evolving now to meet the needs of the community.″
Meeting those needs is becoming increasingly difficult. In Phoenix, caseworkers have time to visit their wards only four times a year. Tennessee’s new public guardian’s office took in 37 people in the first two months and expects to reach 300 in the first year.
Thirty-two states have some form of public guardianship, and almost all are finding big problems that are getting worse.
Some public guardians have been indicted, others criticized for neglecting wards or ″warehousing″ them in nursing homes.
In California, a grand jury blamed the Santa Clara County public guardian’s office for the 1985 starvation death of 79-year-old John Nagle. The office hadn’t seen the ward in two years. The grand jury’s report helped establish new guidelines for the office.
The public guardian for Du Page County, Ill., pleaded guilty to charges of official misconduct and theft last year after he was accused of investing wards’ money for his own benefit. He was ordered to repay $12,600.
John M. Hartman, a former Bay County, Mich., public guardian, admitted in 1985 that he embezzled $129,506 from some of his 75 wards. He was sentenced to five years in prison.
Las Vegas’ public guardian, Jared Shafer, has drawn fire for making real estate investments with partners in the law firm he chose to handle most of his office’s business.
In North Dakota, wards are placed in the hands of part-time public administrators, appointed officials with no training, staff or money to care for their charges. In one case, a public administrator put two wards in the care of a friend who charged each estate $2,000 a month for room and board.
″When you don’t have the appropriate staff, you get into these binds,″ said Verdine Dunham, president of the California Association of Public Administrators. ″Sometimes I wake up in the middle of the night ... (worried) that I haven’t done something that will come back to haunt me.″
Added Phoenix public guardian Dean Trebesch: ″There’s more realization now that the power that goes with guardianship is so awesome and the loss of rights so awesome that we’d better make darn sure we do it right.″
While some social service professionals hail the care and services provided by public guardians, other experts point to the problems of handling so many with so few.
In Phoenix, for example, so many are now under the umbrella of the public guardian that caseworkers handle 75 wards apiece. San Francisco has 315 wards and two caseworkers. Alameda County, Calif., which includes the city of Oakland, has frozen its caseload at 450 with just three caseworkers. Alaska’s six public guardians handle 280 cases. Four guardianship officers in Kentucky have an average case load of 150 each.
In Portland, Ore., five people handle 180 wards with a $180,000 annual budget. ″We’re stretched thin,″ said Jeff Brandon, deputy public guardian. ″There’s probably 500 cases that are not even sent here, because they figure they’ll get a ‘no’ from us.″
In Los Angeles, the case load breaks down to more than 200 wards per worker.
″The reality is with those case loads we’re not getting out there very often,″ Treharne said.
Few guidelines exist for running public guardianship offices, but some experts have suggested limits.
″The public guardian must be adequately staffed and funded to the extent that no office is responsible for more than 500 wards, and each professional in the office is responsible for no more than 30 wards,″ said Winsor Schmidt, a guardianship expert and law professor at Memphis State University.
In its year-long investigation into guardianship of the elderly, the AP found the push to public guardianship is due in part to a lack of private guardians, including family members, willing to take on non-paying or low- paying cases.
Needing someone to authorize medical procedures, guarantee payment, sign hospital discharge papers, pay monthly bills or even recover money lost to swindlers, many agencies and social workers are looking for a place to turn.
One survey obtained by the AP in Massachusetts, where there is no public guardian, showed that 94 percent of the state’s hospitals reported ″experiencing guardianship problems with patients, the largest being the lack of potential guardians.″
Without a public guardianship program the mentally ill, some of them elderly, who have been declared incompetent have no one to speak for them. In Pennsylvania, it is estimated 5,000 to 6,000 mentally ill people have been declared incompetent since 1979, and half have been released from institutions.
″It’s a mess. These people are in no-man’s land. No one is protecting them,″ said Edward Carey, a member of the Pennsylvania bar association’s subcommittee on the elderly and infirmed.
Yet some oppose the idea of public guardianship.
Lawrence Frolik, a law professor at the University of Pittsburgh, sees it as another layer of bureaucracy. ″The last thing you want is a state office whose existence depends upon taking away the rights of others,″ Frolik said.
Terry Roth, a consultant to the Pennsylvania Association of Retarded Citizens, fears a return to institutionalization of the mentally ill.
″As soon as you create a public guardianship, you’re going to have someone filing against every bag lady out there,″ he said.
In some places that do have public guardianship, officials have begun cutting budgets, asking the public guardians to become more self-sufficien t through fees charged to the wards’ accounts.
In Los Angeles, income from fees was supplemented last year with $2.5 million from county tax coffers for a total budget of $9 million. This year the county commissioners cut that $2.5 million to less than $1 million.
In the last nine years, county support has fallen from 67 percent of Treharne’s budget to less than 15 percent. About 85 percent of Treharne’s cases are indigent.
″We do want some big cases (large estates to which fees could be charged) ourselves, but we don’t hustle them,″ he said.
Treharne’s office has been criticized by a public interest group claiming too many people have been moved out of their homes and routed to institutions. Of 1,000 elderly wards (the office is responsible for 2,200 people, half of them mentally ill), only 50 are maintained in their homes.
Florida, which has a huge elderly population, only this year launched pilot public guardianship programs in two counties.
Ten years ago a count by Florida’s Office of Aging and Adult Services found that 2,700 people, 63 percent of them older than 60, needed guardians. About 1,000 of them had already been found incompetent in court. Today the figure is believed to have doubled.
The three-person operation in Fort Lauderdale will fill its 40 spaces by October, its 10th month of operation, public guardian Lisa Goldstein said.
″It took 10 years of resistance and I still get told all the time, ’We don’t need you,‴ Ms. Goldstein said. ″If we don’t get an increase in staff we will not be able to accept people. To me, it would be a crime if the state opened the floodgates and closed them without fully realizing the potential of the problem.″
Public guardians agree that as the population ages, as people live longer and as hospitals and nursing homes require more guardianships, there will be even greater strains on public guardians.
″I think we provide a needed service,″ said Shafer, the Las Vegas public guardian. ″But as our senior population grows, it’s gonna get worse.″
In San Francisco, the public guardian has begun diverting people from guardianship by establishing payment programs and arranging for sales contracts that allow the elderly to remain in their homes until death.
Said Scannell, ″Alternatives to conservatorship (guardianship) is really where the emphasis should be.″
Full Article & Source:
From the archives: Guardians of the Elderly – An Ailing System - Part IV
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
