MASON CITY, Iowa – A plea deal is struck over money stolen from a dependent adult.
Michael
Edward Studer, 63 of Mason City, was initially charged with
first-degree theft and financial exploitation of an older individual.
Studer
was accused of using his Power of Attorney to transfer or withdraw more
than $50,000 from the bank account of a dependent adult between June
2021 and December 2022. Court documents state the victim’s home fell
into foreclosure because of that theft.
Studer has now pleaded guilty to one count of third-degree theft. His sentencing is scheduled for January 8, 2024.
When the state of Alaska transferred dozens of public guardianship
cases to a nonprofit last year, the results included extended hospital
stays, thousands of dollars in debt and lapses in public benefits for
some of Alaska’s most vulnerable residents.
ADN reporter Iris Samuels says the state has been swamped with public
guardianship cases in recent years, which led them to outsource dozens
of them.
This interview has been lightly edited for clarity.
Iris Samuels: We’ve known for a while that the
public guardian section in the Office of Public Advocacy is just
buckling under way too many cases. They basically have so many cases
that they can’t really handle them the way they should be handled. So
that’s why they say that they transferred, or requested that the courts
transfer, some of the cases that they were handling to this new private
agency and this person who’s running it, Tom McDuffie, who said, “I can
take these cases.” And this all happened last year in 2022. So Tom
McDuffie started this new agency called Cache Integrity Services. And
ultimately, all told, this private entity handled 110 cases or so. Some
of them were taken from OPA. Some of them were people who would have
otherwise paid for a private guardian.
Wesley Early: So what exactly went wrong with McDuffie’s clients?
IS: Basically, what we learned in this reporting is
that he just bit off more than he could chew. And he would say that;
that’s what he said to me when I spoke with him. And what that means is
he had so many cases, and he just didn’t have the staff to handle it.
He, at various points, didn’t have any staff at all. And with these
guardianship clients, you have to be filing paperwork to get these
public benefits that these people rely on. And when you have too many
people, you just cannot file that paperwork fast enough. And in some
cases, it seemed that no effort was made to reach out to these people.
So these are people for whom, again, a guardian is like their parent.
The guardian makes all the decisions when it comes to health and
finances. And when that paperwork isn’t filed, those decisions aren’t
made. In some cases, clients were left in the hospital for months at a
time when they should have been discharged because there was no one to
discharge them. There’s no one to sign to approve a discharge.
WE: And I imagine that had a financial toll on some of them, too.
IS: Yeah, there were also cases where, you know,
people had certain assets that needed to be sold, or the kinds of
financial decisions that are made in the course of someone’s life that
weren’t made. And when you push off these important decisions, it does
lead to debt in certain cases. It prolongs debt in some situations where
people were in debt and that debt needed to be resolved. And it wasn’t
because, again, those decisions weren’t being made.
WE: So, is there any legal action related to this issue?
IS: Yeah, we already know there’s a couple of
different cases, at least. Last year, the Northern Justice Project,
which is a civil rights firm here in Anchorage, filed a lawsuit against
the Office of Public Advocacy, basically saying that when OPA requested
that all these cases be transferred to Cache Integrity Services, they
did so in a way that violated the law, because they didn’t assign
clients an attorney and didn’t accurately, or even in any way, explain
to them the meaning of their care being transferred from someone who’s
an employee of the state to someone who’s a private actor who may charge
different fees, or just may act in a different way from what the public
guardian might do.
And an Anchorage Superior Court has already determined that, at least
in one case, the state is at fault for not appointing an attorney and
not following the law. There is also another case where Cache Integrity
Services was sued by one of their clients for failing to do what they’re
supposed to do. And then several instances where judges have basically
said, “We can see that Cache Integrity Services isn’t doing what they’re
supposed to be doing, that Tom McDuffie didn’t do what he told the
court that he would do,” and then Cache Integrity Services was removed
as guardian. So there’s several fronts of legal action, but not really
an overall solution to all of these people that the courts appointed
MacDuffie to be a guardian in.
WE: We’ve heard reporting about backlogs at the
Office of Public Advocacy with some blaming a lack of staffing there. Is
that what’s going on here with guardianship, and what’s being done to
fix the problem?
IS: Yeah, I think that’s a good question. The Office
of Public Advocacy has said, actually, that they don’t think this is a
staffing issue, that what they think is this is an issue with high
turnover in the public guardian section.
So basically, it takes two years to train a public guardian. It takes
a long time to learn all the things that a guardian needs to be able to
do, and they can’t keep that staff long enough. I do think that this
has to do with the staffing in the Office of Public Advocacy. And it may
be a fact that you just cannot recruit the kind of people, the kind of
skilled people, that you need to do this job well, for whatever reason.
And I don’t know if that’s because the salaries aren’t commensurate with
the work that needs to be done, or for other reasons of kind of
mismanagement within the Office of Public Advocacy. That’s an open
question, but I do think that, sort of like with other issues of social
services the state needs to provide, there’s a question here of is the
state investing enough resources to make sure that these services are
provided effectively?
A disbarred Tallahassee attorney was sentenced to
14 years in prison after he pleaded guilty to defrauding clients —
former professional football players who had suffered concussions or
other brain injuries — of millions of dollars from the settlement of a National Football League class-action lawsuit.
Phillip Timothy Howard,
62, used his law firm and several Tallahassee investment companies
under his control to rip off his clients, committing wire fraud and
money laundering, federal prosecutors said in a news release. His
clients included retired NFL athletes and former football players from
Florida State University and Florida A&M University.
U.S.
District Judge Allen Winsor, who sentenced Howard on Monday at the U.S.
Courthouse in Tallahassee, also ordered him to pay more than $12
million in restitution. When he is released, he’ll have to serve three
years on what’s called supervised release, a kind of probation, and he
must pay over $12 million in restitution.
Nearly 20,000 retired players in 2015 negotiated a settlement with the NFL, with over $1 billion in payable claims,
which includes those diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s
disease, Lou Gehrig’s disease and for players who died before April 2015
from chronic traumatic encephalopathy, or CTE, USA TODAY has reported.
From
2015 to 2018, “Howard fraudulently enticed his clients to invest ...
with his investment companies,” the release said, adding that the
“former NFL player-investors were provided fraudulent quarterly and
year-end investment statements.”
“Despite reassuring investors that their money was
secure, (he) never informed them that almost none of the investment
funds yielded a return and failed to disclose that the investment funds
had been commingled with funds used to operate his law firm and to issue
payroll for its staff, pay Howard’s personal mortgages, and otherwise
personally enrich (him),” prosecutors said.
Moreover,
“Howard sought third-party lenders that would be willing to lend money
to Howard’s former NFL clients in advance of their potential NFL
concussion settlements as part of the NFL class-action lawsuit … (but)
Howard and others fraudulently obtained and attempted to obtain
approximately $8 million from (those) lenders.”
Howard was indicted last year by a federal grand
jury on racketeering charges. He pleaded guilty to a single count of
racketeering in August as part of a plea deal with prosecutors.
U.S.
Attorney Jason Coody said that the sentence "punishes the defendant's
criminal conduct" and serves as a "deterrent to others who would
selfishly steal to unlawfully enrich themselves."
"The defendant should have been protecting the interest of his injured
clients, rather than swindling their investments," Coody said.
Joshua Wood, 21, allegedly took over $50,000 over a period of time from his elderly, care-dependent relatives.
Author: Leah Hall
DAUPHIN COUNTY, Pa. — A man is facing theft charges after he allegedly stole over $50,000 from his relatives.
According to the Derry Township Police Department,
Joshua Wood, 21, from Cleona was arrested on Nov, 7 by State Police. He
is accused of fraudulently taking money from his elderly relatives'
bank accounts and using it for himself.
He allegedly took over $50,000 over a period of time from his elderly, care-dependent relatives, who he was living with.
Wood was taken to the Dauphin County Judicial Center. He is facing
charges of financial exploitation of an older adult or care-dependent
person, forgery- alter writing, access device fraud and theft by
deception.
Elder
financial abuse happens when someone takes advantage of a senior for
their money. It can happen if you’re planning to pass down an estate of
millions, or if the only money you have is your monthly Social Security
check.
While financial abuse can look like a scam or someone attempting to
alter your will, it can also be a nursing home or other medical
institution inappropriately increasing your payments.
It can be your caretaker doling you an “allowance” from your own bank
account, refusing to allow you to access the rest of the funds.
It could even be a family member who is constantly “borrowing” money with no intention of paying you back.
There are ways to insulate yourself against elder financial abuse,
and a few action steps you can take if you ever find yourself the
victim.
Here’s how to be proactive in protecting your finances as you age.
Learn Who Typically Inflicts Elder Financial Abuse
RealPeopleStudio / Shutterstock.com
Financial abuse is typically committed by the people closest to the victim.
With elder financial abuse, it can be and often is the people you
have emotional attachments with — like friends and family — but it can
also be the people or institutions who are providing your care.
Financial abuse is tricky, as the initial warning signs aren’t always associated with your bank account.
You’ll want to look out for relationships that are controlling or
possessive, people who lovebomb you (even if the relationship isn’t romantic), and those who oscillate between the two.
Unfortunately, people are particularly apt to prey on the elderly
because in a dark way, they’re looking at your estate. They either want
to liquidate it or inherit it with their own interests in mind.
Because con artists prey on the elderly, it’s not just established
relationships you’ll want to watch – you’ll also want to be wary of new
people that come into your life and want to get too close too quickly.
Protect Yourself From Guardianship
Gines Romero / Shutterstock.com
Nichelle Nichols. Britney Spears. Michael Oher. These are all people
who have been victims of guardianships — or conservatorships, depending
on the state. Unfortunately, even in the world of non-celebrities, these
examples are the rule rather than exceptions.
“Because of your disability, your voice has been given to someone
else. Your decisions, your liberty is taken. The guardian could decide
on where you live, how you live, or even what you do daily.”
Some people will attempt to put you under guardianship simply because
it’s easier to do to an older person. The courts have implicit biases
that would lead them to believe you’re less capable, as erroneous as
those biases may be.
Because anyone can pursue guardianship at any time in an attempt to
commandeer your finances, it might not be a bad idea to have a lawyer’s
phone number at the ready.
If you go into the process unprepared and the conservatorship or
guardianship is awarded, you’ll likely never get out of it — even with
legal representation.
Discuss the Pitfalls of Guardianship With Your Family Members Now
GBALLGIGGSPHOTO / Shutterstock.com
Some family members may want to put you under guardianship with
genuinely good intentions. This is typically due to a lack of education
on the topic.
Here are some potential outcomes your well-meaning family members may not be aware of yet:
Establishing guardianship doesn’t mean it can’t be contested. If
there’s a shadow of a chance that there’s a sibling or even a distant
family member who has nefarious intentions, guardianships often open up a
window for them to swoop in. They may try to take away guardianship
from the well-meaning family member, and they may be successful.
If the guardianship is contested, it’s not uncommon for the courts
to remove family members or friends altogether. Then you’d get a
court-appointed guardian who might meet with you once per year, if that.
They don’t know you, but they’d be making all the decisions about every
aspect of your life — or neglecting to make those decisions at all,
leaving you in perpetual limbo.
Guardianship is often used as a state-sanctioned tool for financial
abuse, so it actually makes it harder for you to escape an abusive
situation. If your family member really wants to protect you, the best
way to insulate you from this type of abuse is to give you more freedom
to make your own choices — not less.
Alternatives to Guardianship
fizkes / Shutterstock.com
There may be practical reasons you want to give someone else the ability to execute some things on your behalf.
Maybe you have an immunodeficiency and don’t yet feel comfortable in
indoor public spaces, but you still need to complete in-person financial
transactions inside a bank.
Maybe you’re in the early stages of Alzheimer’s, and you’ve already
discussed with someone you trust how you’d like them to arrange your
care.
In these cases, some disability advocates might recommend supported decision making,
which is essentially a series of power of attorneys that gives someone
the ability to sign documents and make certain, limited decisions on
your behalf.
Unlike a guardianship, a power of attorney can be revoked at any
time. So if you’re unhappy with how someone is acting on your behalf,
you retain the ability to take that power away from them.
What To Know About Supported Decision-Making
Syda Productions / Shutterstock.com
A power of attorney can be extremely limited in scope. You can get
things like a medical power of attorney or a financial power of
attorney.
But it can get even more granular than that. It could be for a
one-time decision or signature, or it could be specific to only one
aspect of your care.
Regardless of how narrow you want the power of attorney to be, this
is something you should absolutely draft with your own attorney — not
someone who has ever represented the other party.
You also don’t want to search for free templates online. If you pursue this document, it’s too important to not get it right.
For Brooks, even supported decision-making goes too far.
“It’s not great,” he said. “Because still, the other individual has the power to make decisions about your financial needs.”
Familiarize Yourself With Current Financial Scams
Grusho Anna / Shutterstock.com
Scams
are another type of financial abuse you’re likely to come up against.
It’s not all just people calling you up for donations to a fake charity
like in HBO’s “Telemarketers,” either. (Though that does happen with
frequency.)
Currently, the most prolific scams are romance scams, and seniors are particularly vulnerable.
If you’re doing online dating, make sure to be wary of people who
live far away, try to get too emotionally close to you too quickly, or
ask you to send them money or a gift card for any reason — no matter how
sad a story they may tell, or how quickly they “promise” they’ll pay
you back.
Odds are, they’re not a real person, and they’re exploiting what they see to be a vulnerable or lonely state due to your age.
They’re repurposing the old Nigerian prince scam into new, emotionally manipulative packaging to match the times.
Build a Strong Social Network
Rawpixel.com / Shutterstock.com
A lot of times as we age, our social networks get smaller. If this
happens to you, know that it’s not your fault. Our society is structured
to isolate our elders.
It happens so naturally that it’s something you have to actively
combat, or rebuild again after your social network experiences a period
of contraction. You can get started by exploring free and cheap
activities for seniors.
A strong social network can help insulate you against financial abuse.
When you have people you regularly interact with and trust –
especially outside of your caretakers – it makes it harder for other
people to take advantage of you.
Seek Services From State Agencies With Your Eyes Wide Open
wavebreakmedia / Shutterstock.com
When you encounter financial abuse, there are state resources that
can help, but it’s important to go into the process with your eyes wide
open.
For example, one of the agencies — Adult Protective Services — not
only provides support for financial abuse, but it also can enforce
involuntary institutionalizations.
That means that you could theoretically end up in a situation where
your abuser convinces the agency to force you into a communal care
setting if the agency doesn’t side with you.
“It can go either way,” Brooks said. “You do not know what the
outcome will be. Because it’s your word against the other people’s
words.”
Key Tips for Reporting Concerns
fizkes / Shutterstock.com
Another important point that Brooks brought up was that if a
concerned friend or family member reports to a state agency, often that
isn’t enough.
“They might say, ‘Yes, we’ll investigate and do a welfare check,'” he explains.
“But when they are doing this welfare check, and the individual is
there with their abuser, the abused individual may be afraid to speak
up. This then creates the notion that the individual is okay — even
though they’re not.”
One way he suggests avoiding this situation is setting up a 1:1
casual discussion between the case worker and the person being abused —
no caretakers or anyone else present. This can create a safer
environment for the victim to self-advocate.
Speaking up comes with risks you should be aware of, but Brooks says it’s still far and away preferable to staying silent.
“When you’re quiet, nothing is being heard. Nobody knows what is going on. It is best to speak up rather than be a bystander.”
Lean Into State Resources for Elder Financial Abuse
LightField Studios / Shutterstock.com
Here are the governmental agencies and services where you can report elder financial abuse:
Adult Protective Services, a different office for every state.
Obviously,
when there are people who need a guardian, the state should be that
guardian — for no profit, truly guarding the health and welfare of the
helpless individual and truly conserving their assets. That would also
involve searching for the individual’s (or couple’s) relatives. A judge
should know that the state has search capabilities that a guardian
doesn’t.
Bill O’Toole, Arlington
I
recently retired as a trust executive in Florida with 48 years’
experience assisting elderly clients with financial and life-care
issues. The Nov. 5 article about guardianship described a process that
is debilitating and degrading to people and their families when
confronted with an austere adjudication of incompetency in court. Some
of my most rewarding work was reversing the process to obtain a
restoration of capacity — albeit at the cost of tens of thousands of
dollars.
The best technique for avoiding the need for a court-appointed guardian is a revocable living trust.
The person creating the trust initially serves as his or her own
trustee, with a provision for a successor trustee to serve when needed.
The trustee has broad powers to manage and contract for services that
protect and care for the individual. There are other techniques, but the
revocable living trust is a great starting point.
A disbarred attorney will spend a
year in prison after pleading guilty Thursday afternoon to defrauding
his clients of more than $360,000, including money from an estate meant
to benefit Honor Flight New England.
David Dunn pleaded guilty to four counts of theft misapplication and was taken into custody immediately after Judge David Anderson sentenced him.
The
plea and sentencing came with emotions from both victims and supporters
of Dunn. More than a dozen people sat on one side of the gallery,
including about a half-dozen wearing “Honor Flight Guardian” T-shirts,
and nearly 40 sat behind Dunn showing support.
Anderson
addressed both sides in making his decision, saying Dunn’s actions were
“a deep breach” of clients’ trust in their attorney.
“This was a serious and systematic failure that happened over a five-year period,” Anderson said.
He said letters of support show that Dunn has “given much” throughout his life.
“The monies have been repaid, which is a significant factor,” Anderson said.
Prosecutor Bryan Townsend asked for a sentence of 5 to 10 years with 2 1/2 years suspended.
“This
defendant, as an attorney, was in the ultimate position of trust and he
abused that trust over and over and over again over the course of five
years,” he said.
As
for Honor Flight, the organization that takes veterans on trips to
Washington to see the nation’s memorials, Dunn “felt his needs to take
precedence over that of disabled veterans,” Townsend said.
Townsend
said Dunn has attempted to use his health and overwork as a “get out of
jail free” card. The theft took place between March 3, 2016, and June
9, 2021, according to the Attorney General’s Office.
Dunn’s
attorney, Michael Iacopino, argued for Dunn to be released on
probation, especially after having a brain tumor removed in 2012 and
suffering from deep depression.
“It
is interesting how the state turns the good things in David’s life
around and tries to turn them into aggravated factors,” Iacopino said.
Part
of the money was used to help a client who indicated he was about to
lose his home, Iacopino said. Some of the money went to pay for
operating expenses.
“He didn’t do it to go out and buy a fancy car. He didn’t do it to wear fancy suits,” Iacopino said.
From
a podium at the front of the courtroom, Dunn turned around and spoke
directly to at least one victim and supporters of Honor Flight New
England to say he was sorry.
“I
do not want to make excuses. I am the one responsible for my actions
and no one else is to blame,” he said. “What I did was wrong.”
Dunn, who was disbarred last year, said he planned to replace the funds.
Victim
advocate Amy Van Auken read a letter on behalf of a victim identified
as “SB,” who had more than $100,000 stolen from a trust fund.
“David
took more than money from me. He took my sense of well-being and
security,” she wrote. “I know that I am not the only one who has
suffered.”
World War
II veteran Alphonse Pitcher donated a portion of his estate to Honor
Flight, according to court documents. It was Honor Flight’s attorney
Neil Nicholson who exposed the fraud.
Joseph
Byron, Honor Flight founder and executive director, shared touching
stories of sending veterans, mostly seniors, to Washington to visit and
reflect at their memorials.
“In
our case, you stole money from the estate of a World War II veteran who
was touched by his Honor Flight,” Byron said. “He just wanted to do
more, so that others could feel what they felt on that day, the day of
admiration, the welcome home that he probably had never received.”
Three people spoke on Dunn’s behalf, including his daughter Devon.
Devon
Dunn asked Anderson for leniency, calling him an “amazing father,
outstanding member of the community and just a really good man.”
Townsend
said he has never seen so many letters of support for a defendant, but
he needs to be held accountable to send a message to other fiduciaries.
“What
the defendant did was severe. What he did was repeated,” Townsend said.
“What he did was steal hundreds of thousands of dollars from his
clients.”
LOCK HAVEN, CLINTON CO. (WOLF) — Two women are charged with financially exploiting elderly and care-dependent people in Clinton County.
Police
in Clinton County say the two women were charged following unrelated
incidents, but "demonstrate a recently increasing trend in Clinton
County of in-home caregivers taking advantage" of victims in the area.
28-year-old
Britney L. Hostrader of Trout Run was charged for allegedly exploiting a
76-year-old female and an 80-year-old male in Wayne Township.
According to Pine Creek Township Police, Hostrader was an employee of Helping Hands Home Health, an in-home caregiving company.
Hostrader allegedly used credit cards belonging to her
client and her client's husband to make unauthorized purchases of nearly
$2,000, including almost $500 that she reportedly paid on outstanding
costs and fines for her prior criminal cases out of Mifflin County. She
was previously convicted of access device fraud, forgery and theft,
police said.
Shannon Schenck, 45, of Lock Haven, was charged for
exploiting a 71-year-old female resident of Mill Hall Borough while
working for Arcadia Homecare and Staffing, police said.
According
to the Mill Hall Borough Police Department, Schenck used the victim's
credit card for over $2,000 to pay for her personal utility bills.
Schenck has previous drug and DUI convictions, officers said.
Both women have been charged with financial exploitation of older adults and access device fraud.
I am writing in response to the ADN’s Oct. 27 story
regarding the challenges being faced in the guardianship system. Many
of the issues raised in the piece were inaccurately explained or lacked a
proper factual basis. Much of this is understandable because
guardianship and the guardianship system are complex and cannot offer a
soundbite explanation.
A
guardian is entrusted with making all decisions of consequence on
behalf of an individual that a court has deemed “incapacitated.”
Appointing a guardian results in the taking away of an individual’s
rights to make their most intimate life decisions and financial
decisions. Guardianship is the greatest restriction on individual
liberty short of incarceration. A guardian is delegated immense power by
the court — and that power comes with immense responsibilities.
I
want to begin by properly framing the overarching issue: The problems
inherent in the guardianship system go beyond any single administration,
agency or private provider. It is a multifaceted problem that has
snowballed over a decade.
First,
the guardianship system is supposed to be a primarily private system.
The article failed to provide this basic information. When the Alaska
Legislature created the Office of the Public Guardian in the early
1980s, it intended that it would remain a small advisory entity that
would lend its expertise to private guardianship providers. The Public
Guardian actually has a legal duty to continue to find a private
guardian. Alaska Statute 13.26.720 states: “The public guardian, when
appointed as guardian or conservator, shall endeavor, for as long as
practical, to find a suitable private guardian or conservator for the
public guardian’s ward or protected person.”
Second,
the Public Guardian, like any other appointed guardian or conservator,
has no unilateral power to transfer a client to a new guardian or
conservator. It all requires a court process with full court oversight
and review, because only a Superior Court judge can appoint, substitute
or dismiss a guardian or conservator, whether it is the Public Guardian
or a professional or even a family member.
When
making those decisions, the law requires the judge to consider an
appointment to the Public Guardian as the last resort. Family members,
friends and private professionals are required to be given priority and,
if suitable, appointed before the Public Guardian should even be
considered.
Third,
we are concerned that the story didn’t focus on and ask the real
questions plaguing guardianship in Alaska. Have the statutes been
followed properly over the last decade? Is there an over-appointment
problem of guardianships and conservatorships that has led to our
state’s current crisis?
While it
is true there are people in need of a guardian or conservator, Alaskans
should be equally concerned about whether this process is being
overused, even if it is being done so with the intent to protect. If you
are under full guardianship, you have no legal authority to sign a
cellphone contract, set your own medical appointments or even decide
where you want to live. The basic life decisions most of us take for
granted as adults in our country are no longer yours to make.
Guardianship
ethics require a guardian to work with a protected person to maximize
their autonomy and independence. Guardians are supposed to be able to
focus on what the person can do, not what they can’t. This has simply
not been occurring at the Public Guardian due to the size of the
caseloads. Public guardians have been forced to move from emergency to
emergency with barely enough time to address basic needs, and we believe
as a public agency our clients deserve the guardianship services the
law and our ethics require. To do that, public guardians must have a
caseload that allows them to address the clients as people they have
committed to help.
Overwhelming
the Public Guardian means that almost 1,600 people, whom the court have
declared need our protection, will not get the protection they deserve.
Fourth,
it is important to recognize that there are inherent barriers to a
guardian getting what their client needs. From the obstacles of not
being able to get an accurate Social Security number, a client not being
Medicaid eligible due to owning property that needs to be sold, to the
frustrations with financial institutions not accepting legal orders and
everything in between. The story fails to convey that many of the
challenges experienced by Cache Integrity and complaints lodged are
about things wholly outside of the guardian’s control. The Office of
Public Advocacy and private guardians deal with the same challenges on a
daily basis.
From
an outside perspective, someone simply sees that a client did not
receive benefits and debt is accumulating. But it is the specific
financial situation of each client that drives what can be accomplished.
This is not to say that Cache Integrity didn’t drop the ball in certain
cases. But one should be cautious about making that conclusion without
knowing the specific facts of a case.
Fifth,
Beth Goldstein’s response — “Tom, this is exciting” — was to the
prospect of a nonprofit entering the field to help Alaskans who need a
guardian.
The
story failed to acknowledge that Cache Integrity actually agreed to
waive its opening fees for many of the 45 cases involved. Thus, the
$1,000 fee didn’t even apply to those cases. It also failed to
acknowledge that the Public Guardian is required to charge those
equivalent fees under the law.
This
information made it appear as though Goldstein was taking delight in
people being charged $1,000. This is simply not true. It was
disappointing to see such a baseless inference being made.
One
question that could have been asked is why the court kept appointing
clients to Cache Integrity until its caseload exceeded 100. Another is
why Tom McDuffie accepted those appointments when he didn’t have to. The
simplest answer is probably the most likely: Everyone was doing the
best they could to provide services to vulnerable Alaskans despite a
severe lack of certified public guardians in the state. The story
certainly highlighted why overloading a guardian is counterproductive.
Finally,
the story didn’t properly acknowledge the good news on the horizon. The
administration in cooperation with the legislature has given OPA six
additional public guardian positions, as well as two eligibility
technician positions. Once certified, these positions will ensure OPA is
sufficiently staffed and there will be a buffer in place when a
resignation occurs. It took a great deal of effort to be able to accept
cases on the Kenai Peninsula despite recently losing two certified
public guardians. By January, OPA should be able to accept a limited
number of guardianship appointments in most jurisdictions. The
moratorium is accomplishing what it intended even sooner than expected.
Guardianship
is complex, difficult and specialized. It is challenging to distill the
issues within the guardianship system into a digestible narrative.
However, it should be emphasized that public guardians are dedicated
public servants who want nothing more than to help people. If the Public
Guardian collapses, there will be 1,600 people without guardians. That
is what Beth Goldstein and I are working to prevent every day.
James E. Stinson is the director of the Office of Public Advocacy.
