I do not know, but the usual expectation in these things is that you will be expected to make 'reasonable' efforts to give notice to this person. Define reasonable, I know. But if you do know where this person is, I wouldn't try to avoid contacting him/her on the grounds that it isn't a permanent address.
I have a question, if you have another party that does not have a permanent address or has not been in contact, are you obligated to provide them a serve notice? My problem has been that I provided the last known address for the other party but that party is not available to respond.
Thank you Country for your reply. Mom couldn't take memory med aricept, its documented in her records from 2011. The dr and my brother placed her on it twice and she got very sick. I am aware of her dementia decline however his bad decisions have greatly hurt her and her wishes were not honored regarding these meds. My request was to be heard that mother was in pain, he ignored my mother's difficulties and my pleas as well. I am here with her and he is out of state. The progression of the disease is out of my control that is true. He did 'place' her on this med, he asked the NP and doctors to 'place' her on it and they complied even tho her medical history says she couldn't tolerate it. The dr even said she didn't feel the records mattered since it was years ago. this is my story, its true.
Tried, I'm really, truly sorry to read your sad description.
For the sake of your peace of mind, take a step back. Unless your brother is a qualified medical practitioner, he cannot have 'placed' your mother on any medications. Therefore it is her illness, which was being treated by her physicians, that has worsened. Therefore it is not your permitting him to take over POA that has ultimately led to her decline, it is her illness; and however hard you fought, and however hard you had tried originally, nothing you or anyone could have done would have prevented its progression. Please take comfort.
Going back to the burnout, it sounds as if you - you, not me - feel that that was some kind of failure on your part. NO. Please try to find somebody you can talk this through with who can help you go right back to that point and look at what happened from there, step by step. It could take so much weight off your mind. Again, I'm so sorry for your mother's illness and your troubles.
I was poa and cared for mom for years, my brother stepped in to help me and took over poa becasue I had burnout. He turned into a dictator and barred me from having any say in moms care, I couldn't even ask the staff if she had a shower. Brother placed mom on memory meds that were contraindicated, I found out after mom ended up in ER. Meds were removed but info was still kept from me. Long story short I tried to regain poa but brother claimed mom was incompetent, and facility rejected my poa, I even had mom assessed by a neurologist on her competency. She was still able to decide this. My brother blocked it alonf with the facility. I tried to get guardianship. I was smeared by my brother that I was an elder abuser and the facility beleived him. The court ruled in his favor. After 9 months mother is in hospice after declining from other meds he placed her on that have made her dementia worse. Facility doctors, courts never beleived me. I am a wreck and am coping with losing my mother to a corrupt and cruel situation. Lawyers and courts took my money and my credibility, gov't agencies did nothing. I know the truth though. That's all I have.
Rural, exactly. If there is one thing I'm learning it's that I must either a) get things down on paper now or b) refrain from complaining when life comes and thumps me on the side of the head when I'm least expecting it! The thing is, especially at the moment, there's so much discussion at large about what we must do for elders/parents/the indigent elderly etc etc and hand-wringing and demographic time bombs… And I think, hang on. It's not our parents we're talking about. It's US. WE need to get our acts together.
Time gathers pace, don't you find? We'll be there before we know it. Eek.
Countrymouse that is true in most cases, and in some cases,we do not expect to get old. One lady lost her memory to alzheimer's at 65, I'm sure she didn't expect that. But more importantly, there may be in many situations, one sibling that is more suited and perhaps closer to what the parent had in mind as a caregiver. I think the question is can someone be impartial enough to weigh the evidence and decide who is better suited.... and the answer I'm getting here is NO. I never would have known that and so am grateful - once again - for this forum. It is true that a court would not be able to discern the different truths in the room from different siblings and so would go with a third party. This might be in the best interests of the parent, and it might not. I really like the suggestion of family counseling. Or a paid mediator of some sort. There is a field of expertise in which people learn the art and skill of arbitration. That person might be able to find a compromise, so that the resources are not wasted.
But from the mother's point of view, what were the downsides? Did the quality of care suffer? Was she herself unhappy with the choices and decisions made?
What makes me suck my teeth, a bit, over this is this. If you've set your heart on your kids looking after you, it's up to you to sort out your affairs in good time. If you don't, too bad. We can none of us claim we didn't know we were going to get old.
And I would go on to question how well siblings who can't set aside their differences enough to co-operate can be relied on to act objectively and selflessly when it comes to caring for their parents. The only proper concern of the court is the protection of the vulnerable person. And yes, that sometimes is going to mean riding rough shod over other family members. Well. "Shoulda thought of that before…"
I just want to agree with those who pointed out the downside to a court-appointed guardian. I did not experience this personally but someone in my email support group had issues with her power-hungry brother. The Court appointed a guardian and the woman from my group had no say whatsoever in her mother's (mother had Alzheimer's) care. Please consider the suggestion of trying family counseling.
IsntEasy, thank you for a very lucid and balanced post - it makes good reading. The only thing is, it isn't only court-appointed attorneys who would be acting negligently if they put the interests of other family members on a par with those of their client, of course - this applies also to anyone wielding POA or guardianship. I wish that were a little more forcefully driven home, sometimes...
I might add to my above statement, when asked who my mother would like as her guardians, she stated she thought "four was better than one", and the investigator based her recommendation to the court on that one statement. My mother could have meant 4 oranges rather than one orange, etc.
Having already been in this situation, in my case the court appointed a court investigator to speak with all my sisters and one brother and my mother who could speak at the time, although wasn't exactly competent. The decision resulted in all four siblings being co-guardians, with me left out. So good luck!
I'd first try having the two family members sit with a family counselor (one who's familiar with issues involving the elderly). They can help you both to be more objective about who would make the more logical choice for guardian. But, if instead, this is a matter of disagreement over who would be able to best protect (or best benefit) from the parent's assets or to get paid for care over the objections of the sibling, you'll need to duke it out yourselves if you want to keep that as the goal. If you go to the court, your parent's needs will be well met, but the court-appointed guardian will always make decisions based upon their client's best interest which is what Iwentanon experienced. Retaining the house as an inheritance for client's children is not the guardian's objective, best care for the client is, so they sold the house and used the proceeds for her care. It would be considered negligent of the attorney to put the desires of any other family member above the needs of the person for whom they are guardian. Sadly, hind sight is 20/20. If your family had sat down with an elder law attorney 5 years ago, all of this conflict could have been avoided.
If you think the court will pick someone over another, they could but I doubt it, it is in the courts interest to take the money trail and run, they have their own agenda. The court will see it as a disagreement and a right to seize what you think you had coming...your inheritance...
The downside to a court appointed guardian, they make all the decisions...selling the house,setting up spending of assets, or conservatoire except for the courts spending, but your family will never have a say so, everything is out of your hands, etc.
The upside to a court appointed guardian, the people who spent the money wrong or questionably, to begin with, won't be able to and you can distance yourself from these cockroaches who suck the life out of you...
In our case we were trying to protect the family home and get paid for caregiving through "cash and counseling"...they sold her house against her will and she is living with us, spending her money from the sale of her house on rent and daycare, as opposed to living in her house that was $14,000 cheaper...mandatory daycare (because the court sees that as necessity) even though she still socializes with lifetime friends and has cultural activities.
My advice would be to reconcile if you can, but if the relationships have deteriorated too much and they (the guardian at litem and the court) recommend you (the family) go in for a family meeting, they do not mean reconciling to your advantage, you (the family) will be on your way out.
I wouldn't be this judge for all the tea in China. But to be honest, if you really can't come to a sensible decision on your own about who 'chairs the committee' it doesn't say much for your ability to make good, objective choices on your parent's behalf, either.
On the other hand, I suppose there must be instances where one sibling is an obviously trustworthy caregiver and another is making mischief. What's going on with your family, bobbystephenson?
As Pam said, you and siblings can disagree on who should be appointed, happens all the time. One thinks they will be better than another. Imagine what would happen if an emergency arose and you still aren't agreeing. Do yourselves a favor, agree on a third party geriatric care manager to serve as guardian. Yes it will cost some money, but my suspicion is that there probably are some assets that everyone is concerned with. Been there, done that! How is care for the parent being done now?
Well I don't think it is any business of the state or any so call Judge. I think your family needs to grow up and think the spectacle that your family is creating, work things out amongst yourself or you would all pay a hectic price depending on our system.
It is really quite simple when you go before the Judge. In the event the parties cannot agree who should be guardian, the Judge will select an independent third party from the county list of attorney-guardians. Happens quite often. It very effectively ends the infighting.
I do not know, but the usual expectation in these things is that you will be expected to make 'reasonable' efforts to give notice to this person. Define reasonable, I know. But if you do know where this person is, I wouldn't try to avoid contacting him/her on the grounds that it isn't a permanent address.
For the sake of your peace of mind, take a step back. Unless your brother is a qualified medical practitioner, he cannot have 'placed' your mother on any medications. Therefore it is her illness, which was being treated by her physicians, that has worsened. Therefore it is not your permitting him to take over POA that has ultimately led to her decline, it is her illness; and however hard you fought, and however hard you had tried originally, nothing you or anyone could have done would have prevented its progression. Please take comfort.
Going back to the burnout, it sounds as if you - you, not me - feel that that was some kind of failure on your part. NO. Please try to find somebody you can talk this through with who can help you go right back to that point and look at what happened from there, step by step. It could take so much weight off your mind. Again, I'm so sorry for your mother's illness and your troubles.
Time gathers pace, don't you find? We'll be there before we know it. Eek.
What makes me suck my teeth, a bit, over this is this. If you've set your heart on your kids looking after you, it's up to you to sort out your affairs in good time. If you don't, too bad. We can none of us claim we didn't know we were going to get old.
And I would go on to question how well siblings who can't set aside their differences enough to co-operate can be relied on to act objectively and selflessly when it comes to caring for their parents. The only proper concern of the court is the protection of the vulnerable person. And yes, that sometimes is going to mean riding rough shod over other family members. Well. "Shoulda thought of that before…"
But, if instead, this is a matter of disagreement over who would be able to best protect (or best benefit) from the parent's assets or to get paid for care over the objections of the sibling, you'll need to duke it out yourselves if you want to keep that as the goal.
If you go to the court, your parent's needs will be well met, but the court-appointed guardian will always make decisions based upon their client's best interest which is what Iwentanon experienced. Retaining the house as an inheritance for client's children is not the guardian's objective, best care for the client is, so they sold the house and used the proceeds for her care. It would be considered negligent of the attorney to put the desires of any other family member above the needs of the person for whom they are guardian.
Sadly, hind sight is 20/20. If your family had sat down with an elder law attorney 5 years ago, all of this conflict could have been avoided.
The court will see it as a disagreement and a right to seize what you think you had coming...your inheritance...
The downside to a court appointed guardian, they make all the decisions...selling the house,setting up spending of assets, or conservatoire except for the courts spending, but your family will never have a say so, everything is out of your hands, etc.
The upside to a court appointed guardian, the people who spent the money wrong or questionably, to begin with, won't be able to and you can distance yourself from these cockroaches who suck the life out of you...
In our case we were trying to protect the family home and get paid for caregiving through "cash and counseling"...they sold her house against her will and she is living with us, spending her money from the sale of her house on rent and daycare, as opposed to living in her house that was $14,000 cheaper...mandatory daycare (because the court sees that as necessity) even though she still socializes with lifetime friends and has cultural activities.
My advice would be to reconcile if you can, but if the relationships have deteriorated too much and they (the guardian at litem and the court) recommend you (the family) go in for a family meeting, they do not mean reconciling to your advantage, you (the family) will be on your way out.
Court of Protection Theft, Families Against Court of ...
They seem to have tremendous amount of happy clients, what you have to remember once you approach the court there is no returning.
On the other hand, I suppose there must be instances where one sibling is an obviously trustworthy caregiver and another is making mischief. What's going on with your family, bobbystephenson?