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 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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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.
Time gathers pace, don't you find? We'll be there before we know it. Eek.
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 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.
See All Answers