Guardianship battles - Child is going against parents wishes vs Child who wishes to respect wishes. Any advice?

Follow
Share

A child is trying to revoke durable power of attorney with false allegations against sibling who is respectful of parents wishes. The first one has already gained guardianship against both parents wishes and trying to claim same for other parent. The parents have typical health and mental ability for being in the 80's and do not have Alzheimer's as first child insist. The 1st child has tried to put them in care before against doctors and insurance recommendations - leaving them with a large bill they had to pay out of pocket. The 2nd child wishes to have them live with them or nearby. The 2nd child has worked in nursing and with Alzheimer's patients before. This child is also on disability and has not the income to fight her father's legal battle. Has anyone had to fight a sibling over care of a parent. The father cannot get a loan to fight because of the 1st child's latest court filings - which means the father can not fight for himself. Court date in January for mother. Any ideas?

This question has been closed for answers. Ask a New Question.
Find Care & Housing
14

Answers

Show:
Lawyers and their bills. Gets in the way of doing good.
Helpful Answer (0)
Report

It is very scary what a person can do to an elder they trust there children and sadly you can't. My sister is only interested in control. Hide money what ever. Hasn't even seen her mother but continues causing problems. Good luck
Helpful Answer (1)
Report

So good to hear! Thanks much!
My friend had the POA and Medical POA for her father, my friend did not have it at that point for the mother as the sibling had already gone ahead without notice. Meanwhile before their father could get his 2nd doctors exam (the first one was very good and he passed with flying colors) the sibling came to the doctor's office and took possession of the father. And refused to allow the doctor to exam the father nor to my friend. The sibling will not allow any more exams. I have seen the court papers and all there were in the way of reasons for the emergency guardianship were vague and simple allegations. It's mind boggling and the sibling has thrown around statements and way too many people just accept it as the truth. My friend has reason to expect there has been some purposeful financial damage done on the siblings part to the parents accounts. The fact that the sibling refuses any further doctor exams does not add up. What is there to fear? If one truly believes that both parents have Dementia and Alzheimer's than a second exam should at least prove it. Since I last wrote the parents are now separated and the whereabouts of the father are unknown. My friend is concerned that the sibling may either deny or add medications which in a court ordered exam may cause the father to appear less than able. The legal representatives of the father had warned if the exam was not allowed they would bring it up to the court to secure the exam. My friend said the last time this situation happened that the sibling forced the father to give in because if he did not the sibling would put them in separate homes and they would never see each other again. That time all of the process did not go this far. At this point this seems to be happening now. I try not to think ill about the sibling. Yet the details I have been told by the friend and her parents and what is currently going on ... well, it's serious. And as I said before there is much under the surface .... and an history of hostility towards my friend that is not warranted. I am hoping on the court date that someone will ask me things. I know much is hearsay against the sibling yet the temporary guardianship was only on the siblings heresay. After this situation with the parents is settled there will still another legal fight for all the claims the sibling has charges against my friend. This is just so ridiculous .... and as in much of life if one does not have the income or means to pay lawyers one can lose by default. Thanks again. I will pass it on.
Helpful Answer (0)
Report

I just went through similar situation with my sister and 95 yr old mother. I promised my m yrs ago I would have her live with me and not put her in nursing home. Make along story short my sister put my mother in one with out asking her or telling. Me. I went before judge after hiring lawyer. He appointed guardian for my mother I won because of this man I didnt hav poa or on health proxy. Don't give up. My m was discharged Xmas eve. Good. Will win over bad!!
Helpful Answer (1)
Report

Thank you for that comment.
Helpful Answer (0)
Report

I Wil only comment upon the mother's aphasia. Strokes that affect the left hemisphere of the brain rarely leave cognitive processes unscathed. Any psychologist worth his/her salt can evaluate non-verbal reasoning skills.
Helpful Answer (0)
Report

Yes, there are some questionable motives and actions concerning child 1 - things that are important and best not to say anything about in this forum. And yes, I and others will be there for the court hearings to assist in any way we can. I am aware that even in the best of situations a family member's health or mental state can stretch beyond one's personal capacity to care for them - that's why I discuss that with child 2. It is devastating when that happens. I am aware of how much she would give of herself to care for them and how hard it would be to accept her limitations. My mother suffered from multiple physical and mental illnesses - there came a point where the only possibility was long-term care in a nursing home. She had become a danger to herself and others. So I don't downplay the negative side with child 2. Yet I don't neglect the fact that the parents are active people that are not ready for full-time care. I know it will likely happen someday, with their age it may be more of a matter of sooner than later. Or with any mercy something will take them each quickly.

It's unfortunate that the filings happened without the time to fairly respond and counteract them. It's unfortunate the court did not at least interview the father. It happened though. As to personal experience my mother-in-law had a cancer that spread and made it known to her children that she wanted to pass at home, did not want to go in a home and did not want life-saving methods used. She was clear on this and the family honored it. No one wanted to lose her yet we all respect her right to decide. She died at home and over 20 years later I still wish she was here with us. I believe that end-of-life and how and we want to be treated before is our unique and personal decision. All our love and wish to keep someone with us does not override this. I don't feel and think that my ache at losing them should cause them more pain. I believe if my friends parents wish to live at home or with family until they pass it is up to them. And if they have paid the expensive premiums for in-home health care then attention should be paid.

I am not casual about this situation, I have made it known to my own family that I would rather pass early than in a home. I know that I would be lost without the things I know, my pets, my family. I have also told my family that if I was in a mental state where I no longer knew anyone, as with Alzheimer's or severe brain damage it may likely become another matter that they will need to choose. I believe in hospice care as a choice.

Right now my friend's parents are aware and able, very disappointed that their child 1 has acted this way. If the mother's voice was not bound by her recent stroke she could and would speak up for herself. Sadly she is and cannot take a test to display how lucid she is. And more sadly sometimes a family member will be acting out of greed or an lack of more than a superficial compassion. One could say I have only listened to child 2, however the guardianship papers show specific reasons which were not verified. So the court at the time only took child 1's word. Opinion not facts have are all that came from child 1. As I have said the motivations are not always seen from the outside. I do look forward to the hearing and I appreciate that with the medical exams the lawyer will finally be on board to defend the father. My friend is checking out the care facilities near them to see how the different places compare as to care, services, and costs in case that would later be needed. I am relieved the court has appointed an ad litem for each parent. If the court gives the father back his life and care of his wife then I will make sure my friend has this site to refer to. I think it helps to have exchanges with others who have had the experience or presently going through the caregiver situation. There will be challenges that will become new to her. And she will need input. Thank you for everyone's reply it helps to get other caregivers input and understand a bit of how the legal system may question the situation.
Helpful Answer (0)
Report

The parents and both children could speak at the Show Cause hearing, both sides can present MD reports, the court evaluator also reports, as does the Guardian ad Litem. Sit through one of these hearings. See for yourself. You are getting an opinion and not facts from Child #2.
Helpful Answer (0)
Report

Child 1 went to court, asked for guardianship of his mother on the grounds that his parents were incompetent, as certified only by himself, and was granted it without question or further investigation? Goodness. Was the court aware that Child 2 had a valid DPOA? Was neither the father nor Child 2 notified of these proceedings? If they were notified, were they not represented? It all seems, um, odd.

I am happy to take your word for it, then.

What are we to suppose are the motives of Child 1? What reason could he have to commit his parents to (extremely expensive) long term care other than a sincerely held belief that it would be in both of their best interests?

I am not unsympathetic to caregiving siblings wrestling with meddlesome relatives who think they know better, believe me. I have mental scars of my own. And I do not suggest for a moment that a disability on its own disqualifies anybody from caregiving, since it has been well demonstrated that it doesn't disqualify people from virtually any vocation known to man. You've had a paraplegic President. We've had a blind Home Secretary (and his dog). More power to their and others' elbows.

But as a quick tour of this site will tell you, caring for elderly parents is in no way comparable to raising children; and as many of us have discovered it is not comparable to anything else much either - through "the trenches" get mentioned quite a lot. It seems often to be the case that it is only a little way in, too late to go back, after the second or third unanticipated development such as the onset of dementia or a disabling stroke, that one becomes painfully aware of the scale of the challenge. If your friend knows where she can lay her hands on the support and resources she will need to maintain her parents safely in their own home, that's a good start. But having decided myself that I am going to stick this out come hell or high water and care for my mother 'til the end of her days, I still cannot in good conscience recommend it to anyone else.

However, the real point about your friend's disability is how it will be perceived by a court which is in the process of comparing the pros and cons of two proposals competing for responsibility for the parents' long term care. I would like to be more optimistic about it, but I'm not sure the world has quite got that far yet.

I don't doubt your friend's championship of her parents; but I'm still puzzled about what her brother's reasoning is. Has anyone suggested any ideas?
Helpful Answer (2)
Report

Somewhat wrong - I am neither child, only trying to seek information for child 2. So far only the mother is under the guardianship of child 1. A ad litem representative has been appointed to act in her best interest. The mothers only problem is that her speech has been affected. Using this child 1 had her declared unable to take care of herself and keeps repeating that both of his parents have Alzheimer's. At this point the father has 1 medical evaluation saying he is not incompetent and can speak and act on his own behalf. And now he has an ad litem rep from the court as well. With the 1st evaluation the attorney for the father has something to work with. And the paperwork from a 2nd doctor's exam is also being processed. Yes, the father is in his 80's and slower than he was earlier in life, he moves slower and generally is slower is processing things. Yet his mind is sharp. The mother is handicapped by the stroke only in her speech. We all recognize that is a problem. Yet losing one's speech does not make a person incompetent. Many people are born without speech or hearing or lose it at some point in life due to illness or accident. My husband has lost most of hearing and no one makes him to be incompetent.
The court did not declare that either parent was incompetent, only took the word of child 1 of that they were incompetent and to protect the mother in the moment child 1 was given guardianship. It is only now that work is being done to prove things one way or the other.
Child 2 would not argue against care in a home if they were unable to take care of their affairs or due to mental and health problems they were in serious need of 24/7 care. This child also recognizes as they have grown older her parents need more help with things. Yet this is true of all of us. I am decades younger and have seen all the changes in myself over the years. Needing help at some point in life is normal. There are many things that I can't do anymore, when I need help I ask. When they need help they ask. In the earlier mentioned challenge the insurance company denied the billing because the parents did not need to be in a home not to protect the insurance company's assets. The parents were active and able to take care of their own needs. Right now the fight is over the father retaining his rights, his ability to care for him and his wife. When the medical papers are made known then it will go a long way to not only having a lawyer yet also to finally getting access to his own funds back. And in the long-run getting his wife back.
As far as child 2 goes and their ability to care for the parents whether they live with or nearby. Yes there is a disability, it does not allow employment yet the child has cared for their person and own child for a number of years. Child 2 has the will, temperament, and affection to tend to the parents. And the previous experience in health care has given her insight to the practicalities of the daily care. One can not be judged for having a disability alone as being unable to give care. Many parents have serious health problems and still raise healthy and thriving children - we don't take the children from them. Many people have health problems that are not readily seen. I applaud child 2's will to be there for the parents. I applaud the awareness on what they can do and formatting a plan to have success for all. Things in my posting concerning legal status of the parties are fluid, alterations happen throughout the day. Of course there are more complexities in the matter - things which may illustrate how much child 2 is honestly working for their parents behalf.
Originally the situation was that without an attorney the father could not defend himself or his wife. Now it looks like he will have the means to do so. Without the help of child 2 he would not. No one in the court had allowed the parents voice to be heard otherwise. Not until child 2 stepped up for the parents.
Helpful Answer (0)
Report

This question has been closed for answers. Ask a New Question.
Related
Questions