Courts strip elders of their independence

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/01/13/courts_strip_elders_of_their_independence/

At 73, Cromwell is one of hundreds of forgotten docket numbers in Massachusetts probate and family courts, where judges routinely fast-track infirm elders into the care of guardians, often with little evidence to justify such wrenching decisions.

Cromwell, after a broken ankle and a brief rehab in early 2006, had expected to go home. But on the say-so from the nursing home's doctor - a short, nearly illegible diagnosis - a judge decreed that Cromwell was mentally ill and handed all of her decision-making to a guardian. Cromwell lost all power over her own life, with no opportunity to object, no right to have a lawyer represent her, no chance to even be in the courtroom.

Three months later, the same judge, E. Chouteau Merrill, made the guardianship permanent - in a two-minute hearing in which the judge asked not a single question. </snip>

My brothers and sister did this with my father. Took his rights away against his will. Put him in homes. Sold his house. Eventually he stopped eating and died. They said they had doctor notes on incompetence. They took him for tests to prove he was not capable. He asked for my help but I could not fight my rich siblings. I told him he needed to prove he was competent, he needed his own lawyer, doctors, and other professionals to testify and work for him. He got a good lawyer but it was already too late. Once they put you in those homes, they drug you to be able to manage you. If you object to anything, you are analyzed and drugged. Those drugs and dosages never match and the next thing you know the person has a stroke. It becomes a self-fulling prophecy.

He would have been much happier elsewhere - even if he was not eating right and lived in a mess - he was happy with his mess. He had been that way for over 40 years but they used the same traits he had displayed for years and used them as evidence.

But my mother chose how, when and where she passed away. Hard to do hospice @ home, but worth it.

to lessen the population of our seniors. It quietly and slowly slouches forward.

After all, what better way to save social security than to decrease the elder population?

Tucker Carlson, that fool, opined on MSNBC *I think we will have a much better country when all the baby boomers are gone to the great beyond.* I may not have his exact quote, but if not, it's close.

This needs to be addressed. Soon.

did that to her Mom, my special Gram. Mostly because Gram, former owner of a telephone company in our small town back during the Depression, and a REAL "Woman of Independent Means", chose to spend too much money for my Mom's liking. I remember Mom saying something to the effect that Gram was spending her inheritance. My response was "What did YOU ever do to earn that money"? Now, mind you, my Mom raised 6 kids during the 50's - 60's, she was an intelligent woman who would have preferred to work outside the home. My Dad informed her she had her job...raising kids. My Mom did a lot but I never understood where she got off thinking my grandparent's money was hers "just because". My Gram was such an independent woman, always had been. When Mom did that to her, at the age of 94, it did her in. What a nasty thing to do to anyone, unless it is honestly warranted, imvho.

his will - he was concerned about the money. She 'blew through over $200,000' in nursing home care in less than 2 years. It was easier than letting him live on his own and being called because of problems. With him put away they did not have to 'worry' about him. He had been a very independent soul and 'over the top' most of his life. He was a door to door salesman. Takes a lot of rejection. He talked to all kinds of people. He also 'ticked' a fair number of them off. He had a lot of unusual behaviors in social settings yet was also sociable - dancing, fun, laughter - he could be extremely obnoxious at times - and at other times go out of his way for you but not necessarily in a way you would want from him

.... my grandfather, who was a true child of the depression (if there was a way to pinch a penny, he did it, from repainting cars with barn paint to turning off the cruise control going downhill so he would gain speed) was always one to hold tightly to every dollar.

When he started showing signs of Alzheimer's, none of his children wanted to have him declared incompetent. So, as the years went by, he sold his house and farm to a sneaky realtor for about 25% of the price other developers had offered him, got tricked out of several thousand dollars by convincing scam artists, and changed his will to leave all his money to "the eskimos." Apparently in his dementia, he decided he had once hiked to the north pole, and he was quite impressed with the friendly eskimos he had met along the way.

Fifteen years ago, he probably would have had a heart attack at the thought of wasting so much money, but in his reduced mental state, he had no problem throwing it away.

I don't need (and don't expect) any of his money, but what happened is not what my grandmother wanted, and it is not what he would have done if he still had his faculties about him.

In this case, someone should have been appointed guardian long ago.

(All of this is besides the general safety issues, like driving his golf cart across busy streets, thinking he could take up roller-blading when he was 88 years old, or foregoing showers and clean clothes for as long as he could get away with it.)

and those are not the cases I believe are the issue here. If an estate, no matter what size is involvolved, the courts will rule on the slimmest of evidence and testimony, even in the face of quite transparent skullduggery. In these cases it is necessary to make the case well known locally as this is the way you remove these jusdges(they are all state courts, not fed).