Not signed in (Sign In)

Vanilla 1.1.2 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

    •  
      CommentAuthormary75*
    • CommentTimeJun 25th 2008 edited
     
    deleted
  1.  
    If it were me, I would consult with my attorney and his attorney as to whether his children have ANY legal rights to say ANYTHING. If they have no legal standing, then they should have no say. Why can't your attorney ask for a speedy court date due to circumstances? I guess I don't understand why his children have been able to postpone the hearing. They shouldn't be putting you and their father through this. Talk about selfishness! I personally wouldn't compromise with the children because they shouldn't have a leg to stand on if they have no legal standing, but I am known for being very hardheaded.
    • CommentAuthorSunshyne
    • CommentTimeJun 25th 2008
     
    It's not at all unusual for other family members to get greedy and cause trouble once someone petitions for committeeship (I assume that's the equivalent of the U.S. conservatorship). An uncontested petition will move through the U.S. courts quite smoothly, especially if the ADLO is still well enough to express his wishes. When someone protests the petition, however, the case becomes much more complicated, since the court has no way of knowing whether the person petitioning for conservatorship or the parties protesting the petition are acting in the best interests of the ADLO, and so it takes a lot more time and effort for everyone to prepare for the hearing.

    In all fairness, sometimes the person petitioning for control of the assets is the "bad" party, and those protesting it are on the side of the angels.

    Unless postponing the hearing would be damaging to mary75's husband in some way, I very much doubt the hearing could be moved up again.

    But I agree with you, Mary, the children should NOT be putting mary75 and their father through this. Selfish, greedy, self-centered, insensitive, heartless, I'm sure there are quite a few other appropriate terms for them. I mean, when you get right down to it, that's blackmail.

    I imagine mary75's lawyer suggested a compromise to see if a court battle could be avoided by making a REASONABLE compromise. A court battle could get very painful for mary75 and her husband, as well as take a lot of time and cost a lot of money.

    I would be very surprised if the children could actually prevail in court -- it would be entirely too obvious what their motivation is, especially given the shenanigans they've pulled so far.

    I also suspect that if mary75 gives in on this point, that won't be the end of their demands, not by a long shot. Sharks smelling blood, springs to mind.

    But if you want to consider it, just to get the committeeship in place as quickly and painlessly as possible, I would make very sure that the terms of use are clearly spelled out in a legal document, and include (1) that they receive PRIOR authorization to go to the cottage from the committee for any and all visits; (2) that the length of a visit is clearly spelled out and if the terms of the authorization are violated, then the entire right to use the cottage is voided; (3) the children must pay all associated costs (utilities, whatever), pay a fair share of the upkeep needed to keep the cottage in good shape, and pay any and all costs associated with repairing any damage they might do to it, deliberately or otherwise; and (4) the children would NOT have authorization to bring guests to the cottage.

    As for selling the cottage later on -- that would be something for the committee to decide, and the decision probably should be made on the basis of how best to handle his assets to maximize their value.
    • CommentAuthordivvi*
    • CommentTimeJun 25th 2008
     
    If they havent had visiting priveleges in the past by themselves without DH why would you agree to that now? my own opinion would be that since acct and dr have ruled him incompetent to make his own decisions now,the wife would be appointed his guardian without any issues. the kids cant protest all they want but they would have to have documentation that states contrary their father in in his 'right' mind and dont think thats going to be feasible at this point. so i would call their bluff and stick to my guns esp if i knew DH did NOT want them to visit his properties. and yes i would sell when the time is good and eliminate that issue altogether- you will have money them for his care later. i have dealth with greedy kids who want nothing more than financial gain in my past marriage and now this one as well. i am thru being the 'nice' person who is reasonable. divvi
    • CommentAuthorSunshyne
    • CommentTimeJun 25th 2008
     
    "i am thru being the 'nice' person who is reasonable" ... after reading all your posts here, divvi, I have a little trouble believing that. You constantly amaze me by how perceptive you are to your husband's real problems, and how creative you are at handling them. I DO believe that you're a fierce tigress when it comes to protecting him, though!
    •  
      CommentAuthorStarling*
    • CommentTimeJun 25th 2008
     
    I think we all end up getting tough in one way or another. Either that or we don't survive.
    •  
      CommentAuthormary75*
    • CommentTimeJun 25th 2008 edited
     
    deleted
  2.  
    Mary75, call me cynical, but if you allow the children to go to the cottage, what is to stop them from taking everything in the cottage and trashing it? I wouldn't allow them there if it were me, even supervised. Given what they have been doing, I don't trust them to act civilized. But that is just me. Please be careful.
    •  
      CommentAuthormary75*
    • CommentTimeJun 26th 2008 edited
     
    deleted
    • CommentAuthortherrja*
    • CommentTimeJun 26th 2008
     
    Okay, I'll add my two cents into this mix. Your husband has stated what he wants and it sounds like it is consistent with what he has always stated. It may make you the "bad guy" but I agree with you respecting his wishes and if they want something different they can go through the court system.

    I ran into something similar. My husband did not want his children talking to his doctors or getting information from his doctors. They were doing this for their mother. Unfortunately, he never told them personnally that he didn't want them involved in the doctors. I respected his wishes and stood my ground on the "no". They started conservatorship proceedings. It was a very difficult timeframe as he had progressed to the point where he could no longer state what he wanted. My lawyer was able to talk to their lawyer a week before the hearing and find out what their points were. We were able to answer them and show that there were no grounds for the hearing so they decided to withdraw. It was a very long 2 months trying to come to grips with the fact that they were trying to take my husband and take control of him.

    Its nice that they backed off but now there is always an awareness that they could reinstitute the proceedings. I work very hard to try and do what is right and best for my husband and not be influenced by that "threat" hanging over my head.

    Letting them use the cottage where you have no control of the outcome, does not sound like a good idea.
    •  
      CommentAuthormary75*
    • CommentTimeJun 26th 2008 edited
     
    deleted
    • CommentAuthorSunshyne
    • CommentTimeJun 26th 2008
     
    therrja, it is my understanding that the party that initiates a conservatorship petition is more likely to prevail than one that protests, especially if the AD patient is living with the person who files the petition. Have you talked with your lawyer about whether it would be a good idea for YOU to file? A pre-emptive strike?

    I'm assuming your husband is too far along now to express his wishes ... but if he still can tell the court he wants you to care for him, that will also make it easier for you to get your petition approved and much more difficult for the children to protest.
    • CommentAuthortherrja*
    • CommentTimeJun 26th 2008
     
    My lawyer did not feel that I needed to start a conservatorship petition for myself for him as I am his POA/DPOA and on the Living Will. When we were going through this, my husband had put the paperwork in place long before AD raised its head so we were able to use that as one of our arguments.

    Apparently, unless there is proof of gross negligence, if a spouse is named on POA/DPOA then that is who the judges favor. As he is now in a facility that has an excellent reputation, they would have a hard time proving gross negligence of physical care. I also have worked all along with an accountant and financial advisor on the handling of his IRA, pension and social secuity so it would be difficult to prove monetary negligence.

    I have to go back and check the documents but I believe that there is a line in there where I am named his conservator if he can no longer take care of himself.

    You do bring up a good point though that I should ask if there is something that ought to be put in place or if I am covered for the end stages and the decisions that will need to be made at that time.
    • CommentAuthordivvi*
    • CommentTimeJun 26th 2008
     
    if you are named the DPOA for financial issues and named as POA on the health care or (living will )to make decisions for him if hes unable i am not following why anyone still needs to file for conservator or guardian??

    i ask cause this is what we have is DPOA that is valid even if he is incompetent as it went into effect at the signing and poa on the health care proxy for any decison making there. am i missing something? divvi
    •  
      CommentAuthormary75*
    • CommentTimeJun 26th 2008 edited
     
    deleted
    • CommentAuthordivvi*
    • CommentTimeJun 26th 2008
     
    i have followed your story Mary75 its horrible. in my case yep there are those greedy kids in the background but my DH is wayy too far gone mentally for anything to be done about them getting him to change any of that now. they dont want anything to do with him now. rare visits no offers to take him out for a drive, no respite for me, nothing. except they will definately be there with their hands out when its all over. this i can be sure of plus lots of difficulty settling the estate. the misery wont end even after death dare i say in both our cases. divvi
    •  
      CommentAuthormary75*
    • CommentTimeJun 26th 2008 edited
     
    deleted
  3.  
    We are a strange sorority. Marsh-should I add a strange fraternity, too.
  4.  
    bluedaze, thanks for including us.