Tag Archives: guardianship abuse

CONTACT 13: Another guardian charged with abuse

by

jason_hansonby  Darcy Spears

LAS VEGAS (KTNV) – Another private guardian was charged with abuse of a vulnerable person on Thursday.

The young victim in the case was the first to come forward and talk with Contact 13 about corruption in the guardianship system.

Jason Hanson’s guardianship case was supposed to end when he became an adult. But Contact 13 discovered the court kept it open for seven years after his 18th birthday. And during that time, several so-called professionals came in and out of his life while the money set aside for his care dwindled away.

Darcy: “Did you get lost in the system or do you think it’s more sinister than that?”
Jason: “I don’t know if I got lost in the system or if it was more underhanded than that. But the system definitely needs to change.” 

(Click to Continue)

Article & Source:
CONTACT 13: Another guardian charged with abuse

Forbidden: The Fool’s Challenge

by

4

harrassmentAll you people claiming to advocate for the elderly and disabled, just who do you think you are to challenge judicial decisions, facilities, attorneys, conservators, guardians and fiduciaries?  They are, after all, proven, by their positions, to be above reproach.  How dare you challenge their intent, actions and/or character!

Judges, attorneys, CEO’s and others in charge have proven by the stations they have risen to, to be of perfection… the elite of the world… the all-knowing… and the all honest.  Never do they take advantage of their positions for personal financial gain nor to have a personal agenda in play.  Never do they do anything beneath their position.  To suggest otherwise is to be singled out to be disgraced and to possibly be labelled a threat or even mentally unbalanced.

I’m not sure what has happened to common sense and healthy thought process, but some kind of virus has been on the attack, it would seem.  Facts seem to be subjective or totally irrelevant.  It’s almost as though we are living in the “mad house” out here in the everyday world.  Too many things, arguments and decisions are outright crazy.

We have various Courts that worry about individuals taking advantage of the elderly or disabled, while signing off on outrageous fees for attorneys, appointed guardians and so forth.  What is the difference between the latter and the former?  Oh, is it because the latter is condoned by the courts and protected by some carelessly written law or skillful misinterpretation?  That somehow makes one right and the other wrong?

Worse than the money drain by the courts and appointed anointed-ones is the power to isolate the victims.  (Yes, victims.  What else would you call the people, who suddenly are imprisoned and forced to be and have done unto them what they would not, and do not, want done unto them and theirs?)

How can someone that robs another of companionship, enjoyment, freedom, money, property and simply an existence called living, be considered humane?  Animals are treated better than many of the elderly and disabled thrown into the system, because they could be thrown into the system — even if by a wrongful technicality in the law or by a court that is complicit due to bias or simply doesn’t look beyond the surface or listen to the bothersome advocates or nobodies that dare speak against the supposed “perfect” attorneys, professional guardians and such?  They never lie or steal or do unethical things, now do they?

In recent news, we have heard…

“WASHINGTON — Three central Ohio nursing homes were among 33 in 11 states cited for improper care and billing practices yesterday as part of a $38 million settlement among a major nursing-home company, the U.S. Department of Justice and the state of Ohio.

“The announcement in Washington and Columbus resolved an investigation by the federal government, Ohio and seven other states into charges that Extendicare of Canada provided services at those 33 homes that were “materially substandard” or “worthless” because the company did not provide care to residents that meets federal standards, according to the settlement agreement.”  (Federal investigation finds three local nursing homes lacking )

Now wait a minute.  I thought “all” facilities provided only the best of care and that complainers were just making things up or exaggerating.  They weren’t?

More recent news…

“The Ohio Supreme Court has suspended Akron attorney Rami M. Awadallah from practicing law after ruling that he fraudulently and deceptively represented several of his clients — including some in Lorain County — during court proceedings.”  (Ohio Supreme Court suspends area attorney)

What’s that?  An attorney “fraudulently and deceptively represented several of his clients”?  But… but… but… I thought that was impossible?  I thought “all” attorneys “always” spoke nothing but the truth and “always” acted in the best interest of the client or ward.  He didn’t?  What’s up with this?

More in the news…

“Paul S. Kormanik, a Columbus attorney considered up until two months ago to be legal guardian to more incompetent people than anyone else in the nation, was indicted today on theft charges by a Franklin County grand jury.

Prosecutor Ron O’Brien and Attorney General Mike DeWine will announce the charges this afternoon after the grand jury determined there was sufficient evidence that Kormanik stole about $41,000 from two of his wards.”  (Lawyer indicted for theft from those he was supposed to protect)

An attorney — a legal guardian — was indicted for what?  Stealing?  Stealing from people he was the guardian for?  Oh my!  Bubble buster!

While we are talking about a system lacking perfection and often tilted towards the powerful, though not necessarily the righteous or side with the cleanest of hands, let’s return, for a moment, to discussion involving isolation of the wards.  What judge or guardian or facility could possibly think isolation of a non-violent, non-contagious person is a good thing?

Decades ago, researchers found there is such a thing as “failure to thrive”.  It actually exists.  There is no question.   Why then, would anyone place another person in isolation and risk that person dying due to “failure to thrive”?  Why?  How can it be justified?  It can’t!  Therefore, I believe, anyone involved in isolating a non-violent, non-contagious person, should have to answer why they should not be charged with kidnapping and abuse or even murder, should the person die as a result.

I can think of numerous cases where people have been thrown into isolation and the ironies surrounding it all is out there in a suburb of the Twilight Zone.  Yes, so amazing is it all that I’m surprised a “duh” isn’t permanently imprinted upon both the perps and the out-of-touch — can’t get it — zombie followers that go around drooling false talking points, as though it is gospel, while alleging the truth-tellers are the liars.

 When a ward is put into isolation, who is the threat?  The one that ordered the isolation or the one challenging it?

When a petition is presented to starve & dehydrate a ward, who is the threat?  The person who did the petitioning or the one that fights for life, visitation, rehabilitation and stimulation?

The answers should be quite easy to figure out, but instead, it looks as though too much power and trust has been placed where not deserved.  It would seem, according to recent news, that we can’t always assume the courts and appointed anointed-ones are of perfection and holier than thou after all.  Maybe sometimes they are up to no good and their word isn’t worth what comes out of a donkey’s rump.  And, maybe sometimes people are wrong, but without any ill-intent.  Maybe they just lost sight and are blinded by self-preservation and inability to admit error.  But how do we know?  How do we know, if we don’t inquire and investigate behind the curtain, especially a curtain pulled tightly, as if to keep any from peeking in?

Advocates are necessary in a world that seems to have lost its way.  A world with too many who have come to believe good is evil and evil is good.  People that see the lie as truth and the truth as lie.  People who often admire the wrong-doer and find fault with the victim and the victim’s advocates.  People who aren’t even aware any longer that they might be wrong, because they are somehow “entitled”.  Aren’t they supposed to get more and be treated better than those they treat so poorly?

No?  Who says?  Who dares to challenge the new rule of they who control the lives and assets of vulnerable ones ordered to be incompetent, even though they — the vulnerable — might not be as incompetent or alone as decreed by a court?

Who dares to give challenge?

The advocates, whether they be professional advocates or family or friends or even concerned citizens made aware of someone’s plight — that’s who dares give challenge!

Yes, true advocates are necessary as long as the madness and wrongness reigns.  May the war be quickly won and the vulnerable-victims placed in the hands of those who dare to truly and unselfishly care!

It’s time to challenge!  It’s time to win!  It’s time to give lives back to those who have been violated by a system gone wrong!

Elder abuse by Santa Clara County Public Guardian: PG escorted from building

by

by Linda Kincaid

 On September 25, 2014, Santa Clara County Public Guardian Don Moody was “escorted from his office” according to San Jose Inside.  Moody is on administrative leave following two consecutive Civil Grand Jury reports of serious deficiencies.

 A grand jury report out this summer—the second in as many years—noted that Moody fails to track the amount of work and number of clients he handles. The people he hires to manage clients’ property don’t go through a thorough background check, the report found. Instead of having a panel of experts determine whether to assume control of a person’s estate, effectively revoking their civil rights, the decision lies with one person. And for years, countless referrals from the court have reportedly fallen through the cracks.

The latest grand jury report was spurred by a complaint that the office mishandled a case in which a client died before being conserved by the county.

The 2013 Civil Grand Jury report noted that written procedures at the Public Guardian’s office were not current.  In some cases, procedures were years out of date.

The 2014 Civil Grand Jury report noted that written procedures at the Public Guardian’s office had current dates, but content was not current.  Procedure 804.0 (slideshow above) concerning “Client Visitors, Phone Calls, Personal Mail” is of special interest given Moody’s history of unlawful imprisonment and isolation of conservatees.

In 2012, the Public Guardian was isolating conservatees from family and friends.  No visitors.  No phone calls.  No mail. The 2013 Civil Grand Jury investigation was initiated in response to a complaint filed by this Examiner.

Conservatee Gisela Riordan was unlawfully imprisoned and isolated at San Jose assisted living facility Villa Fontana for over two years.  Conservatee Lillie Scalia was isolated for a year.   Both women had families who wished to visit them and to care for them.   Moody used his victims’ own funds to pay to the unlawful imprisonment and isolation.

ABC7 I-Team investigated numerous abuses by Moody’s office.  See video above.

Media coverage and citizen advocacy led to passage of Assembly Bill 937 (2013), which clarified that conservatees have the right to receive visitors, phone calls, and personal mail.   Governor Brown signed the bill on August 19, 2013.  The bill amended Probate Code 2351(a) as of January 1, 2014.

2351.  (a) Subject to subdivision (b), the guardian or conservator, but not a limited conservator, has the care, custody, and control of, and has charge of the education of, the ward or conservatee. This control shall not extend to personal rights retained by the conservatee,  including, but not limited to, the right to receive visitors, telephone calls, and personal mail, unless specifically limited by court order.

Procedure 804.0 fails to comply with the legislative intent or the plain language of AB 937.  Conservatees have an immediate right to have visitors.  The Probate Code does not modify the right such that elderly or disabled individuals can only receive visitors after a week’s delay or if the Public Guardian decides to cooperate with the visit.

The plain language of the Code is clear.  Conservatee’s have the right to receive visitors, unless specifically limited by court order.  The 2015 Civil Grand Jury might find Procedure 804.0 to be of interest.

Full Article & Source: 
Elder abuse by Santa Clara County Public Guardian: PG escorted from building

Wife’s Visitation in Jeopardy: The Recycling of Gary Harvey’s Holiday Restrictions

by

By on December 10th, 2010

Last year, I wrote the following article.

By Carrie K. Hutchens on November 7th, 2009

Gary Harvey is the brain injured man from New York, who seems to have his own private “death panel” determined to kill him off and to make his and his wife’s life as miserable as possible, until the sentence is carried out.  One might think it could get no worse than it has been.  One should never think such thoughts, lest one (or more) be shown that — for however bad — things can actually get worse!

Though it wasn’t Sara sitting on the so-called ethics committee that determined Gary should be starved and dehydrated to death — the Guardian and County (who actually were involved in the attempted death of an innocent person) — have suggested she is a danger to her husband.

Huh?  Did I miss something there?

Hasn’t a DNR been placed on Gary?  If something does go wrong — that’s it, isn’t it?  Those in charge have made it clear they have no intention of lifting a finger to save his life, but yet, it is Gary’s wife, Sara, that is considered the danger to him?

The Twilight Zone has competition!

Let’s see…

It is the Guardian, County, and So-Called Ethics Committee that decided Gary should die, but Sara needs to be supervised when visiting him?  So, what do they think she is going to do to Gary that they need to protect him from?

Certainly can’t be death!

Certainly can’t be torturing him to death by starvation and dehydration!

So just what are the supervised visits suppose to be accomplishing?  What protection are they allegedly providing?  What are they supposedly preventing?

I’m with you — I don’t know either!

I did get word though, that the bills for these questionable supervised visits are being charged to Gary and he is either out of money or running out of money to pay for them.  What does this mean?  No more visits with his wife?  And this is in Gary’s best interest how?

I don’t know who these people are that think they are looking out for Gary Harvey’s best interests, but I certainly wouldn’t want them in charge of looking out for my best interests under any circumstances.

Isolation is a form of torture.  It causes failure to thrive.  So now, when those in control of Gary didn’t get him starved and dehydrated to death, and have not been able to implement the DNR — they are going to deny him his wife’s visits?  Who are they trying to punish?  Gary for being disabled or Sara for fighting to bring her husband home?

One can only wonder!

Amazing!  I can actually recycle my article as  if it was current and remaining accurate.  How often does that happen?

Here it is the holiday season of 2010 and Sara Harvey gets a letter from Bryan Maggs, Chemung County Attorney, stating that her visitations with Gary are suspended immediately.  Isn’t that the same gift they offered last year?  I’m so impressed with the repeat gift and the timing — NOT!

Shame on these people!

If there was a problem, beyond Sara filing various motions with the court, where are the records of the official meetings where the hospital, county, guardian and all the heavy-weight personnel discussed any issues that might bring her to no visitation at Christmas time once again?

The court system is a strategy thing.  Attorneys do this and attorneys do that… and it is all a major game.  But Sara is not allowed to play back, even when the county and guardian and hospital feel free to do whatever and force her into a courtroom to challenge their inappropriate behavior?

If Gary were at home, and someone reported that his care was inappropriate, Sara would have to answer this challenge.  Why would the county, guardian and hospital think they should be beyond the same challenge?  It is, after all,  allegedly their actual job to be an “expert provider” and to provide excellent care in all ways.

If Gary were at home and Sara was starving & dehydrating him to death, the authorities would pull him from the home, put him in “protective custody” and most likely charge her with all kinds of things, including attempted murder.  Why haven’t the county and guardian and hospital been likewise challenged and charged?  Why hasn’t the court pulled them back in to answer why they tried to kill off someone not terminally ill?

If Gary was home with Sara, she could be challenged for this and for that and for anything someone wished to challenge her with, but she wouldn’t be able to simply write a letter and terminate visitation by all these people that thought she was not providing well.  Why then, can all these people so simply terminate her visits with Gary when they have been challenged?

It’s wrong!

It would be wrong no matter what, but it is really wrong that these people decide to terminate visitation during the holiday season.  It says a great deal about them.  It proves, by their actions, that compassion is not something in their list of priorities, yet they claim to have Gary’s best interest in mind?

How often can one recycle an article?

How often can one recycle an article where all one has to do is change the date?

It should make it quite apparent that something is totally wrong in the Harvey case, for one, and the system needs to get things right, rather than allow all this craziness and bullying to wrong the victim and the family that strives to fight to get it all back right.

It should.

Will It?

I don’t know, but is the holiday season a time to take away the moments a wife and husband have together, especially when holidays together are possibly limited by health issues?

I don’t know, but what can Sara Harvey possibly do to Gary Harvey that warrants supervised visits – that outweighs the county’s attempt to kill him off?

Nevertheless, here it is the holidays again… and Sara’s visits with Gary have been terminated once again!

Merry Christmas!

This article was originally published at Dakota Voice.  It can once again be recycled — holiday visits are off!  This year the doctor said either Sara goes or he goes!  Supposedly the guardians and attorneys can’t find a new doctor to replace him, so they booted Sara from visiting her own husband!  Welcome to the New World of cruelty & the power of government!

 

Carrie Hutchens is a former law enforcement officer and a freelance writer who is active in fighting against the death culture movement and the injustices within the judicial and law enforcement systems.

Guardianship: Time for Accountability

by

5

isolationGuardianship abuse seems to be one of the most profitable scams of the day!  Are you safe from it?  Not necessarily.

Professional guardians, and professionals who become guardians, in some states, can isolate the ward (even from family and friends), bill outrageous amounts, sell houses and other property, take over bank accounts and make the ward’s life absolutely miserable as they do.  Don’t believe it?  Neither did many others, until it happened to them.

The public is led to believe they have the right to pick the person they wish to make decisions for them, should they become unable to do so or need some help.  However, in Florida, it appears, judges are allowed to ignore the person’s wishes and place him or her under the care of a professional guardian.  Once that appointment has been made, the family can be completely excluded from the ward’s life.  Worse, if there can be a worse, the ward is completely at the mercy of the guardian for better or for worse.

A guardian should be someone who is looking out for the best interest of the ward — not the ward being a money-making product to be billed to pennilessness.

When a guardian has already been chosen by the person, the courts should not be allowed to ignore that wish and appoint a professional guardian, unless there are some serious extenuating circumstances.

In my opinion, one of the first signs something is terribly wrong with a guardian situation is when the ward is isolated from family and friends.  This action alone suggests there is something to hide.  If not, then why would a guardian worry about the ward associating with all the people that had meant so much to him or her?

People who don’t understand the harm isolation can do, should spend a couple of months alone in a room with no stimulation and the only human contact (and brief words exchanged) being when someone brings a meal and picks up the tray.  That experiment will give you a taste of what many under guardianship go through and what you may one day be looking forward to, if the laws are not changed.

The courts should not have the right to over-ride a person’s wishes, without true cause to do so.  This is a person’s life after all.  And family members and friends should be considered for guardianship prior to any professional being thought of.

Professional guardians should be held to the strictest of standards and there should be no immunity for them not also given to a family member or friend acting in the same capacity.

Guardians should not be allowed to create bills and then sell off the ward’s home and possessions to make payment, as easily as it seems it can be done in many jurisdictions.

Wards should not lose the right to fight for their freedom from guardianship, especially if it is a wrongful one.  As it is, if the guardian has all the say — the ward can be silenced and kept from fighting against an abuse guardianship situation.  How is that right?  Doesn’t that defeat the very purpose of guardianship?

Guardianship may have been created to help those who had no one to help them, but it has evolved into a money-making adventure too often gone wrong.  It’s time for review.  It’s time to fix the loop-holes and laws that allow the wards to become nothing more than pawns and products to use up, drain and throw away.  It’s time to limit judicial and guardianship control and to hold the system accountable!