Reblogged from NOTEGA - Working to End Guardianship Abuse:

Read this story about how an mentally disabled man was put into a drug trial and eventually died. The University should be held accountable.

Then think about the recent rush to conduct medical trials and testing on individuals with Alzheimers disease !

Informed consent is required under the UN Human Rights Laws and according to the Nerunberg code.

What has America come to?

We must speak out about the abuse and violation of the rights of the eldelry an disabled in this country.

Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine announced Wednesday that Yvonne Alexander was sentenced to 18 months in prison for Medicaid fraud in the theft of $53,000 in benefit income from a resident of Graceworks Lutheran Services group home, which serves developmentally disabled individuals.

Alexander forged documents to gain control of a resident’s Ohio Public Employee Retirement System (OPERS) survivor benefits. In all, Alexander was sentenced to 19.5 years in prison for multiple counts of theft for stealing a total of $105,000 from several residents and for the Medicaid fraud. She was also ordered to pay the Attorney General’s Office $3,000 in investigation costs.

“It’s unconscionable that someone would engage in so much deception to steal from a developmentally disabled elderly person so reliant on others,” said Attorney General DeWine. “But my office, in cooperation with other agencies, will investigate and prosecute these cases with all the resources we have.”

The Ohio Attorney General’s Office Health Care Fraud Unit worked with the Cincinnati Police Department and the Hamilton County Prosecutor’s Office in the investigation and prosecution of this case.

Alexander, 53, a former Graceworks manager, forged a probate court guardianship appointment letter to gain control over the resident’s OPERS survivor benefit. Alexander%2

Source and Read More at : Local woman sentenced in Medicaid fraud case | News | Downtown – Mt. Auburn Area News.

A retired Massachusetts judge on Tuesday defended her decision to order a mentally ill woman to have an abortion and be sterilized against her wishes, and she blasted Boston University for rescinding a job offer after her ruling sparked controversy. Christina Harms said she believes the schizophrenic woman would have chosen to have an abortion if she had been mentally competent. In her ruling, she granted a petition from the woman’s parents to have their daughter declared incompetent…Full Story

Read more: Comments: Ex-Judge in Mass. Defends Forced Abortion Ruling – ABC News.

By Jim Ware – Jim.Ware@StarNewsOnline.com

Published: Monday, April 23, 2012 at 10:14 a.m.  – New Hanover County’s Department of Social Services serves as the court-appointed guardian for 66 elderly and disabled people to ensure their health, safety and well being.

On July 1 that number could swell to at least 81, or by 22.7 percent, if a court-ordered plan by the state Department of Health and Human Services is approved by the General Assembly.Under a draft guardianship proposal, county departments of social services in North Carolina would be tasked with providing or contracting for guardianship for people with mental health issues, developmental disabilities and substance abuse issues.

Source – Read More: General Assembly to consider guardianship proposal | StarNewsOnline.com.

Questions sent to the Senate Special Committee on Aging in 2011

IN RESPONSE TO THEIR HEARING ON ELDER ABUSE

WE ARE ASKING OUR STATE AND NATIONAL LEADERS WHY ?

1. Why is it legal to abuse and rob the elderly in guardianships?

2. Why is it legal to force an “alleged” incapacitated person into guardianship with an emergency or some other hearing without due process of the law where the ward is not present and/or not represented by counsel? Why are our constitutional due process rights under the 14th amendment not protected in guardianships?

3. Why is it legal to isolate a ward, to over medicate, to chemically restrain, to sterilize and even authorize an early death through hospice in guardianships?

4. Why do the advance directives of these dear elderly citizens appear to mean nothing? The designation of a pre-need guardian, a power of attorney or health care surrogate are routine ignored in the incapacity process.

5. Why is it legal for one person (a judge) to give one human being to another private citizen (“the guardian”), then walk away, and let that person have their way with the incapacitated person and their estate?

6. Why are there no jury trials?

7. Why are these wards of the State in guardianships not being protected by the State… are they not wards of the State?

8. Why is it that when someone allegedly steals from an elderly or vulnerable person that the alleged victim can be sent into a guardianship instead of the crime being investigated by the criminal justice system and adult protective services? The victim is forced to pay for the crime in a probate court instead of it being handled by the criminal justice system where the victim doesn’t have to foot the bill to get justice? Furthermore, rarely are the allegations of wrong doing  that create the need for guardianship ever proven in these guardianship cases. Instead, they are being used as an excuse to take over the life of the person and their property. Why do the American Rules of Civil Discovery not apply to Guardianship Proceeding?

9. Why do we need to have emergency hearings for guardianships when adult protective services should be able to do their job and protect the vulnerable alleged incapacitated person until they can be afforded due process?

10. Why is it legal to bill tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars to a ward for services that do not benefit them in breach of any fiduciary duty and yet it is not called a crime, it is called protection of the ward ?

11. Why is it legal for a guardian to deny visitation to a ward, to allow them to be isolated from their community and their loved ones ?

 WHY ?

Join the Forum discussion on this post

RESOLUTION

Protecting Elderly and Disabled Adults in Incapacity and Guardianship Proceedings

WHEREAS : Many elderly and disabled citizens are subjected to findings of incapacity in a court where a judge can appoint an individual or corporation as guardian of their person or their property and these citizens can be stripped of their all their constitutional and civil rights. They can be stripped of the right to their liberty and their property, of the right to associate with family and friends, of the right to live in their community, and of the right to vote. Often time these vulnerable citizens are denied due process and are denied the right to hire their own attorney to represent them during these proceedings.

WHEREAS : While there are vulnerable citizens who do need some protection, most do not need to lose all of these rights, and some are not incapacitated, but because of flaws in the system and a lack of checks and balances they can end up losing all of their rights. There is a tremendous opportunity for abuse and exploitation under guardianships that can be perpetrated by greedy parties who use the system in an effort to wrongfully gain control of another person’s liberty and property. It all happens under the guise of protection and color of law and in the wrong hands it can be devastating. Sometimes, it seems elderly citizens with assets end up in a guardianship just because they are old and have money.

WHEREAS : Many citizens have never heard of guardianships and are not aware of what rights they have to defend themselves when someone alleges that they are incapacitated and files a petition with the court to have them declared incapacitated and placed under a guardianship.

WHEREAS : Guardianship and incapacity proceedings are extremely expensive due to the high costs of profession guardians and legal expenses that are paid form the individual’s estate. After an individual’s estate has been depleted by the high costs of the guardianships, it is you and I, the American taxpayers, who picks up the tab for the risk when an individual’s Social Security and VA benefits are placed under the control of a guardian who uses them to pay for services that do not benefit them instead of for their care.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

Every citizen subject to a guardianship or incapacity proceeding shall be afforded proper procedural due process before they can be stripped of their liberty and property and, that no citizen shall be denied the right to hire an attorney of their own choosing to defend themselves in an incapacity or guardianship hearing. These citizens shall also retain the right to appeal and the right to request that their rights be restored (at any time 1) after they have been removed by the court.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT :

Every individual subject to any guardianship or incapacity proceeding in the court a shall be given advanced written notice (in 14 point bold print) that includes:

(a) Notice of their right to demand a jury trial

(b) Notice of their right to hire an attorney of their own choosing and

(c) An explanation of what rights they can lose under a guardianship2

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT :

No individual should be involuntarily subjected to a HIPPA release of medical information to any person or entity or involuntarily

subjected to any court ordered medical, psychiatric or psychological exam for the

determination of capacity, without a hearing to determine the need. And, no hearing

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED THAT :

No citizen under a guardianship shall be denied the right to vote.

Submitted by:

Latifa Ring – Elder Abuse and Guardianship Victims Taskforce for Change and

The National Organization to End Guardianship Abuse (NOTEGA)

FOOTNOTES:

1 In some cases, citizens are denied the right to ask for their rights to be restored for one year. This is unacceptable.

2 The alleged incapacitated person must be informed that they can lose the right to vote, that they can lose the right to marry and the right to divorce. They must be informed that they can lose the right to their liberty and property, that they can lose the right to association with family and friends, the right to decide where they live, to decide what medication they take or not take and what medical procedures they are subjected to. Also that they can lose the right to object to the use of chemical and physical restraints, the right to report abuse, the right to object to chemical testing and trials and the right to have their advanced directives honored by the court or the court appointed guardian, and the list goes on.

3 In recent cases HIPPA releases have been given to guardian ad litem(s) and attorney ad litem(s) without proper notice to the alleged incapacitated person and court orders for psychiatric and medical evaluation issue without an opportunity for the alleged incapacitated person to object .

Join the Forum discussion on this post

Guardianship Fraud Hotline in Palm Beach County !

“Using the Guardianship Fraud Hotline, you can anonymously report potential incidents of financial fraud or waste involving court-appointed guardianships over elderly, minor children and incapacitated individuals. This includes but is not limited to:

• Missing money or property
• Suspicious loans, funds transfers, opened or closed accounts/lines of credit
• Suspicious purchase or sale of real or personal property
• Violations of federal, state or local laws, rules or regulations
• Guardian has a conflict of interest or exhibits signs of more expensive lifestyle
• Forced removal from their home or residence

Submissions are sent directly to the Clerk & Comptroller’s Division of Inspector General.”

Read More Here http://www.mypalmbeachclerk.com/fraudhotline.aspx

via Guardianship Fraud Hotline – Clerk & Comptroller, Palm Beach County.

With elderly abuse rising, government and courts consider stricter guidelines.Hot TopicsRead Dayton local news on your mobile phone

By Randy Tucker, Staff Writer

Updated 10:01 AM Thursday, October 28, 2010

A scathing government report released Wednesday blames lax screening and oversight of court-appointed guardians for hundreds of allegations of financial exploitation and abuse of the elderly.

The report to the Senate’s Special Committee on Aging focused on 20 cases from 15 states and the District of Columbia in which guardians stole or improperly obtained more than $5.4 million from 158 victims who in some cases were also neglected and abused.

In one case, a former cab driver was convicted of fraud after obtaining guardianship of an unrelated 87-year-old man with Alzheimer’s disease, from whom he embezzled more than $640,000. In Ohio, “the potential for such abuse is very real, but there is no uniform structure in place to even try to prevent that,” said Michael Kirkman, executive director of the Ohio Legal Rights Service.

Governments and courts are considering stricter guidelines, however. The Ohio Supreme Court is considering a proposal to establish statewide certification and conduct standards for guardians.

Meanwhile, Congress next year is once again expected to consider the Elder Justice Act, first proposed in 2005 by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), which would deal directly with such issues as protection for seniors under guardianship.

Michael Kirkman, executive director of the Ohio Legal Rights Service, said such legislation is needed to protect seniors who are often appointed guardians after they��

via Legal guardians steal millions from elderly, report says.

Posted From :

http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/dayton-news/legal-guardians-steal-millions-from-elderly-report-says-987975.html

Hale ordered to pay ‘Aunt Betty’ estate $81K

Jill Harmacinski

jharmacinski@eagletribune.com

The Eagle Tribune

Sun Apr 08, 2012, 12:15 AM EDT

LAWRENCE — Retired Lawrence police officer William Hale has been court-ordered to pay back $81,000 to the estate of an elderly Andover Street woman he befriended and allegedly stole from.

Judge Timothy Feeley last week placed an attachment on Hale’s 7 Meadow St. home to recoup money he took from the estate of Elizabeth B. Lacey, who died at age 89 on May 1, 2007, according to court documents. The attachment is for $70,000, nearly half the valuation of the three-bedroom house, which is assessed at $147,200, according to city records.

In recent probate and civil trials, Hale, a 33-year police veteran, repeatedly invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination when asked if he cashed and deposited checks belonging to Lacey, known to her close friends and surrogate family members as “Aunt Betty.”

Hale has not been criminally charged, although the case remains under review by District Attorney Jonathan Blodgett’s office.

Lacey’s surrogate family members applauded Feeley’s decision and attachment on his Tower Hill home.

via Hale ordered to pay ‘Aunt Betty’ estate $81K » Merrimack Valley » EagleTribune.com, North Andover, MA.