WTF?!? German court: man must pay care costs for father who cut off contact more than 40 years ag

[Dennis Olson]

German court: man must pay care costs for father who cut off contact more than 40 years ago



Published February 12, 2014

| Associated Press




BERLIN – A German federal court has ruled that a man must pay the cost of old-age care for his late father, who severed ties with him more than four decades ago.

The Federal Court of Justice said Wednesday that the man, whom it didn't identify, must pay more than 9,000 euros ($12,300) to the city of Bremen to cover the costs of his father's care in a home for the elderly in the three years before his death in 2012.

The man's parents divorced in 1971, when he was 18. His father broke off contact the following year and later wrote a will naming a female acquaintance as his heir.

The court found that although the father broke off contact, he fulfilled his parental duties while his son was a minor.

Print Close

URL

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/0...sts-for-father-who-cut-off-contact-more-than/

 

[Publius]

If there is any estate they should take it from that.

 

[naturallysweet]

The man abandoned his son at a time when he probably really needed a father, and then disinherited him. I think the German government just wants money, and doesn't care how unethical it has to be to get it.

 

[Dozdoats]

the German government just wants money, and doesn't care how unethical it has to be to get it

ALL governments just want money, and NONE of them care how unethical they have to be to get it. Best wrap your mind around that idea... SOON.

 

[Betty_Rose]

The man abandoned his son at a time when he probably really needed a father, and then disinherited him. I think the German government just wants money, and doesn't care how unethical it has to be to get it.

Ditto.

My father abandoned me when I was much younger than this, and I didn't hear from him again for 35 years, when his second wife was dead, and he was old and dying and he was flat-busted broke. In the end, I was the only one who sat by his side and wiped his brow and held his hand at the end of his life. I'm glad I did it, but boy oh boy, do I think the court is wrong on this one.

 

[KenGin31]

If you ever drive in Germany don't any animals. You'll wind up paying for it's offspring.

 

[Terriannie]

Ditto.

My father abandoned me when I was much younger than this, and I didn't hear from him again for 35 years, when his second wife was dead, and he was old and dying and he was flat-busted broke. In the end, I was the only one who sat by his side and wiped his brow and held his hand at the end of his life. I'm glad I did it, but boy oh boy, do I think the court is wrong on this one.

I'm glad you did this! You did what The Commandments tell us. Honor Thy Father and Thy Mother. God didn't say "But only if they deserve it!"

There were sometime I WISHED my father would abandon me because of his abuse, however as I grew, I forgave him and though I had to hold him at arms length, I was respectful which helped and I was peaceful in dealing with him. I truly feel I was rewarded for my forgiveness when I was able to see his change in his old age and before he died. All those wasted years vanished!!!

 

[ainitfunny]

(I had three little girls when my sister in law called to ask if we would take in DH'S elderly father. I dug deeper into the WHY move him from one coast to the other? She finally admitted they had been taking care of him in their home and that he was MOLESTING or trying to molest THEIR kidS. I put my foot down and said absolutely not!! He had been an extremely BAD father to my DH and never sought any kind of relationship with us to the point of NOT EVEN ASKING US IN FOR COFFEE after we drove from California to N Carolina in order to show him his new granddaughter and to get acquainted with me his son's wife. He never even learned my or his granddaughter's names. They (him and his evil wife) just stood outside for about 10 minutes (after NOT SEEING HIM FOR 10 YEARS)and chatted with DH then acted like they were missing a TV show or something and bid us farewell, nice to see you!!!! I just stood there in shock, exhausted from the long trip and wondering where we would sleep? NORMAL people do not act like that. DH drove on to his sister's house where we were warmly welcomed. DH had lots of stories from his horrible childhood with the evil stepmother and drunk father before he quit school and ran away. They did not provide clothes for him so he WORKED AS A SMALL CHILD selling newspapers on the corner, shining shoes, delivering groceries on a bike,, later ushering in a movie theater between the age of 7-15, saving his money to buy some decent clothes and a pair of shoes for school!! He even fed himself, buying bowls of chili in a local greasy spoon with his own money, for his supper at nine years old.They stole what he earned because they needed the money for shoplifting step-mom's bail!! They stole what his brothers in the military sent home to buy clothes for him and his little brother and bought booze and what else they wanted instead. Nope, I don't feel guilty. I cared for my dear mother for MANY years in my home and later, my DH when he became so ill for so long. But that guy belonged sleeping in a doorway or at the local men's shelter. Nasty man. Once a family cuts off contact that pretty much says it.

 

[Loon]

I've read somewhere that the US is considering this type of method of recouping costs of nursing home patients. Instead of everyone going on Medicaid and having the .gov pay for their care, they will bill their offspring.

 

[Loon]

Adult Children Could Be on Hook for Parents' Nursing Home Bills


The adult children of elderly parents in many states could be held liable for their parents' nursing home bills as a result of the new Medicaid long-term care provisions contained in a law enacted in February 2006. The children could even be subject to criminal penalties.

The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 includes punitive new restrictions on the ability of the elderly to transfer assets before qualifying for Medicaid coverage of nursing home care. Essentially, the law attempts to save the Medicaid program money by shifting more of the cost of long-term care to families and nursing homes.

One of the major ways it does this is by changing the start of the penalty period for transferred assets from the date of transfer, to the date when the individual would qualify for Medicaid coverage of nursing home care if not for the transfer. In other words, the penalty period does not begin until the nursing home resident is out of funds, meaning there is no money to pay the nursing home for however long the penalty period lasts. (For the details, click here.)

With enactment of the law, advocates for the elderly predict that nursing homes will likely be flooded with residents who need care but have no way to pay for it. In states that have so-called "filial responsibility laws," the nursing homes may seek reimbursement from the residents' children. These rarely-enforced laws, which are on the books in 29 states (the figure was 30 but Connecticut's statute has since been repealed), hold adult children responsible for financial support of indigent parents and, in some cases, medical and nursing home costs.

For example ,Pennsylvania recently re-enacted its law making children liable for the financial support of their indigent parents. Jeffrey A. Marshall, an ElderLawAnswers member attorney in Williamsport, Pa., says the new Medicaid law could trigger a wave of lawsuits involving adult children.

"Litigation between nursing homes and children is likely to flourish," Marshall writes in the Jan. 20, 2006, issue of his firm's Elder Care Law Alert. "Nursing homes will sue children who will counter-sue for sub-standard care."

According to the National Center for Policy Analysis, 21 states allow a civil court action to obtain financial support or cost recovery, 12 states impose criminal penalties for filial nonsupport, and three states allow both civil and criminal actions.


http://www.elderlawanswers.com/adult-children-could-be-on-hook-for-parents-nursing-home-bills-5181

 

[ainitfunny]

Adult Children Could Be on Hook for Parents' Nursing Home Bills


The adult children of elderly parents in many states could be held liable for their parents' nursing home bills as a result of the new Medicaid long-term care provisions contained in a law enacted in February 2006. The children could even be subject to criminal penalties.

The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 includes punitive new restrictions on the ability of the elderly to transfer assets before qualifying for Medicaid coverage of nursing home care. Essentially, the law attempts to save the Medicaid program money by shifting more of the cost of long-term care to families and nursing homes.

One of the major ways it does this is by changing the start of the penalty period for transferred assets from the date of transfer, to the date when the individual would qualify for Medicaid coverage of nursing home care if not for the transfer. In other words, the penalty period does not begin until the nursing home resident is out of funds, meaning there is no money to pay the nursing home for however long the penalty period lasts. (For the details, click here.)

With enactment of the law, advocates for the elderly predict that nursing homes will likely be flooded with residents who need care but have no way to pay for it. In states that have so-called "filial responsibility laws," the nursing homes may seek reimbursement from the residents' children. These rarely-enforced laws, which are on the books in 29 states (the figure was 30 but Connecticut's statute has since been repealed), hold adult children responsible for financial support of indigent parents and, in some cases, medical and nursing home costs.

For example ,Pennsylvania recently re-enacted its law making children liable for the financial support of their indigent parents. Jeffrey A. Marshall, an ElderLawAnswers member attorney in Williamsport, Pa., says the new Medicaid law could trigger a wave of lawsuits involving adult children.

"Litigation between nursing homes and children is likely to flourish," Marshall writes in the Jan. 20, 2006, issue of his firm's Elder Care Law Alert. "Nursing homes will sue children who will counter-sue for sub-standard care."

According to the National Center for Policy Analysis, 21 states allow a civil court action to obtain financial support or cost recovery, 12 states impose criminal penalties for filial nonsupport, and three states allow both civil and criminal actions.


http://www.elderlawanswers.com/adult-children-could-be-on-hook-for-parents-nursing-home-bills-5181

Laws like that might prompt some kids to "off" the elderly parent.
Who can pay $8 TO 12 THOUSAND A MONTH?
With the cost of nursing home care being so unaffordable for any but the very richest to pay the kids are put in the dilemma of becoming bankrupted by their parent for their care.
THERE ARE SOME ELDERLY CONDITIONS THAT ARE NOT POSSIBLE TO CARE FOR IN A HOME SETTING.
And since the kids BOTH have to work to earn enough for a family there is NOBODY to stay home and care for "mom"

NOW THAT IS A CONVINCING WAY TO GET THE NEXT GENERATION VOTING TO SUPPORT "DEATH WITH DIGNITY" EUTHANASIA LAWS ISN'T IT????
We old folks are screwed.

 

[Betty_Rose]

Yeah, but there are also people like my millionaire uncle, who (in 1995) moved his $1 million worth of assets and TWO houses into his children's bank accounts five years before he needed long-term care.

It was a slick move, and when he needed long-term care, he went onto Medicaid and his kids were wealthy beyond their wildest dreams.

That's also just not right.

 

[Heretic]

I know a woman who was raped by her biological father, who was convicted and spent 20 years in the pen.
When he got out, she had to pay for his upkeep at a retirement center, then pay for his funeral expenses.
This was in Kentucky. The scumbag died in 2001.

Terry

 

[Elza]

Adult Children Could Be on Hook for Parents' Nursing Home Bills


The adult children of elderly parents in many states could be held liable for their parents' nursing home bills as a result of the new Medicaid long-term care provisions contained in a law enacted in February 2006. The children could even be subject to criminal penalties.

The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 includes punitive new restrictions on the ability of the elderly to transfer assets before qualifying for Medicaid coverage of nursing home care. Essentially, the law attempts to save the Medicaid program money by shifting more of the cost of long-term care to families and nursing homes.

One of the major ways it does this is by changing the start of the penalty period for transferred assets from the date of transfer, to the date when the individual would qualify for Medicaid coverage of nursing home care if not for the transfer. In other words, the penalty period does not begin until the nursing home resident is out of funds, meaning there is no money to pay the nursing home for however long the penalty period lasts. (For the details, click here.)

With enactment of the law, advocates for the elderly predict that nursing homes will likely be flooded with residents who need care but have no way to pay for it. In states that have so-called "filial responsibility laws," the nursing homes may seek reimbursement from the residents' children. These rarely-enforced laws, which are on the books in 29 states (the figure was 30 but Connecticut's statute has since been repealed), hold adult children responsible for financial support of indigent parents and, in some cases, medical and nursing home costs.

For example ,Pennsylvania recently re-enacted its law making children liable for the financial support of their indigent parents. Jeffrey A. Marshall, an ElderLawAnswers member attorney in Williamsport, Pa., says the new Medicaid law could trigger a wave of lawsuits involving adult children.

"Litigation between nursing homes and children is likely to flourish," Marshall writes in the Jan. 20, 2006, issue of his firm's Elder Care Law Alert. "Nursing homes will sue children who will counter-sue for sub-standard care."

According to the National Center for Policy Analysis, 21 states allow a civil court action to obtain financial support or cost recovery, 12 states impose criminal penalties for filial nonsupport, and three states allow both civil and criminal actions.


http://www.elderlawanswers.com/adult-children-could-be-on-hook-for-parents-nursing-home-bills-5181

The way I read this is in regards to assets transferred before applying for Medicare. Basically transferring everything to the kids so the individual appears poor in order to qualify for benefits. Effectively they are attempting to claw back his assets from the kids not the kids direct assets. Those that didn’t receive the parent’s money wouldn’t be on the hook for anything. YET! Give the thieving bastards a little time and I’m sure that they change it so you are.

 

[Loon]

Medicare does not pay for long-term care. If he is indigent with less than $2,000 in assets then Medicaid will pay for long term health care.

Yeah, but there are also people like my millionaire uncle, who (in 1995) moved his $1 million worth of assets and TWO houses into his children's bank accounts five years before he needed long-term care.

It was a slick move, and when he needed long-term care, he went onto Medicare and his kids were wealthy beyond their wildest dreams.

That's also just not right.

 

[Dobbin]

Isn't this "From those of ability to those of need?"

Otherwise known as redistribution of personal possessions. You all own property "communally" now. No more individual possessions.

Taxachusetts ain't known as the "Commonwealth of Massachusetts" fer nuttin.

Common as in wealth.

And why Owner won't live there.

Dobbin

 

[packyderms_wife]

German court: man must pay care costs for father who cut off contact more than 40 years ago



Published February 12, 2014

| Associated Press




BERLIN – A German federal court has ruled that a man must pay the cost of old-age care for his late father, who severed ties with him more than four decades ago.

The Federal Court of Justice said Wednesday that the man, whom it didn't identify, must pay more than 9,000 euros ($12,300) to the city of Bremen to cover the costs of his father's care in a home for the elderly in the three years before his death in 2012.

The man's parents divorced in 1971, when he was 18. His father broke off contact the following year and later wrote a will naming a female acquaintance as his heir.

The court found that although the father broke off contact, he fulfilled his parental duties while his son was a minor.

Print Close

URL

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/0...sts-for-father-who-cut-off-contact-more-than/

This has happened in the states before. I'd say sometime around 2006/07 there was a big buhrah about the state, I think it was Ohio, forcing the abandoned child pay up for the ailing parent.

K-

 

[packyderms_wife]

Adult Children Could Be on Hook for Parents' Nursing Home Bills


The adult children of elderly parents in many states could be held liable for their parents' nursing home bills as a result of the new Medicaid long-term care provisions contained in a law enacted in February 2006. The children could even be subject to criminal penalties.

The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 includes punitive new restrictions on the ability of the elderly to transfer assets before qualifying for Medicaid coverage of nursing home care. Essentially, the law attempts to save the Medicaid program money by shifting more of the cost of long-term care to families and nursing homes.

One of the major ways it does this is by changing the start of the penalty period for transferred assets from the date of transfer, to the date when the individual would qualify for Medicaid coverage of nursing home care if not for the transfer. In other words, the penalty period does not begin until the nursing home resident is out of funds, meaning there is no money to pay the nursing home for however long the penalty period lasts. (For the details, click here.)

With enactment of the law, advocates for the elderly predict that nursing homes will likely be flooded with residents who need care but have no way to pay for it. In states that have so-called "filial responsibility laws," the nursing homes may seek reimbursement from the residents' children. These rarely-enforced laws, which are on the books in 29 states (the figure was 30 but Connecticut's statute has since been repealed), hold adult children responsible for financial support of indigent parents and, in some cases, medical and nursing home costs.

For example ,Pennsylvania recently re-enacted its law making children liable for the financial support of their indigent parents. Jeffrey A. Marshall, an ElderLawAnswers member attorney in Williamsport, Pa., says the new Medicaid law could trigger a wave of lawsuits involving adult children.

"Litigation between nursing homes and children is likely to flourish," Marshall writes in the Jan. 20, 2006, issue of his firm's Elder Care Law Alert. "Nursing homes will sue children who will counter-sue for sub-standard care."

According to the National Center for Policy Analysis, 21 states allow a civil court action to obtain financial support or cost recovery, 12 states impose criminal penalties for filial nonsupport, and three states allow both civil and criminal actions.


http://www.elderlawanswers.com/adult-children-could-be-on-hook-for-parents-nursing-home-bills-5181

This is what I was referring to in my previous post, thank you for posting this Loon, and Ain't yes this is exactly what they are pushing for euthenasia of the elderly.

K-

 

[packyderms_wife]

Ditto.

My father abandoned me when I was much younger than this, and I didn't hear from him again for 35 years, when his second wife was dead, and he was old and dying and he was flat-busted broke. In the end, I was the only one who sat by his side and wiped his brow and held his hand at the end of his life. I'm glad I did it, but boy oh boy, do I think the court is wrong on this one.

I'm glad you did this! You did what The Commandments tell us. Honor Thy Father and Thy Mother. God didn't say "But only if they deserve it!"

There were sometime I WISHED my father would abandon me because of his abuse, however as I grew, I forgave him and though I had to hold him at arms length, I was respectful which helped and I was peaceful in dealing with him. I truly feel I was rewarded for my forgiveness when I was able to see his change in his old age and before he died. All those wasted years vanished!!!

(I had three little girls when my sister in law called to ask if we would take in DH'S elderly father. I dug deeper into the WHY move him from one coast to the other? She finally admitted they had been taking care of him in their home and that he was MOLESTING or trying to molest THEIR kidS. I put my foot down and said absolutely not!! He had been an extremely BAD father to my DH and never sought any kind of relationship with us to the point of NOT EVEN ASKING US IN FOR COFFEE after we drove from California to N Carolina in order to show him his new granddaughter and to get acquainted with me his son's wife. He never even learned my or his granddaughter's names. They (him and his evil wife) just stood outside for about 10 minutes (after NOT SEEING HIM FOR 10 YEARS)and chatted with DH then acted like they were missing a TV show or something and bid us farewell, nice to see you!!!! I just stood there in shock, exhausted from the long trip and wondering where we would sleep? NORMAL people do not act like that. DH drove on to his sister's house where we were warmly welcomed. DH had lots of stories from his horrible childhood with the evil stepmother and drunk father before he quit school and ran away. They did not provide clothes for him so he WORKED AS A SMALL CHILD selling newspapers on the corner, shining shoes, delivering groceries on a bike,, later ushering in a movie theater between the age of 7-15, saving his money to buy some decent clothes and a pair of shoes for school!! He even fed himself, buying bowls of chili in a local greasy spoon with his own money, for his supper at nine years old.They stole what he earned because they needed the money for shoplifting step-mom's bail!! They stole what his brothers in the military sent home to buy clothes for him and his little brother and bought booze and what else they wanted instead. Nope, I don't feel guilty. I cared for my dear mother for MANY years in my home and later, my DH when he became so ill for so long. But that guy belonged sleeping in a doorway or at the local men's shelter. Nasty man. Once a family cuts off contact that pretty much says it.

while it would be nice for all of us to be able to care for our ailing aging parents, and to be honest I was ready to run home and take care of my dad and then shtf this weekend with my brother who informed me that a family meeting had happened and that I am no longer a member of the family simply because I am a female. I was also told if I tried to make contact or come home to see my dad I would experience extreme harm that would most probably be fatal.

My dad and my brother deserve each other and I am contemplating going off grid, as in deeply off grid to the point of legally having our names changed, etc., you know that kind of deeply off grid. I don't want my brother and his cow of a wife knowing where or who I am after what transpired over the weekend. I figure once they bleed my dad dry financially they will throw him my way but since my dad is in agreeance with my brother and has essentially declared me a bastard I say let them reap what they sew! To be honest I don't even want to be even remotely tied to people who are this stupid, and I'm not talking low IQ here I'm talking willfully stiffnecked and stupid!!!

K-

 

[WriterMom]

So, is there a way to become legally un-associated with one's parents as an adult? I do understand the commandment that tells us to honor our parents, but sorry, my father has been a drug addict for the last 40-50 years and my mother is a nut case. They are mean, selfish, and they willingly lie to suit their own needs. They want nothing to do with me, and I want nothing to do with them. There is no way I'm paying for anything for those people. Is there anything I can do to protect myself against the possibility of having to pay for their care someday?

 

[packyderms_wife]

So, is there a way to become legally un-associated with one's parents as an adult? I do understand the commandment that tells us to honor our parents, but sorry, my father has been a drug addict for the last 40-50 years and my mother is a nut case. They are mean, selfish, and they willingly lie to suit their own needs. They want nothing to do with me, and I want nothing to do with them. There is no way I'm paying for anything for those people. Is there anything I can do to protect myself against the possibility of having to pay for their care someday?

Short of changing your name legally, moving to another state or even another country, I don't know. I'm wondering the same thing.

K-

 

[WriterMom]

while it would be nice for all of us to be able to care for our ailing aging parents, and to be honest I was ready to run home and take care of my dad and then shtf this weekend with my brother who informed me that a family meeting had happened and that I am no longer a member of the family simply because I am a female. I was also told if I tried to make contact or come home to see my dad I would experience extreme harm that would most probably be fatal.

My dad and my brother deserve each other and I am contemplating going off grid, as in deeply off grid to the point of legally having our names changed, etc., you know that kind of deeply off grid. I don't want my brother and his cow of a wife knowing where or who I am after what transpired over the weekend. I figure once they bleed my dad dry financially they will throw him my way but since my dad is in agreeance with my brother and has essentially declared me a bastard I say let them reap what they sew! To be honest I don't even want to be even remotely tied to people who are this stupid, and I'm not talking low IQ here I'm talking willfully stiffnecked and stupid!!!

K-

I'm sorry to hear about your situation....sounds like you are much better off without them. What a sick thing to threaten you with harm if you go near them. How do families get so crazy? !

 

[Heretic]

Short of changing your name legally, moving to another state or even another country, I don't know. I'm wondering the same thing.

K-

Name changes are recorded in the court records, tied to social security numbers and the IRS tax database.
Changing your name will not let you hide from even a half hearted search attempt.
A good friend was disowned by her mom and changed her name. And was really bummed out when "mom" found her.
She got a restraining order. Fortunately mom had a stroke when the RO was delivered.
Just because someone contributed DNA and sort of, kind of, raised you, does not qualify them for any special consideration.

Terry

 

[packyderms_wife]

I'm sorry to hear about your situation....sounds like you are much better off without them. What a sick thing to threaten you with harm if you go near them. How do families get so crazy? !

The past couple of days have been extremely stressful especially since until last month I hadn't heard from him in oh about nine years now. I thought about starting a thread in the bomb shelter simply because I don't know if my brother would wander across a site like TBK or not??? Anytime anyone mentions this place on my FB page I'm pretty quick to delete their posts, and PM to explain why and they tend to be quite understanding. Based on things that happened this weekend I'm pretty certain my mother is rolling in her grave. My brother is arrogant to the nth degree, bragging about his money and his ability to control and hurt others and then in the same breath declaring how moral and godly he is, he has no idea the spiritual hell he's whipping up for himself. Who knows maybe that's for the best?

K-

 

[ainitfunny]

And what happens if that parent REFUSES to be taken care of by their child, who cannot afford to pay nursing home costs, and the parent elects to go to a nursing home instead? Does the adult child have any say at all in the matter?

 

[Dobbin]

And what happens if that parent REFUSES to be taken care of by their child, who cannot afford to pay nursing home costs, and the parent elects to go to a nursing home instead? Does the adult child have any say at all in the matter?

http://newoldage.blogs.nytimes.com/...sponsibility-laws/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

November 20, 2008, 6:00 am
Adult Children, Aging Parents and the Law
By JANE GROSS

Are children legally responsible for their parents’ care? (Susan Farley for The New York Times)At the end of my mother’s life, for six months, a year at most, Medicaid paid for her care in a nursing home. She was broke by then, after living on a pittance since she was widowed at 58, using the proceeds from her house to pay for six years of assisted living and part of her nursing home stay and never seeing a penny from a long-term care insurance policy that cost a bundle but covered none of what she needed. She had given my brother and me no up-front money to hasten her eligibility for Medicaid and died with $26 to her name and nothing to leave to her children. The good news was we didn’t even have to put her will in probate.

I share that so everyone will know that my mother wasn’t the elderly equivalent of a welfare queen. She played by the rules and earned a government handout the old fashioned way, and I never felt a second of guilt that Medicaid was footing the bill for her last miserable months on earth. That said, I sometimes wondered why adult children weren’t legally responsible for their parents’ financial support, assuming they had money in the bank. Don’t get me wrong; I didn’t want to pay for her $14,000-a-month (yes, $14,000) nursing home bill. But I could have, if truth be told, at least for a while.

So it fascinated me to learn that in 30 states, (PDF of 30-state list) http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/health/NOA/30states.pdf adult children are legally responsible, at least on paper, to pay for necessities like food, clothing, shelter and medical attention for indigent parents. These statutes, known as filial responsibility laws, are modeled on the Elizabethan Poor Laws of 1601, which made blood relatives the primary source of support for family members, the elderly included. Public assistance was available only as a last resort.

The American colonies had similar laws to England’s — and they were enforced — until the advent of the New Deal, which created the Social Security system, intended to provide 45 percent of a worker’s pre-retirement wages. That would keep mom and dad afloat in the good old days. Civil or criminal cases seeking assistance or reimbursment from adult children all but stopped. But, even more significant to the quiet passing of filial responsibility was the introduction of Medicaid, in 1965, a pillar of the Great Society, which had eligibility requirements that seemed at odds with the existing state laws, even though courts had upheld their constitutionality.

Since Medicaid is an entitlement, not a program everyone pays into like Social Security or Medicare, the Federal government defines eligibility. And Federal law prohibits state Medicaid programs from looking at the finances of anyone other than the applicant or the applicant’s spouse. When the elderly exhaust their assets, individually or as a couple, the government steps in and pays for their long-term care. Adult children are not part of the Medicaid eligibility equation.
But Medicaid is in big trouble — cutting here, squeezing there — and will be inundated when baby boomers reach old age. The staggering cost of long-term care and the explosion in the number of people who will need it has prompted a second look at filial responsibility laws as a way to deal with the impending crisis. The National Center for Policy Analysis, a conservative policy group, identified contributions from adult children as one solution to increasing expenditures and insufficient revenues in a 2005 issue brief. A few law journal articles followed, most recently one earlier this year in The Elder Law Journal.

The more temperate arguments about holding adult children responsible take into account the competing demands on their savings, if they have any, including college tuition and impending retirement. Also, most proponents of enforcing filial responsibility laws would exempt those who were abandoned in childhood and see to it that one sibling doesn’t get stuck while the others skip town.

Among the most thought provoking ideas in the journal articles are these from Allison E. Ross, in “Taking Care of Our Caretakers: Using Filial Responsibility Laws to Support the Elderly Beyond the Government’s Assistance.’’ Would enforcing these laws encourage families to plan for the costs associated with the end of life, as they do for the costs at the beginning? Would the transfer of assets from parent to child as an inheritance protection plan stop if the children would then have to spend that money on their parents? And would the quality of life for the institutionalized elderly improve if adult children supplemented rather than replaced the government’s support? That’s what most of us do informally anyhow.

From Jane: I have replied directly to some of the comments below but also wanted to offer a general clarification. It was not my intent to suggest that filial responsibility laws were fair, wise or likely, in this day and age, to ever be enforced again. I simply was interested, personally and intellectually, in exploring whether such laws existed now or ever had and, if so, whether there was any movement, however limited or far-fetched, to revisit the question under current conditions vis a vis Medicaid.

Curious these 30 states. Curiouser still that a social program such as New Deal or Great Society would have "over-ridden" these filial support laws - at least then.

Now given the Obama Administration focus to deprive anyone of wealth and give it to his rich friends, not so much.

Dobbin

 

[zeker]

while it would be nice for all of us to be able to care for our ailing aging parents, and to be honest I was ready to run home and take care of my dad and then shtf this weekend with my brother who informed me that a family meeting had happened and that I am no longer a member of the family simply because I am a female. I was also told if I tried to make contact or come home to see my dad I would experience extreme harm that would most probably be fatal.

My dad and my brother deserve each other and I am contemplating going off grid, as in deeply off grid to the point of legally having our names changed, etc., you know that kind of deeply off grid. I don't want my brother and his cow of a wife knowing where or who I am after what transpired over the weekend. I figure once they bleed my dad dry financially they will throw him my way but since my dad is in agreeance with my brother and has essentially declared me a bastard I say let them reap what they sew! To be honest I don't even want to be even remotely tied to people who are this stupid, and I'm not talking low IQ here I'm talking willfully stiffnecked and stupid!!!

K-

sry to hear this Pac wife. A word of advice.. should ANY contact be made in the future.. record it somehow.. any.. how. keep notes and dates etc. Too bad you couldnt have recorded any of the prior stuff.
if the ugly beast raises its head 5 yrs from now at least you would have some record... just sayin

 

[packyderms_wife]

And what happens if that parent REFUSES to be taken care of by their child, who cannot afford to pay nursing home costs, and the parent elects to go to a nursing home instead? Does the adult child have any say at all in the matter?

Very often not. IIRC the one case from 2006/07 the parent abandoned the family was abusive in all areas and got their sh*t together much later in life. IIRC the one child who remained and was being forced to pay for the parents care had been sexually abused by said parent. To me that's just bloody insult to injury!

K-

 

[packyderms_wife]

sry to hear this Pac wife. A word of advice.. should ANY contact be made in the future.. record it somehow.. any.. how. keep notes and dates etc. Too bad you couldnt have recorded any of the prior stuff.
if the ugly beast raises its head 5 yrs from now at least you would have some record... just sayin

I am seriously considering getting a smart phone now, most of them have the capability to record phone conversations. I did take very good notes while the conversation (that's a real stretch to call it a conversation since he screamed at me non-stop I wasn't able to get a word in edgewise) was happening.

K-

 

[ainitfunny]

It is NOT JUST "NURSING HOME COSTS" a child can be "on the hook for"!
Children can be forced to pay for the ordinary daily living costs of a "low income" unemployable elderly parent!
An indigent or otherwise insufficiently funded PARENT'S "retirement costs", food, shelter, utility bills etc are also subject to being court order paid by their children before the State will deem them eligible for and tax funded welfare!

Also, if the child can be made to consent to ANY amount of contribution towards a parent's support, then that amount is added to the parent's income calculation as if they were actually receiving it, to further reduce the eligibility of the parent for public aid!

Can an Adult Child be Held Responsible for a Parent's Nursing Home Costs?
Posted on June 18, 2012 by Patti Spencer
http://www.pennsylvaniafiduciarylit...responsible-for-a-parents-nursing-home-costs/
On May 7, 2012 the Pennsylvania Superior Court issued an opinion in the case of Healthcare Retirement Corporation of America v. Pittas. The court found a son liable for his mother’s $93,000 nursing home bill under Pennsylvania’s Filial Responsibility Law. This high-profile case raises concerns.
Currently 30 states have laws making adult children responsible for their parents if their parents can’t afford to pay for their own care. They have rarely been enforced. Since it has become more difficult to qualify for Medicaid and have long term care costs paid under that program, it looks like nursing homes are going to start enforcing the filial responsibility law to get paid.
Filial responsibility is the personal obligation or duty that adult children have for protecting, caring for, and supporting their aging parents. In England, the Elizabethan Act of 1601 for the Relief of the Poor, provided that "[T]he father and grandfather, and the mother and grandmother, and the children of every poor, old, blind, lame and incompetent person, or other poor person not able to work, being of a sufficient ability, shall, at their own charges, relieve and maintain every such poor person." These Elizabethan "poor laws" became the model for the United States’ legislation on the same subject.
In Pennsylvania, the first law imposing a duty of filial support is found in the Act of March 9, 1771, which required that children support their indigent parents if the children were of sufficient financial ability. The current Pennsylvania statute provides that certain relatives including a child have the "responsibility to care for and maintain or financially assist an indigent person." However, this responsibility does not apply if the "individual does not have sufficient financial ability to support the indigent person" or if a parent abandoned the child for 10 years during the child’s minority. Neither the terms "indigent" nor "sufficient financial ability" are clearly defined in the law.
An example of its enforcement is the 1994 Pennsylvania Superior Court case, Savoy v. Savoy which involved an elderly parent whose reasonable care and maintenance expenses exceeded her monthly Social Security income. The Superior Court found that she was indigent and affirmed the lower court’s order directing her son to pay $125 per month directly to her medical care providers.
In the case of Healthcare Retirement Corporation of America v. Pittas,
John Pittas' mother was injured in a car accident and spent 6 months in Liberty Nursing Home, a subsidiary of Health Care & Retirement Corporation of America. She left the nursing home and left the country, moving to Greece, leaving a large portion of her nursing home bill unpaid. The nursing home applied for Medicaid for Mr. Pittas' mother but the application is still pending.
The nursing home sued Mr. Pittas for $93,000 under Pennsylvania's Filial Responsibility Law, which requires a child to provide support for an indigent parent. The Lehigh County trial court ruled in favor of the nursing home, and Mr. Pittas appealed. Mr. Pittas argued, in part, that the court should have considered alternate forms of payment, such as Medicaid or going after his mother's husband and her two other adult children.
A three-judge panel of the Pennsylvania Superior Court agreed with the trial court that Mr. Pittas is liable for his mother's nursing home debt. The court held that the law does not require it to consider other sources of income or to wait until Mrs. Pittas’ Medicaid claim is resolved. It also said that the nursing home had every right to choose which family members to pursue for the money owed. The case is now the subject of an en banc reconsideration petition filed with the Pennsylvania Superior Court.
According to elder law expert Professor Katherine Pearson, in the last 30 years there have only been 3 cases discussing the Filial Support Law. What makes this case unique in Pennsylvania, said Pearson, is that "it is the first time substantial dollars have been awarded against an adult son to support his mother who is in a nursing home - almost $93,000. It's a game-changer in terms of the dollars and cents that we are talking about in terms of filial support."
If a parent enters a nursing home with insufficient funds to pay for his or her care, adult children should be vigilant about potential claims against their own assets to pay for that care. Remember, the statute goes both ways, it can also apply to a parent who has an adult child who is indigent. There have been numerous attempts in the Pennsylvania legislature to amend or repeal the Filial Support Law. Contact your representative and/or state senator if you are concerned about the Filial Support Law currently being enforced in Pennsylvania.
　
　

 

[blueberry]

For those wondering, it is called the 'filial responsibility law'. Some states have it, some don't. Here is a list of the states that have it:


States with Filial responsibility laws are: Alaska, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, and West Virginia.

To look up the actual language of the statutes, here are the citations:

1. Alaska Stat. 25.20.030, 47.25.230 (Michie 2000)

2. Arkansas Code Ann. 20-47-106 (Michie 1991)

3. California Fam. Code 4400, 4401, 4403, 4410-4414 (West 1994), California Penal Code 270c (West 1999), California Welf. & Inst. Code 12350 (West Supp. 2001)

4. Connecticut Gen. Stat. Ann. 46b-215, 53-304 (West Supp. 2001)

5. Delaware Code Ann. tit. 13, 503 (1999)

6. Georgia Code Ann. 36-12-3 (2000)

7. Idaho Code 32-1002 (Michie 1996)

8. Indiana Code Ann. 31-16-17-1 to 31-16-17-7 (West 1997); Indiana Code Ann. 35-46-1-7 (West 1998)

9. Iowa Code Ann. 252.1, 252.2, 252.5, 252.6, 252.13 (West 2000)

10. Kentucky Rev. Stat. Ann. 530.050 (Banks-Baldwin 1999)

11. Louisiana Rev. Stat. Ann. 4731 (West 1998)

12. Maryland Code Ann., Fam. Law 13-101, 13-102, 13-103, 13-109 (1999)

13. Massachusetts Gen. Laws Ann. ch. 273, 20 (West 1990)

14. Mississippi Code Ann. 43-31-25 (2000)

15. Montana Code Ann. 40-6-214, 40-6-301 (2000)

16. Nevada Rev. Stat. Ann. 428.070 (Michie 2000);
Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. 439B.310 (Michie 2000)

17. New Hampshire Rev. Stat. Ann. 167:2 (1994)

18. New Jersey Stat. Ann. 44:4-100 to 44:4-102, 44:1-139 to 44:1-141 (West 1993)

19. North Carolina Gen. Stat. 14-326.1 (1999)

20. North Dakota Cent. Code 14-09-10 (1997)

21. Ohio Rev. Code Ann. 2919.21 (Anderson 1999)

22. Oregon Rev. Stat. 109.010 (1990)

23. 62 Pennsylvania Cons. Stat. 1973 (1996)

24. Rhode Island Gen. Laws 15-10-1 to 15-10-7 (2000); R.I. Gen. Laws 40-5-13 to 40-5-18 (1997)

25. South Dakota Codified Laws 25-7-28 (Michie 1999)

26. Tennessee Code Ann. 71-5-115 (1995), Tenn. Code Ann. 71-5-103 (Supp. 2000)

27. Utah Code Ann. 17-14-2 (1999)

28. Vermont Stat. Ann. tit. 15, 202-03 (1989)

29. Virginia Code Ann. 20-88 (Michie 2000)

30. West Virginia Code 9-5-9 (1998).


http://everydaysimplicity.blogspot.com/2006/02/filial-responsibility-laws-list-of.html

 

[ainitfunny]

Grandparents can be surprised and be court ordered made to RE-pay what they thought were tax funded support (welfare, Medicaid) and care costs for retarded, blind,elderly, mentally ill, handicapped, drug addicted, alcoholic, or otherwise UNEMPLOYABLE relatives, even shirttail ones they have never even met, children, AND GRANDCHILDREN, PARENTS AND GRANDPARENTS in new FEDERAL forcing ALL STATES to "claw back costs" from what they choose to call you, the "Responsible Relative Funding"

The laws specifically EXEMPT the "claw back" from any requirement to be applied fairly to ALL THE RESPONSIBLE RELATIVES, so one person could be targeted and on the hook for the whole amount or for supporting SEVERAL RELATIVES, while other siblings pay nothing!

 

[happyface78]

I don't like the fact that government is sticking its hands down our throats (again).

That being said, people shouldn't have to be reminded about this. It's just another sign and symptom of "the nanny state".

Deuteronomy 5:16
"Honor your father and your mother, as the LORD your God has commanded you, so that you may live long and that it may go well with you in the land the LORD your God is giving you.

1 Timothy 5:4
But if a widow has children or grandchildren, these should learn first of all to put their religion into practice by caring for their own family and so repaying their parents and grandparents, for this is pleasing to God.

Exodus 20:12
"Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the LORD your God is giving you.

I know not everyone is a Christian, but even other religious and philosophical views have very similar tennets regarding this issue.

 

[Dobbin]

I wonder about finding children responsible to "pay back" costs associated with parental care.

It might be contested on the basis of "no say in the matter." Children in these cases are not usually given the opportunity to direct an elderly parent's care.

And their interference may be considered invasive to the lifestyle of a parent of otherwise sound mind - and to elders able to make care decisions on the basis of the facts in front of them.

As such, not having say, to hold children responsible for the care decisions of others creates a "ex-post-facto" situation.

Note that the intent of the original filial laws was to compensate for the absence of ANY care.

The imposition of an ex-post-facto decision, particularly where filial care has previously been neatly usurped by social programs of the 1930s and 1960s, puts the children in the position of being judged guilty when in fact they had no actionable alternative - they expected their parents would be taken care of by the progressives - and calculated their financial life according to this modus.

For the government to demand otherwise is tantamount to "changing horses in mid-stream."

Gosh I can't resist a good simile. Sorry.

Dobbin

 

[Countrymouse]

Wonder how long before they make ADOPTED children pay for their BIOLOGICAL parents' care?

God forbid........

 

[MountainBiker]

Yeah, but there are also people like my millionaire uncle, who (in 1995) moved his $1 million worth of assets and TWO houses into his children's bank accounts five years before he needed long-term care.

It was a slick move, and when he needed long-term care, he went onto Medicaid and his kids were wealthy beyond their wildest dreams.

That's also just not right.

I agree. This is the kind of cheating that States are trying to stop.

 

[NC Susan]

we have a thread on South Dakota passing laws protecting and sheltering all assets into a trust fund for inheritance instead of doctor bills and death taxes-> .

http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...ta-Little-Tax-Haven-on-the-Prairie&highlight=

AND you dont have to be a resident to open a trust

 

[Ravekid]

Yeah, but there are also people like my millionaire uncle, who (in 1995) moved his $1 million worth of assets and TWO houses into his children's bank accounts five years before he needed long-term care.

It was a slick move, and when he needed long-term care, he went onto Medicaid and his kids were wealthy beyond their wildest dreams.

That's also just not right.

I agree. This is the kind of cheating that States are trying to stop.

In an era where million(s) are living cradle to the grave on welfare, paying minimal, if any, taxes over their lifespan, producing nothing of value but being a mass consumer of state resources, why do we shame someone who sounds like a very strong producer in this country? This guy likely paid out tons in taxes to have that much in savings. I bet he paid tons into healthcare, Medicaid, Medicare, SS, and into state and local taxes. So in his dying years, he decided it was his time to let the state raise him. I see both sides, but I think it is wrong to talk down about people who spent the vast majority of their life doing what one is supposed to do, being a producer, not a consumer, and then daring to leave their offspring what many worked hard for and saved.

In other words, if people like this are so awful, why even work in life? Why save one penny? Spend your money like a drunken fool, because the state is getting so greedy, even if you leave the grand-kids $1,000 twenty years before you go into a nursing home broke, they are likely to come and demand that $1,000. This action taken by the states will be taken as a lessen by the producing masses: Don't work too hard, don't save for a rainy day, because eventually the state will take it all.

Want a more fair system? Simply install levels of care. You want a premium level, you have to pay. You have stage of cancer with a less than 10% remission/cure rate, but treatment may give you another five months, you pay for that treatment, otherwise give the money to the kids and the state will provide you with pain management and basic hospice care in your last days under Medicaid, same thing folks who never had any money get. That way everyone who saves and produces over their life has a choice, extend their elderly years buy using their money to buy additional care, or choose to part this world being able to leave your kids and grand kids a little something.