Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A lot of this will play out revolving around the following. Will we allow those without to die while those with live? What will be the conditions that we decide who government will intervene to save and what will be the criteria? Young, Old, Disabled, Non Disabled etc Will these become protected classes worthy of our collective support and others not? What will this decision making process of winners and losers do to our social fabric and international standing?
It is absolutely true that many states have filial support laws. Before I went to college, I worked a couple years at the County Dept. of Social Services in our city. If anyone had ever received "general relief" as it was called back then, they could have a lien filed against their house so that when they died, the county could be reimbursed for what they paid out...even though when the person was given that "general relief," they were not told this.
Seniors who lived in their own home and received what was then called "Old Age Assistance" were entitled to receive support from their adult children...if the adult children could financially manage it.
I was the one back then who filed these liens with the District Attorney and sent out the financial forms to the adult children to see if they had the means to help support their parents. Those were the days back in the late 60's when most people had at least three or four children at home, so naturally they could not afford to support their parents too. Back then, a social worker would often follow up with the family to double check.
I never heard of a lien being placed against the adult child's home though...at least in Wisconsin.
It is the parent putting their assets in a irrevocable trust that will motivate states to go after the kids to pay.
I totally agree with you. A parent's assets should first go to pay for the medical and long term care that they need. Only if something is left after all this is taken care of should children expect to inherit. That's what I think is majorly wrong. Too many children are spending their "inheritance" before mom or dad even dies.
Its a function of a number of things. We've developed a standard of living in this country that is far too expensive and is something more and more people can't keep up with. Than, there are often "ne-er-do-well" children in a family who for different reasons never developed much of an ability to earn money. So, they start looking at mom and dad's money quite early in their lives as a means to support themselves.
I think the law should be modified to allow assets in a irrevocable trust to be treated as those of the elderly that established the trust, particularly if the motivation was to enrich children at the expense of the taxpayers.
I totally agree with you. A parent's assets should first go to pay for the medical and long term care that they need. Only if something is left after all this is taken care of should children expect to inherit. That's what I think is majorly wrong. Too many children are spending their "inheritance" before mom or dad even dies.
Its a function of a number of things. We've developed a standard of living in this country that is far too expensive and is something more and more people can't keep up with. Than, there are often "ne-er-do-well" children in a family who for different reasons never developed much of an ability to earn money. So, they start looking at mom and dad's money quite early in their lives as a means to support themselves.
I think the law should be modified to allow assets in a irrevocable trust to be treated as those of the elderly that established the trust, particularly if the motivation was to enrich children at the expense of the taxpayers.
There are a lot of folks who agree with this thought. I know - b/c I have just recently been privy to a discussion about reimbursement (nursing home and hospital bill) due to this very situation.
Perhaps now is the time to refocus the conversation away from government going after assets to pay the bills of folks in nursing homes to the real topic at hand. Ought those private companies providing life saving services to the elderly be entitled to the full contractual compensation for the services they provide? Remember Medicaid reimburses at a lower rate than the actual charge for the service. My read has been that it is the Nursing Home that may be using Finial laws seeking the full compensation for the services they rendered. Focusing on evil government is comfortable but saying the Hell with the company taking care of mom I want the money for myself might not be. I wonder how many parents would be creating irrevocable trust and gifting money if they new the level of individual care would be based on the percentage of the full bill you were paying. Imagine if they had a floor for full pay and another for Medicaid with different services and treatment protocals.
I have mixed feelings about this subject. I was born 1963. My parents got married 1957. Purchased their home 1960. I was born 1963. The house right across the street was up for sale. My dad's parents, life long farmers finally retiring, purchased the house right across the street. A few yrs later, another house on the block came up for sale... my mothers parents purchased the house.
Guess what this taught me? STRONG family values! My Grandparents were less than 3 doors away. As the Grandparents health failed, we were all just a few doors away from each other. More importantly... little did we know, that my Dad would suddenly faulter at age 45. I was 11 yrs old when my dad died.
Having those grandparents as neighbors, was everything my Mother and I needed back in 1975. Those grandparents were busy churning their yards into edible gardens. Mother and I never went hungry. The grandpa's did the repairs necessary, whether it be car, house or whatever. Grandmas did the sewing, harvesting the produce.
Later in my teen yrs... the grandparents were showing their fraility. It was MY JOB to look after them! Paternal Grandpa eventually went blind and deaf from diabetics while his wife was wheelchair bound from severe arthritis.
While my teen classmates lived a typical teen party lifestyle of the late 70's.... I was catering to the needs of my grandparents. I would come home from school, and rush to their house. Grandma would give me the money to walk to the local grocery store and buy necessary items, like bread, oleo and flour.
Grandpa would tell me to fetch the local lawn mower repair guy.
Did this obligation and responsibility steal from my childhood? NO! It taught me obligation and responsibility!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It made me stronger. It made me less selfish.
It gave me a sense of values, morals, and character. Just maybe... we NEED to return to those days?
Each and every one of them eventually ended up in a Nursing Home. But I assure you.... it wasn't until it got THAT BAD before we made that decision.
Now adays... it's just too easy to toss the elder to the side, like yesterdays trash.
Perhaps now is the time to refocus the conversation away from government going after assets to pay the bills of folks in nursing homes to the real topic at hand. Ought those private companies providing life saving services to the elderly be entitled to the full contractual compensation for the services they provide? Remember Medicaid reimburses at a lower rate than the actual charge for the service. My read has been that it is the Nursing Home that may be using Finial laws seeking the full compensation for the services they rendered. Focusing on evil government is comfortable but saying the Hell with the company taking care of mom I want the money for myself might not be. I wonder how many parents would be creating irrevocable trust and gifting money if they new the level of individual care would be based on the percentage of the full bill you were paying. Imagine if they had a floor for full pay and another for Medicaid with different services and treatment protocols.
I'm not sure that is correct. In the Pennsylvania case, the son refused to assist in completing the Medical Assistance application. The facility needs documentation to support the Medical Assistance application and for some reason the (I don't give a s***?) children refuse to lift a finger to help the facility get the documents. Anyway, in the PA case there was eventually an application for Medical Assistance and it was noted that the son would be reimbursed if the application was approved. Last I checked, the application was denied. Nevertheless, I would find it odd that a facility would accept a patient without informing the patient, in writing, that the full fee would be charged unless the patient was approved for Medical Assistance.
I checked out Maryland's stand on all of this. We have a statute that prohibits nursing facilities from charging relatives for care. However, we also have a statute that requires the relative to assist in obtaining Medical Assistance for the resident. Failure to do so can result in a $10,000 fine.
The State WILL pursue children for the cost of care of their parent in a State Mental Health facility. Note to self: Keep up the LTC premiums. (Yes, some of our older demented residents end up in the chronic ward of our State Mental Health hospitals.)
It doesn't matter what folks THINK should happen as far as adult children paying for the care of their parents.
All that matters is what statutes are in place that give the state (or a corporation) the right to go after adult children for their parents' debts.
You can bet that as Boomers get older and become a greater drain on resources, old legislation will either be accessed or new legislation will be introduced to make someone, other than the taxpaying public, responsible for paying the bills.
The first step is to decrease the life span of Boomers who have chronic conditions and rely on Medicare to pay for their healthcare. That means denial of service, which will come about (and is already coming about) by changes in reimbursement - and standards of care will change as will protocols.
The second step is towards self-directed suicide or family-directed euthanasia, i.e., mandatory (or highly encouraged) DNRs for certain conditions/diseases and no more extended life support (or surgical or "extraordinary" treatment) after a certain age or stage of specific diseases.
I'm a boomer, I'm on Medicare and I have chronic conditions. These comments make me feel like I should apologize to taxpayers for not dying soon enough. Wow.
I have mixed feelings about this subject. I was born 1963. My parents got married 1957. Purchased their home 1960. I was born 1963. The house right across the street was up for sale. My dad's parents, life long farmers finally retiring, purchased the house right across the street. A few yrs later, another house on the block came up for sale... my mothers parents purchased the house.
Guess what this taught me? STRONG family values! My Grandparents were less than 3 doors away. As the Grandparents health failed, we were all just a few doors away from each other. More importantly... little did we know, that my Dad would suddenly faulter at age 45. I was 11 yrs old when my dad died.
Having those grandparents as neighbors, was everything my Mother and I needed back in 1975. Those grandparents were busy churning their yards into edible gardens. Mother and I never went hungry. The grandpa's did the repairs necessary, whether it be car, house or whatever. Grandmas did the sewing, harvesting the produce.
Later in my teen yrs... the grandparents were showing their fraility. It was MY JOB to look after them! Paternal Grandpa eventually went blind and deaf from diabetics while his wife was wheelchair bound from severe arthritis.
While my teen classmates lived a typical teen party lifestyle of the late 70's.... I was catering to the needs of my grandparents. I would come home from school, and rush to their house. Grandma would give me the money to walk to the local grocery store and buy necessary items, like bread, oleo and flour.
Grandpa would tell me to fetch the local lawn mower repair guy.
Did this obligation and responsibility steal from my childhood? NO! It taught me obligation and responsibility!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It made me stronger. It made me less selfish.
It gave me a sense of values, morals, and character. Just maybe... we NEED to return to those days?
Each and every one of them eventually ended up in a Nursing Home. But I assure you.... it wasn't until it got THAT BAD before we made that decision.
Now adays... it's just too easy to toss the elder to the side, like yesterdays trash.
Why did they eventually end up in nursing homes?? In our case, my father was more than willing to have my grandmother move into our 1000 sf home even though my grandmother would have made the seventh member of the household. My mother (grandma's daughter) was the one who said she'd lose her mind if my demented grandma move in. So to the nursing home Granny went.
OTOH, my paternal grandfather was allegedly mean at times, but he was not demented. He took turns living with 4 or 5 of his children until his death at the age of 85. (I need to go back and see how long he actually stayed with the family, it may not have been very long - he spent quite a few years of his life in prison.)
*Note that my mother and my uncle's wives were full time homemakers and would have assumed the full burden of caring for my grandparents.
I'm a boomer, I'm on Medicare and I have chronic conditions. These comments make me feel like I should apologize to taxpayers for not dying soon enough. Wow.
First of all, I wasn't saying this is what I want to occur.
I was simply outlining what I think is on the horizon.
I am also a Boomer and while I am not on Medicare, I also have chronic conditions.
My husband IS on Medicare, he is a Boomer, he has chronic health issues (CHF).
I feel it is only wise to look forward and plan as best as we can for the future, knowing that most likely hubby, at least, won't live long enough to be affected greatly by the changes in healthcare delivery, standards of care, protocols, etc.
We (Boomers) are already being attacked by Gen Xers, in particular, in the media -- as being a "drain on society." They are angry about our "taking their jobs and keeping them from moving up b/c we aren't retiring early enough." They are angry about our "draining the Social Security system."
Medicare reimbursement guidelines/regs have already been changed and will continue to change, annually, to cut costs everywhere possible, when it comes to senior care.
And Medicaid is running in the red, with huge shortfalls.
I am sorry that you took this personally, but it is what it is.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
