Son ordered to pay $93k nursing home bill for his mother (transfer, creditors)

[Oildog]

Interesting topic. I feel for the guy but it sounds like the family didnt do their homework on the payment stuff. Another case where $500 in lawyer time would have been worth it.

[jghorton]

It seems that most articles like this with inflamatory titles are designed to create controversy and sell advertizing, ... not to convey truth or provide balanced coverage. I don't have first hand knowledge of this situation, but, consider this possibility:

It has become common practice today to transfer all assets from elderly people to their children... when it appears that nursing home care is imminent. This is because people with assets must pay their own bills, unlike people with no assets. This practice then leaves taxpayers/Medicaid to pay for the nursing home care of people who could otherwise afford it. I believe the window has now been widened to 3-years, but, this 'window' has been made necessary entirely by people seeking to avoid paying their own bills.

[Escort Rider]

Originally Posted by jghorton

It seems that most articles like this with inflamatory titles are designed to create controversy and sell advertizing, ... not to convey truth or provide balanced coverage. I don't have first hand knowledge of this situation, but, consider this possibility:

It has become common practice today to transfer all assets from elderly people to their children... when it appears that nursing home care is imminent. This is because people with assets must pay their own bills, unlike people with no assets. This practice then leaves taxpayers/Medicaid to pay for the nursing home care of people who could otherwise afford it. I believe the window has now been widened to 3-years, but, this 'window' has been made necessary entirely by people seeking to avoid paying their own bills.

Excellent point, but I am just amazed that so many states (someone said 30 states, I believe) have these filial responsibility laws and they haven't been declared unconstitutional. Who can imagine something more outrageous? Let's just do a thought experiment:

You are an autonomous adult, and you have no control over your parent. Maybe you have almost no relationship with that parent. Maybe your parent was mentally ill and your childhood was a hell on earth. So now you get a bill in the mail for your parent's care? That is just completely insane. What happened to the concept that adults, no matter their age or their family status, are responsible for themselves and their actions? If an old person is not able to manage his or her affairs, then someone needs to step in and have a court declare the person incompetent and appoint a guardian, whether a government agency or whomever.

But a person over whom you have no control can just create a debt that you have to pay? It just boggles the mind. "Unfair" is far too weak a word for it.

[no kudzu]

^^^^^^I totally agree. Surely this has been challenged in a few courts. I can understand the scenario where elders have transferred property ownership to kids but in most states Medicaid does not step in until 3 years so not too many folks are getting away with this.

[Lizita]

Originally Posted by Oildog

Interesting topic. I feel for the guy but it sounds like the family didnt do their homework on the payment stuff. Another case where $500 in lawyer time would have been worth it.

Why is it the children's responsibility to do the homework or see a lawyer? It's great to help your parents but why should you have a legal obligation to ensure that their medical bills are paid? I have no involvement in my parents' affairs and wouldn't even think to get legal advice should one of them need medical care. I don't see at all why I should be held accountable for not doing something I didn't even know I had to do and that I shouldn't have to do. I'm not responsible for my parents and they are not responsible for me.

[Lizita]

Originally Posted by jghorton

It seems that most articles like this with inflamatory titles are designed to create controversy and sell advertizing, ... not to convey truth or provide balanced coverage. I don't have first hand knowledge of this situation, but, consider this possibility:

It has become common practice today to transfer all assets from elderly people to their children... when it appears that nursing home care is imminent. This is because people with assets must pay their own bills, unlike people with no assets. This practice then leaves taxpayers/Medicaid to pay for the nursing home care of people who could otherwise afford it. I believe the window has now been widened to 3-years, but, this 'window' has been made necessary entirely by people seeking to avoid paying their own bills.

The problem is that this law affects everyone, not only the ones who have transferred assets to their children to get out of paying their bills. That's clearly not fair.

[bouncethelight]

I agree, this isn't fair, and it shouldn't be allowed to happen.

That said, the guy could try to help himself just a little. This is from the article linked in the first post...

Pittas said he is keeping his elderly mother, who is recovering from a stroke, and father, 78, both in Greece, out of the legal dispute.

Why is he trying to protect her, when she's the one who incurred the debt? And she is only 66 - not exactly elderly by most standards. Plus she was in the nursing home with two broken legs, so it's not like she was so sick she couldn't make her own decisions - and someone else stuck her there. There's no reason to believe she didn't know this could happen.

Liberty spokeswoman Julie Beckert said she could not comment about the appeal filed on Monday because it is pending litigation.

According to the statement, the company does not "ask family members to use their own personal funds to pay for their loved ones' care."

"However, family members that are responsible parties for financial issues are responsible to gather needed documents per state guidelines for their loved ones care. We, as well as the state, rely on those family members to provide this information for timely and accurate filing."

If he didn't help his mother file the right papers, and if he was named as a "responsible party for financial issues" and if he's now trying to protect his mother and keep her from having to pay the debt? None of that is very smart!

[andywire]

Welcome to America. Dump mom and dad on the side of the road when they start appearing frail. Better yet, take them to the new euthanasia clinic on the other side of town if you know what's good for the bank account. If only there was a toilet big enough so you could just flush them like a goldfish...

[selhars]

The look-back period is FIVE years -- it WAS 3 and was lengthened to five in 2006

[elnina]

Originally Posted by bouncethelight

I agree, this isn't fair, and it shouldn't be allowed to happen.
That said, the guy could try to help himself just a little. This is from the article linked in the first post...

Why is he trying to protect her, when she's the one who incurred the debt? And she is only 66 - not exactly elderly by most standards. Plus she was in the nursing home with two broken legs, so it's not like she was so sick she couldn't make her own decisions - and someone else stuck her there. There's no reason to believe she didn't know this could happen.

If he didn't help his mother file the right papers, and if he was named as a "responsible party for financial issues" and if he's now trying to protect his mother and keep her from having to pay the debt? None of that is very smart!

I think they knew exactly what is going to happen. They moved mother to Greece so she could escape the debts, and didn't think that they would be ordered to pay her nursing home stay.
This guy is a business owner. Is hard to believe that he didn't know...