Are There Alternatives to Guardianship for an Elder with Dementia?

Abacus of Glass Beads

I’m taking a look at the alternatives to unrestricted or plenary guardianship as a result of reading my latest issue of the ABA’s Bifocal magazine, in which the ABA’s House of Delegates adopted Resolution 113, urging states and other legislatures to amend guardianship statutes to consider less restrictive alternative to unrestricted or plenary guardianships of incapacitated adults and to require consideration of putting into place decision making supports that would allow a person the right to supported decision making as an alternative to (or reason for termination of) guardianship of an adult. I found the topic thought-provoking, particularly in light of a recently approved uniform law which contains many references to supported decision making.

In Colorado, an Incapacitated adult is defined our Probate Code at C.R.S. §15-14-102(5) as one

who is unable to effectively receive or evaluate information or both or make or communicate decisions to such an extent that the individual lacks the ability to satisfy essential requirements for physical health, safety, or self-care, even with appropriate and reasonably available technological assistance.

The definition comes from the Uniform Guardianship and Protective Proceedings Act, or CUGPPA in Colorado.  Below I’ll take a brief look at a continuum of less restrictive alternatives to implement in the making of decisions for persons who may be or become incapacitated (but not necessarily determined to be such by a probate court in protective proceedings).

First, I’ll note that each of these aspects of functional capacity and incapacity implicate a person’s rights to self-determination.  Self-determination is a broad topic. The principle of self-determination is prominently enshrined in Article I of the Charter of the United Nations.  It remains a concern under international law due to the fact that there are peoples who are not necessarily represented by the nation in which they find themselves.  For an adult who suffers from a progressive condition or disease process that results in cognitive impairment, there really isn’t such a stretch here to say that a person with dementia is at risk of being “colonized” or have their rights self-determination effectively erased by a legal determination of incapacity.  Here I’m talking about self-determination in the medical, and personal preferences context (concerning levels of care or autonomy, as well as choice of the setting in which one lives). The UN Convention of the Rights of Persons With Disabilities (CRPD), also speaks about supported decision making and you can read more about it here.

The medical or health care POA

I’m focusing on the medical POA here because Colorado’s protective proceeding for a person’s property is known as a conservatorship.  A conservatorship is often not necessary if a person has made effective POA naming an agent and the relationship is working and not otherwise under threat from an interloper.  But. . .  keep in mind that sometimes a non-agent family member or friend can take advantage of a person more easily if there is no court-imposed protection of the person’s property. Ah, there’s that ugly head of patriarchal protection (in the form of parens patriae, the power of the state to act as guardian for those who are unable to protect or care for themselves) again!

Bottom line is that, when people (sometimes known as “patients”) make their wishes known in advance to family members or others and empower another to decide for them as the person’s agent in a MDPOA , that empowerment alone can often lead to better outcomes.  But the fact remains that many of us choose not to choose to name an agent. So what’s next? In Colorado there are also proxy decision makers, which we might consider as “de facto” decision makers under applicable Colorado law.  So, that brings us to the next item. . .

Supported decision making – an intermediate ground . . .  or no man’s land?

This item is specifically included in the newly minted 2017 version of the Uniform Law Commission’s UGPPA, er UGCPAA (Uniform Guardianship, Conservatorship and Other Protective Arrangements Act) at §101(13) where it is listed as one of the “less restrictive alternatives” to guardianship.   In the proposed UGCOPAA, supported decision making means “assistance from one or more persons of an individual’s choosing” (§102(13)); and is added to the end of the above stated definition of incapacity – to read “unable to effectively receive and evaluate information or make or communicate decisions, even with appropriate supportive services, technological assistance, or supported decision making” (§301(a)(1)(A)); is an appropriate consideration for a court visitor to include in the report (§304(d)(2)); for inclusion in the court’s order appointing a guardian (§310(a)(1)); as one of the rights retained by an otherwise incapacitated adult, to “be involved in health care decision making to the extent reasonably feasible. . .  (§311(a)(3)); and in other examples perhaps appropriate for a later blog post. . . .

What are some standards for supported decision making, which is related to “person centered” planning (now part of the Medicare rules, incidentally)?

This alternative sounds all well and good Barb, but what about those elders with dementia whose cognitive impairments are likely to worsen?  Is it realistic to devise a plan for this supported decision making?  After all, those folks are arguably in a situation different from developmentally disabled adults who may can live independently and working in the community, so long as there are community supports.  But I think this is a less restrictive alternative that is seriously underutilized due to the simple fact that people aren’t used to the idea and it is challenging to identify what it might entail and look like in an alternative to probate court protective proceedings or as part of a court’s order granting a limited or restricted guardianship.

Limited guardianship

This one is pretty self-explanatory.  Only certain identified matters are under the authority of a court-appointed guardian and the rest of the rights are reserved to or preserved in the “ward.”  The tricky part with this is an important detail – scarce judicial resources.  Most courts are not anxious to re-examine how supported decision making or a limited guardianship is working and re-tool it as needed.  Most courts have a difficult enough time simply monitoring those guardians!

Plenary or unrestricted guardianship

This is the norm in this country, regardless of lip service in statutes or case law concerning less restrictive alternatives.  But if we are to truly attempt to accomplish guardianship reform, we (courts, elder law attorneys, service providers and other resources) must work together to fashion a viable alternative to what has become the quick and dirty, default request in a guardianship proceeding involving an elder with dementia who may be in the future or already is “incapacitated.”  Stay tuned for more on this topic in the future.

© 2017 Barbara Cashman  www.DenverElderLaw.org

Capacity, Incapacity and Vulnerability

Old boats on the Isle of Mull

This is the last post (for now at least) on the topic of capacity and incapacity. In my field of practice, I must be comfortable with making assessments of capacity concerning potential clients and I must also be familiar with the panoply of assessment tools used by the medical establishment (and psychologists who perform neuropsychological evaluations of capacity).

Capacity and incapacity are legal constructs, but they often arise within a medical context and are typically established (in the Colorado probate code as a requirement for a physician’s letter to support a petition for guardianship) with reference to medical evidence relating to a person’s cognitive capacities or mental status.  Interestingly, issues of medical capacity, or what is commonly referred to as “decisional capacity,” is something in which the court system is rarely involved.  So this relationship between legal and medical capacity is not much of a two way street!

In this post I’m looking at where these two notions of capacity and incapacity can meet.  Sometimes we hear that an elder is not capable of doing something any longer – for physical, cognitive, psychological or emotional reasons, and we often fail to consider the intersections of these parts of each of us as people.  We must depend on the integration of those capacities for our continued functioning.  Sometimes it can be very difficult to determine whether a difficulty is short lived or temporary or whether it is a harbinger of greater difficulties which lie ahead.  We each face these challenges alone, but we must rely on others in this stage of our lives, just as we have in earlier, higher functioning stages of our lives – but most of us  struggle mightily with our vulnerability.  The NIH website has a list of resources available for dementia caregivers available here.

There is an intersection between disability law and elder law in the approach to how we facilitate the assisted decision-making on behalf of another as well as the living arrangements for an incapacitated adult.  This is the term  ”least restrictive means” or also “least restrictive environment.”   The former term is distinguished from regulatory and constitutional law, in the probate incapacity context it is the language of the preference for limited guardianship over unlimited or plenary guardianship.  For the latter, we see the term in the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) which refers to inclusion and mainstreaming, which are of obvious relevance and value to elders who are losing or have lost capacity (ies).

The parallels between the rights of the disabled and the rights of incapacitated elders are numerous.  A large number of elder law attorneys practice in both fields of law because there are so many similarities.  Here’s a link to the Guardianship Alliance of Colorado’s website, which has great resources relating to protecting adults with disabilities.

This determination of incapacity sounds like a one-way street from which there is no turning back, but that is not the whole story.  I came across an interesting article by law professor Nina Kohn and Catheryn Ross about how a person previously stripped of “legal personhood” can regain their legal status.  You can read “Lawyers for Legal Ghosts: The Legality and Ethics of Representing Persons Subject to Guardianshiphere.  The introduction recounts the story of Jenny Hatch, a young woman with Down’s syndrome who was a ward of the state and who successfully challenged not only the terms and conditions of her guardianship, but also her right to make decisions for herself.

Elders in Colorado are part of a “protected class” of persons in our elder abuse statute.  Some of my colleagues take offense at the reference to age because they are close to that age (70) and still don’t want to think of themselves as “old” or in need of protection.   I suspect they don’t consider themselves “old” because they don’t have enough youngsters in close proximity. . . .

What does incapacity mean for a person once a probate court has determined the person incapacitated?

Incapacity determinations by probate courts generally strip a previously capacitated adult of nearly all of their civil rights.  In Colorado, wards (what a person who is named as Respondent in a guardianship petition is called after the court determines the person is incapacitated and in need of a guardian) can still exercise their right to vote.  So once a persons is stripped of those civil rights, a ward essentially ceases to exist in many ways or is legally dead.  This is one aspect of vulnerability.

If you find this patently offensive, please consider the historical common law rules of marriage and property which were “imported” into North America by the colonists.  Hey, didn’t we recently celebrate our independence on the Fourth of July a month ago?! These “coverture laws” basically reduced the legal status of an unmarried adult (otherwise capacitated) woman from an adult to the legal status of an infant once she was married.  These coverture laws pertained to a married woman’s legal rights to own property, to sign contracts, make a will and many other useful matters.  A married woman was otherwise legally incapacitated, but she could seek relief from a court of equity.  Connecticut was one of the first states to establish the property rights of married women.  Back in those early days, the courts of law were separate from the courts of equity, the latter were often referred to as chancery courts.  Those courts were merged with courts of law in many court systems but still exist as separate courts in states like Delaware.  In Colorado’s system of “combined courts” a court sitting in probate is both a court of law (employing the statutory probate code as well as case law) and a court of equity.  Equity is specifically referred to in our probate code, but the two concepts are still legally distinguished from each other because they are different sources of law and the remedies it affords parties.

A ward can regain his or her legal status of personhood – but it can be daunting.  In Colorado, there is a special form for that.   A psychologist I know recently contacted me about getting this form and providing a supporting letter for their client – here is the form from the state judicial website JDF 852.  If imposition of a guardianship over a ward is legal death, then termination of the guardianship based on a restoration (or re-evaluation) of capacity is akin to resurrection.  I won’t go into the gnarly details about the attorney’s ethical rules of representing wards seeking termination of their guardianships, but the Kohn article above is an excellent overview of how attorneys can overcome some of the challenges inherent in our ethical rules to assist those persons in getting their legal personhood or at least some of their rights restored.  Attorneys need to assist these wards to protect fundamental rights.

That’s all for now….

© Barbara E. Cashman 2017   www.DenverElderLaw.org

Capacity and Incapacity Considered

Swirling

As a growing portion of our population continues to age, we are more frequently forced to confront the question of capacity.

What is capacity and why should we care? 

As we continue to enjoy unprecedented longevity, we face greater likelihood of incapacity in our future.  Sometimes this incapacity is short-lived or temporary but for many of us, particularly for elders, it can become an issue that plays out over time and can result in a permanent incapacity.  There are very few “bright lines” to define what is capacity and what constitutes incapacity generally, but there are many useful contextual and functional definitions of capacity to assist us in this effort.

I believe that the more we can learn about how these capacities and incapacities present themselves in the context of our daily lives, the better equipped we can become to help detect and prevent elder exploitation and abuse.  This post is about three particular types of capacity along the capacity continuum.  I use the term “continuum” because it is easy for many of us to think (or rather, wish to believe) that this capacity question is relatively straightforward.  It is not!  Like so many other aspects of human doing and human being, it can get quite complicated.

I’ll look at three familiar types of capacity here to put the question in context.

  1. Capacity to Make Medical Decisions

These medical Informed consent issues can include a range of capacities relating to what a patient is being asked to do – there is a range from the “mundane” question of whether the patient give informed consent to medical treatment or to decline such treatment; if the patient wishes to name a health care agent to make decisions for them in the event of their incapacity; and what about the capacity to make end-of-life wishes known with a living will?  Here the functional elements of these capacities can be broken down into four basic parts:

(a) To express a choice: The standard of expressing a choice refers to patients who are seen to lack capacity because they cannot communicate a treatment choice, or vacillate to such an extent in their choice that it is seen to reflect a decisional impairment;

(b) To exhibit understanding: The standard of understanding refers to the ability to comprehend diagnostic and treatment related information and has been recognized in many states as fundamental to capacity.

(c) To appreciate the implications of a particular choice or course of treatment. This aspect capacity has been described as the ability to relate treatment information to one’s personal situation. The standard of appreciation can reflect the patient’s ability to anticipate or infer the possible benefits of treatment, as well as to accept or believe a diagnosis.

(d) To rationally process information. This reasoning aspect of capacity involves the ability to recognize and offer rational explanations or to process information in a logically or rationally consistent manner.

Each of these aspects of medical capacity are interwoven into the ongoing conversation of one’s medical treatment and are of course highly subjective in many ways due to the individual patient’s own preferences or style of communication.

  1. Capacity to Drive an Automobile

This one is big for us Americans who don’t have so many public transportation options! The ability to drive is often one of the last things to go because it can in some ways restrict an elder’s ability to go places on their own schedule.  The AARP has an online defensive driving course and AAA has resources for getting evaluations of one’s driving skills as well as clinical assessments, but the “official” Colorado program is the Drive Smart program – click here for more information about it.  Under Colorado law, doctors (and optometrists) can provide medical opinions to the DMV concerning a patient’s medical condition and the patient’s physical or mental ability to safely operate a vehicle.  For more information about when an examination is required, here’s a link to a power point about it from the Colorado Coalition for Elder Rights and Abuse Prevention.

  1. Capacity to Make a Will

As an estate planning and elder law attorney, I meet with prospective clients and must make capacity determinations as a matter of course.  The ABA has a handy guide for lawyers and psychologists concerning assessment of a person’s capacity.  It is available here.  In order for an attorney to represent a client, an attorney must first establish that the potential client has the capacity to hire the attorney as well as direct the activities of the attorney.  We have a special rule of professional conduct which applies to clients with diminished capacity.

Historically, this testamentary capacity is at the lowest level along the capacity continuum.  In Colorado, the law is a bit less clear since the Breeden case, but  many states still recognize testamentary capacity as a separate and special category.  The Colorado probate code allows for a protected person (a person under a conservatorship) to make a will through the conservator. See Colo. Rev. Stat. §15-14-411.

One of the aspects of this low level of capacity required to exercise our testamentary freedom is that a will can be subject to challenge under some circumstances.  The person’s ability to make a will, or their testamentary capacity, can be the subject of a lawsuit known as a will contest.  Challenges to testamentary capacity often revolve around “undue influence,” in which a person challenges the will (and sometimes nontestamentary transfers as in the recent Colorado Appeals Court decision in Estate of Owens v. Dominguez).  Undue influence depends on many situational factors but generally can require a showing by the one challenging the will that: a person standing to benefit from the new will was in a confidential relationship with the testator (person making the will); that the person received a substantial benefit; from the testator who was suffering some mental, social or psychological impairment which compromised the testator’s mental capacity or independent thinking.

To conclude this post, if we think of capacity not just as a concept but as grounded in a particular context – as illustrated by the examination of capacity to perform a particular task, we can go much further in our examination of how much capacity is required and whether the requisite capacity is lacking.  From this contextual basis, we can then take a look at what type of assistance to “facilitate capacity” is appropriate and what kind of “assistance” is actually interference indicative of improper influence, exploitation or abuse.  I’ll write more on this topic this summer.

© Barbara E. Cashman 2017   www.DenverElderLaw.org

 

World Elder Abuse Awareness Day, June 15, 2017

Face on the Rock of Cashel

This isn’t my first post about World Elder Abuse Awareness Day or WEAAD for short. It’s an annual post for me on this day – last year I looked at the “international” part of WEAAD, as well as the national (federal) focus.  This year I will focus on a local aspect – as in Colorado law that can be used to stop an abuser straightaway.

First let’s revisit the basics of what can constitute elder abuse – keeping in mind that each state has its own set of laws addressing this matter, as does the federal government.  This lack of a common definition is part of the challenge in reporting elder abuse and identifying the numbers of elders involved.  But I think the biggest challenge remains in recognizing that elder abuse is a problem that affects our society, not just individuals taken advantage of by strangers or harmed by their loved ones because they are perceived as old, of little value to society, or as an impediment to an heir’s inheritance…

While there is an unfortunate variety of types of elder abuse – elder abuse generally includes:

Mistreatment – this is the preferred term for the American Society of Aging, which is offering a course on mistreatment as comprising abuse and neglect;

Abuse of a financial nature/exploitation – this includes the unauthorized or illegal use of or access to an elder’s financial resources that covers a range of activities such as theft, undue influence, deception or fraud, misrepresentation or coercion;

Abuse of physical nature – this includes violence of a physical nature, including slapping, hitting, restraining or confining an elder, overmedicating or giving improper medication;

Abuse of sexual nature – includes a caregiver forcing an elder to watch or participate in sexual acts;

Abuse of psychological or emotional nature – can be very subtle when employed by a manipulative or cunning family member or care provider;

Neglect of an elder can occur when a caregiver fails to actively or passively fulfill the role of caregiver (paid attendant or unpaid family member) or when an elder self-neglects.

The Adult Protection Services – APS for short – is part of the Colorado Department of Human Services and they have broken their page into four basic categories: caretaker neglect; exploitation; physical or sexual abuse; and self-neglect.  But this offers a very broad brush approach of what to report!

There are other options available in addition to simply reporting suspected mistreatment, abuse or neglect.  One of these involves getting immediate and direct protection against an abuser by means of obtaining a civil protection order.  A civil protection order proceeding is in county court and is available to persons who elders (and at risk adults, those who have developmental disabilities or some other cognitive impairment) who are victims of abuse to prevent further contact by the alleged perpetrator of the abuse.  Read more about the instructions and forms available on the Colorado State judicial website here.

The JDF 402 form for a complaint or motion for civil protection order specifically lists “abuse of the elderly or at-risk adult,” and cites Colo. Rev. Stat. §26-3.1-101(1) and (7).  That latter section of the statute, which is the definitional portion of the “protective services for at-risk adults,” provides

(7) “Mistreatment” means:

                (a) Abuse;

                (b) Caretaker neglect;

                (c) Exploitation;

                (d) An act or omission that threatens the health, safety, or welfare of an at-risk adult; or

                (e) An act or omission that exposes an at-risk adult to a situation or condition that poses an imminent risk of bodily injury to the at-risk adult.

You can see that there is astatutory provision for mistreatment that comprises abuse in our state.  The term is broad and necessarily so.  Remember that the statistics used by the National Council on Aging indicate that elders who have suffered abuse have a 300% higher risk of death as compared to those who have not been mistreated.

The take-away for this post is that there is an immediately available remedy to stop the mistreatment of elders in the form of a civil protection order.  The county courts have the forms available and magistrates or judicial officers to review the complaints or motions for such relief against an abuser respond quickly.

For elders who are suffering mistreatment at the hands of an abuser, a civil protection order can prevent further harm and help to safeguard the elder’s health.  I believe that raising awareness of available remedies to stop further abuse of elders is an important step toward realizing the goals of WEAAD.

© 2017 Barbara Cashman  www.DenverElderLaw.org

Dementia, Fear and Aid in Dying

Sunset on an Artificial Lake

 

For this first post of June, I am revisiting a topic that has been discussed in previous posts: Alzheimer’s (or other forms of dementia) and the fear of aging.  Combining that volatile mix with the question of assisted dying presents a long list of novel questions.  The topic  was sparked by a phone call I received from someone residing in another state but who was looking for information about Colorado’s End of Life Options Act.  The specific query concerned the caller’s desire to explore options to end a spouse’s suffering from Alzheimer’s disease.  My response was fairly straightforward and I think the caller was a bit surprised by my candor.  I explained that under the Colorado law a patient or “qualified individual” was required to, among other things, have the capacity to give informed consent to the  receipt of the aid-in-dying medication to end the qualified person’s life.  See Colo. Rev. Stat. § 25-48-102(13) defining “qualified individual” and § 106(e) which concerns more details of the individual’s “informed decision.”

The caller was surprised when I explained that the only legislature which has to date considered expanding the aid-in-dying law to dementia patients was Oregon.  The Oregon Senate Bill 893 would allow for those persons otherwise qualified for administering receiving life-ending medications under Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act, except that the  patient who ceases to have capacity to give informed consent can still be given life ending medication if there is a specific advance medical directive which expressly authorizes an agent under a medical power of attorney to collect and administer the life-ending medication if the incapacitated person previously received a prescription for such medication.

Alzheimer’s Disease and other forms of dementia (here I will collectively refer to them as AD) are typically the most feared diseases of post-modern westerners who privilege their rationality (remember the Cartesian mantra “I think therefore I am”) and perceived autonomy over all else.  Further, our techno-medical way of examining aging, of parsing out different functions of one’s life ascribed to different body parts, leads us to believe that whatever form of cognitive impairment – age related or otherwise – might just be a part in need of fixing or a disease waiting to be cured. This type of reductionist thinking refuses to look outside its own narrow pigeon hole. In the meantime, those of us who do not perish will age in our own unique ways and many of us will struggle with its challenges.

Whose fear is it – and whose suffering?

What do we make of this fear of AD and fear of a person’s – er – a personality’s – disintegration?  I think in several important ways it is the same fear as the terror of dying, just a bit more latent and prolonged, and therefore more menacing than death for some people.  I’ll quote from Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar (III.i. 102-105) here, the conversation between Cassius and Brutus:

Cassius: Why he that cuts off twenty years of life

Cuts off so many years of fearing death.

Brutus: Grant that, and then death is a benefit:

So are we Caesar’s friends that have abridged

His time of fearing death.

There are many ways to respond to one’s own AD and to that of a loved one’s.  One way is to project our own fears onto the other person, who appears a shadow of the former self or as completely incapacitated.   But there is no standard response, even though some “conventional wisdom” (I use the term tongue in cheek here) might be welcomed by many who find the disease and its process most bewildering.  A slight detour here . . .

Bewilder is defined in the Merriam Webster online dictionary as (transitive verb):

1:  to cause to lose one’s bearings (see bearing 6c) bewildered by the city’s maze of roads;

2:  to perplex or confuse especially by a complexity, variety, or multitude of objects or considerations His decision bewildered her. utterly bewildered by the instructions.

And what if we break down that verb into a command – be wilder, wild from the noun wild) to be:

1: A natural state or uncultivated or uninhabited region.

2: (the wilds) A remote uninhabited or sparsely inhabited area.

Now back to my topic. . .

My concern is that there are many faces of Alzheimer’s Disease just as there are many aspects to an individual’s response to a loved one affected by AD.  I am thinking particularly of a recent article published in Kaiser Health News, entitled “How to Help Alzheimer’s Patients Enjoy Life, Not Just ‘Fade Away,’” and you can read that here.  The fact remains that each person is affected by AD is his or her own way and the “preoccupation with the cerebral pathology” (which the psychiatrist Dr. David Rothschild criticized in his 1936 paper on the psychodynamic model of senile dementia) often serves to fan the flames of fear and anxiety over our collective preoccupation with the losses of aging.  There are many other paths to choose here – not just the one of least resistance which is fear based.

© 2017 Barbara Cashman  www.DenverElderLaw.org

When and How Should Someone Report Suspected Elder Financial Abuse or Exploitation?

Safety in Numbers

My posts about reporting elder abuse remain my most popular among readers and since it’s been a while since I’ve written on the topic, I thought it was time! I get regular calls from people about this question, often from adult children who are concerned about what is going on with a parent.  Plus, I listened to a webinar put on by the ABA last week about recognizing and preventing these scams.  Today I’m focusing on federal programs and resources.  Here’s a link to the US Department of Justice (DOJ) Elder Justice Initiative to get started.

Among the presenters at the webinar were a representative from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and a prosecutor from the US DOJ Civil Division’s Consumer Protection Branch.  I mention these two federal resources because most of us tend to focus only on local or state law enforcement when it comes to reporting suspected financial abuse or exploitation of an elders.  One other recent detail popped up on a listserve recently, reporting a scam concerning what was represented to be an “escrow company” to the victim and who told her they were assisting in the sale of her time share in Mexico.  Apparently tens of thousands of dollars were cumulatively wired to the scammers, for the purported purpose of covering taxes and transaction fees.  I searched online and found several posts about these types of scams that sound like perfectly legitimate businesses.  One of these scammers was using the name of a legitimate Colorado business.  Couple this with a scammer’s ability to “spoof” a phone number on the recipient’s caller ID, and it’s a pretty dangerously convincing mix!

The scammers are as familiar as the rest of us with the adage “if it’s too good to be true it probably is,” but some of these scams persist, coming in many new and different forms.  The more troubling scam scenario however is the much more legitimate sounding scam, which doesn’t purport to be a “sure thing,” but instead rely on a common human tendency toward “in for a penny, in for a pound” behavior, or what economists refer to as sunk cost fallacy and psychologists call commitment bias.

Many of these scenarios involve mail fraud and wire transfers.  Read a recent press release from the DOJ about actions concerning mail schemes targeting by foreign nationals.  Last March, the CFPB issued an advisory and a report with recommendations for best practices for banks and credit unions on “how to prevent, recognize, report, and respond to financial exploitation of older Americans. Financial exploitation, the illegal or improper use of a person’s funds, property or assets, is the most common form of elder abuse and costs seniors billions of dollars per year.”  The Advisory, which contains recommendations concerning the development of internal controls for the protection against and reporting of exploitation, training of staff to prevent , detect and respond to elder financial exploitation and using appropriate technology for the detection and reporting to local, state and federal authorities, is available here.  The executive summary of the CFPB’s report begins with an important message:

Elder financial exploitation has been called the crime of the 21st century and deploying effective interventions has never been more important. Older people are attractive targets because they often have assets and regular income. These consumers may be especially vulnerable due isolation, cognitive decline, physical disability, health problems, or bereavement. Elder financial exploitation robs victims of their resources, dignity and quality of life—and they may never recover from it.

You can read more of the report here.

There are many ways that scammers defraud elders and some of these include Medicare, Medicaid and health insurance fraud (which is akin to a form of identity theft), IRS and tax scams, mail fraud and internet scams involving “sweethearts” and online dating, sweepstakes and lottery “winnings” and tech support scam.  The Justice Department also has a helpful roadmap identifying what type of scam and which federal agency to which it can be reported.

One valuable thing for people to consider in reporting an incident of suspected elder financial abuse and exploitation is this: a single victim may not have suffered a devastatingly huge loss, relative to their life savings perhaps, and it may even have been a relatively small loss, but if it is multiplied among a range of victims nationwide, what the scammers take can amount to millions of dollars.  This is why reporting remains critically important.  We are charting new ground here as many facts and figures about the incidence and forms of elder financial abuse and exploitation remain unknown due to underreporting.

That’s all for now.

© Barbara E. Cashman 2017   www.DenverElderLaw.org

Dementia and Its Disproportionate Impact on Women

Denver Elder Law

Italian Doors

I read with interest Heather Snyder, Ph.D.’s blog post from December 28, 2016, titled “Alzheimer’s Falls More Heavily on Women Than on Men.”  She is Senior Director of Medical and Scientific Operations at the Alzheimer’s Association and suggests that effective approaches to preventing, diagnosing and treating Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia (I collectively refer to these as AD for convenience) will likely be tailored to a variety of factors which include genetics, hormones and lifestyle – which involve gender.

The National Institute on Aging observes that Alzheimer’s disease is currently ranked as the sixth leading cause of death in the United States, but recent estimates indicate that the disorder may rank third, just behind heart disease and cancer, as a cause of death for older people.

Awareness of this important detail is lagging! According to an Alzheimer’s Association blog post, women in their 60s are about twice as likely to develop AD than are breast cancer.  That 1 in 6 chance for a woman to develop AD at 65 compares with a 1 in 11 chance for men.  A recent study shows that a person with a particular gene variant, ApoE4, which both men and women may carry, poses a markedly higher risk of the disease to women than men.

Observation, as anecdotal evidence, might suggest that because women tend to live a few years longer than men, they are more likely to have dementia, but this doesn’t hold water.  Dementia, and AD in particular, is a disease that tends to last a number of years and the majority of person affected by the disease are older, er. . .  old – meaning 60 “or better.”  The number of people affected by early-onset AD is less than 5% of all persons affected and most of those persons have the familial AD.  But what causes AD in the remainder of the persons with early-onset  AD and the vast majority of older persons diagnosed by the disease remains unknown.

You might have heard the news in late November about a highly touted AD drug, which had looked promising in clinical trials, showed little promise to significantly slow the decline of dementia caused by the buildup of amyloid plaques as indicative AD.  The latest difficulties will certainly move this field forward and trials of another amyloid-targeting medication are due later this year.

Here is a video about a Swedish photographer’s project, Into Oblivion, which shows poignant pictures of French residents (mostly women) living with AD behind locked doors.  Yes, there is French spoken in the video, but the pictures speak for themselves.  In our country of course, most of us don’t refer to this living arrangement as a “protective unit” or “lockdown,” we choose instead to refer to it as “memory care,” as if living in a secure unit implied care for a failing memory!  It raises the ethical issue about whether confinement is care.

I’ll be writing more on those ethical discussions surrounding care of persons with AD.

© Barbara E. Cashman 2017   www.DenverElderLaw.org

Dementia and the Growing Prevalence of Elder Abuse

Not Winter Flowers

Not Winter Flowers

I was reading a list serve post yesterday that told of the member’s father (a retired attorney in another state) who got a call from a scammer claiming to be an attorney working on behalf of a grandchild in trouble with the law.  The post was essentially a “heads-up” kind of post to a new mutation on the old long lost grandchild scam.  You can read an article about how that scam works from the perspective of the scammer here.  Sadly, some other members of the list serve community reported a couple instances of this one when it worked successfully, relieving the loving grandparent of a sum of money.  One such scam was traced to a caller in the Ukraine!  If it sounds like it might never happen to an elder you know, think again – these folks are quite sophisticated.

This is an introduction to some news that I recently read about our neighbors in the UK: Dementia is the leading cause of death in England and Wales.  Read the BBC News article here.

This means that as other health challenges are effectively managed throughout one’s old age, dementia remains in the background so to speak, a silent killer.  It’s no surprise that the bulk of these dementia deaths were of women, as women tend to have a longer life span than men.  What I thought was particularly interesting was this figure: Dementia, including Alzheimer’s disease, accounted for 15.2% of all female deaths, up from 13.4% in 2014.  Is this due to more effective means of diagnosing Alzheimer’s (which ordinarily must be done with a brain autopsy or at least a slice of that organ’s tissue to identify those amyloid plaques)? Or is it due to an actual rise in the number of persons afflicted with the disease, as demonstrated in the graph in the article which shows it steadily overtaking heart disease since 2012?

Dementia is a leading side effect if you will – of our longevity.  This news doesn’t just impact our health and longevity of course, factors mightily in the need for further raising the awareness of elder abuse.  Folks with dementia are likely to be victims of some form of elder abuse, neglect or exploitation.   The burden on the rest of us to be able to detect elder abuse is crucial to our collective well-being.  The community plays a foremost role in the detection of elder abuse in its many forms and so community members – through meals on wheels volunteer, peers at a community center or members of a faith community, can play a major part in this effort.  I don’t want to minimize the importance of prevention, but I think our awareness needs to focus first on the detection of the myriad forms of elder abuse.

My introduction to this post was about a scam by someone posing as a person assisting a grandchild – but most of the reported cases do not involve “stranger danger” as it is called in the child welfare context.  Sadly, when the abuser or exploiter is an adult child or other family member (as the vast majority of such cases appear to be) the elder is faced with a difficult choice indeed because their ability to be maintained in their own home is severely compromised.  We have some battered women’s shelters, but no emergency housing for abused elders.   We simply must be able to move forward with the development of services for at risk elders and design some kind of basic architecture of supportive services.  Right now, everything is dependent on where an elder lives.   How many community resources there are largely depends on local and state funding because whether the detection resources, such as law enforcement and adult protection services, are adequately informed to detect elder abuse – makes a huge difference.

Here’s a link to a very informative program from Nashville Public Television.  Especially as we tout “aging in place” as the best kind of living arrangements for most elders, we must face what that can mean for them and the risks it can pose.  We must respond to this call for being present to our elder community members!  I will write more about what looks to most of us to be a challenging landscape of familial relations and unfamiliar ethical territory.

© Barbara E. Cashman 2016   www.DenverElderLaw.org

Successful Elderhood, Autonomy and Driving

 

Columns of Support

Columns of Support

Last week I was driving from my office in Littleton to my dental appointment in southeast Denver. I took a familiar route, proceeding down the twists and turns of Monaco Parkway as I proceeded north of the Denver Tech Center. I’m not in the habit of recounting my driving experiences in these blog posts, but that afternoon was different because I called 911 while underway.  . . . There was an elderly driver who was driving in the parallel northbound lane alongside me for several blocks and then he moved over (negotiating the median in a sort of left turn) to the southbound side of the parkway as he proceeded northbound (at 30 mph or better). Luckily there were no cars for the four or so blocks he drove down the wrong side of the parkway, so a head-on collision was avoided.  He corrected himself and ended up driving behind me for several more blocks before turning off from Monaco Parkway. I didn’t think it was a drunk driver – I suspected it was a confused driver.  Just a couple days before a colleague from one of my listserves had asked me about what could be done regarding contacting someone about an elder he knows who has much difficulty operating a motor vehicle.   This is a tricky matter!  He forwarded me the email he received from the commander of the metro district for the Colorado State Patrol, which advised him to

Dial *CSP(277) from a cell phone if you observe dangerous driving behavior.  Of course, if the situation rises to the level of an emergency, you can always dial 911.  These situations are particularly difficult as pro-actively requiring a person to submit to a re-exam for their driving privilege can only be initiated by a family member or a physician.  Law enforcement can make the request but only after observing driving actions that would support the need.

I was reminded of the 14-year-old boy who was killed in southeast Denver by an 81-year-old driver with a history of driving problems.  This issue of when it is time to turn over the car keys is a difficult one for many elders as well as their family members because alternative transportation arrangements are required to get the elder to the grocery store, appointments and other places.  Many elders will not willingly give up their car keys and sadly, it often takes a crisis or an accident for the elder and family members to realize driving is no longer a safe option for the elder.

One of the other factors (besides requiring alternative transportation for a car-less elder) contributing to the difficulty of determining when driving is no longer safe is the challenge of getting a diagnosis of dementia.  This fear of such a diagnosis is shared by elder and family members – which is why I have referred to dementia as being “contagious” in the sense that we are all afraid of it – for the elder and for ourselves as family members.

So when do we decide and how do we decide, as individuals, families and communities – when we are no longer able to safely operate a motor vehicle?  Do we tenaciously cling to our badge of independence?  A Rilke quote comes to mind here:

The transformed speaks only to relinquishers.  All holders-on are stranglers.

From: Uncollected Poems by Rainer Maria Rilke, translated by Edward Snow, 1996.

What part of our identity as autonomous persons is our ability to be able to drive?  This concern with safety is a distinct one because it involves operating a car and all the dangers that poses to the drivers and others on the roads (or sidewalks).  Here is a recent article which addresses the challenges to driving a car which are faced by the growing number of persons diagnosed with Alzheimer’s Disease.  How do we negotiate the changes in our lives and our ability to manage for ourselves as we age?  These questions do not have easy or even simple answers, but we must nonetheless grapple with them!  I think another poem is in order. . .. this one entitled “Sunset:”

Great carnal mountains crouching in the cloud

That marrieth the young earth with a ring,

Yet still its thoughts builds heavenward, whence spring

Wee villages of vapor, sunset-proud. —

And to the meanest door hastes one pure-browed

White-fingered star, a little, childish thing,

The busy needle of her light to bring,

And stitch, and stitch, upon the dead day’s shroud.

Poises the sun upon his west, a spark

Superlative,—and dives beneath the world;

From the day’s fillets Night shakes out her locks;

List! One pure trembling drop of cadence purled—

“Summer!”—a meek thrush whispers to the dark.

Hark! the cold ripple sneering on the rocks!

E. E. Cummings (or e.e. cummings, if you prefer)

I will write more on this topic soon.

© 2016 Barbara Cashman  www.DenverElderLaw.org

Let’s Raise Awareness About Elder Abuse!

elder abuse awareness

Moonlight Near Westcliffe

For this last post of June, I wanted to circle back on the importance of raising awareness of elder abuse.  You can read the Presidential Proclamation on June 15, 2016, for World Elder Abuse Awareness Day right here and if you’re curious about the language of the Elder Justice Act, passed as part of the Affordable Care Act (as Title VI subtitle H, §§6701 et seq.), read this link.

In Colorado, as in nearly all other states, adult protection units are responsible for the reporting and investigation (along with law enforcement agencies) of elder abuse.  The Elder Justice Act is federal legislation which requires the U.S Department of Health and Human Services “to oversee the development and management of federal resources for protecting out seniors from elder abuse.”  Additionally, the U.S. Department of Justice is charged with taking action to prevent elder abuse.

The effective coordination of these county, state and federal efforts is of course a work in progress.  What we do know about raising awareness of elder abuse and exploitation is that it will lead to more reporting of such abuse.  Here is a link to a recent article in the Sacramento Bee which links the raised awareness of such abuse to a dramatic increase in reports to local law enforcement.   This is important to bear in mind as the baby boomers begin to become a greater proportion of the cohort affected by elder abuse and exploitation.  In my practice, I have unfortunately become familiar with national and international internet scams which relieve elders of their hard-earned retirement money.  This is a particular area in which the federal government might play a unique role as so much of our law of the internet is based in federal law.

Another tragic side effect of the victimization of elders, besides the shame, victimization and impoverishment which results from financial exploitation is that these elders, along with elder victims of all types of elder abuse – including physical and sexual abuse – are likely to die much sooner than their peers who were not victimized.  But many pieces of this puzzle remain unidentified due to the lack of long term studies which collect valuable statistics about elder abuse of various types! This is of course another aspect of the importance of raising awareness.  Because so much of elder abuse still remains unreported, this is a major quality of life challenge not just for elders and their loved ones and community, but also for those of us of “a certain age” who might be looking forward to a safe and meaningful elderhood.  How can we make things better for elders at risk now and in the future?

What is elder abuse and who are its primary victims of such elder abuse? By the numbers, they are largely women and the “old” of the elder population – meaning folks over 80.  Sadly, the vast majority of the abusers are family members of the elder or trusted friends or advisors.  Because most elders live in the community – not in institutions – this is a particular challenge for all of us who are community members to become familiar with the signs so that we can report concerns about safety, suspicious behaviors and the like to local law enforcement.

First – what are the kinds of elder abuse that we’re talking about? Here is a helpful listing from the U.S. government’s Administration on Aging website, which also has many helpful resources:

  • Physical Abuse—inflicting physical pain or injury on a senior, e.g. slapping, bruising, or restraining by physical or chemical means.
  • Sexual Abuse—non-consensual sexual contact of any kind.
  • Neglect—the failure by those responsible to provide food, shelter, health care, or protection for a vulnerable elder.
  • Exploitation—the illegal taking, misuse, or concealment of funds, property, or assets of a senior for someone else’s benefit.
  • Emotional Abuse—inflicting mental pain, anguish, or distress on an elder person through verbal or nonverbal acts, e.g. humiliating, intimidating, or threatening.
  • Abandonment—desertion of a vulnerable elder by anyone who has assumed the responsibility for care or custody of that person.
  • Self-neglect—characterized as the failure of a person to perform essential, self-care tasks and that such failure threatens his/her own health or safety.

 

And what about the warning signs of elder abuse which we can be more aware of?

  • Bruises, pressure marks, broken bones, abrasions, and burns may be an indication of physical abuse, neglect, or mistreatment.
  • Unexplained withdrawal from normal activities, a sudden change in alertness, and unusual depression may be indicators of emotional abuse.
  • Bruises around the breasts or genital area can occur from sexual abuse.
  • Sudden changes in financial situations may be the result of exploitation.
  • Bedsores, unattended medical needs, poor hygiene, and unusual weight loss are indicators of possible neglect.
  • Behavior such as belittling, threats, and other uses of power and control by spouses are indicators of verbal or emotional abuse.
  • Strained or tense relationships, frequent arguments between the caregiver and elderly person are also signs.
  • Changes in the elder’s personality or behavior, especially if the elder becomes withdrawn or despondent, questions to her or him can be very important in identifying a situation which may be the cause of the elder’s silent suffering.

Lastly, here is another helpful self-help resource specifically for Colorado residents – from Colorado Legal Services.  That’s all for now – but don’t forget . . . . Denver’s Senior law Day is coming up on Friday July 29, 2016 and will be held at the Denver Police Protective Association’s Event Center.  More details later.

© Barbara E. Cashman 2016   www.DenverElderLaw.org