What do you all think?

[cindig2]

This isn't a Baptist question, but is a Christian question.
What do you all think of a parent putting their home and assets in their children's name to avoid paying for their own care if they go into a nursing home, and having the tax payers pay? I personally feel like it is wrong, the government has tried to regulate this by making it five years instead of three.
Anyone have an opinion on this?

 

[johnd]

Hi cindig2
johnd here , I am new to the B B , I do hope this mite helps you, What did the Lord say when
he was asked the same thing!!! in mark 12:14-17
I think the Lord gave the right answer, p t l

 

[delly]

cindig, We just buried our mother in November. She was in a nursing home for a little over a year. She did not put her property in her children's name. The government got all of her Social Security and Retirement check during that time. Now they are also going to take her property to help pay the remainder of what her check did not pay. She received almost #1,500 per month but they stated that it costs between $3,000 and $4,000 a month to take care of one patient in a nursing home. Several years ago we tried to get her to put her property in our name, but she could not understand how the government would take it.
I must say that every thing they did for her was charged at an exorbatant rate. Everything except meals and baths was done by a specialist. It looks like the people who work there were only trained to do the most basic care. If she had her toenails trimmed, it had to be done by a podiatrist. Her meds were ordered from a place almost 100 miles away instead of cheaper places nearby. If they got her up to walk a little they charged $75 just to do that. Her Medicare paid for a lot of this but some things had to be covered by TennCare and now the State of Tennessee wants their money back.
Her property is only 2 acres and a mobile home. We will be fortunate to get $25,000 out of it, then we have to give the state most of that.
There are 7 of us and my youngest brother'schildren. None of us have ever taken any handout from the government in any way. Everyone,accept me and my brother who died owns,property. Every one wants their property to go to their kids.
No one ever expects to have to go to a Nursing Home but when we do the goverment gets everything we have worked for all our lives. Maybe it's better to never have anything then they can't take anything away from your kids who may really need it. I hope you are prepared to give them everything you have worked for. I have seen them take hugh farms and homes worth several hundred thousand dollars in some cases. The more you have the bigger the welcome to the nursing home.

 

[Thankful]

To answer your question, I do not think that it is right.

A person should be responsible for his/her own care.

The problem is that most people do not have enough money to pay for extended care in nursing homes. It is very expensive. After all, a person in a nursing home receives around the clock care, which includes medical care. They receive three meals a day, snacks, etc.

A person in a nursing care facility actually has their own maid, dietitian, cook, housekeeper, butler, doctor, nurse, nurse aid, groundskeeper, handyman, transportation, carpenter, physical therapist, activity director, chaplain, hairdresser, etc.

The fee charged by the nursing home seems to be too much, but it really isn't.

I believe that social security and retirement go for the person's care in the nursing home. It does not go to the government. Actually, the government will step in and assist in the payment of the person's care. (This is our tax money). Therefore, if the property is given to the children and the government pays for the care, then we as taxpayers are paying for that person's care instead of that person or that person's children who are the responsible parties.

Personally, I have an extended care policy and other income that will be used if I need long term care. I do not consider it giving the money to the government. It will be for my care.

We have taken care of our children and they do not expect any of our money or property if it is needed for our care.

 

[HankD]

I personally feel like it is wrong, the government has tried to regulate this by making it five years instead of three.

I feel that the government is wrong and imposing an unfair burden on the people.

Each of us works every year until Tax Freedom day (late May-early june in America) for the government:

We work all of our lives supporting our government big time and then at the end we and our families are subjected to a medical community that the government refuses to control in terms of costs.

Why feel guilty about taking those steps to keep some of it in a legitimate and legal way.

HankD

 

[Scarlett O.]

cindig2, this isn't a matter of not wanting to pay your own way.

This is a matter of losing everything you have. I mean everything. Property, homes, every cent in the bank. Everything you have that you worked for and to have the right to say how it is spent or left for inheritance is snatched away from you like you are a blithering idiot.

You are left with nothing. And your family STILL has to pay for a host of incidentals that the government won't pay for.

This has nothing to do with sloth or greed. It has to do with the unfortunate and ridiculous costs of keeping the elderly in nursing homes.

And not everyone has the luxury nor the ability to keep them at home.

3 of my grandparents died at home. My last grandparent is in the nursing home. My dad and his brother put everything in their names 10 years ago. It saved my grandmother's precious house and her dignity. Believe you me, my family's eyes have been disgustingly opened at the horrid way the elderly's assests are ripped from them.

We are content, however, with her good and humane treatment and the way the nursing home treats her and others we see there.

Don't confuse an attempt to save an elderly parent's home and assests with greed and an attempted escape of responsibility.

Peace-
S.O.

 

[Thankful]

If a person enters a nursing home as a private pay person (no government assistance), they can have a larger room, private bath and not limited by the rules set out by the State.

I do not see how saving a home and assets benefits a person who cannot live in the home and the only need they have is for their care.

I think it hurts a person's dignity more when they have to take state assistance than if they can pay for their care out of their own funds.

I do know that we take care of our veterans and they do not have to liquidate their assets to enter a veteran's center when they cannot pay the entire amount. The government does take care of them.

I still think that putting a person's house in another's name to get state assistance is escaping responsibility and does show greed.

The elderly when they reduce their assets and enter a nursing home may use these assets to pay for their funeral. They are allowed to keep their car and certain amount of money (this of course varies according to state rules). Medical expenses, doctor, hospital, ambulance expensives are all covered.

If a person lives long enough, then they will lose all their assets, but they also lose those assets when they die.

Maybe our taxes would not be so high. Maybe we would not have to work so many months to pay them if everyone who can would pay for their own care and not put their assets in another person's name to receive government assistance.

 

[dianetavegia]

1 Timothy 5:4 But if any widow has children or grandchildren, let them first learn to show piety at home and to repay their parents; for this is good and acceptable before God......... . 8 But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever... 16 If any believing man or woman has widows, let them relieve them, and do not let the church be burdened, that it may relieve those who are really widows.

If the parent or grandparent is not too ill to remain in a home, I believe they should be taken care of either in their own homes or brought into our homes. That would solve this problem. Some refuse. Jim's grandmother was in her mid 90's and refused to come and live with us or other relatives. She was not able to walk and couldn't bear noise or a lot of activity. She had sold her home while she was still able to drive and went into an assisted living place. When her savings was finally used up and her ability to walk or care for herself in anyway was gone, she had to move into a state funded facility. She lived to be 98.

Some refuse help from relatives out of self pride and end up with no pride left. Very sad.

I don't know what will happen when my mother (if my mother) gets to that stage. She's a very mean woman and would terrorize our household. She cannot tolerate children or animals either. She has lots of money and several homes, plus perfect health at almost 73. I'm sure she'd fight us every step of the way if we tried to bring her here or have my brother and his newest wife (number 6) move in with her.

 

[menageriekeeper]

Assisted living care is not the same as nursing home care and is quite a bit cheaper.

This we found out while looking for care for T's grandfather. Now things may be different in other states, and you get what you pay for, so different facilities charge different rates. However, we found a very nice assisted living facility that provides 24 hour care, sees to it that hygenic needs are met(big thing for alheimer's patients), feeds them 3 meals and three snacks a day(and sees to it that they eat), gives meds and cleans up after them, all for about a third of what similar nursing home care costs.

As for the original question. I think that grown children are just that, grown. They should not expect anything more from their parents than their raising. These things used to not even be a question. When Mom/Pop got to old to take care of themselves they moved in with the kids. There was no where else for the most part.

It is hard to see the family home be sold to pay for nursing home care, but think how much harder it would be to provide 24 hour a day care for a person who can't respond, can't care for themselves, or maybe can't even turn themselves over in bed. I couldn't physically stand up to it and I am young yet. My FIL and his sister have been providing care to his father who has alzheimer's for nearly three years now. The physical toll on the two of them has been terrible.

I could go on and on about this, but the bottom line is, Papa's money will first go to his care, so his care doesn't end up killing my FIL and his sister. If anything is left, then maybe we will get an inheritance. If not, he helped us out plenty before he ever got like this. That'll be enough.

 

[dianetavegia]

Jim's grandmother and step grandfather had the option of cooking for themselves or eating with a group. When her husband died, grandma began to eat one meal a day with the others and would attend their special days, trips, etc. She really enjoyed her time in the assisted living facility. She expected to move from there into their nursing home but she was well and quite capable of taking care of herself for so long that her money ran out by time she was too ill. She'd broken her hip 3 times and it never healed the last time. Just moving in bed was very painful for her. Sad....... Still, I think with Grandma, having a stranger bathe and dress her was less demeaning than if one of her grandchildren had done it. She'd outlived her children and many grandchildren and great grandchildren.

 

[HankD]

My MIL had Alzheimers for over 10 years before she died. She had raised her 3 children alone and bought a house in Santa Clara California after the departure of her husband. Her express desire was for her children to inherit her estate.

All would have been lost to corporate profit had the family decided to institutionalize her. My wife cared for her 24/7 for several years and she was in much better hands in terms of genuine care and concern. We brought in special caregivers for bathing, periodic therapy and respite.

It just doesn't seem right for the corporate/state establishment to devour the life time savings of someone who has contributed into the system all during that life.

It can be legally moderated.

HankD

 

[menageriekeeper]

Do you mind if I a couple of questions Hank, that might help clarify why we are of different opinions? If I'm being nosy just ignore me.

Was your wife in her sixties when she started taking care of her mother? Prior to the onset of Alzheimer's, did your MIL like you?

My FIL will be 65 in July. He suffers from serious heart problems and diabetes and is disabled. Papa didn't like my MIL before the alzheimer's kicked in, he hates the very sight of her now. He has called her names I'd get banned for if I repeated them here, not to mention accusing her of stealing from him and trying to murder him and this was while he still had some semblence of sanity. He feels just about the same way about his son in law.

This means that neither of them can be of any help toward Papa's care. FIL and his sister do it all 24/7, every other two week period. Aunt J btw is 70 and almost blind and has other health problems. In spite, she drives up from south Mississippi to north Alabama by herself.

My husband is the only grandchild in driving distance and he works anywhere from 50-60 hrs a week, so he's no help. We have three kids, so I'm no help. And we are settled financially.

Inhome caretakers here cost more than the assisted living facility even if you can find someone who won't steal you blind.

An inheritance is a luxury, not a right. Papa's money goes to care for Papa.

Cudo's to you and your wife for being up to caring for your MIL.

 

[HankD]

Do you mind if I a couple of questions Hank, that might help clarify why we are of different opinions? If I'm being nosy just ignore me.

Was your wife in her sixties when she started taking care of her mother?

No.

Prior to the onset of Alzheimer's, did your MIL like you?

Yes.

"Cudos" Thank you.

An inheritance is a luxury, not a right. Papa's money goes to care for Papa.

So is the desire of the loved-one a right. My MIL wanted her estate to stay in the family.

I personally resent the fact that people (not necessarily you or anyone else who has posted to this thread) equate this desire to keep the estate in the family and not hand it over to the establishment, with greed on the family's part; especially those not knowing all the details of the specific cases.

My MIL worked long and hard with a departed husband to raise her family and buy a house.
Neither she nor the family felt that it should go anywhere else but should stay in the family.

Until the latter stages and until the anti-social symptoms set in, my MIL was happy to live with family members. She lived with us for about seven years, she died in her sleep at age 86 in our home last spring.

Her daughter, my sister-in-law, who is totally disabled and requires kidney dialysis is now living in the house that my MIL worked so long and hard to acquire.

HankD

[ March 13, 2005, 10:12 AM: Message edited by: HankD ]

 

[menageriekeeper]

So is the desire of the loved-one a right. My MIL wanted her estate to stay in the family.

No, desire is a want, not a right. This is exactly where you and I differ in our thinking.

You MIL didn't desire alzheimer's but it wasn't a right for her not to suffer in it. She didn't have a choice. We can want something all day long but it doesn't mean that it is going to happen.

Your MIL may have wanted her house to go to her family, but when she came down with a desease that in the end requires such personalized care, her needs then superceded her wants. Somehow that care must be paid for.

Now your MIL was lucky(so was her family) that she had family to care for her that were both willing and physically able.

Not everyone is, however, able to find a relative who will care for them. They may have a bunch waiting in line for the "inheritance", but they are not willing to make the sacrifice of caring for an alzheimer patient. So what happens then? Grandma/Grandpa gets thrown in the nearest nursing home on whatever the government will pay, because she signed her property over to her children. And just where does the government get the money to pay for her/his care? From my pocketbook! Yours to, if you stop to think about it.

This kind of thing happens all the time where I live. The usual excuse it that Grandma/Grandpa payed taxes and SS all their lives and why should the government now take over their home? Well maybe because she/he needs care above what their retirement income will provide and their assets are the only thing they have left to pay for it with.

To long have we lived in a society where the government hands out money to whoever has their hands out for it. This has given us a sense of entitlement that we ought not to have. It is not a right for us to leave behind assets for our children. It is our right to have those assets used to provide the best care possible for us when we can no longer care for ourselves. Have we worked all our lives to be thrown into whatever home becomes available because of our desire to leave our children something.

The best thing I can leave my children is the Lord and the tools they need to make their own living. I don't want them living in expectation of something that may never occur.

As a matter of fact, I've already begun to tell my children to not think they have to put their lives on hold in order to provide care for me. If they want to provide that care, wonderful. If not, just see to it that I'm fed and warm and the rest will take care of itself. I'd rather not be a physical burden to them and leave them less.

 

[Dr. Bob]

Because of my illness and inability to get any medical insurance (at any cost), we could lose all of our assets - home, savings, ira, etc in a couple of days. My wife would be left with nothing.

We are examining a "trust" concept right now which would have limited liability for my wife when my time comes.

I don't want to "gyp/jyp/jip/gip" er cheat (can never remember how to spell that word) the government - but I have to provide for my wife first.

My MD says my condition will worsen but I will probably be able to stay at home until death and not have to pay the outrageous costs of long-term care in a private facility. Guess there ARE little things to be thankful for . .

 

[Thankful]

Dr. Bob, I see your situation as different from a person who has no dependents. You are responsible to take care of your wife if possible and I certainly admire you for that.

In some states, if one spouse has to go a nursing home, then the other spouse can keep the home and certain assets, and the spouse in the nursing home can receive state benefits.

 

[delly]

None of us are being greedy. We knew that we could not keep our mother at any of our homes. She was very ill tempered and disagreeable. Besides, all of us have jobs to go to so there was no one at home to take care of her.
As to the great care that nursing homes provide; let me say that it wasn't always that great, but this was supposed to be the best around and we could not get her into any others. She was admitted to the hospital 5 times during the year for being dehydrated because they would not see that she drank enough water. There were many complaints of them not giving the patients water or seeing that they ate their meals. She needed to be assisted with meals and none of us were close enough to be there to feed her. Once she could not be admitted to the hospital because the nursing home had put it in her folder that her primary provider was TennCare and they wouldn't cover the hospital stay. When my sister questioned the doctor and told him that she had Medicare, they called the nursing home and, sure enough, the papers and a copy of her medicare card were in her folder. They had simply overlooked it for months. She was admitted to the hospital without any hesitation after that. That was the first time when she was dehydrated.

We gave them money to keep her hair groomed, but, when we went to visit, she looked like her hair hadn't been combed and it was long and stringy. We always asked about the money and they said they had it. They just forgot to get her hair done.

Although she was a vegetarian (and we told them this) they insisted that she must eat the meat they brought. She would not eat it at all.

All those people may have been on the payroll to provide care for the patients, but being on the payroll and actually providing the care may be totally different from the care the patients actually get.
We complained but had no options to making them do what they needed to do for her.

My mother worked all her life. She didn't have a high paying job and never had enough to save up any money. She had a small place and wanted her kids to have it after she was gone. I'm sure she would be turning over in her grave if she knew that the state is getting the biggest part of what she worked so hard for.

 

[cindig2]

I agree with Thankful and menagereikeeper,
It just doesn't make sense to me to think that we are entitled to let the government pay our way because we don't want what we worked for all our lives to pay for it. What right do we have to demand that? That is what long term care insurance is for. And, it needs to be purchased before you get too old and have medical problems so that you can afford it. My husband and I have had long term care insurance for 5 years, and we are both still in our 40's.
The government has tried to make it more difficult to do this sort of thing by making it 5 years instead of 3. I personally wouldn't want my parents in a nursing home on medicade if they had a home that could help pay their way. There is a big difference the way private pay and medicade are treated. If you can afford it, get long term care insurance!

And Diane, I agree with you. I personally plan on taking care of my parents as long as it is possible, but they also have long term care ins. and it also icludes in home care.

 

[menageriekeeper]

Delly, the problems you have described with your mother's nursing home are rampant here as well. You have to have someone who can physically stay on top of things every day or two and complain loudly, to get decent care. And they charge an arm and a leg.

And it is a racket, to a certain extent. But part of that problem is that consumers don't question the bills or even request an itemized accounting of the care recieved.

IF the patient is mobile, assisted living is a much better choice.

Dr. Bob, I agree with Thankful. You are in a different position. The government shouldn't be able to take your wife's assets in order to pay for your care. Seeing to it that you have care while still providing for her, now, while you are still fairly healthy is a wise decision.

 

[Thankful]

Well, I just typed a post and I don't know what happened to it. I hope that this isn't a duplicate. Of course, I can't remember exactly what I said in the first one.

When a person is in a nursing home, it is helpful to have someone who can visit often and coordinate the care with the workers.

When my dad went to a nursing home, my mother went every day, all day to take care of him and you better believe it, those workers knew what she wanted. She demanded excellent care. Then when she checked into the nursing home, she could demand the kind of care that she wanted.

I, too, wanted my parents to live with me, but they would not.

Dehydration and Bed sores are a problem with most bed patients.

There is a patients bill of rights that gives the patients certain rights and it is difficult for the workers to make them do things that they do not want to do. They are like children, but must be treated with dignity like adults.

I certainly admire the workers who can persuade these patients to do things that they don't want to do. Many of them do not want to bathe. Some do not want to eat. Some want to wear the same clothes every day. Some do not want their hair shampooed or cut. The list goes on and on.

I am sure that there are some "bad" nursing homes and some "bad" workers, but for the most part, most of them are doing a wonderful job, and I for one appreciate those workers. Many of them love their patients.

It is strange that a hospital would refuse a Medicare age person. Probably was some clerk who didn't understand.