Sonoma County CA Separates Elderly Gay Couple & Sells All Their Possessions

[iamkeri1]

"Tenants in common" is not a good choice to protect a couples rights. A home, car or other property owned as tenants in common gives each partner rights to only half of said property. Children or even distant relatives of the deceased or incapacitated partner could force the property into probate. The remainng partner would most likely be forced to sell the property and give half to the suing family member. Any jointly owned property should be titled as "Joint tenants", with the added phrase "with full rights to survivor", which adds further clarity to the intention of the owners.

"Tenants in common" should only be used if either partner has children or other relatives that they wish to have to leave their assets to rather than their partner.

This article makes me so sad, But I add my plea that you not use it as an excuse to avoid obtaining necessary documents to protect your rights. No system is perfect. This is an awful situation, but it could have happened just as easily to a cohabiting elderly straight couple. In Florida, during the last election, when the charming voters of my state decided to eliminate the legal status of "domestic partner", the biggest group lobbying to keep it from being passed was an elder rights group which used only straight couples as spokespeople. The religious right was so anxious to eliminate any possibility that gay folks could establish a legal relationship of any kind, that they through cohabiting straight people under the truck as well.
Sad Smooches,
Keri

Originally Posted by June

I read the articles this morning and wondered what "The rest of the story" was.

If someone has medical power of attorney and presents it, it must be honored, regardless of the relationship. I mean, you could have anyone have your power of attorneys, even if they're not blood/legal family.

Why was the other partner put into a nursing home? Why were the belongings sold? Was the other partner suffering from dementia or otherwise infirm at the time? Was the paperwork submitted at the time, or discovered later after all this stuff had happened, which doesn't excuse it, but might explain it better.

There are a lot of holes in this story that need to be filled in as far as timelines before I am satisfied that this was an actual deliberate act of homophobia and not just some kind of paperwork snafu with disastrous results.

I don't like being used by either side of the media, and frankly, this feels a bit skewed to me.

It did however remind me of the 1st If Walls Could Talk (someone else go find the video, I'm too lazy) where the female couple had been together for 30 years and when one of them died, the other lost everything even though she had paid the mortgage too. I remember crying hard and long as I watched that.

AND ALSO! Don't use this story as a reason NOT to get protected in your partnership in anyway you can because you think "it doesn't matter". It does.

Tenants in common if you own a house
Legal AND Medical POA's
Wills
Right of Remains
Living Wills - Who gets to pull the plug

There's some other stuff, someone else can fill in. It seems like I have about 7 different documents with my partner outlining what will happen and who's in charge.

[Corkey]

Originally Posted by Kobi

Corky,

I have worked in health care for 30 years. People can not be "involuntarily committed" to a nursing home. Involuntary committment is a legal, mental health thing not a medical thing.

People can be coerced, prodded, persuaded etc. and this is usually because it is for their own well being i.e. not safe for them to be at home or alone or having an inadequate caretaker.

People who are unable to make these decisions for themselves require quardians and/or conservators, both court appointed and court accountable proceedings.

There is something big missing from this story or it deliberately used inflammatory language to piss people off.

Have done this work forever. You can NOT commit someone to a nursing home.

First off, the name is Corkey, and secondly in my own family my cousins mother in-law was FORCED into a nursing home, she didn't want to go, she fought not to go, but was FORCED by the courts to go. You weren't there, you have no clue how horrible it is to see this happen to a loved one.

[cinderella]

Signed and shared.

Originally Posted by PearlsNLace

A friend shared this link with me, and it helped with my frustrated feeling that there was nothing I could do about this situation.

Well, actually, there is a little something here we can do. This is what I have done, and you can do it to:

http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/...paign_KEY=2441


Just thought Id share.

[SuperFemme]

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/di...0&file=260-267

260. Unless the provision or context otherwise requires, the
definitions in this chapter govern the construction of this part.



262. "Beneficiary" means the person entitled, but for the person's
disclaimer, to take an interest.



263. (a) "Creator of the interest" means a person who establishes,
declares, creates, or otherwise brings into existence an interest.
(b) "Creator of the interest" includes, but is not limited to, the
following:
(1) With respect to an interest created by intestate succession,
the person dying intestate.
(2) With respect to an interest created under a will, the
testator.
(3) With respect to an interest created under a trust, the
settlor.
(4) With respect to an interest created by succession to a
disclaimed interest, the disclaimant of the disclaimed interest.
(5) With respect to an interest created by virtue of an election
to take against a will, the testator.
(6) With respect to an interest created by creation of a power of
appointment, the donor.
(7) With respect to an interest created by exercise or nonexercise
of a power of appointment, the donee.
(8) With respect to an interest created by an inter vivos gift,
the donor.
(9) With respect to an interest created by surviving the death of
a depositor of a Totten trust account or P.O.D. account, the deceased
depositor.
(10) With respect to an interest created under an insurance or
annuity contract, the owner, the insured, or the annuitant.
(11) With respect to an interest created by surviving the death of
another joint tenant, the deceased joint tenant.
(12) With respect to an interest created under an employee benefit
plan, the employee or other owner of an interest in the plan.
(13) With respect to an interest created under an individual
retirement account, annuity, or bond, the owner.




264. "Disclaimant" means a beneficiary who executes a disclaimer on
his or her own behalf or a person who executes a disclaimer on
behalf of a beneficiary.


265. "Disclaimer" means any writing which declines, refuses,
renounces, or disclaims any interest that would otherwise be taken by
a beneficiary.


266. "Employee benefit plan" includes, but is not limited to, any
pension, retirement, death benefit, stock bonus, or profit-sharing
plan, system, or trust.


267. (a) "Interest" includes the whole of any property, real or
personal, legal or equitable, or any fractional part, share, or
particular portion or specific assets thereof, or any estate in any
such property, or any power to appoint, consume, apply, or expend
property, or any other right, power, privilege, or immunity relating
to property.
(b) "Interest" includes, but is not limited to, an interest
created in any of the following manners:
(1) By intestate succession.
(2) Under a will.
(3) Under a trust.
(4) By succession to a disclaimed interest.
(5) By virtue of an election to take against a will.
(6) By creation of a power of appointment.
(7) By exercise or nonexercise of a power of appointment.
(8) By an inter vivos gift, whether outright or in trust.
(9) By surviving the death of a depositor of a Totten trust
account or P.O.D. account.
(10) Under an insurance or annuity contract.
(11) By surviving the death of another joint tenant.
(12) Under an employee benefit plan.
(13) Under an individual retirement account, annuity, or bond.
(14) Any other interest created by any testamentary or inter vivos
instrument or by operation of law.

[Miss Scarlett]

Kobi, I have to disagree with you. I've been in law for nearly as long as you have been in medicine. People most certainly can be involuntarily committed into medical facilities including nursing homes. In NC a court action is filed either for Adult Protective Services or Incompetency. We do numerous cases like this each month - my boss represents our county's DSS in APS, CPS and CSE cases. These cases can be filed and adjudicated in a matter of weeks. Anyone can file one of these cases, not just DSS.

Here is the link to the Complaint filed by Clay Greene's attorneys - please take the time to read this. I think it will give everyone a better understanding of what happened and fill in the gaps in the news story I posted in my OP.

http://www.nclrights.org/site/DocSer...pdf?docID=7461

Just because you have all the right documents doesn't mean some narrowminded and/or ignorant person/institution will honor them.

Remember the lesbian couple from Washington who were in Florida for the Rosie Cruise?

http://www.lambdalegal.org/in-court/...-memorial.html

Here is the link to the Amended Complaint filed in that matter:

http://data.lambdalegal.org/in-court...nt-amended.pdf

Sadly the Federal Court granted the Defendant's Motion and dismissed the action.

We must continue to fight for our equality!

[christie]

Originally Posted by Miss Scarlett

Kobi, I have to disagree with you. I've been in law for nearly as long as you have been in medicine. People most certainly can be involuntarily committed into medical facilities including nursing homes. In NC a court action is filed either for Adult Protective Services or Incompetency. We do numerous cases like this each month - my boss represents our county's DSS in APS, CPS and CSE cases. These cases can be filed and adjudicated in a matter of weeks. Anyone can file one of these cases, not just DSS.

Here is the link to the Complaint filed by Clay Greene's attorneys - please take the time to read this. I think it will give everyone a better understanding of what happened and fill in the gaps in the news story I posted in my OP.

http://www.nclrights.org/site/DocSer...pdf?docID=7461

Just because you have all the right documents doesn't mean some narrowminded and/or ignorant person/institution will honor them.

Remember the lesbian couple from Washington who were in Florida for the Rosie Cruise?

http://www.lambdalegal.org/in-court/...-memorial.html

Here is the link to the Amended Complaint filed in that matter:

http://data.lambdalegal.org/in-court...nt-amended.pdf

Sadly the Federal Court granted the Defendant's Motion and dismissed the action.

We must continue to fight for our equality!

Wow. If you go to page 66 of the first link, the letter to the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors detailing this ordeal is just heartbreaking. I do think that this is a valid story.

I think that part of our wanting to believe that it isnt a full disclosure of the facts is more about us wanting to think that it couldnt happen to us.

Unfortunately, IMO, it can.

[Miss Scarlett]

Originally Posted by apocalipstic

So none of the paperwork we have will work I guess. Wills, powers of attourney, hippa forms, all for nothing.

This is so very sad and telling.

If California acts like this, then those of us in way more conservative states are screwed for sure.

Don't believe that your paperwork is worthless. For every case like this there are hundreds/thousands of couples nationwide who have no problems at all.

I am not surprised to see this happen in California. After all, look what happened with Prop 8.

I don't know what is going on out there...complacency by the LGBTQ Community? Apathy? Laziness? Whatever it is, the LGBTQ Community in the US needs to set aside their differences, band together and stand up like they did back in the 70s.

This attitude isn't only in California. We have it here in NC too. But the fact that it seems to be surfacing out west is scary. I cannot speak for any other area but here in NC it seems that the younger LGBTQ generation is ignorant of their history and takes what few rights we have for the moment for granted.

We must educate the generations following us.

[SuperFemme]

Originally Posted by Miss Scarlett

Don't believe that your paperwork is worthless. For every case like this there are hundreds/thousands of couples nationwide who have no problems at all.

I am not surprised to see this happen in California. After all, look what happened with Prop 8.

I don't know what is going on out there...complacency by the LGBTQ Community? Apathy? Laziness? Whatever it is, the LGBTQ Community in the US needs to set aside their differences, band together and stand up like they did back in the 70s.

This attitude isn't only in California. We have it here in NC too. But the fact that it seems to be surfacing out west is scary. I cannot speak for any other area but here in NC it seems that the younger LGBTQ generation is ignorant of their history and takes what few rights we have for the moment for granted.

We must educate the generations following us.

This is exactly the kind of thing I am frightened of, and I have more paper work than the SCOTUS would need. Legally Married? Check. Living Trust? Check. Advanced Directive? Check. Durable Power of Attorney? Check.

Do NOT let this story keep you from making informed decisions or completing the correct legal paperwork. Let it be a lesson. Give copies of your wishes to your loudest, most vocal loved ones.

The people that will cut a bitch for you if you can't do it yourself.

But do NOT shrug your shoulders and decide WTF why should I bother?

[Strappie]

This story.. actually made me cry. How shameful. I sent this off to my family.

I told them I hope that this will not happen to me or anyone else.

This has to end!

[Miss Scarlett]

Originally Posted by SuperFemme

This is exactly the kind of thing I am frightened of, and I have more paper work than the SCOTUS would need. Legally Married? Check. Living Trust? Check. Advanced Directive? Check. Durable Power of Attorney? Check.

Do NOT let this story keep you from making informed decisions or completing the correct legal paperwork. Let it be a lesson. Give copies of your wishes to your loudest, most vocal loved ones.

The people that will cut a bitch for you if you can't do it yourself.

But do NOT shrug your shoulders and decide WTF why should I bother?

Originally Posted by Strappie

This story.. actually made me cry. How shameful. I sent this off to my family.

I told them I hope that this will not happen to me or anyone else.

This has to end!

By all means make certain that you let as many people as possible know your wishes. And know the wishes of your loved ones.

This is not just an LGBTQ issue. What happened to this couple can happen to straight couples too. Click on the link - the story has an audio clip from Barbara Coombs Lee that is worth listening too.

From NPR:

Obama Pushes Hospitals To Honor Patients' Choices

By Scott Hensley
April 16, 2010

By ordering hospitals that take Medicare or Medicaid money to allow patients to be visited and helped by whomever they want, President Obama was taking a shot at those that have resisted the wishes often recorded in advance directives.

The presidential memo specifically notes the challenges for gay and lesbian people whose partners have sometimes been unable to act as legal surrogates.

Many hospitals already have broadened the categories of people permitted to visit or aid a hospitalized person. And some states, including North Carolina, have patient bills of rights that give the hospitalized person the power to say who's OK to visit.

But there's also been some backsliding on advance directives, too. Barbara Coombs Lee, president of Compassion & Choices, a patient advocacy group, talked with NPR's Julie Rovner about problems in some states, such as Idaho, where conscience provisions allow health workers who disagree with a patients' treatment choices to ignore them. (Emphasis mine)

Similarly, late last year the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops made the use of feeding tubes for patients nearing the end of their lives more likely, even when people had specified beforehand that they didn't want them.
(Emphasis mine again)

Dr. Jason Schneider, former president of the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association, told NPR's Ari Shapiro that unless a hospital has a formal policy allowing same-sex visitations, gay couples can run into trouble. Same goes when it comes to who can be a surrogate decision maker for an incapacitated person.

The president's order will take time to implement in federal regulations. But advocates hailed the decision. Some say the New York Times' reporting on the case of a same-sex couple in Florida helped push things along. Despite having power of attorney, a woman was unable to see her partner before she died of an aneurysm in 2007.

Similarly, late last year the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops made the use of feeding tubes for patients nearing the end of their lives more likely, even when people had specified beforehand that they didn't want them.

Dr. Jason Schneider, former president of the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association, told NPR's Ari Shapiro that unless a hospital has a formal policy allowing same-sex visitations, gay couples can run into trouble. Same goes when it comes to who can be a surrogate decision maker for an incapacitated person.

The president's order will take time to implement in federal regulations. But advocates hailed the decision. Some say the New York Times' reporting on the case of a same-sex couple in Florida helped push things along. Despite having power of attorney, a woman was unable to see her partner before she died of an aneurysm in 2007.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2010..._ordering.html

[SassyLeo]

A couple of years ago, my father was admitted to the ER in the BAY AREA of CA. Every time a new person would enter his hospital room, his partner would get the "20 questions" and my dad, all doped up on pain meds would have to try to explain to them whom he was while his partner would produce the legal documents.

His partner took him there. He helped admit him. He is hanging out the entire time... giving the admitting desk all my father's personal/legal information, his ID, insurance card, etc. I have to think... who the fuck else would he be?

[Jess]

Originally Posted by SuperFemme

This is exactly the kind of thing I am frightened of, and I have more paper work than the SCOTUS would need. Legally Married? Check. Living Trust? Check. Advanced Directive? Check. Durable Power of Attorney? Check.

Do NOT let this story keep you from making informed decisions or completing the correct legal paperwork. Let it be a lesson. Give copies of your wishes to your loudest, most vocal loved ones.

The people that will cut a bitch for you if you can't do it yourself.

But do NOT shrug your shoulders and decide WTF why should I bother?

Lord, I pity the fool who ever tries to keep the girl out of my room. I also pity the poor bail bondsman she calls later! Busy busy, I tell ya!

[apretty]

Originally Posted by Kobi

Corky,

I have worked in health care for 30 years. People can not be "involuntarily committed" to a nursing home. Involuntary committment is a legal, mental health thing not a medical thing.

People can be coerced, prodded, persuaded etc. and this is usually because it is for their own well being i.e. not safe for them to be at home or alone or having an inadequate caretaker.

People who are unable to make these decisions for themselves require quardians and/or conservators, both court appointed and court accountable proceedings.

There is something big missing from this story or it deliberately used inflammatory language to piss people off.

Have done this work forever. You can NOT commit someone to a nursing home.

it's not a novel, there's bound to be some omitted facts. however, i'm wondering if you think that the omitted facts will lead to an alternate, 'happy ending', one not detailed here? do you think that a gay man doesn't die and his partner doesn't end up losing everything? (i don't)

[Apocalipstic]

Originally Posted by christie0918

Wow. If you go to page 66 of the first link, the letter to the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors detailing this ordeal is just heartbreaking. I do think that this is a valid story.

I think that part of our wanting to believe that it isnt a full disclosure of the facts is more about us wanting to think that it couldnt happen to us.

Unfortunately, IMO, it can.

Yeah, I guess I have this very misguided idea of Californians being wayyy more liberal and cool about things than anyone in TN. But in Nashville I have never had a problem. I give my doctors and hospitals the forms, but they have always indicated Cynthia woudl be able to see me regardless?

Now in a rural TN area? Who knows....though, there seem to be a lot of LBGTQ people in the medical profession.

Either way, its terribly sad.

[patrick_sdmn]

The "main stream" press is reporting on it now. The local paper here in Sonoma County (Press Democrat) is working on a story, and here's a piece from the NY Times: http://bayarea.blogs.nytimes.com/201...-forced-apart/

Kate Kendell updated her blog at the Bilerico Project: http://www.nclrights.org/site/DocSer...pdf?docID=7461

[patrick_sdmn]

Originally Posted by Kobi

Corky,

I have worked in health care for 30 years. People can not be "involuntarily committed" to a nursing home. Involuntary committment is a legal, mental health thing not a medical thing..

Hi Kobi -

You can read the complaint that was filed (with all the names, dates, and details) on NCLR's site here: http://www.nclrights.org/site/DocSer...pdf?docID=7461

[patrick_sdmn]

Originally Posted by June

I read the articles this morning and wondered what "The rest of the story" was.

Check the NCLR site for the legal complaint that was filed:

http://www.nclrights.org/site/DocSer...pdf?docID=7461

[patrick_sdmn]

Originally Posted by cybersuebee

There was a comment by someone who said she had searched Sonoma County records for a year and found no documentation to support the story.

Well she didn't look very hard.

http://www.sonoma-county.org/board/m...a_20091103.htm

[patrick_sdmn]

Originally Posted by Kobi

As presented, I have a hard time believing the story contains all the facts. Properly executed paperwork is rarely ignored. ple can not be "forced into nursing homes against their will".

Will be interesting to see the entire story.

Read the legal complaint and weep - it's heartbreaking.

http://www.nclrights.org/site/DocSer...pdf?docID=7461

[Waldo]

There is more to the story - of course there is because this is just the beginning.

The complaint is a legal allegation from the plaintiff against a series of defendants. No arguments have been made. No exhibits have been presented.

After reading the complaint quickly I have a better understanding of, seemingly, why things may have happened the way they did. BUT I don't KNOW why they did, nor will I ever know.

There are allegations of abuse from the defendants against the plaintiff in regard to the decedent. What if they were true? Does that change anything for your opinion of what happened?

If the plaintiff was abusing his partner of 20 years and the medical staff acted to protect the decedent from continued abuse and sold off property and belongings to pay for the care required... does that make it ok?

Again - I don't know what happened and I have not read every word, I'm just exercising my critical thinking skills in an effort to understand how and why this happened.

patrick_sdmn - you seem to be very passionate about this. Are you involved some how? Your profile says you're in Sonoma County and you just joined today and these five posts are the extent of your activity on the site. Would love to know more if you're willing to share.