Rainey Attorneys Law

Attorneys Law

Leave A Review Waco: (254) 457-5083

(254-752-8644)

Georgetown: (512) 357-7169

(512-598-9005)

Call Us Now
Leave A Review
PLAN TODAY
PROTECT YOUR ASSETS FOR YOU AND YOUR FAMILY

Medicaid’s Home Care Waivers Can Help You Avoid a Nursing Home, But the Line May Be Long

Latest News

by

Medicaid long-term care benefits traditionally pay mainly for nursing home care, but the federal government can grant “waivers” to states allowing them to expand Medicaid to include home and community-based services. The downside is that receiving care in a nursing home is an entitlement, while getting care at home is not.

Medicaid is a joint federal-state program that provides health insurance coverage to low-income children, seniors, and people with disabilities. In addition, it covers care in a nursing home for those who qualify. Each state operates its own Medicaid system, but this system must conform to federal guidelines in order for the state to receive federal money, which pays for about half the state’s Medicaid costs. (The state picks up the rest of the tab.) A Medicaid waiver allows states to waive some of the federal rules with the intention of providing services to individuals who wouldn’t normally be covered by Medicaid. The waiver must be approved by the federal government.

The most common type of Medicaid waiver expands Medicaid to cover home care to individuals who need a high level of care, but who would like to remain at home rather than enter a nursing home. Care that may be provided by a waiver includes personal attendants, home health aides, medical supplies and equipment, respite care, counseling services, transportation, homemaking services, hot meal delivery, and more.

Each state sets up its own waiver program, so the rules and requirements vary widely. Usually, to qualify an applicant must need a level of care similar to what is needed to qualify for Medicaid coverage in a nursing home. The point of the waiver is to allow an individual who would normally need nursing home care to remain at home, which is typically a far less costly form of care. States may also target different health conditions, such as HIV, Alzheimer’s disease, diabetes, cystic fibrosis, among others. Each state also sets its own income and asset levels for its waiver programs, which may vary from state to state, and may be different from the income and asset levels used for Medicaid coverage of nursing home care.

The downside of state waiver programs is that waivers are not an entitlement, meaning that states are allowed to limit the number of people who qualify for services under a waiver. Just because an applicant meets the criteria for eligibility does not mean the applicant will be approved for the services. As a result, waitlists for filled programs can run for months or years.

To find and apply for a waiver program in your state, contact your state Medicaid office.

by

Medicaid law provides special protections for the spouses of Medicaid applicants to make sure the spouses have the minimum support needed to continue to live in the community while their husband or wife is receiving longterm care benefits, usually in a nursing home.

One of the most important protections is the “community spouse resource allowance” or CSRA. It works this way: if the Medicaid applicant is married, the countable assets of both the community spouse and the institutionalized spouse are totaled as of the date of “institutionalization,” the day on which the ill spouse enters either a hospital or a long-term care facility in which he or she then stays for at least 30 days. (This is sometimes called the “snapshot” date because Medicaid is taking a picture of the couple’s assets as of this date.)

In order to be eligible for Medicaid benefits a nursing home resident may have no more than $2,000 in assets (an amount may be somewhat higher in some states). In general, the community spouse may keep one-half of the couple’s total “countable” assets up to a maximum of $128,640 (in 2020). This is the community spouse resource allowance (CSRA), the most that a state may allow a community spouse to retain without a hearing or a court order. The least that a state may allow a community spouse to retain is $25,728 (in 2020).

Example: If a couple has $100,000 in countable assets on the date the applicant enters a nursing home, he or she will be eligible for Medicaid once the couple’s assets have been reduced to a combined figure of $52,000 — $2,000 for the applicant and $50,000 for the community spouse.

Some states, however, are more generous toward the community spouse. In these states, the community spouse may keep up to $128,640 (in 2020), regardless of whether or not this represents half the couple’s assets. For example, if the couple had $100,000 in countable assets on the “snapshot” date, the community spouse could keep the entire amount, instead of being limited to half.

See also “Medicaid’s Attempt to Ensure the Healthy Spouse Has Enough Income: The MMMNA”

by

When one spouse is in a nursing home and applying for Medicaid, planning has to take into account the possibility that the spouse who is not in the nursing home (called the “community spouse”) may pass away first. This is because the community spouse’s death may make the spouse in the nursing home ineligible for Medicaid.

In order to qualify for Medicaid, a nursing home resident can have only a limited number of assets. Careful planning can allow the resident’s spouse to maintain some assets. However, if that community spouse passes away first and leaves those assets to the nursing home resident, the resident suddenly
would be over Medicaid’s asset limit.

While the community spouse can write a will that disinherits the Medicaid resident, most states have laws that allow spouses to claim a portion of their deceased spouse’s estate regardless of what the will says. This is called the elective or statutory share. The amount the spouse can claim varies from state
to state.

A spouse can disclaim his or her elective share, but if a Medicaid recipient disclaims the inheritance, it is considered an uncompensated transfer of assets and the recipient may receive a period of Medicaid ineligibility. To avoid this, the community spouse will most likely need a will that addresses this issue. One option is for the community spouse to create a will that leaves the nursing home spouse exactly the amount of the elective share. Another option may be to create a special trust that contains the elective share. You should talk to your attorney to determine the best course of action for you and your spouse.

by

Netflix’s popular new movie, I Care a Lot, may be far-fetched in a lot of ways. However, it does highlight some real weaknesses in the guardianship system that make it possible for an unscrupulous guardian to take control of an elderly person’s life and bleed their resources dry. Fortunately, steps can be taken to avoid the guardianship system and the kind of nightmare the film portrays.

What Is A Guardian?

A guardian is someone appointed by a court to make decisions on behalf of an incapacitated individual (“ward”). The guardianship process usually starts when a family member or social worker notifies the court that someone can’t take care of themselves.

The court often appoints a family member as guardian. However, if the family can’t agree on a guardian or there is no family to act as guardian, the court may appoint a public guardian. Public guardians are supposedly neutral individuals who are hired to act in the ward’s best interest.

Guardianship Fraud In I Care A Lot

I Care a Lot follows one such public guardian who exploits the system to gain control of her wards’ estates. The guardian, Marla Grayson, typically petitions for an “emergency guardianship” without notifying the ward.

In the case that takes up most of the film, Marla appears on the doorstep of a very surprised Jennifer Peterson with a court order declaring Peterson incompetent (she is nothing of the sort) and forcing her to relocate to a long-term care facility. Marla has already arranged for Jennifer’s doctor to declare Jennifer incompetent, and Marla also has a deal with a long-term care provider to admit Jennifer to his facility. And because it is an emergency guardianship, Jennifer is not required to be notified to appear in court to defend herself.

Without Jennifer’s knowledge or consent, Marla takes control of her life and finances. After Jennifer is moved to the care facility, Marla begins the process of selling her house and belongings, taking a generous cut of the proceeds.

From there, the movie takes a lot of twists and turns that we won’t reveal here. However, the starting premise is unfortunately not Hollywood fantasy.

The Case Of April Parks

The film’s premise is in fact quite similar to a real-life case involving Nevada public guardian April Parks. As guardian for hundreds of wards, Ms. Parks, took over their lives, sold their belongings, and charged their estates hundreds of dollars an hour.

Over her 12 years as a public guardian, Ms. Parks built relationships with hospitals and medical providers to refer patients to her. She found doctors who were willing to declare her targets incompetent. Families often found out too late that their loved one was under guardianship and beyond their legal control.

How Pervasive Is Guardianship Abuse?

Ms. Parks is clearly at the far end of guardianship exploitation and has been sentenced to 16 to 40 years in prison, but there are other unscrupulous guardians still exploiting the system. Unfortunately, in many states, the lack of court oversight combined with poorly trained guardians leads to abuse. Courts often do not have the resources necessary to provide proper oversight, and only a small minority of states certify their professional guardians.

However, not all states are equally vulnerable to guardianship exploitation.

  • New York’s guardianship system requires that an independent evaluator meet with the ward before an incapacitation hearing
  • Arizona requires that its professional guardians be licensed through the state and that the ward have an attorney present during the incapacitation hearing, among other protections
  • Florida’s governor signed a law in 2019 requiring guardians to report details of payments
  • Nevada has enacted a number of reforms, including requiring that individuals subject to guardianship be represented by an attorney

In a rare display of bipartisanship, Congress passed a bill in 2017 that empowers federal officials to investigate and prosecute unscrupulous guardians and conservators appointed by state courts.

Guardianship Law And The Ugcopaa

While some states have begun passing reforms, there is more to be done. The Uniform Law Commission, which provides states with model legislation, has proposed the Uniform Guardianship, Conservatorship, and Other Protective Arrangement Act (UGCOPAA). The law would allow a court to order a protective arrangement rather than a full guardianship when appropriate, require that notice of the guardianship be sent to family, and prevent the guardian from barring family members from visiting the ward, among other things. So far only Washington and Maine have enacted the model law.

Regardless of your state’s laws, the best approach is to avoid the need for guardianship and conservatorship entirely by putting durable powers of attorney and health care proxies in place ahead of time when you can choose the person you would like to make decisions for you when necessary. Even if you’re not at risk of exploitation because your children or grandchildren would step in, the need for court intervention causes otherwise unnecessary expense and delay.

by

Britney Spears’s legal fight to wrest back control over her personal and financial affairs has flooded the issue of guardianship in Klieg lights. While a full guardianship may be necessary for many individuals who are incapable of managing their own affairs due to dementia or intellectual, developmental or mental health disabilities, the Spears case underlines the option of more limited alternatives.

Every adult is assumed to be capable of making his or her own decisions unless a court determines otherwise. If an adult becomes incapable of making responsible decisions, the court will appoint a substitute decision maker, usually called a “guardian” or a “conservator,” depending on the state.

Guardianship is a legal relationship between a competent adult (the “guardian”) and a person who because of incapacity is no longer able to take care of his or her own affairs (the “ward”). The guardian can be authorized to make legal, financial, and health care decisions for the ward. The National Center for State Courts says that about 1.3 million adults are living under guardianships or conservatorships with some $50 billion in assets.

The standard under which a person is deemed to require a guardian differs from state to state, and because guardianships are subject to state law, data on them is hard to collect and protections against abuse vary widely. Netflix’s popular movie, I Care a Lot, spotlighted some weaknesses in the guardianship system that make it possible for an unscrupulous guardian to take control of an elderly person’s life and bleed their resources dry.

The Spears Case: An Unusual Situation

Britney Spears has been under a court-ordered conservatorship that has controlled her career and finances since 2008. Her father, Jamie Spears, was appointed her temporary conservator when the pop singer was allegedly struggling with mental health issues and had been hospitalized, and a Los
Angeles court later made the conservatorship permanent.

On July 14, a Los Angeles judge approved the resignation of Spears’s courtappointed lawyer and granted her request to hire her own lawyer. The 39-yearold singer told the judge that she wants to end the long-running conservatorship that put her father in charge of her estimated $60 million
fortune and business affairs, and others in control of such personal decisions as whether she can marry and have a baby. “I’m here to get rid of my dad and charge him with conservatorship abuse,” she said.

Whatever the merits of this controversial case, what makes Spears’s situation so unusual is the fact that she does not appear to be incompetent, at least when it comes to her professional accomplishments. In the 13 years since the conservatorship was put in place, she has continued her career as a pop star, earning millions from a four-year concert residency act in Las Vegas and serving as a judge on the television reality show “The X Factor.”

Another anomaly is the fact that until now Spears was represented by a courtappointed attorney who, she argued, did not represent her wishes or interests. However, while the media has given wide coverage to Spears’s side of the dispute, we have heard almost nothing from the professionals handling her affairs, who are constrained from publicly disclosing confidential information.

It’s easy to see why conservatorship, which takes away a person’s right to make decisions about significant aspects of his own life, is considered among the most restrictive legal remedies in the American judicial system. For this reason, courts are legally required to seek alternatives that will safeguard the ward’s finances and wellbeing but with the fewest restrictions, in an effort to protect that person’s rights.

Protections Without Total Loss of Control

In the case of an elderly person who may no longer be able to handle some or all of her own affairs, there are various approaches that provide protection without stripping that person of control over all decisions, as in Spears’s case.

Many people in need of help can make responsible decisions in some areas of their lives but not others (such as making major financial decisions). Families might consider setting up what’s called a “limited guardianship.” Most states allow judges to appoint guardians with limited powers that are specifically tailored to the alleged incapacitated person’s needs. For example, a court can appoint a guardian to oversee a person’s housing and health care, but not to manage the person’s bathing, eating, and socialization. Conservators can be appointed to handle the financial affairs of someone who is not good with money, without having any power to manage health care decision making—the options are almost infinite.

Alternatives to Guardianship

Sometimes, guardianship isn’t the answer at all. If a person can execute estate planning documents, she can also sign a durable power of attorney and a health care proxy, which allows someone to assist her with decisions without court involvement. “Supported decision making” is a growing alternative to guardianship in which trusted advisors like family, friends or professionals assist in making decisions, although the individual retains the ultimate right to make their own decisions.

Trying an alternative to guardianship can be important for several reasons. First, it prevents a court from ruling that someone is “incapacitated,” which carries with it a stigma and can be hard to undo, as Britney Spears is finding. Second, it puts the person in the driver’s seat. Third, it is much less expensive and time-consuming.

Another option is a revocable or “living” trust that can be set up to hold an older person’s assets, with a relative, friend or financial institution serving as trustee. Alternatively, the older person can be a co-trustee of the trust with another individual who will take over the duties of trustee should the older
person become incapacitated.

Experts say that Britney Spears faces a long, difficult path if she seeks to terminate her conservatorship. She would need to file a formal petition, which would require presenting evidence in hearings and depositions. She could face objections at every stage from attorneys representing her father and others involved in her care. (Spears has indicated her unwillingness to submit to a mental evaluation or test in her effort to end the conservatorship.)

If you have questions about what type of guardianship may be right for your family member, or if you are currently under guardianship and are looking to gain control of your affairs, talk to your elder law attorney today.

For an article on what may lie ahead in the Britney Spears case, click here.

For an article by University of Virginia Family Law Professor Naomi Cahn on how guardianships can lead to abuse, click here.

by

Long-term care involves not only a loss of personal autonomy; it also comes at a tremendous financial price. Proper planning can help your family prepare for the financial toll and protect assets for future generations.

Long-term care can be very expensive, especially around-the-clock nursing home care. Most people end up paying for nursing home care out of their savings until they run out, at which point they can qualify for Medicaid to pick up the cost.

Medicaid rules require that recipients have no more than $2,000 in “countable” assets (the figure may be somewhat higher in some states) and limited income. Any excess assets need to be spent down before you can qualify for Medicaid. In addition, in order to be eligible for Medicaid, you cannot have recently transferred assets. If you transfer assets within five years of applying for Medicaid, you may be subject to a penalty period during which you cannot receive benefits. After you die, Medicaid also has the right to recover from your estate, which in the case of a Medicaid recipient usually means only the house.

Careful planning in advance can help protect your estate for your spouse or children. If you make a plan before you need long-term care, you may have the luxury of distributing or protecting your assets in advance. This way, when you do need long-term care, you will quickly qualify for Medicaid benefits. The following are some tools that can be d in an estate plan to prepare for Medicaid:

  • Trusts. One of most important estate planning tools you can use is an “irrevocable” trust — a trust that cannot be changed after it has been created. In most cases, this type of trust is drafted so that the income is payable to you (the person establishing the trust, called the “grantor”) for life, and the principal cannot be applied to benefit you or your spouse. At your death the principal is paid to your heirs. This way, the funds in the trust are protected and you can use the income for your living expenses. For Medicaid purposes, the principal in such trusts is not counted as a resource, provided the trustee cannot pay it to you or your spouse for either of your benefits. However, if you do move to a nursing home, the trust income will have to go to the nursing home. And to avoid Medicaid’s “look-back period,” the trust must be funded at least five years before applying for benefits.
  • Annuities. Annuities are another tool married couples can use to prepare for Medicaid. An immediate annuity, in its simplest form, is a contract with an insurance company under which the policyholder pays a certain lump sum of money to the insurer and the insurer sends the policyholder a monthly check for the rest of his or her life. In most states the purchase of an annuity is not considered to be a transfer for purposes of eligibility for Medicaid, but is instead the purchase of an investment. It transforms otherwise countable assets into a non-countable income stream. As long as the income is in the name of the spouse who is not in the nursing home, it’s considered non-countable. For single individuals, annuities are less useful, but if you transfer assets, you may be able to use an annuity to pay for long-term care during the Medicaid penalty period that results from the transfer.
  • Protecting your home. After a Medicaid recipient dies, the state must attempt to recoup from his or her estate whatever benefits it paid for the recipient’s care. This is called “estate recovery.” For most Medicaid recipients, their house is the only asset available, but there are steps you can take to protect your home. Putting your house in a trust can be a good option, but once a house is placed in an irrevocable trust, you cannot remove it. Another option is a life estate, which is a form of joint ownership of property between two or more people. They each have an ownership interest in the property, but for different periods of time. The person holding the life estate possesses the property currently and for the rest of his or her life. The other owner has a current ownership interest but cannot take possession until the end of the life estate, which occurs at the death of the life estate holder.

Talk to your attorney about whether your estate plan should include preparation for possible Medicaid eligibility.

by

More than 4 in 10 Americans have at least one step-relative in their family – either a stepparent, a step or half sibling or a stepchild — according to the Pew Research Center. The National Center for Family and Marriage Research estimates that about one-third of all weddings in America create stepfamilies.

A trust case from North Dakota highlights the importance of taking current and potential step-relationships into account when planning your estate.

William and Patricia Clairmont created two trusts for their grandson, Matthew. In both trusts, “the brother and sisters” of Matthew were contingent beneficiaries (meaning they would be the trust beneficiaries if Matthew died).

After the trusts were created, the Clairmonts’ daughter, Cindy (Matthew’s mother), divorced Matthew’s father, Greg, and Greg remarried and had two children with a second wife. In March 2011, Matthew died suddenly and unexpectedly at the age of 25 without a wife, children or a will.

Under North Dakota law, Greg’s two children with his second wife were technically “brothers and sisters” of Matthew and, thus, eligible beneficiaries under the trusts. The Clairmonts argued for an interpretation of the trust that would exclude Matthew’s stepsiblings as beneficiaries or, alternatively, for reformation of the trust to include language that only lineal descendants of the Clairmonts could benefit from the trusts.

Ultimately, the North Dakota Supreme Court granted the Clairmonts’ petition to reform the trusts based on evidence that the Clairmonts made a mistake of law by interpreting the phrase “brothers and sisters” to include only full blood siblings and based on testimony by the Clairmonts themselves on their intention to benefit their lineal descendants alone.

Although things turned out well for the Clairmonts in the end, it took much time and money to get there. The case stresses the importance of addressing step-relations in your estate plan whether or not you are already a member of a stepfamily.

by

Life estates can be an excellent tool for Medicaid planning, probate avoidance and tax efficiency, but there are potential problems to look out for. Knowing the implications and risks of a life estate is essential in determining whether it is appropriate for your situation.

In a life estate, two or more people each have an ownership interest in a property, but for different periods of time. The person holding the life estate — the life tenant — possesses the property during his or her life. The other owner — the remainderman — has a current ownership interest but cannot take
possession until the death of the life estate holder. The life tenant has full control of the property during his or her lifetime and has the legal responsibility to maintain the property as well as the right to use it, rent it out, and make improvements to it.

Life estates are excellent planning techniques in many circumstances. They permit parents to pass ownership in their homes to their children while retaining absolute possession of the property during their lives. By executing a life estate deed, the property avoids probate at the parents’ deaths, is protected from a Medicaid lien, and receives a step-up in tax basis.

However, there are potential issues that may arise with life estates and it’s important to fully understand the following risks:

  • As a life tenant, you may not easily sell or mortgage property with a life estate interest. The remaindermen must all agree if you decide to sell or borrow against the property. One thing that can help is a testamentary power of appointment in the deed. This is a mechanism that permits the life tenants to change who ultimately receives the property by directing its disposition in their wills. It won’t allow the life tenant to sell the property, but it does give the life tenant more bargaining power with the remaindermen. Another option is a nominee realty trust. This type of trust permits one or more children to act as trustee or trustees for all the children, and provides that they must follow the direction of a majority of the beneficiaries. So, if there are four children and one child objects to the sale or mortgage of the property, but the other three are on board, the majority can direct the trustee to sign the papers necessary to facilitate the sale or borrowing.
  • If the property is sold, the remaindermen are entitled to a share of the proceeds equal to what their interest is determined to be at that time.
  • It is not as easy to remove or change a name once it is on a deed to real estate as it is to change the beneficiary on a life insurance policy or bank account.
  • Once a remainderman is named on the deed to your house, he or she has an interest in the home and his or her legal problems could become yours. For example, if your child, who is a remainderman, is sued or owes taxes, a lien could be filed against your home. Your child’s interest in the home is not protected if he or she files for bankruptcy. If your child gets a divorce, his or her spouse could claim all or part of your child’s interest in your home. Should your child die before you do, the child’s estate would have to go through probate unless at least one other remainderman was listed as a joint tenant. However, while these claims may be made against the property, no one can kick you out of it during your life.
  • Giving away an interest in property could disqualify you from receiving assistance from Medicaid, should you require long-term care within five years of the transfer. In addition, if you and the remaindermen were to sell the property while you were in a nursing home, the state could have a claim against your share of the proceeds for payments it has made on your behalf, but the share of the proceeds allocated to your children would be protected.

As with most planning tools, a life estate can be very useful with valuable benefits, but it is not for everyone. In many cases, the potential problems outweigh the benefits. As the law in this area is complex, it’s important to talk to a lawyer who knows about this in-depth. To find an attorney near you, click here.

by

It is a very good idea to create advance directives in order to plan for the possibility that you may one day be unable to make your own medical decisions. In doing so, there can be confusion about the difference between a living will and a “do-not-resuscitate” order (DNR). While both these documents are advance medical directives, they serve different purposes.

A living will is a document that you can use to give instructions regarding treatment if you become terminally ill or are in a persistent vegetative state and unable to communicate your instructions. The living will states under what conditions life-sustaining treatment should be terminated. If you would like to avoid life-sustaining treatment when it would be hopeless, you need a living will. A living will takes effect only when you are incapacitated and is not set in stone — you can always revoke it at a later date if you wish to do so.

When drawing up a living will, you need to consider the various care options and what you would like done. You need to think about whether you want care to extend your life no matter what or only in certain circumstances. A living will can dictate when you want a ventilator, dialysis, tube feeding, blood transfusions, and other life- saving or life-prolonging options.

A DNR is a different document. A DNR says that if your heart stops or you stop breathing, medical professionals should not attempt to revive you. This is very different from a living will, which only goes into effect if you are unable to communicate your wishes for care. Everyone can benefit from a living will, while DNRs are only for very elderly and/or frail patients for whom it wouldn’t make sense to administer CPR.

In addition to a living will, you will also need a health care proxy or broader medical directive.