I’m sending a copy of this letter to the LA Times, NGA Executive Director, etc. You can forward it to the list of guardianship victims.
318 Philadelphia Avenue W. Pittston, PA 18643 December 10, 2005 Laury Gelardi, Executive Director National Guardianship Association 1604 North Country Clug Road Tucson, AZ 85716-3102Dear Ms. Gelardi: I am writing to your organization now due to the article in the LA Times and your organization’s response. I called about 2 yrs. ago but did not follow up with any written communication. The NGA has written ‘standards’ and ‘ethics’ which demonstrate the purpose and goals of guardianship. Most would then assume that the membership of Registered Guardians would follow those guidelines. When I called previously, I was told there was no mechanism to require accountability of the member Registered Guardians. Two years later, it is my hope and expectation that you have been able to structure a mechanism which insures accountability regarding those who are listed as Registered and/or Master Guardians.
As you well know; guardianship is the only approved mechanism for denying all choice(s), rights, possessions, finances and contacts(including family) to the ‘ward’ other than the prison system which is supposed to deal with criminal activity. It is the single, most powerful force existing to deny/overcome all God-given, Constitutionally protected human rights of law abiding citizens. Your organization can require accountability of its members by examining complaints and requiring members to actually follow both your ‘standards of practice’ and ‘code of ethics’ or members should be removed from your membership listing.
Since human beings are fallible and guardianship grants just about unlimited power over other human beings who become “wards”; accountability must be a priority. Abdicating responsibility soley to the discretion of the courts does not demonstrate a serious priority; nor commitment to guardianship as a protective force rather than an abusive, exploitive force. If guardianship was not so inherently overreaching financially, it may not need a sufficient number of sources requiring accountability. Until the horrific damages and injuries from wrongful, illegally obtained guardianships actually become rare and/or non existent, the mechanisms for accountability must increase and your organization is primed for that task.
Personally I have a very serious complaint to file with your organization concerning one of your registered members. I also have verifiable evidence of wrongdoing; actions by a registered guardian that are in direct violation of both your standards and ethics. The actions taken by her have been nothing less than abusive and exploitive. The only persons who have benefited are those who wrongfully obtained, practically speaking, ‘ownership’/guardianship of my mother.
The alleged guardianship was obtained by suppressing felony crimes and in fact colluding with the perpetrators and fabricating an adversarial relationship between my mother and myself.
This alleged guardian allowed the three perpetrators to keep the money embezzled from my mother’s bank account; ignored my bonafide(DPOA)Durable Power of Attorney and then purported to “revoke my DPOA”. Of course, there is usually a court, attorneys, sometimes care providers, corporate nursing facilities who cooperate with each other to share some form of benefit to themselves at the expense and injury of the so-called ward. For that reason alone, it would be very difficult or impossible to have “too much accountability based on verifiable evidence”.
Please demonstrate a congruence of both word and action by making accountability to NGA’s “Standards of Practice” and “Code of Ethics” a priority. Without such a priority, a mechanism for enforcing accountability, NGA’s praise of the LA Times article is empty and less than worthless, so is NGA’s Standards of Practice and Code of Ethics. What I mean by “less than worthless” is: “by creating the appearance of an organization that represents a quality of guardianship adhered to by your membership; NGA strongly suggests that a safe, protective and beneficial guardianship practice is to be expected at least by registered guardians’. It is more harmful to create a false appearance, act as a decoy and steer the the public away from the horror of too many actual guardianship practices.
In fact, the epidemic of abusive, exploitive guardianships across the country has nearly reached ‘critical mass’ proportions. I will submit my complaint against the registered NGA member in a separate letter. The definition of “victims of guardianship” includes family members and others advocating for the rights and good care of elders, who have been villified by hearsay and the “wards” who have been isolated from those very people that have verifiably acted in the elder’s best interest.
Please respond within 5 days to this inquiry and above statements which are made from my own experience as well as the experience of other “victims of guardianship” across the country who have shared their experience with me.
I will forward a copy of this letter to the LA Times in hope of a meaningful and verifiable response.
Sincerely, Mary Connors
