Hitting crisis point as predicted

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Instead, they choose to stay put in a precarious situation which they can no longer afford. If they want to do that, we CAN LEND them the money after we sell my aunt's house, but we WILL put a lien on their house so we are paid back after they both pass. That will cut into my sister and brother's inheritance, which will piss them off, but tough crap.

Nope, then definitely do not offer to do that. (See post above). Stop telling anyone (parents, sister, brother) that you have the ability to pay for your parents' care. Sell the aunt's house. Save the profits, they are your inheritance from your aunt, correct?

You do not have any money to help your parents. The offers you make that are contingent upon this or that are not hitting rational ears, including the ears of your sister and brother. If they are counting on an inheritance from your parents home, they are also not rational. Who do they think is going to pay for their parents' care, if not from the sale of their house?

I'd agree if it was five years ago. They are now 86 and 87 so rational or not, the chances of both living another 5 years is pretty small, so the most practical solution at this point, I've decided, is to let them stay where they are with money lent from the sale of the house. Yes my sister and brother are counting on that money (more my brother, not my sister as she will collect a nice SS payment and pension when she's 65). My brother has created his own issues and I'm not very empathetic due to his decisions. My sister, however, has put in the hard work, so really I'm more focused on her.

There were so many better solutions 5 years ago, but that was in the past and I have to see this situation as it is right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, have you previously posted about the situation with your family? If so, no need for another thread.

No idea if OP has posted before, but there’s no rule that someone can post about something only once.

Yes, OP posted about this in December:

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1021319.page

There was A LOT of good advice given in response to OP's multiple prior posts. It does not seem like that is what OP is looking for, as OP does not acknowledge nor appreciate it. One particular post that was very insightful was:

"Generally, there is no lawful obligation for one adult to provide, supply, manage or pay for care, goods and services for another adult.

With parents (depending on your beliefs) there may be a moral obligation to do these things, but that obligation must be weighed in context. A person is not obliged to ruin themselves, become a doormat, sign to voluntarily take on legal obligations they otherwise would not have. This is particularly true where the person who needs help has caused or substantially contributed to their condition, typically by rejecting timely suggestions and offers of more limited aid.

That being said, nobody has a right to an inheritance either, and if somebody wants to run their estate into the ground to maintain control over it they have the right to do that.

Waiting for the (typically inevitable) need for the person to be hospitalized and then need discharge planning, the PP’s suggestion to simply tell the discharge planner that you are not available personally or in terms of assets to contribute anything sounds cruel, and it can have a cruel impact. The question is whether that impact is the result of the non-helper’s decision or the cumulative decisions of the person in need. Typically, both are in play, but it is undeniably true that people frequently dig themselves into their own trouble. Dragging a second person down with them seems attractive, but in fact, a penurious person probably qualifies for government-funded health care and residential placement. It may not be all everybody would have wanted, but it will be something, and it leaves people who otherwise would be getting drowned in the tsunami free to try to help with extras where they can and to be a set of eyes on the caretakers.

This is dreadful stuff. Very often, the person one feels an obligation to is “no longer home.” Short term therapy and mutual support groups can help us see the reality of things and be more objective. There is no benefit in being angry at the needy person. You can’t be half in (for whatever your “share” of assets is) and half out (for caretaking). You can’t control other people. There is no benefit in destroying yourself trying to meet unreasonable demands or share responsibility with people who are not going to perform.

One of my parents was tired of the nursing home and hospitals. They wanted to come home and sit in their easy chair. It was this time of year. Their “plan” was completely unreasonable. They couldn’t walk, could barely stand up, we’re cycling between respiratory emergencies as their kidneys failed. There wasn’t time to get help on a moment’s notice, even if the money was there for anything but a brief respite, which it wasn’t. I promised I’d do what I could when I could. Instead, they rolled over and died that night with their best friend in the room with them. They probably wouldn’t have survived the trip home.

In situations like these, the goal is to be a lifeboat, not a rescue ship, hoping when the end comes to feel that we’ve done what we could, that what we didn’t do was not within our power, and that anybody (including the committee in our head) who says otherwise is ignorant at best and a malicious liar at worst.

Hope this helps. Good luck."

If OP just wants to vent, then vent away. That's fine. But OP just needs to be clear that they are not seeking input nor advice and just want to complain. It will prevent others from wasting their time providing thoughtful insight which is not what OP wants.

OP here. This was the last line of my original post:

Just had to get this out.

Did you miss it?

Did you miss it in your previous posts where several people gave you advice to get therapy as you do not seem to be managing this situation well? That would be the best place to "get this out." Seriously, OP, you are dancing on a knife edge psychologically and I sincerely hope you get professional help. Your knee-jerk defensiveness and sarcasm are undoubtedly manifesting in other parts of your life both at work and at home. It cannot be pleasant way to live, for yourself and for those around you. Please ... go talk to someone.

Doing that as well. Therapist agrees with me -offer but don’t expect takers. Also said being pissed is normal. I’m being asked to ruin my own future to provide for their whims

So don’t.

I'm decidedly not. But I AM allowed to be pissed off because of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I won't contribute anything unless we are getting paid back out of the house sale when they pass. That's my only offer on the table financially.

OP, my advice to you is to take that offer off the table. You say you are not dealing with rational parents. If your parents were capable of being rational, that would be a fine offer.

But what they are hearing in your offer is this: "Daughter is financially able to take care of us the way we want right now." And they just aren't moving away from this. They aren't thinking about your financial needs down the road, just their own.

You need to refuse to pay ANYTHING. Don't tell them they have to sell the house. Just tell them that you cannot fund them. Eventually SOMEONE will tell them they should sell the house to pay for their care. but you don't have to be the bad guy.

I've told them I can't fund them. Have not offered proceeds from the house - it's something husband and I have discussed. Sorry for the confusion. It's going to get interesting as house is in trust so nursing home, etc can't tap it. So they will be forced to go with Medicaid. And that's when decisions will have to be made. It just makes me sad and angry as it will be that much harder at that point, and didn't have to be.

[Anonymous]

Can you post on the Money forum asking about a "reverse mortgage"? This may help out the family situation overall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can you post on the Money forum asking about a "reverse mortgage"? This may help out the family situation overall.

They won’t do it. Reasons unknown and unexpressed.

I had my mother on the phone the other day. If my father passed, she would move back cross country immediately and so would my sister. My father will not but would be willing to move to my Aunt’s house nearby. My mother said absolutely not because ‘the neighbors are nosy and she doesn’t like the neighborhood’. It’s perfectly fine

I spoke with my brother, who actually agreed with me - he doesn’t care about an inheritance (he’s got a great job now and believes in fixing his own life). I will talk to my sister this weekend. Husband and I decided that a LEGAL loan of 100K after we sell my aunt’s home, to be paid in full upon the sale of their home, is probably going to be the best plan if the stubbornness continues. My sister will probably have a fit as it reduces her inheritance, which she is counting on. Since she is also balking at any sort of move, I’m not really caring much about that.

My mother’s short term is definitely affected as a result of her stroke. Her response to needing help was “we’ll hire someone in”. I asked her “with what?” . She said ‘Medicare will pay for daily help’. I reminded her they will not (again). The sad thing is she’s still really enjoyable to be around and we have a lot of fun together. She is SO frustrated with my Dad. We are also strongly considering getting power of attorney over my Dad so he is forced to leave the area. Once in my beach home, he will be VERY happy as he does love it there.

One stubborn elder is hard. Two is harder. My sister is afraid to relocate as well, but understands it’s the best thing at this point. She knows I will help her get re-established.

[Anonymous]

I would talk to a CA based elder care lawyer. You should probably avoid doing anything that would make it harder for them to qualify for Medicaid, if needed. I think selling the house would be in that category but a specialized lawyer would know better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would talk to a CA based elder care lawyer. You should probably avoid doing anything that would make it harder for them to qualify for Medicaid, if needed. I think selling the house would be in that category but a specialized lawyer would know better.

They are in AZ so I don’t know what a CA lawyer would have to say that’s relevant? My parents have a home that’s worth a lot of money, that’s too much home for them. I don’t understand why anyone would subject their folks to Medicaid housing/living, if it could be avoided, given how dreadful a lot of those places are. The home is in trust so Medicaid could not attach it anyway. The ultimate goal here is for my parents to use their own asset for their own care, while BOTH are alive. When ONE passes, the situation becomes both financially and logistically easier to manage. Too many cooks, and all that.

[Anonymous]

I am sorry OP. This is so hard. I am dealing with this now with my grandfather. Stubbornly never made plans to age in place or anything and now it’s a crisis as he can’t stay in his home and won’t consider leaving.

I really wish more people would try to think this through younger.

[Anonymous]

OP again. I had mentioned in another thread that I hospiced my Aunt, who had pancreatic cancer. One thing for ALL of you to take into consideration: the elderly don’t often think rationally, and therefore don’t really even take into consideration, how badly their decisions affect others. All she wanted to do was stay home/die at home. That could have been easily done had she (a) money (b) other family that came to help. As it was, she had neither and it was just me. There was no physical way I could medicate every hour around the clock, feed, diaper, etc. on my own. It never occurred to her (understandably) the huge burden, physical and emotional, that put on me. Hospice came max three times per week to help, for 45 minutes each time. When she was finally taken inpatient, it turned out the tumors were blocking her bladder output, creating a toxic situation. Doctor there remedied that, despite a DNR, and Medicare would only pay for 5 days inpatient. Then the bullying started by the inpatient hospice social worker that I take her home. That was physically impossible for me. I had already been away for 1.75 months, had shuttered my own business during that time, etc. I chose to go home as I was on the verge of physical collapse. She survived another month in the hospice center, which was non-profit, so took donations. Even after coming home I was fielding calls from the social worker until I told her to stop calling me, to call my cousin who had medical POA. I don’t blame my aunt - it’s not her fault she got cancer - but there is NO way one person can do something like this alone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would talk to a CA based elder care lawyer. You should probably avoid doing anything that would make it harder for them to qualify for Medicaid, if needed. I think selling the house would be in that category but a specialized lawyer would know better.

They are in AZ so I don’t know what a CA lawyer would have to say that’s relevant? My parents have a home that’s worth a lot of money, that’s too much home for them. I don’t understand why anyone would subject their folks to Medicaid housing/living, if it could be avoided, given how dreadful a lot of those places are. The home is in trust so Medicaid could not attach it anyway. The ultimate goal here is for my parents to use their own asset for their own care, while BOTH are alive. When ONE passes, the situation becomes both financially and logistically easier to manage. Too many cooks, and all that.

Sorry I thought OP's parents were in CA, obviously they should consult a lawyer based in the state where the parents are. Medicaid can pay for home care in some cases too and there may be good Medicaid nursing homes depending on the state (and if you get on a wait list early). My grandparents were in a great Medicaid nursing home. OP can't impovrish herself to pay for her parents care so that may be the only option.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would talk to a CA based elder care lawyer. You should probably avoid doing anything that would make it harder for them to qualify for Medicaid, if needed. I think selling the house would be in that category but a specialized lawyer would know better.

They are in AZ so I don’t know what a CA lawyer would have to say that’s relevant? My parents have a home that’s worth a lot of money, that’s too much home for them. I don’t understand why anyone would subject their folks to Medicaid housing/living, if it could be avoided, given how dreadful a lot of those places are. The home is in trust so Medicaid could not attach it anyway. The ultimate goal here is for my parents to use their own asset for their own care, while BOTH are alive. When ONE passes, the situation becomes both financially and logistically easier to manage. Too many cooks, and all that.

Sorry I thought OP's parents were in CA, obviously they should consult a lawyer based in the state where the parents are. Medicaid can pay for home care in some cases too and there may be good Medicaid nursing homes depending on the state (and if you get on a wait list early). My grandparents were in a great Medicaid nursing home. OP can't impovrish herself to pay for her parents care so that may be the only option.

I'm OP and yes, I will NOT impoverish myself to pay. Both my parents refuse nursing home care. Can consult a lawyer re: their home/trust. I believe their social security puts them over the threshold to qualify for Medicaid. When one passes, that will change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would talk to a CA based elder care lawyer. You should probably avoid doing anything that would make it harder for them to qualify for Medicaid, if needed. I think selling the house would be in that category but a specialized lawyer would know better.

They are in AZ so I don’t know what a CA lawyer would have to say that’s relevant? My parents have a home that’s worth a lot of money, that’s too much home for them. I don’t understand why anyone would subject their folks to Medicaid housing/living, if it could be avoided, given how dreadful a lot of those places are. The home is in trust so Medicaid could not attach it anyway. The ultimate goal here is for my parents to use their own asset for their own care, while BOTH are alive. When ONE passes, the situation becomes both financially and logistically easier to manage. Too many cooks, and all that.

Sorry I thought OP's parents were in CA, obviously they should consult a lawyer based in the state where the parents are. Medicaid can pay for home care in some cases too and there may be good Medicaid nursing homes depending on the state (and if you get on a wait list early). My grandparents were in a great Medicaid nursing home. OP can't impovrish herself to pay for her parents care so that may be the only option.

I'm OP and yes, I will NOT impoverish myself to pay. Both my parents refuse nursing home care. Can consult a lawyer re: their home/trust. I believe their social security puts them over the threshold to qualify for Medicaid. When one passes, that will change.

They could spend down their SS to qualify for Medicaid if they end up needing long term care. At a certain point if they can't live independently and no one will take care of them, they may end up in a nursing home whether they want to our not (esp if they are hospitalized and then can't be discharged home).

[Anonymous]

OP, I mean this kindly. Stop helping. They have two options - do what you say, exactly and without negotiation, or do it without your assistance at all.

Stop engaging on this with them. I’ve read a ton of your posts and you’re enabling all of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Instead, they choose to stay put in a precarious situation which they can no longer afford. If they want to do that, we CAN LEND them the money after we sell my aunt's house, but we WILL put a lien on their house so we are paid back after they both pass. That will cut into my sister and brother's inheritance, which will piss them off, but tough crap.

Nope, then definitely do not offer to do that. (See post above). Stop telling anyone (parents, sister, brother) that you have the ability to pay for your parents' care. Sell the aunt's house. Save the profits, they are your inheritance from your aunt, correct?

You do not have any money to help your parents. The offers you make that are contingent upon this or that are not hitting rational ears, including the ears of your sister and brother. If they are counting on an inheritance from your parents home, they are also not rational. Who do they think is going to pay for their parents' care, if not from the sale of their house?

I'd agree if it was five years ago. They are now 86 and 87 so rational or not, the chances of both living another 5 years is pretty small, so the most practical solution at this point, I've decided, is to let them stay where they are with money lent from the sale of the house. Yes my sister and brother are counting on that money (more my brother, not my sister as she will collect a nice SS payment and pension when she's 65). My brother has created his own issues and I'm not very empathetic due to his decisions. My sister, however, has put in the hard work, so really I'm more focused on her.

There were so many better solutions 5 years ago, but that was in the past and I have to see this situation as it is right now.

The one take away I have from your situations and so many others is that the conversation has to happen over and over and over before any change can happen. It's like there has to be a warm up to the idea by repeating it over and over. I think most people shy away from doing this because it becomes and argument. It seems that the level headed rationale person in the conversation is the one who has to be able to state the situation plainly and keep talking even when there is yelling and disagreement and then once they have said what needs to be said stop and not engage in arguing. I think it takes a long time but repeating the conversation frequently means it becomes more difficult for the other parties to bury their head in the sand because they are aware the situation needs to be dealt with in the back of their minds but as long as no one is discussing it they feel it's ok not to think about it either.

[Anonymous]

Wait, OP.

You say that your parents have a house that is worth a lot of money? But -- it is in a trust?

So they *cannot* just sell it, downsize, and use the proceeds to hire in home care for themselves.

Are you, your brother and sister the beneficiaries of this trust?

Your parents are expecting you to pay for things, because you will be the ones to inherit the house?