My Brother's Keeper, lliterally?
July 16, 2019 4:08 PM Subscribe
This was/still is me, now I'm back for another question regarding my brother this time.
My brother was sent to a mental health facility in another state. For some reason - he was discharged and turned up three states away in May. They found my sister through Facebook - and she forwarded the message to me. I spoke to the shelter - they seemed to have a good program, and I was happy that he'd found a place to recover. Well - to my surprise on Saturday - I got a call from Good Samaritan, who informed me that he had been in their care for three weeks in a catatonic state, and the treatment team was considering ECT, but he was obviously unable to consent. I said I'd be willing to be his health surrogate, and the doctor said they'd contact me this week if he was unresponsive to medication. Today I was contacted by an APS social worker who asked me if I would become my brother's guardian. This process involves court filings and court fees (of a not small amount). And would also mean travel and work leave time as it's about 3 hours away. I have had to take a lot of leave to deal with the mother situation, and there's a cost and court and even more responsibility. The social worker said I could reimburse my self for the cost and travel once I had control of my brother's finances (to which I replied - uh he has no finances?)
But the social worker said I would be able to apply for Social Security Disability on his behalf and that would help pay for his care and I could also reimburse myself for the expenses. (which seems... not right??)
I don't have money for a lawyer. Plus I'm already handling my mother's accounts, bills, and care. Am I a terrible person if I say go ahead and make him a ward of the state instead? The social worker said that they would not be able to help him access his SSD, which would be needed to pay for his facility care.
I don't want him to end up under a bridge or anything, but I'm only one person.
Please hope me again, Mefi - you were enormously helpful last go 'round!
My brother was sent to a mental health facility in another state. For some reason - he was discharged and turned up three states away in May. They found my sister through Facebook - and she forwarded the message to me. I spoke to the shelter - they seemed to have a good program, and I was happy that he'd found a place to recover. Well - to my surprise on Saturday - I got a call from Good Samaritan, who informed me that he had been in their care for three weeks in a catatonic state, and the treatment team was considering ECT, but he was obviously unable to consent. I said I'd be willing to be his health surrogate, and the doctor said they'd contact me this week if he was unresponsive to medication. Today I was contacted by an APS social worker who asked me if I would become my brother's guardian. This process involves court filings and court fees (of a not small amount). And would also mean travel and work leave time as it's about 3 hours away. I have had to take a lot of leave to deal with the mother situation, and there's a cost and court and even more responsibility. The social worker said I could reimburse my self for the cost and travel once I had control of my brother's finances (to which I replied - uh he has no finances?)
But the social worker said I would be able to apply for Social Security Disability on his behalf and that would help pay for his care and I could also reimburse myself for the expenses. (which seems... not right??)
I don't have money for a lawyer. Plus I'm already handling my mother's accounts, bills, and care. Am I a terrible person if I say go ahead and make him a ward of the state instead? The social worker said that they would not be able to help him access his SSD, which would be needed to pay for his facility care.
I don't want him to end up under a bridge or anything, but I'm only one person.
Please hope me again, Mefi - you were enormously helpful last go 'round!
Best answer: But the social worker said I would be able to apply for Social Security Disability on his behalf and that would help pay for his care and I could also reimburse myself for the expenses. (which seems... not right??)
This is variant by state a little but basically, no that is right. My mother was a "designated payee" for a local friend who was on SSDI and could not manage his own finances. The bank account was a very specific kind of bank account which was in her name but "held for" him in a legal way such that when she died I couldn't just take it over, it had to go to this man's new designated payee. There are a lot of rules that govern that sort of thing but the understanding is that people on SSDI may need care or expenses paid and being the designated payee managing those things is an acceptable use of that person's money.
That said, and the reason I am writing all this out is that you can probably be a designated payee without being a guardian (this is what my mother did) which might be cheaper, give you some options and not be as costly. My partner has a grown child on SSDI but decided not to take the route to be his child's guardian (complex, costly, other pitfalls) and that might be a middle path. Any of it is not without hassle and it's okay, of course, if you decide you do not even want to do this.
If you want to look into this more your local federal elected official may have "constituent services" which can give you some answers about SSDI (applying, what's involved, etc) without committing you to anything. Also re-up my suggestion from last time which is trying to find a NAMI support group in your area. These are tough decisions and sometimes it's nice to be in a room of people who have been there to help you feel better about whatever choices you have to make.
posted by jessamyn at 5:20 PM on July 16, 2019 [5 favorites]
This is variant by state a little but basically, no that is right. My mother was a "designated payee" for a local friend who was on SSDI and could not manage his own finances. The bank account was a very specific kind of bank account which was in her name but "held for" him in a legal way such that when she died I couldn't just take it over, it had to go to this man's new designated payee. There are a lot of rules that govern that sort of thing but the understanding is that people on SSDI may need care or expenses paid and being the designated payee managing those things is an acceptable use of that person's money.
That said, and the reason I am writing all this out is that you can probably be a designated payee without being a guardian (this is what my mother did) which might be cheaper, give you some options and not be as costly. My partner has a grown child on SSDI but decided not to take the route to be his child's guardian (complex, costly, other pitfalls) and that might be a middle path. Any of it is not without hassle and it's okay, of course, if you decide you do not even want to do this.
If you want to look into this more your local federal elected official may have "constituent services" which can give you some answers about SSDI (applying, what's involved, etc) without committing you to anything. Also re-up my suggestion from last time which is trying to find a NAMI support group in your area. These are tough decisions and sometimes it's nice to be in a room of people who have been there to help you feel better about whatever choices you have to make.
posted by jessamyn at 5:20 PM on July 16, 2019 [5 favorites]
It might be worth reaching out to NAMI. They have tons of resources for family members dealing with mental illness, including support groups and a helpline. There may be resources in your brother's location that they could connect you with.
A section of their website deals with taking care of yourself as you try to help an ill family member. That's really important, no matter how you proceed. And, you may decide that taking care of yourself means not being able to assume guardianship of your brother.
Remember, social services professionals have a strong incentive to hand over the care of a disabled adult to a family member. They have limited resources and if they can take even one person off their rolls, it's a win for them. They are not your advocate. They are your brother's advocate. Don't let anyone pressure you into taking action that may be at direct odds with your emotional, physical, mental, and financial limits. You need your own advocate and that's where a support group could really be of use to you.
posted by MissPitts at 7:00 PM on July 16, 2019 [10 favorites]
A section of their website deals with taking care of yourself as you try to help an ill family member. That's really important, no matter how you proceed. And, you may decide that taking care of yourself means not being able to assume guardianship of your brother.
Remember, social services professionals have a strong incentive to hand over the care of a disabled adult to a family member. They have limited resources and if they can take even one person off their rolls, it's a win for them. They are not your advocate. They are your brother's advocate. Don't let anyone pressure you into taking action that may be at direct odds with your emotional, physical, mental, and financial limits. You need your own advocate and that's where a support group could really be of use to you.
posted by MissPitts at 7:00 PM on July 16, 2019 [10 favorites]
Why doesn't your sister do it? You're taking care of mom, she can do brother.
Personally I would not do this. No way.
posted by medusa at 7:08 PM on July 16, 2019 [9 favorites]
Personally I would not do this. No way.
posted by medusa at 7:08 PM on July 16, 2019 [9 favorites]
I would not do this in your position. You already have your mother’s care on your shoulders. His case is not easy or simple and it will be very expensive. The public conservators that would be assigned to your brother are experts in how the system works and are used to severe cases. This is a shock, but please be realistic about how much you can take on while still caring for yourself and being there for your son. I would burn out within a year or two if I was managing my own life and work along with taking care of a parent’s and sibling’s care.
posted by quince at 10:34 PM on July 16, 2019 [3 favorites]
posted by quince at 10:34 PM on July 16, 2019 [3 favorites]
If your sister can't do any of the work, can she at least cover the costs for you for both your mom and brother? It seems like the money is a big part of the problem. If she covered the costs, you would be able to take FMLA leave from work to deal with things.
posted by hydropsyche at 6:05 AM on July 17, 2019 [1 favorite]
posted by hydropsyche at 6:05 AM on July 17, 2019 [1 favorite]
Best answer: Am I a terrible person if I say go ahead and make him a ward of the state instead?
No, especially because you are already taking care of a parent. We as a society (via the government, other non-profit orgs, etc.) should take care of people in his situation. It’s not your job/obligation to take care of anyone besides your own children (and perhaps, depending on the situation, one’s parents). Otherwise, it’s unfair to burden a person because of their biological relationship.
Having read in your previous question that you have a “strained relationship with both my mother and brother, for er, reasons, including how she treats me and my son” and that your “mother is competent and able to make her own decisions”, i’d say you are morally/ethically/legally clear to leave their care to social programs and themselves. Don’t damage/ruin your life for them. The time, labor, and money you spend on them is essentially taking away resources from your child, as well.
The social worker said that they would not be able to help him access his SSD, which would be needed to pay for his facility care.
Hmmm. Seems to me that if there are federal dollars available for his care, any organization responsible for him would be applying for that money. Perhaps there is some weird unfortunate circumstance that prevents it from happening, but it’s still not your responsibility. Don’t let others shift the burden to you.
posted by D.C. at 2:50 PM on July 17, 2019 [4 favorites]
No, especially because you are already taking care of a parent. We as a society (via the government, other non-profit orgs, etc.) should take care of people in his situation. It’s not your job/obligation to take care of anyone besides your own children (and perhaps, depending on the situation, one’s parents). Otherwise, it’s unfair to burden a person because of their biological relationship.
Having read in your previous question that you have a “strained relationship with both my mother and brother, for er, reasons, including how she treats me and my son” and that your “mother is competent and able to make her own decisions”, i’d say you are morally/ethically/legally clear to leave their care to social programs and themselves. Don’t damage/ruin your life for them. The time, labor, and money you spend on them is essentially taking away resources from your child, as well.
The social worker said that they would not be able to help him access his SSD, which would be needed to pay for his facility care.
Hmmm. Seems to me that if there are federal dollars available for his care, any organization responsible for him would be applying for that money. Perhaps there is some weird unfortunate circumstance that prevents it from happening, but it’s still not your responsibility. Don’t let others shift the burden to you.
posted by D.C. at 2:50 PM on July 17, 2019 [4 favorites]
This thread is closed to new comments.
I'm not sure what it means exactly in your context/your state to make your brother a ward of the state. There are different kinds of guardians, conservators, etc, with varying levels of professionalism and oversight. There have been mmmany high profile (nyt, nyt again, New Yorker, AARP, HuffPo, etc etc) cases of guardians abusing and scamming the elders under their care, usually eventually warehousing them. Since your brother doesn't really have any assets, maybe he'd be less of a target, I don't know. I haven't heard much good of them.
You can't do any more than you can do. If it comes down to it and you can't be his guardian, that's just how it is and you're not a monster. I mean that sincerely!! But I would be sure to carefully research in advance exactly what kind of legal arrangement is being formed, who the person is, and how you would challenge or remove them if they turn out to be abusive (which may be a court process more expensive than getting yourself made guardian in the first place). I would just generally be extremely cautious of going that route.
posted by peppercorn at 4:52 PM on July 16, 2019 [1 favorite]