By Karen Fritz, PF 392
Family conservatorships are rarely straightforward. Each case carries unique motivations and challenges, making the role of a conservator both complex and demanding. While there are licensing requirements and standards that conservators must meet, the real journey lies in navigating the emotional and practical aspects of caring for a loved one. This article explores two distinct family conservatorship cases, each with different motivations and outcomes, highlighting the complexities involved and the impact on family dynamics.
There are many reasons, motivations and objectives as to why people are conserved. No two situations are the same nor are the objectives; therefore, it stands to reason there is no “how-to-do” manual that one can refer to in order to become a successful conservator.
Certainly, there are licensing requirements which need to be studied and satisfied, but that is for another edition. Also, there are an infinite number of personality styles that will also determine success; however, the purpose of this writing is to focus on two families that I have been involved with; both have very different reasons for pursuing conservatorships for a family member; both had either siblings acting as conservators or the parents.
What is a Licensed Conservator?
First, what is a licensed conservator? It is a person who has met stringent requirements and ultimately passed a state test and has been issued a license by the California Consumer Bureau. Once a person is licensed, a court appoints a person as a conservator to act in the best interest of the conservatee. There are several types but for the purpose of this writing, let’s address two: a conservator of the Person and of the Estate. An appointment can be granted for one or both authorities based upon the potential conservatee’s circumstances. In either case, this appointment grants authority to “step into the conservatee’s shoes.”
Conservator of the Person
Specific to the Person, this provides the conservator with the authority to make decisions specific to a conservatee’s personal care, living arrangements and health-related issues.
Conservator of the Estate
An appointment as conservator of the Estate, refers to a conservator who has been given the authority to make financial decisions such as investments, paying bills and general banking activities. In order for an appointment to be made, the court requires proof that the potential conservatee lacks the ability, or better said, lacks the necessary capacity to make sound personal and financial decisions.
The process is made to be difficult; and it should be. We certainly don’t want this to be an easy bar to reach, since the process, if approved, takes away the personal rights of a person to make medical and financial decisions for him or herself.
Assessing Capacity
There are different benchmarks used to determine what kind of capacity may be lacking. For instance, a person who lacks capacity to make sound medical decisions, may still be able to choose their partners, to marry or to travel, but if determined they cannot make sound financial decisions, and even though they can legally enter into a marriage contract, they may not have the capacity to enter into a real estate contract. Real estate contracts require a higher level of capacity than a marriage contract. These examples are just a very small glimpse into the types of decisions that can be impacted as a result of a conservatorship. Be assured, these issues can become much more complicated and challenging.
Family A: A Voluntary Decision
Now let’s look at two examples of the different motivations that initiate a conservatorship. These two families each had family members as conservators but the situations are extremely different as to why the court appointed a professional conservator.
Family A, has 5 adult children; 1 of which, Tony, has PTSD and is bipolar. He is a veteran and has dealt with this condition the majority of his life. He lacks the capacity to make either medical or financial decisions. For the past 11 years, his sister and brother have shared responsibility as his conservators; they are referred to as co-conservators. Only up until recently, they elected to nominate a professional, licensed fiduciary to act in their brother’s best interest. This is a loving family but they had to make a tough decision; to allow an outsider to act in their brother’s best interest. Several things facilitated this decision. The first is that one conservator has a very demanding position and has pressing family issues where she found it was impacting her health. She also felt that because the majority of responsibilities fell upon her, it was now impacting her relationship with her brother, the second half of this conservatorship.
This issue extended into the relationships with the other siblings and their families. Tony also resented them because he saw them as his “boss” and became argumentative with them. It was clear that everyone wanted the best for Tony. However, in the end, the sister didn’t feel like a sister any longer, having to meet accounting deadlines and all the required documentation filings the court requires to maintain a conservatorship. Finally, the family got together and decided to interview several conservators. This responsibility was taken on by another brother who contacted several conservators and arranged for meetings with the co-conservators. I am pleased to say that they ultimately nominated me to become their brother’s conservator. The transition has been successful and now the family can revert back to a traditional family; not having to point fingers at each other by blaming who is doing all or none of the work. Since everyone’s objective remains the same, the family continues to visit with Tony as their brother, not as his conservators.
Family B: A Court-Mandated Decision
Family B did not have much choice in the appointment of a conservator as did Family A. In this case, the parents are divorced and both acting as co-conservators to their next to youngest daughter who is now 30 years old. They have 4 adult children; however, daughter Mary, has a rare genetic neurological disability where she needs help with every aspect of daily activities. She cannot walk on her own, cannot talk or understand the basics. Custody and financial issues continue to bring these parents back to court because they cannot agree on any issue. Needless to say, this has caused undue stress. The mother has a professional position, and the stay-at-home dad has become Mary’s primary caregiver. As a result, co-caregiving is fraught with disagreements. Initially, the court mandated mediation which did not work for several reasons; primarily because there was no willingness to compromise. Several interested parties agreed that the only way to make this work was for the parents to relinquish their conservatorships and the court agreed to appoint a professional conservator of the Person to mediate any conflict concerning caregiving scheduling. There are many factors that change a schedule, sometimes with and sometimes without notice. This only adds to the complexities of this process. However, my objective is to make sure that I maintain Mary’s best interests while recognizing the needs of the parents. That’s not to say they don’t have her best interests at heart, it means that I need to be able to find a compromise that works for all.
Conclusion
Here are two cases where families were faced with difficult decisions, one voluntary and the other mandated but could have been avoided. Regardless, both stepped up, put feelings aside and looked at it from the perspective of their loved ones.