Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Families of elderly patients losing homes to TennCare
WBIR NBC-10 Knoxville ^ | 10/23/6 | SHEILA BURKE

Posted on 10/23/2006 10:24:56 AM PDT by SmithL

To foot the bill for Mary and Lawrence Henkel's nursing home care, her children sold everything their parents owned except for the Donelson, TN home the couple had lived in since 1967.

"That was my father's dying wish - to hold onto the house, live in it, take care of it," said Nashville resident Judy Clifford, 66, one of three Henkel children. "That's what he told me, and he gave the house to me."

Now TennCare wants to sell the home to help recoup the roughly $288,000 that the state says it paid to take care of Mary Henkel in the nursing home before she died in February 2003 at the age of 81. Her husband had passed away years earlier.

The Henkel children, who value the home at $110,000, aren't alone. They're among families across the state being asked to give up the family home as TennCare redoubles its efforts to recoup some of the roughly $1 billion a year that the state pays for nursing home and other long-term care.

State officials say they're merely doing what is required by the federal government. And they point out that Tennessee isn't nearly as aggressive as some other states in recouping the money spent on long-term care.

"We're talking about a very emotional time in someone's life or in the family situation, and of course it's something that we wouldn't be unsympathetic to," said Marilyn Wilson, a spokeswoman for TennCare. "If we are going to provide Medicaid coverage, we must actively engage in estate recovery efforts."

It's a common practice for TennCare, the state's expanded Medicaid program, to go after the family homes of nursing home patients who have passed away. Generally, by the time a nursing home or long-term-care recipient gets on TennCare, the patient's family has spent down all of the family assets, except for the home.

TennCare tries to recover money when patients are 55 or older and received long-term care. It will not go after a property if a surviving spouse still lives in the house or a minor child or a child who is considered disabled by certain federal requirements lives there.

Bigger push

The state is stepping up its efforts to get properties on at least two fronts.

In April, TennCare hired an Atlanta-based outside consulting firm to help find properties that deceased long-term-care recipients passed on to their heirs without going through probate. And when it does find the property, it's going to force open an estate.

Under Tennessee law, the property can pass to the heirs without going through a probate court. But if TennCare finds out about the property, it can petition the court to force open an estate, which is what happened in the Henkel case.

The Tenncare Bureau also is looking to the state's highest courts to extend the time that it has to petition a court to get the property.

State law says all creditors have 12 months to file a claim on an estate.

Last month, Davidson County Probate Court Judge Randy Kennedy sided with another family in a fight over a home because he said TennCare waited too long to make a claim. The case was the first of several different ones in Nashville, including the Henkel case, in which TennCare forced open an estate more than 12 months after the patient died.

"We are going to appeal these cases, and the reason why is that of course both federal and state law requires that the state engage in estate recovery, and so as lawyers for the state we are duty-bound to assert all of the legal arguments available to us that support the right to recovery," said acting Attorney General Michael Moore. Moore, whose own mother is in a private nursing home, said he knew how exorbitant the cost of long-term care was.

TennCare argues that it shouldn't be bound by the statute of limitations because it involves public funds.

But experts in probate law disagree and say the one-year rule applies to TennCare.

"I don't know anybody who would disagree with Judge Kennedy's ruling," said Jeff Mobley, a Nashville attorney and an expert in probate. TennCare, he said, has asked the legislature in the past to extend the statute of limitations and is always asking for more ways to recover the money.

Paying for care

The money the Bureau recovers is only a tiny fraction of what the state pays into long-term care.

About 32,000 people on TennCare receive long-term care on any given day, spokeswoman Wilson said. On average, TennCare recoups $14 million a year of the money spent on that population. Last year, more than $1 billion of the program's overall $7 billion budget went toward long-term care.

The state generally has about 500 estate recovery cases per year, Wilson said. It's too early to gauge how successful the outside consultant will be in efforts to recover money.

Tennessee's estate recovery program is actually middle-of-the-road and nowhere near as aggressive as some states, Wilson said, specifically citing others that require nursing home patients to sell their property before they die.

But the practice of taking the family home still comes as a devastating blow to the children of the patients, one legal expert said.

"There is a sense of unfairness about it," said Tim Takacs, a Hendersonville attorney and expert on elder law. "People will come into the office here before Mama's on Medicaid and it's like, 'All she's got is this little house, and she lost her health, she lost her husband, she lost everything else, and now they want the house, too.' ''

Takacs thinks there should be an honest debate about what people should pay and what the government should pay.

He and Mobley, the probate lawyer, say people also need to do a much better job of planning for the high costs of long-term care and not wait until a family member is in a nursing home.

"We like to have people come in before they are in a crisis," Takacs said. "It's never too late to do something. It's just when they don't do anything, that's when they're likely to get an estate recovery claim."


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; US: Tennessee
KEYWORDS: healthcare; tenncare; viatical; yourtaxdollarsatwork
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-184 next last
To: ErnBatavia
My sibs and I are facing this with my parents right now - altho we're not quite at the point where they're institutionalized yet....be it either the current caregivers or "the home", they'll run out of funds - except for their home - in around three years.

You should make an appointment to talk to a financial advisor in the morning

161 posted on 10/23/2006 6:39:04 PM PDT by SauronOfMordor (A planned society is most appealing to those with the arrogance to think they will be the planners)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: wmfights

Then there is a Lady Bird deed. Google that little gem.


162 posted on 10/23/2006 6:57:21 PM PDT by shankbear (Al-Qaeda grew while Monica blew)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: brytlea
"I think this is quite fair. I'm not willing to have no law on the chance it might be taken too far."
________________________________

We agree on the personal responsibility. Under the current rules, those individuals who can afford to do extensive estate planning get everyone else to pay for them. The lawyers make money. The accountants make money. The guy who loses is the poor schmuck that doesn't have the education, or resources, to do the estate planning, his family ends up with nothing.
163 posted on 10/23/2006 7:41:28 PM PDT by wmfights (Psalm : 27)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

I think the rub here is that the person who has no house because they maybe rented all their life loses nothing and their care is paid for. It rubs me to a certain degree also (well to a big degree) but when I was young I was told ownin a house was security to be sold to take care of you in old age if need be. I own and solely because I do the monies can be used.

Simple solution: Kids should not put their parents in nursing homes if they want the property. Caring for them no matter what their condition is the price they pay to inherit it.


164 posted on 10/23/2006 7:48:47 PM PDT by Snoopers-868th
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wmfights

If you don't like the current law, work to get it changed.
susie


165 posted on 10/23/2006 7:49:09 PM PDT by brytlea (amnesty--an act of clemency by an authority by which pardon is granted esp. to a group of individual)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: BOBWADE

ping


166 posted on 10/24/2006 12:32:31 AM PDT by zip (((Remember: DimocRat lies told often enough become truth to 48% of all Americans (NRA)))))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sergio

I agree totally.....


167 posted on 10/24/2006 6:22:04 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: WIladyconservative

Trouble is, meeting the current legal standard for "caring for" your parents can easily run into hundreds of thousands of dollars, which most people don't have and/or don't want to blow on a futile exercise in stretching out poor quality of life for much longer than is natural. Most people who tried to "care for" their elderly parents on an out of pocket basis would end up in legal trouble, accused of elder neglect or abuse.


168 posted on 10/24/2006 9:08:41 AM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: steveo

Yes, they are not places you would wish to place your loved one. I saw an article in our local paper today about a program in Vermont where the state pays $80 per day to a home (a relative) caregiver. They were saying it was cheaper than the $125 per day they had to pay to a nursing home and the care was much better. I plan to call my LTC guy and ask, if this becomes a common thing throughout the US, will my LTC cover a relative providing care in my (or their) home. It really makes a lot of sense. Many people want to care for their relatives but can't stand the financial hit. Since we (in the form of our government) are going to pay anyway why not get better care for the elderly for less cost if possible.


169 posted on 10/24/2006 1:25:09 PM PDT by pepperdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: pepperdog; GovernmentShrinker

I care for my father 24/7. The financial hit is not that big a deal. The emotional hit will knock your socks off.

Medicare or the VA pays for his doctor's appointments, medicines, wheelchair, hospital bed, and most durable goods (oxygen, concentrator, etc.). We have an aid come in every week to help bathe him. Medicare pays for twice a month, if we want 4 times a month we pay the difference which is only $25 a visit.

Today he was assessed and placed on Hospice care. Medicare picks up the tab 100% and it is administered through the VA.


170 posted on 10/24/2006 4:59:10 PM PDT by WIladyconservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

we got homestead laws in Florida that prevent this


171 posted on 10/24/2006 5:00:17 PM PDT by dennisw (Life is a tragedy for those who feel, and a comedy for those who think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WIladyconservative

God Bless You! I know it is a heavy emotional, as well as physical, burden. In our family we found hospice to be a wonderful resource. I hope you have someone to spell you occasionally, it is very important to look after your own health.


172 posted on 10/24/2006 5:46:03 PM PDT by pepperdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: WIladyconservative

The financial hit is huge. It's just that you're not paying it. Though if you're physically capable of caring for him 24/7, then you are capable of full time employment, and are taking the financial hit of foregoing that -- something that people with children to support at the same time usually can't do. Under the type of scheme outlined in this article, the government can subsequently raid your father's estate to recoup as much of its expenses as the estate is worth. Meanwhile, your father would get no choice as to how his estate is being wiped out.


173 posted on 10/25/2006 9:25:24 AM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker
then you are capable of full time employment, and are taking the financial hit of foregoing that -- something that people with children to support at the same time usually can't do.

Bad assumption on your part.

I'm a stay at-home mom as well as a caregiver. Being a one income family is a choice and takes dedication but can and is done quite a bit.

174 posted on 10/25/2006 1:18:26 PM PDT by WIladyconservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
And stealing children's homes is the way to make taxpayers' whole, eh? The bureaucrats forget a family has bankrupted itself to take care of elderly parents. Now they want to throw them out on the streets to fend for themselves.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

175 posted on 10/25/2006 1:23:06 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
If you mortgaged everything but your home to take care of your folks, yeah let 'em take it too. Its your fault you couldn't afford long-term elder care.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

176 posted on 10/25/2006 1:24:35 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: HaveHadEnough
But when the state has already taken ALL of your assets, save your home, that justifies taking it too? In traditional bankruptcy cases, a man's clothes, home and car were always exempt from seizure. As a civilized society, we have understood there are limits to how far one can go to satisfy a debt. Depriving one of the means of shelter and existence is inhumane and offends our sense of morality.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

177 posted on 10/25/2006 1:27:51 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Fairview
A lot of parents do that before they get Medicare. By the time they die, in truth everything has already been exhausted. And the debt left can't be fully covered even if the home is seized.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

178 posted on 10/25/2006 1:33:25 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
If you mortgaged everything but your home to take care of your folks, yeah let 'em take it too. Its your fault you couldn't afford long-term elder care.

Nobody suggested taking homes of the patient's children.

179 posted on 10/25/2006 1:37:31 PM PDT by Graybeard58 (Remember and pray for SSgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: Hildy
Its WRONG to punish heirs for their parents' debt. If the parents did not intend to bequeath their home to their surving children, I have to add I have no moral or legal difficulty with the home being seized to redress Medicare debt. As long as the home is in the parents' name, the state can do that to recover the debt. What it cannot do is go after the kids to satisfy it.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

180 posted on 10/25/2006 1:38:35 PM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180181-184 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson