Posted on 05/08/2007 10:50:01 AM PDT by MissEdie
QUESTION: I am a 42-year-old father of three young children, ages 3, 4 and 7. I am employed by a small company in a small town. My wife, 39, is totally and permanently disabled as a result of strokes and other complications arising from the birth of our youngest child. Although my wife can converse, she is unable to move from the neck down and requires total care.
After it was determined that rehabilitation wouldn’t improve her condition, my group health insurance stopped paying. The most difficult question was whether to place my wife in a nursing facility at $6,000+ per month, which we can’t afford, or try to keep her at home.
I checked into Medicaid and was told that because my wife had a 401(k) and because we were frugal and had been able to save our money, we would have to exhaust most of it to qualify her for benefits. She is receiving Social Security Disability and now has Medicare.
My employer has been very good to me, but that is ending because I have missed a lot of work with sick children, children’s sports and my wife’s care.
I am stressed out and have begun taking sleeping pills and anti-depressants. I am getting no help with my wife’s care, and I have nowhere to turn.
I am torn between caring for her and making sure our children are taken care of and educated. We are both only children and expect to inherit from our families, and have received gifts that we have put away for our children, but my lawyer said these gifts and inheritances would have to be used to provide for my wife’s care. He also said divorce is our only option to get my wife proper care and allow me to raise and educate our children. She agrees.
This is a sad state of affairs, and I wanted you to pass this on to your readers.
ANSWER: We appreciate the opportunity to let our readers know that long-term care issues and Medicaid affect more than just the elderly. And we agree that it is a sad state of affairs when the richest country in the world — a country that has historically taken pride in the strength and unity of the American family — has sunk to pre-1986 depths by again passing legislation called the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, which takes direct aim at middle-class families like yours and forces breakups of American families for economic reasons.
Impoverishment attributed to a spouse’s need for institutionalization more frequently affects older women who must spend down to poverty level to qualify their spouses for Medicaid, often eliminating a lifetime’s savings. Yet younger families like yours also are caught in the same crunch. This is devastating when young children are involved.
And, as your lawyer correctly told you, the help you receive from your families will go toward her care, ignoring your children’s needs.
So we agree with your lawyer that divorce probably is your only option. Some would disagree, asserting that you should have purchased long-term care insurance. But in the final analysis, you can thank the Congress, the president and the elected officials in your state of residence whose shortsightedness makes this drastic move your only option.
This is sad.
Caring for his wife is the best way to take care of and especially educate his children. They'll certainly know what love is. No mention of a church helping. No mention of remarriage either.
As one who has spent twenty years in accounting in health care, your suggestion is right on the money, so to speak.
Carolyn
Agreed,
I think this guy needs to talk to a better lawyer, this letter smells fishy to me. Elders “hide” millions in assets so they can receive care etc, I suspect that 1) this guy needs a better/different lawyer or 2) this entire thing is a set up by activists and isn’t a real letter at all.
Once you are disabled, you cannot obtain long term care insurance, disability insurance, or life insurance. All must be purchased before you are disabled or ill.
Concur. There are any number of people that feel that they shouldn’t be asked to use their assets to pay for college, healthcare, housing or other things the soicalists have convinced them oaught to be “free”.
Seems like he is torn between money and his wife.
It is not inheritance until they, ...well, inherit it (i.e. you are dead).
until then it is your assets, and if you want to keep them and have taxpayers cover your bills then you are missing the whole point here.
Personally, I think the story is bunk. Why do people try to protect their assets, when you acquire assets for just this type of thing. As sad as your situation is, why should any government agency pay for the care of your wife?
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.