Tag Archives: elder law

Long-term health care planning for same sex couples

By Patrice A. Putman, Maine elder law attorney

On June 26, 2013, the US Supreme Court overturned essential parts of the Defense of Marriage Act, a decision that has a major impact on many of my friends and clients. Until then, the federal Defense of Marriage Act “DOMA” did not allow the recognition of same sex marriage. This meant that a married same sex couple who had lived together for 20 or even 60 years was not able to take advantage of the hundreds of federal benefits that the government gives to married heterosexual couples. Many people realize that same sex couples have not been able to take advantage of the tax benefits associated with filing joint federal income tax returns or Social Security benefits. Something that people are less aware of is the inequity in how long-term care rules have applied to these couples. Now, in Maine, a state where same sex marriage is recognized, these inequities can begin to be addressed.

When a family receives a diagnosis of dementia, they not only need to live with frightening health consequences, they also need to deal with a myriad of financial consequences. Where health insurance and Medicare pay for the diagnosis and treatment of most illnesses, they do not pay for long-term care costs when a person needs to move into an assisted living or nursing home. Only long-term care insurance and Medicaid (called MaineCare in Maine) pay for long-term care. Long-term care generally costs $70,000 a year or more. MaineCare will begin contributing to long-term care costs when a person has less than $10,000 in assets.

When a married person moves into an assisted living facility, MaineCare allows the couple to transfer their assets to the spouse who still lives at home. This means that while the spouse who moves into the assisted living facility can only have $10,000, the rest of the couple’s assets can be kept and used by the spouse at home. When a married person moves into a nursing home, MaineCare allows the spouse living at home to own a home, a car, personal property, and have other assets totaling $115,920. Unmarried couples do not have these options. Only the $10,000 rule applies to the unmarried person.

Now that the Supreme Court has declared significant parts of DOMA to be unconstitutional, the federal government must begin providing same sex spouses the same ability to transfer and protect their hard-earned assets that other married couples have always had. Now, when dementia hits a married gay or lesbian couple, they will have the same heartbreak and the same financial concerns that other married couples have, not 100 times more – at least if they are lucky enough to live in a state like Maine where same sex marriages are allowed and recognized.

The information provided here is for educational purposes only. It should not be construed as rendering legal advice or offering an answer to a specific legal problem.

Second marriages: pre-nuptial and post-nuptial agreements

By Sally Wagley, Maine elder law and estate attorney

Some clients who marry later in life do not think, before the wedding, about the usefulness of a prenuptial agreement. In the flush of romance, these clients may not have their minds on practical matters, such as ensuring that their assets will remain separate should they divorce and ensuring that children from previous marriages will inherit.

After the wedding, when things calm down, these clients may turn their attention to these sobering issues. They may, at that point, wish they had executed a prenuptial agreement. Is it too late for these clients to execute an agreement of this kind?

No, it is not too late for these clients. Post-nuptial agreements under which each member of the couple agrees to forego certain spousal rights in the event of divorce or upon death. In this situation, each one will need to see advice from his/her own lawyer, as a single lawyer would face a conflict of interest in representing them both. Also, each one has to make full disclosure to the other of all financial assets that each has, so that there are no secrets between them in this regard.

Second marriages: the “elective share,” your spouse’s right to part of your estate when you die.

The law in Maine is such that, absent an agreement to the contrary, a married person cannot disinherit his or her surviving spouse. The law gives the surviving spouse the right to go to court to demand that he or she receive at least one-third of the deceased’s “augmented estate.” The determination of the amount that the surviving spouse can receive takes into account not only the assets in the deceased spouse’s name but also some of the surviving spouse’s assets.

We have many clients who marry later in life, sometimes for the second time. Each spouse has accumulated assets separately and may have children from a previous marriage. One or both spouses may wish to favor his or her own children in the will, choosing not to leave anything to the surviving spouse or perhaps to leave only a modest amount. For those clients who die without being aware or without addressing the “elective share” issue, the deceased’s children may be in for an unpleasant surprise, should the surviving spouse choose to seek more from the estate than what was left to him or her in the deceased’s will.

Clients who are either planning to marry or who are already married, who wish to agree that neither will file for the elective share against the other’s estate can put this in writing in a prenuptial or postnuptial agreement.

Proposed cuts to prescription drug help for Maine’s elderly

By Sally M. Wagley, elder law attorney

As an attorney focusing on elder law, I am carefully watching the Maine Governor Paul LePage’s proposed cuts to MaineCare programs serving the elderly.   My last blog post was about the proposed elimination of coverage for residential care (also known as “assisted living” or “boarding home” care).  

The Governor’s budget proposal also includes cuts to prescription drug assistance to Maine’s elderly.   According the Spectrum Generations, the proposed MaineCare cuts are as follows:

  • Prescription Drug and Health Care Assistance for People over 65 and People with Disabilities: Approximately72,000 Maine elderly and people with disabilities would lose some or all assistance they currently receive to pay for Medicare and/or prescription drug costs. Of the 72,000, over 20,000 (with incomes between 135-185% FPL) will lose all assistance they currently receive through the Medicare Savings Program (MSP) to help pay for Medicare premiums, co-payments and deductibles, prescription drug costs, and coverage through the so-called “donut hole”. The remainder, approximately 52,000 people, will lose some assistance with Medicare and/or prescription drug costs.
  • Prescription Drug Assistance for Certain People over 62 and People with Disabilities: Approximately 5,000-6,000 low-income older adults (over age 62) and people with disabilities who do not have Medicare will lose all assistance they currently receive to afford their prescription medications through the Drugs for the Elderly program (DEL). These are individuals with serious health conditions such as diabetes, heart disease and Lou Gehrig’s Disease.

These MaineCare cuts, of course, must have legislative approval in order to go into effect.  Hearings are being held at the State House right now.  More details will be coming.

Governor proposes: no more MaineCare for assisted living and residential care

by Sally M. Wagley

This week Maine’s governor released his proposal for cuts to the MaineCare (Medicaid) program.   A number of the proposed cuts will affect Maine’s elderly. 

An area of particular concern is the elimination of MaineCare coverage of expenses faced by elderly and disabled people who live in residential care and assisted living facilities.   As an elder law attorney, I have many clients in these facilities who cannot afford to pay the monthly cost of $4000 to $7000, who are on MaineCare or will need to apply for it soon.  I also have many clients who are stressed out caregivers who cared for an elderly relative for as long as possible, before reaching the point of exhaustion.  

Assisted living and residential care facilities are for elderly people, many of them with Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia, who need supervision around the clock. In these settings, they are provided with security, reminded when to eat, dress and bathe, are helped with medication, and provided assistance with some activities of daily living.

 Where will these people go if they can’t get MaineCare and can’t afford to pay privately?  Most will not meet the criteria for nursing home level of care.  So they will have to return to live with exhausted spouses and other relatives, many of them also elderly and with health problems).   For those without families or homes to go to, or whose families simply cannot take them back, the outcome is not clear. 

 The governor’s proposal is at this point just that — a proposal, which will need legislative approval before it becomes a reality.  Regardless of whether you agree with the governor, it is important to be aware that this change may be coming.

New law requires financial institutions to honor Maine powers of attorney

New law requires financial institutions to honor Maine powers of attorney

Have you ever tried to transact business on behalf of an elderly or disabled relative using that person’s financial power of attorney (POA)?  Have you been told by the financial institution that it will not accept the form because it was a) signed too long ago, or b) is not on the institution’s preferred form?  This scenario can be extremely frustrating if you are trying to look after someone, paying bills and monitoring investments.  Your elderly or disabled relative may now be too incapacitated to sign a new POA on a form acceptable to the financial institution, requiring you to spend time and money getting a court order appointing you conservator. 

Hopefully, this will change as of July 1, 2010, when a new Maine law, the Uniform Power of Attorney Act, takes effect.  The purpose of the law is to make it easier to use validly executed POA’s.  Under this law, financial institutions are subject to penalties if they fail to honor powers of attorney which have been properly acknowledged (witnessed by a notary public or attorney at law):

  • Institutions may not require an additional or different POA form if the form you have grants you the authority to perform the act requested.
  • Institutions have a maximum of seven days to honor a POA. 
  • If an institution has a question of concerning the validity of the document or your authority as “agent”, the institution must, within that seven-day period, ask you to sign a “certification” of your authority, or must seek an “opinion of counsel” (letter from an attorney regarding the legality of the document).
  • Once the institution has obtained the certification or opinion of counsel, it has only five additional days to honor the document.  
  • If the institution violates these rules, and if you have to obtain a court order confirming the validity of the POA, the financial institution will be required to pay attorney’s fees and costs incurred by you to obtain that court order. 
  • (There are, however, exceptions to these rules.  An institution will not be required to honor the document or pay attorney’s fees and costs if: the institution had actual knowledge that the POA was terminated; if the institution had a good faith belief that you lack authority to perform the act requested; if the institution had a good faith belief that physical or financial abuse, neglect, exploitation or abandonment has occurred; or if it would be inconsistent with federal law to honor the document.)