Tough love, or welfare fraud?

[cybercoma]

He's not being denied food and shelter. He's being offered food and shelter in rehab. If he chooses to turn that down, that's his choice to live on the street and continue killing himself.

[jacee]

No he isn't being offered rehab ... but even if he was, what does he eat when he gets out?

It's too easy for ill intentioned families to take control of an addict's own money and leave them destitute, and that's what's happening here.

You and TimG are too blinded by the 'not enabling' concept to see that's not what this is about.

This is about fraud/theft and cruelty ... with a thin camouflage of a pretense of 'not enabling'.

If this ever went before a judge, the family would be ordered to release some of his/her funds regularly for basic needs.

Edited November 7, 2012 by jacee

[TimG]

No he isn't being offered rehab ... but even if he was, what does he eat when he gets out?

Well if he was clean and sober then he would get some of his money back.

You and TimG are too blinded by the 'not enabling' concept to see that's not what this is about.

This is exactly what it is about. You figure that it is more humane to let a addict piss away all of his money then go on welfare or die. I happen to think that it is more humane to give an addict incentives to get into treatment, recover and live a long life. Edited November 7, 2012 by TimG

[guyser]

Which type of Power of Attorney did your friend sign?

Sounds like the CPOA one, in which case your friend signed up for this treatment.

Perhaps you can shed some light here.

Edited November 7, 2012 by guyser

[Guest American Woman]

I'd never heard of welfare "offering" rehab - the person has to choose to go, and then welfare picks up the tab.

[jacee]

Which type of Power of Attorney did your friend sign?

Sounds like the CPOA one, in which case your friend signed up for this treatment.

Perhaps you can shed some light here.

As I said, it's easy for a family to take control of an addict's money.

[guyser]

As I said, it's easy for a family to take control of an addict's money.

Ok, you have no idea then?

For the record, if someone has POA , then your friend signed it, your friend can deal with the consequences and all the teeth gnashing you want to do is for not

[jacee]

True ... him and all the other addicts who are pressured when impaired to sign POA and give up all access to their own funds, with no provision for food and shelter.

Sure they have legal recourse ... but not the wherewithall to use it.

And that's what their families count on.

I don't believe that our justice system would allow a family to cut someone off totally from their own funds leaving them destitute, regardless of the person's failings.

Unfortunately, it happens outside the supervision of the courts.

I wonder how often ...

[jacee]

I'd never heard of welfare "offering" rehab - the person has to choose to go, and then welfare picks up the tab.

I don't believe it does here, other than a week in detox.

[TimG]

I don't believe it does here, other than a week in detox.

The government will fund certain rehab centers in BC (http://www.pacificatreatment.ca/costs-applying-pacifica). Plus there are a lot of recovery houses that provide room and board in return for the welfare check.

You rant and rave about how your friend was hard done by but it appears that your friend has no interest in getting help for his addiction. This makes it hard to have any sympathy for his situation.

[Guest American Woman]

The government will fund certain rehab centers in BC (http://www.pacificat...plying-pacifica). Plus there are a lot of recovery houses that provide room and board in return for the welfare check.

You rant and rave about how your friend was hard done by but it appears that your friend has no interest in getting help for his addiction. This makes it hard to have any sympathy for his situation.

I figured that your government would pick up the tab - it does in the States if the addict qualifies financially, but I can't imagine that the addict's family would not be willing to release the addict's money to pay for rehab. A week likely won't do it- it has to be a commitment on the part of the addict and the addict has to want to get better more than he/she wants to drink/use. Sober living houses (perhaps the same as recovery houses?) would also accept welfare checks for rent, as you pointed out. The reality that rehab is being all but dismissed as an option says to me that there is really more of a need to give the addict money than to make him/her 'better' - and If the people holding access to the addict's money gave it to him/her, he/she would eventually go through all of it - and end up on the streets anyway. Extensive rehab is the way to go, with 'follow up' life choices, and I hope that's where this addict eventually finds him/herself - and starts living their life.

Edited November 8, 2012 by American Woman

[jacee]

The government will fund certain rehab centers in BC (http://www.pacificatreatment.ca/costs-applying-pacifica). Plus there are a lot of recovery houses that provide room and board in return for the welfare check.

You rant and rave about how your friend was hard done by but it appears that your friend has no interest in getting help for his addiction. This makes it hard to have any sympathy for his situation.

Specifics of a particular situation aren't mine to share, beyond the general context.

It was simply an example of a situation that can and does exist - ie, families take POA control of an addict's money and release NO money at all for food and shelter needs.

And it's frostbite cold out now, and free meals are few and far between.

Edited November 8, 2012 by jacee

[TimG]

It was simply an example of a situation that can and does exist - ie, families take POA control of an addict's money and release NO money at all for food and shelter needs.

It could not have happened unless he signed it away. I know of one addict who had debt collectors after him that voluntarily signed his assets over to his sibling to protect them. He regretted it later when he ran out of money to drink. Frankly, unless you have actually had conversations with the relatives holding the money in trust you should assume that your friend is not giving you the complete story - he is an addict after all - addicts are masters at rationalization and self justification. I suspect there is a lot more to the 'no money for food or shelter' sob story. Edited November 8, 2012 by TimG

[jacee]

It could not have happened unless he signed it away. I know of one addict who had debt collectors after him that voluntarily signed his assets over to his sibling to protect them. He regretted it later when he ran out of money to drink. Frankly, unless you have actually had conversations with the relatives holding the money in trust you should assume that your friend is not giving you the complete story - he is an addict after all - addicts are masters at rationalization and self justification. I suspect there is a lot more to the 'no money for food or shelter' sob story.

I've provided the information repeatedly.

I've confirmed the details.

It can and does happen.

And it's criminal.

[TimG]

I've confirmed the details.

Have you confirmed the details by asking for the trustee's side of the story? If not then you are not getting the whole story.

[jacee]

Have you confirmed the details by asking for the trustee's side of the story? If not then you are not getting the whole story.

yes

[TimG]

yes

And what conditions did the trustee require to release funds?

[jacee]

And what conditions did the trustee require to release funds?

There is no provision for that, just a time limit for review in a few years, if he's still alive by then. Edited November 9, 2012 by jacee

[TimG]

There is no provision for that, just a time limit for review in a few years, if he's still alive by then.

So you are saying the trust is locked up and the trustee can't do anything about it?

[jacee]

So you are saying the trust is locked up and the trustee can't do anything about it?

yes

[TimG]

yes

Those are the kinds of terms that wealthy people will put on trusts for the children until they are old enough to make mature decisions with money. Is this really money that he earned or is it money given to him by someone else?

[guyser]

yes

i am afraid you dont have the whole story then. The POA could access funds since he or she is the POA assigned by your friend.

[jacee]

i am afraid you dont have the whole story then. The POA could access funds since he or she is the POA assigned by your friend.

Could ... but won't.

Family, not friend.

Pressure, not choice.

[jacee]

Those are the kinds of terms that wealthy people will put on trusts for the children until they are old enough to make mature decisions with money. Is this really money that he earned or is it money given to him by someone else?

Earned. Edited November 9, 2012 by jacee

[TimG]

Earned.

So he earned his money and placed into a trust which he cannot access? How is this possible without his consent? If the family did this without his approval then a court must have ruled that he is incompetent - a ruling which does not sound unreasonable given the fact that he is practicing addict with no intention of cleaning up.

If he wants to get the money back then all he has to do is show the court he is competent by going to treatment center and cleaning up his life. Why is this so difficult?

Edited November 9, 2012 by TimG