"Guardian ad litem
is a term for a person appointed to protect the legal
interests of someone considered incompetent or
underage."
(Webster's
New Millennium Dictionary of English)
Protect, indeed!!!
|
National |
|
Association |
|
to |
|
|
|
Guardian |
|
Abuse© |
| |
Special TV Reports |
|
BECOME INFORMED: |
|
| | Ten Dirty Tricks |
| | Warning Signals |
| | Partners in Crime |
| | The Enablers |
| | The Pirates |
| | An Open Door |
| | Misnomers |
| | No One is Safe |
| | Stripped of All Power |
| | Practical Advice |
| | YouTube Videos |
| | Great Escapes |
|
|
In Memoriam |
| | Victims |
| | Soapbox |
| | Who Else is Paying the Price? |
| | Related links |
| | Our Mission |
| | JOIN the NASGA Advocates for Reform |
|
|
Contact us! |
|
Partners in Crime!
|
|
A popular misconception of guardianship/conservatorship victims is that the court-appointed Guardian ad Litem. ("GAL") is an advocate for and representative for their loved one to the court. There are other titles used in different courts: court evaluator, court visitor, etc.
The reality is quite the opposite. The GAL
is an official arm of the court with the responsibility of fact
finding and reporting information to the judge - not advocating for
the Ward. The GAL does not represent the alleged incapacitated
person ("AIP") in any respect. If the AIP doesn't want to go
to a nursing home, for instance, but a nursing home is the GAL's
recommendation, then that's what the GAL reports to the court - not
the wishes of the AIP - and that's what the judge orders! The Ward has to pay for the lawyer who represents the guardian - instead of representing the Ward. The Ward also pays for the GAL who represents the Court - not the Ward. Both the guardian's lawyer and the GAL play the "protection" game all the way to the bank. There is not understanding, either by the Ward or the family, at the beginning of the proceeding about where these fees are taken from. The Ward has to pay all the fees for what the family considers their "adversaries," and the family has to pay their own fees. Go fight City Hall! Once again, the vulnerable Ward gets the short end of the stick. Most of our state statutes entitle the AIP to representation at the inception of the proceedings, but others interject the GAL-type process first. Apparently, the decision-making element is set in motion before legal due process begins, if it begins at all. The AIP's future is threatened by this process, and the legal fee billings are adding up before the first hearing! Look up Guardian ad Litem in Webster's and unfortunately, here's what you'll find:
|
