lavender

Before anyone thinks that 7 year look back period is sacred they should check with a lawyer. It is my understanding that the state can look beyond that period if it is believed that the purpose of the transfer of assets was to render the parent indigent. There are also Pennsylvania filial support laws which can be used to collect medical bills or other care from children. They are not generally used if the child doesn't have the financial ability to care for the parent but if the child has money or other property that came from the parent the state can go after it. Consult a lawyer who knows what he is doing.

Wolves? Where did they come from? Are they barred along with the pigs and elephants or are they allowed since they have raised some of the residents?

Well you don't have to die. Some people go into the personal care home or nursing home and I suppose some just move out. They must sell back to the facility. It gets tricky after that. I think every transaction may be tailored to the individual and their resources. If you ask what one of them costs it is difficult to get a straight answer. We asked at an open house and all we got was an offer to discuss it so I'm not sure how it is handled.

" Durkin’s body was taken to be incinerated while Johnny Cash’s ‘Ring of Fire’ played." Guy had a sense of humor that didn't quit because he was dead.

You have to die of something and double bacon cheese burgers sound better than many of the alternatives. It sounds as though he was missing his wife. A lot.

While you are correct there is also a Pennsylvania state law that allows nursing homes to go after children for parental care. It was apparently not used very often except in cases where children were wealthy or had rendered parents indigent so the state had to care for them but is becoming more popular as nursing home care becomes more expensive. Any non-profit nursing home will not remove a resident unless they become unable to care for them. The private for profit ones can do so. Non profits will accept what is available Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid. Those payments do not cover the cost of care and Medicaid doesn't pay unless the patient has no assets hence the arrangement with houses. Somebody has to make up the difference and that somebody is the patients who can afford to pay for their care. In a nursing home that isn't many where costs are very high exceeding $50,000 a year. It is a dilemma. People think nursing home care should be free but nothing is free. Somebody has to pay for it and the cost is very high. Anyone who can would be wise to look into long term care insurance if they want to preserve an estate for their children.

That is the annual state inspection. Nobody ever got fired over that sort of thing. They give them a number of days to correct it and they go on from there. The state inspectors always find something. One year the biggie was uncleaned dryer ducts. They got several facilities that year.

Yes, both the houses and the new apartment buildings. The houses are sold to the occupants with a buy back agreement or so I have been led to believe.

Non-profit means just that. They cannot make a profit. By law. Christ the King is a non-profit organization. All money must go back into salaries, patient care, building upkeep, and whatever. It, of course, cannot go into someone's pocket if that is what is being implied. Sad!

I'm happy to see that the charges did not include bizarre behavior. I'd hate to think that was illegal.

Giggle! I have pushed it. I no longer adjust the mirror without looking. That voice from nowhere gives me the creeps. I feel like a little kid playing with the telephone and accidentally dialing 911.

I think it is a question of self discipline and the desire to not be ostracized by society that has changed. Maybe religion too played a part in controlling behavior. Being told to man-up or act like an adult might be bad for your ulcers but it certainly improved behavior and eliminated a lot of whining. Being told that you were going to hell probably made for second thoughts. Those pictures of the troop carriers that landed at Normandy give me the shivers. No one in his right mind would have gotten off those things to face what they faced. It was expected of them and they went. Our society today has taught the "me first" attitude that causes more problems for the individual than it brings satisfaction because no one is ever going to be first no matter how we try to cater to the vocal minorities. If you can't be first and get the respect you are unwilling to earn but think you deserve then the answer is to pick up a gun and kill those who have frustrated your wishes. Getting rid of the guns doesn't get rid of the root of the problem.

I see that our local Wal-mart got rid of the "iconic" emotional support dogs.

What we learned was that the good guys wore the white hats and the bad guys wore the black hats. The black hats came to a bad end and the white hats were the heros. Simplistic maybe but children have simple minds. I'm sure little sis had to play the bad guy since no one wanted to identify with him. There are worse ways to live than the old code of the west. Children learn to live through play. As long as the lines are not blurred I see no reason why a toy gun causes a problem. It is a tool that teaches just as a doll is a tool for teaching. The problem arises if a game or program teaches that violence for the sake of violence is acceptable. I agree that parents need to back off. Kiss the skinned knee and send them back out to play metaphorically speaking. The tough survive the rest resort to drugs or other crutches.

It is always to be remembered that you may be paying for services but those performing them are human beings.