Risks and Realities of Medi-Cal ‘Planning’

I am a former home health social worker who used to, as part of my job, assist patients in finding long-term care for family members and for themselves. Although I am an advocate of Medi-Cal use when appropriate, the truth is the system provides not much more than the bare essentials for long-term care.

And as “Managing Her Mother’s Assets Is a Minefield” [Money Make-Over, Jan. 18] says, the woman would have to drain her resources to qualify.

I was--to put it mildly--kind of sickened that the attorney you interviewed, Geraldine Champion, specializes in what’s known as Medi-Cal planning--in other words, helping folks with assets find ways to not use their assets when appropriate to qualify for a system set up for people without assets.

Medi-Cal beds in facilities are sometimes rare, and often there is a waiting list for the ones that exist. Medi-Cal beds are never in private rooms, and I have seen facilities where there are six beds to a room. Sometimes the only Medi-Cal beds available in the county are at the facilities that no one would want to set foot in. So regardless of how tempting her approach seems, how well it reads on paper, it also seems misguided and unethical.

What also seems wrong is that a newspaper as seemingly credible as the Los Angeles Times would run a tip like that, aimed toward the elderly, without offering a clearer explanation of the risks and realities of such Medi-Cal planning.

A little more explanation of the facts--who really can qualify, how many people has she helped and how many people who appeared to fit her typical client profile ended up not benefiting from her work at all, what are the costs of her services--and what Medi-Cal coverage is really all about would be more than appropriate.

Ms. Champion will probably get dozens if not hundreds of phone calls from desperate elderly people and their families who read this article. Most will hang up the phone disappointed.

MEREDITH GORDON RESNICK,

LCSW

Irvine