Conservators for elderly do harm -- and good

Re “Guardians for Profit,” a four-part series on professional conservators, Nov. 16

Kudos to staff writers Evelyn Larrubia, Jack Leonard and Robin Fields for bringing this situation to light. Clearly there is a need for conservators, as well as the potential for outrageous abuse. The fact that someone with no relationship to the client and no previous business or accounting background could be responsible for managing more than $1 million in assets, simply by petitioning the court, is a recipe for incompetence at the very least.

The extent of the problem, particularly as our population ages, is remarkable, and yet this is the first time I’ve seen any coverage of the topic. You have motivated this historically unpolitical woman to investigate how she can help change and improve the system.

CHERIE CRANE

Sherman Oaks

*

I was appalled and outraged to find out through your incredible series that someone can become a court-appointed conservator with no training, and then receive so little oversight and accountability.

I recently became licensed in the state to operate a retirement care facility. To earn my license, I was required to complete 40 hours of training with certified instructors, pass a state-administered test and be cleared through a criminal background check. The California Department of Social Services is charged with licensing and overseeing these retirement care facilities

At the very least, such training, regulations and oversight should apply to conservators -- who wield even greater control over an elderly person’s finances and care. I am sure that many conservators are ethical and compassionate. But the current situation is shameful and must be quickly remedied if we are to protect our elderly from such outrageous exploitation.

LAURA MORGAN

Los Angeles

*

It has always been difficult to get attention for the problems of the elderly, so when The Times approached me for cooperation on a series about conservatorships, I made myself available. I was hopeful that The Times could shed some light on a difficult and complex area. I respect The Times for the amount of resources it put into the story, but I regret that the story is not better balanced and does not reflect the good and important work that the majority of professional conservators and I do.

I too am horrified that some people have taken advantage of the elderly. I told The Times reporters repeatedly that vindicating the rights of victims of elder abuse constitutes a good portion of my services. However, the article does not mention that work.

The Times reported that I was successful without explaining the reason: because I do good work and achieve good results for my clients. I deserve to be paid for that work. At the same time, I am also aware that the privilege of acting as a professional conservator carries a responsibility to society.

As part of that responsibility, I have a policy that once I accept a case, my staff and I continue to provide the same level of services until the client dies, even after exhaustion of the conservatee’s assets. Consequently, about 10% of my caseload is pro-bono.

FRUMEH LABOW

Los Angeles