Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About FormerLegalSecy

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. pg1067, not the answer I really wanted to hear, but I am coming to get the picture.
  2. If you ever need to replace them check out "Personal Sound Amplification Products" -- there are some that don't work at all - you don't want those, but there are others, e.g. Bluetooth devices, that work just as well as hearing aids particularly for mild hearing loss, but are waaaayy less expensive because they are not regulated and not customized like hearing aids are. The analogy would be like getting "readers" off the rack at the store instead of getting customized prescription eyeglasses. They may not help with complex or more severe hearing/vision issues, but for mild and not disease related amplification needs, both work great for a lot less money. 😊
  3. Thanks TC & AJ. Yes, she lives in a "mildly" religious community (I say "mildly" because people of all faiths actually live there) for people 55+. It is a continuous care community that she chose, and she decided on her own when she wanted to move in. She lives in the independent living portion of the community in her own apartment although she does have a cleaning person who comes in once/week to help with heavier cleaning chores. She has a flower garden and a vegetable garden and is the Head of the Film committee that selects & shows movies in the community theater every weekend. The thing is it is hard and painful (and dangerous) for her to try to walk very far due to her arthritis and it would be MUCH safer and easier for her to use a wheelchair or at least a cane (she goes totally ballistic if anyone dares to suggest a walker). But she keeps saying she'd rather die than be seen using any of those "old people" devices (or move into an assisted living apartment in the same community where she already lives) because in her mind those things would "prove" that she is "crippled" and (according to her) "useless." I obviously do not agree with that point of view and have argued about it a lot with her, which has done no good for either of us.
  4. I am sorry to be repeating myself. As you can imagine it is very difficult to be kind of, but not really, responsible for somebody who keeps threatening to commit suicide. This time was different because she actually sent a letter to several people detailing how she was going to do it, which she hadn't done before. I do thank you for your response(s) both then and now and I will not post about this topic again.
  5. Thank you A.J. I hope you know I appreciate your perspective. I think you're probably right about the appropriate amount of skepticism. I think I just need to take a step back and a couple of deep breaths. I did read the statute and I don't think she qualifies. On the other hand she doesn't need to persuade every Dr. in California of her point of view. Only 2 of them. But hopefully not this time. Thanks.
  6. I don't know if this is the right place to put this but please forgive me if it is not. My elderly mother lives in California. I will try to make this as short as I can. I apologize in advance for the length. She has always had a particular flair for the melodramatic, a never ending need to be the constant center of attention, and an uncanny ability to charm or persuade just about anybody into believing just about anything. These things have been true of her for her whole life. It is that last skill that I am worried about. Her only real health issue right now is that she does not want to have to start using a wheelchair due to arthritis. She refuses to take pain medication or prescribed antidepressants or use a wheelchair, and then complains that she can't stand the pain of trying to walk. She's one of those people who says they'd rather die than be seen in a wheelchair, and apparently she means it. Well, so now she is planning on making that happen.. She sent me and 3 other people an e-mail saying that she has made a decision to end her life on her own terms "within the next few months" and she hopes we'll all come and be there with her for this momentous event. She also asked us not to tell anyone else. Not only do I not want to be there for it, I don't want to have anything to do with it, because I am opposed to it, and I don't think she is even eligible. She is NOT TERMINALLY ILL. She IS terminally self-centered and manipulative and stubborn, but she is NOT terminally ill. (I'm sorry if this doesn't sound like I am a very loving child; I am just really angry about this stunt right now. But I digress.) My concern is that she does have a doctor who hates to say no to her. She charms him like she charms everyone else and he pretty much just goes along with her. QUESTION 1: As the eldest child with her Health Care Power of Attorney in the event that she is incapacitated, do I have any standing to say, "No, I am opposed to this at this time. Don't do it." (If she really were terminally ill I think I would reluctantly try to respect her wishes, but again, she is NOT TERMINALLY ILL, at least not at this time.) What I want to do is let her doctor know that if he even THINKS about signing that form certifying that she is terminally ill (let alone helping her find another doctor who will go along with it for the 2nd signature) I am going to sue the living daylights out of him for malpractice and wrongful death and better yet, hopefully have him arrested. She is NOT TERMINALLY ILL (unless you count age, itself as a "terminal illness" which SHE DOES, but I went and read the California statute and it looks to me like it explicitly says that neither age nor disability alone qualifies a person as being "terminally ill" for purposes of that statute.) The thing I'm worried about is that she is (and always has been) such an expert at being charming and manipulative -- I'm afraid she'll charm or manipulate some doctor or another into going along with it and giving her the death drug before I can do anything to prevent it. QUESTION 2: What can I actually do, if anything, to prevent this from happening? We have argued about this before, and her view (which I'm sure she will try to charm her own doctor into believing) is that I am heartless and cruel and "just don't understand."
  7. Yes, another good question. I'm not making this up... Madison Rastafarian church founders arrested once again - WISC https://www.channel3000.com/news/madison-rastafarian-church . . .
  8. In our state's capital city the police recently executed a search warrant, raided an establishment, and arrested 2 people for possession and distribution of marijuana. The place that was raided was the Lion of Judah Rastafarian Church, which considers marijuana to be a sacrament. Since the Lion of Judah Church was only founded a few months ago, or at least that branch of it at that particular location, a lot of people, apparently including the police, think it is just an excuse for a drug house. Setting that aside for a moment... What court is qualified to judge whether something is or is not a church? What would count as evidence for & against? My understanding is that courts tend to accept that anything claiming to be a church is a church (and some people don't like the tax implications of that, but the IRS also does not like to get involved in determining what is or isn't a church either). I guess another question is, when does religious practice trump criminal law (if ever)? And if it doesn't, what would prevent states from criminalizing the religious practices of any religion they would prefer not exist in their state? Inquiring minds want to know.
  9. Good news! Apparently my boss went to bat for me and on Friday they approved the Train travel. In return, I promised to work on overcoming my fear of flying so this will not continue to be a problem every time it comes up. Thanks to everybody for all the good feedback & suggestions & encouragement to keep trying to find a way to overcome it.
  10. Okay, well, it might not be quite that easy. I actually did try taking a fear of flying class at our local airport a couple of years ago. I parked the car at the airport and as I was walking up the sidewalk of the main entrance to go to the class I threw up, barely made it to a trash can to avoid puking all over the sidewalk. I wasn't sick before that, or after that, but I did turn around & go home instead of going to the class. The thing is, I do pick up my husband at the airport all the time (he flies pretty often for his job) and that doesn't seem to bother me. The other thing is, I used to be able to fly and it didn't used to bother me either. I don't even have any idea when I got this way or why - nothing bad happened to me on an airplane, that I remember anyway. Its embarrassing. Ugh.
  11. Thank you both. This is helpful. Long term plan: I think I will look for treatment for fear of flying. I'd really rather get over it. (Will have to check if our health insurance covers that kind of treatment...) Short term: I'll talk to my boss, tell him I'm getting a train ticket, & sign up for Vacation time for the time I will be on the Train. I will pay the $12 more that the train ticket costs than a plane ticket would. I know he doesn't want to get in an argument with the Audit folks, but I'm pretty sure he wouldn't formally discipline me for doing that (I will ask him to make sure). I don't want to put him in a difficult position. But he also knows that even with some health issues I've had in the past year - including 6 weeks of FMLA - I'm still the top performer in the department ... by a lot. I'm pretty sure he wouldn't want to fire me or hurt my career over a Train ticket. The thing that's kind of ironic is that I've had several consulting firms that have tried to pirate me away from my current job recently. Let's just say that they offered pretty nice compensation packages compared to my paltry civil service salary. I didn't even consider them because I would have had to fly … but if I really can overcome my fear of flying, who knows....
  12. I hope this is an easy question. Can my employer, which is a state agency (so I'm not going to name the State), force me to fly for work? I wasn't always afraid of flying but somehow I seem to have developed a fear of it. The last time I had to fly for work was about 5 years ago and it was horrible. I had a panic attack that lasted the entire 4-hour flight each way, and since then I have not gone anywhere near an airport. The few times I've had to travel out of state for work since then I've always managed to come up with some excuse for either driving or taking the train. I know it is not rational to be afraid of flying, and it is actually pretty embarrassing. But I can't help it. I have an upcoming trip and our travel auditor said "no" to the train & to driving ("does not conform to policy"). I offered to take vacation days for the travel time via train but did ask them to pay for the ticket. They said No and told me to get a plane ticket. My boss is okay with me traveling via train but the travel auditor isn't. Can they really tell me I have to fly?
  13. Thank you adjusterjack. This is very helpful info and much appreciated.
  14. Well, thanks everybody. I think my policy is supposed to be easy to read ("plain language") but it is still hard to read -- and reading contracts is what I do for a living these days. It has "underinsured motorist" coverage which is separate from the "uninsured" motorist coverage. This incident does not qualify for coverage under the "underinsured" motorist coverage though. It only lists "bodily injury" as covered by the "Uninsured motorist" coverage so I think that is my answer, although it has some mystifying references in that section to not covering bodily injury or property damage due to nuclear war which makes it appear as though under some other circumstances property damage might be covered. (If I were redlining this contract at work I would flag that as "confusing" and seek clarification.) At any rate, it doesn't look like it intends to cover property damage under the uninsured motorist coverage so I need to let them know whether I want to cover it under my collision coverage & pay the $500 deductible, in which case they want to have an adjuster inspect it, or whether I just want to get repair estimates outside of my collision coverage and handle it without putting in an insurance claim at all. Apparently because it is a 5-year old car they seem to think that it may have depreciated so much that I might not have much of a claim after the deductible is paid. That is a real drag because I take meticulous care of it and only have one more car payment left on it, at which time I was hoping to trade it in & get a new vehicle. But I think the trade-in value of it is reduced by this damage so I will either pay (possibly more than the insurance company thinks I should...) to completely eliminate all traces of damage in order to preserve its trade-in value, or else get the less expensive repairs that my insurance company seems to think appropriate for a 5-year old car and take the hit on the trade-in value . Grr.
  • Create New...