Pennsylvania Case Finds Children Could Pay for Support of Parents
If you are wondering where money might come in the future to pay for nursing home and medical care for your parents, you may not have far to look. It may be from you.
A Pennsylvania Superior Court case decided in May of this year interpreted a law passed in July, 2005 to find that a son was responsible for his mother’s nursing home bill of $92,943. This was merely because he was her son and not due to any fault on his part.
I have written about this subject before. The 2005 Pennsylvania law, referenced as Act 43, took filial responsibility, the idea that a child could be responsible for the bills of a parent which was an old colonial idea, and moved it from the welfare law where it was not being used to the support law, the same code that controls support actions by spouses and minor children. The exception is that it is not necessary to bring the case through Domestic Relations. Nursing homes and other medical providers are suing adult children directly.
The only requirement is that the parent needs to be considered “indigent” and the child, based on a formula contained in the Act, needs to have the means to pay the bill. There is also an exception for adult children who were deserted by their parents for a lengthy period during childhood.
In the Pittas case, Maryann Pittas of Schwenksville, Pennsylvania, who was not yet 65 years old at the time, was injured with her husband, Andrew, in a head-on collision. She was in a coma for more than two weeks and then suffered a stroke that sent her to the hospital and then to rehab. Eventually, after a lengthy rehabilitation, she was moved by the family to Greece to be with other relatives, leaving her son, a local restaurant owner behind.
For reasons that were not disclosed in the record, a Medicaid application was filed but not decided.
The Allentown nursing home owned by HCR Manor Care brought suit for the bill against her son under the filial responsibility law. Mr. Pittas won in arbitration in 2008 but then lost in Common Pleas Court when the nursing home appealed. In May, a three judge panel affirmed the lower court decision and let the judgment against the son for almost $93,000 stand. They also found that he should be able to pay the bill based on his 2008 income of $85,000. His own bills were irrelevant.
Several factors make the Pittas case especially disturbing,
First, it is an appellate Court decision. This means that it would likely be followed in later decisions involving other adult children unless it is overturned on appeal or the law it is based on is repealed.
Second, there was no indication in the decision that the son had done anything wrong. Typically, in these cases, there is some indication that the adult child had received money from the parent. This was not indicated in this case.
Next, as the son pointed out to the Court, there are other siblings. The judgment was entered only against him. The likelihood is that judgment was sought against the son because he is the easiest to reach, the other relatives currently living in Greece. However, there is no limitation under Act 43 of 2005 which would prevent action from being brought against children in other states if the services for the parent were received in Pennsylvania.
The Court assumed that the son had money to pay based on tax returns and other information submitted by HCR.
The requirement that the parent be “indigent” was interpreted as being unable to pay the bill.
Finally, the Court could have waited for a decision on a pending Medicaid application.
This decision is being watched in other states that also have older filial responsibility laws. Pennsylvania, unfortunately, is in the forefront for claims.
One factor the case brings into focus is the need for Medicaid applications to be completed properly with all of the accompanying documentation and support. Nursing homes cannot recover both from Medicaid and from adult children for the same bill. When the laws tightened in 2006 requiring a five year lookback of financial records and greater scrutiny, the perception is that more applications are being delayed or denied. Seek help when needed.
For more, listen to “50+ Planning Ahead” a weekly radio program on WCHE 1520 on every Wednesday from 4:30 pm to 5:00 pm with Janet Colliton, Colliton Law Assocs., PC, and Phil McFadden of Home Instead Senior Care.
About the Author Janet Colliton
Esquire, Colliton Law Associates, P.C. Janet Colliton has practiced law for over 38 years, 37 of them in Chester County, Pennsylvania, a suburb of Philadelphia. Her practice, Colliton Law Associates, PC, is limited to elder law, Medicaid, including advice, applications and appeals, and other benefits planning including Veterans benefits, life care and special needs planning, guardianships, retirement, and estate planning and administration.