Information Release

October 22/01 MONDAY 10AM – Court of Queens Bench

(Surrogate Matter) RE: EMMA FRANK Dependent Adult

DA03-5303 Court Room # 418

THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE’S OFFICE refuses to disclose how much money has been received by their office regarding the sterilization ofEmma, or fees charged by law firm Field, Atkinson and Perraton (Jon Faulds). Noted in the Statement of Accounts it appears that $56,000.was received. Most settlements were completed in November 1999. At the hearing of July 9/01, Lawyer, Les Hills stated that something over $18,000 had now dribbled in, though this was not included in his accounting.

Lawyers, Les Hills, (See also: James Bain) Public Trustee and Pat Henderson, Public Guardian continue to fight tooth and nail not to allow anyone access to receipts in regard to the Passing of Accounts. Hills said in court that that no family member should be given full accounting with receipts & detailed accounting of any of the matters including the sterilization monies.”It is the law”.

July 16/01, Mr. Hills made an undertaking to file an affidavit in regard to these matters and serve all counsel. He has failed to do so.

At the July 16/01 hearing, Judge D.W. Perras (perhaps because there was media present) stated that in fact there were discrepancies. These accounts would have been quickly passed in May, had there not been public questioning, scrutiny and strong opposition.

“Some of the figures with respect to the traveling don’t add up. I can’t make the two coincide, it’s not just a matter of small amounts, it’s substantial”

Emma is an 81 year old who is happy with her coloring book and pencil crayons. Emma is a sterilization victim who has been assessed as “Gravely disabled, global, cognitive impairment related to Downs Syndrome”.

She is an insulin, dependent diabetic, cannot walk and therefore wheel chair bound, suffers from advanced vascular disease of her legs and is overweight. As is typical in nursing homes, no one bras these people. She has ugly ulcerous, draining lesions on her legs, which is an infection known as cellulitis. Cellulitis is a serious illness which should be treated with antibiotics and bed rest. These infected tissues could easily become gangrenous and require amputation. Her legs resemble red, angry looking stovepipes. How has this serious condition been allowed to advance to the stage at which it now is? Presently both legs are bandaged.

Unfortunately, it is typical in nursing homes that physicians fail to look under the covers of their residents. But they do faithfully sign the pt’s nursing file on aweekly basis, which guarantees their pay.

Emma Frank, down syndrome with a serious cellulitis infection was schlepped across the country to dinner theatres, Nashville, Disneyland, Vancouver, costing her thousands of dollars charged to her estate under the blessing and authorization of Public Guardian officer Shirley Peleshytyk.

Emma has been taken on lengthy airplane trips which necessarily exacerbates her severe condition. This elderly diabetic said that she recently had to get up early and get on several airplanes before breakfast. However when there, she said she was left in the room. She was not able to recall the names of the persons who accompanied her. Apparently Mrs Eleanor Low, RN, Administrator of the Rivercrest Nursing Home did accompany her on at least one of the trips.

What does an 81 year old diabetic, who has no teeth, eat when she attends elaborate Dinner Theater buffets or when she is schlepped across the country onairplanes and taken to all kinds of restaurants? If she eats, she is physically harmed. If she is disallowed to eat rich foods and gorgeous deserts from elaborate desert tables, she is harmed emotionally. Apparently she lacks the mental insight to comprehend her illness and the importance of diet. Eleanor Low RN, Administrator, has recorded that: “Emma is a diabetic. She does not understand the importance of diet”, nevertheless it would strongly appear that Eleanor Low is the one who facilitates and participates in many of these activities with Emma.

Noted are some of the excessive expenditures which are quickly dissipating Emma’s estate. Estate and for which solicitor Leslie Hills refuses to give details.

• 08/19/99 -River Dance Tickets, taxi & meals – $263.50
• 11/25/99 -Dinner Theater – $153.70
• 01/11/00 – Dinner Theater – $191.82
• 02/29/00 Dinner Theater – $192.54
• 01/05/01 – Dinner Theater – $172.56
• 02/23/01 – Dinner Theater – $173.45
• 02/27/01 Ice Skating tickets, taxi and food – $163.25
• Disney Land 04/06/99, – Sand and Sea Travel – $5,998.00
• Kelowna – 02/04/99 Sand and Sea Travel – $4,598.25
• Vancouver, BC, vacation costs – March/00 – $2,818,13
• 3 airline tickets Kelowna – Sand & Sea Travel -04/14/99- $439.50
• 1 airline ticket to Kelowna – 04/28/99
• June 16//99 – expenses Kelowna – $2,656.50
• Alaska Cruise – Sand and Sea Travel -06/01/00 – $6,064.44 + vacation costs $300. +
  spending funds $200. + insurance for staff $100. + video & camera $39.57 +
  camera $15.92 + various dinners and lunches (there was some reimbursement on
  this one $1,380.17 from a Grace and Charlene Bonneville)
  Three air flight tickets to Vancouver & expenses – 06/07/00 – $1,933.76 Emma does
  not believe she went to Alaska.
• Trip to Las Vegas – Sand and Sea Travel – 02/11/00 – $6,235.00 Who spent the
  money?
• Vancouver, BC, vacation costs – March/00 – $2,818,13
• Vancouver, BC, July 7/00 – car rental – $560.37
• Vancouver, BC – July 19/00 – airport fees, and family meal expenses – $132.72
• Trip to Nashville, Tennessee – April 19-26/01, – $7,560.82 (Probably a 12-14 hr. trip
  plus the travel from Fort Saskatchewan to Calgary) Not all costs of this trip are included
  in this statement.
• Regular payments to Compassion Canada of $372.00 – who authorized that payment?
• Regular payments to Telus communications, however Emma had no phone.
• No explanation for such expenditures as candy, considering that she is insulin
  dependent. Noted on Page 25, date 01/27/99 and 03/08/99 code #365 and Page 26,
  Eleanor Low – date 05/05/99 code # 369 – Easter Candy $23.85 – Ref No.1144800 &
  other entries.

A noteworthy Hendersonism is as follows, when it was stated at the last hearing that Emma would be on an extremely restricted diet:

“And sir, on that point I can advise apparently she, while a diabetic, can still eat a wide variety of foods. She just has to watch foods on a high sugar content. It’s not a severe diabetic problem”.

Emma was injured by the Provincial Government in the matter of the sterilization, therefore the Office of the Public Trustee and the Office of the Public Guardian of the provincial government, are in conflict of interest.

Note the sticky, draining yellowish exudate from the lesions at the back and side of her right ankle and the anterior side of her left ankle. The angry, red appearance signals a severe infection.

Because of the interest in this matter, the Public Guardian, lawyer Pat Henderson, has now put forward a 2nd, affidavit which contradicts her April 23/01 affidavit putting forward the name of a niece. Previously the Public Guardians Application was to renew the Application For Guardianship by the Public Guardian. It strongly appears Ms. Henderson does not know what she is doing. She brought forward the niece and said niece was applying, however there was no accompanying affidavit filed, nor did niece Karen have a lawyer and no formal application had been made to the court.

The Honourable Mr. Justice D.Perras disallowed participation of interested persons as allowed pursuant to the Dependent Adults Act Section 5 and also evicted a sibling from the court who had been vocal. The elderly sibling died August 13/01, less than a month after the hearing. He also threatened Clifford Frank with costs before any application for guardianship was heard.

There is strong evidence of inappropriate and inadequate care and and even deliberate harm to the dependent elder. Note the photographs. The Office of the Public Guardian and Office of the Public Trustee has either disregarded or participated in the unethical behavior of members of the professional and care giving staff of the Rivercrest Nursing Home and failed to act in the best interests of the very dependent adult?

Ms. Henderson had questioned the presence of media, alleging that it was in contravention of the Dependent Adults Act. Indeed, Ms. Henderson, the court is the people’s court and is intended to be an open forum for the protection of the very people which it allegedly serves. The Public advocates are failing to protect the vulnerable.

The intent of Mr. Hills and Ms. Henderson is to have the Accounts passed on Monday Morning. A number of persons will be watching closely as to how Judge Perras will deal with these questionable matters.

The excessive expenditures and questionable behavior of participants which are identified within the Application For the Passing of the Accounts dated April 18, 2001 demand an independent audit and inquiry.

Office of the Public Guardian, Shirley Peleshytyk was the guardian of Emma Frank and authorized the excessive expenditure and international travel billed to Emma Frank.

Complaint to the Law Society of Alberta

against
Mr. Leslie Hills
Office of the Public Trustee

RE: October 22/01 MONDAY 10AM – Court of Queens Bench (Surrogate Matter) RE: EMMA FRANK Dependent Adult DA03-5303 Court Room # 418

MR. LESLIE HILLS, LAWYER, FOR THE OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE refused to disclose how much money had been received by their office regarding the sterilization of Emma Frank, or fees charged by law firm Field, Atkinson and Perraton (Jon Faulds).

Noted in the Statement of Accounts it appears that $56,000. was received. Most settlements were completed in November 1999.

At the hearing of July 9/01, Lawyer, Les Hills stated that something over $18,000 had now dribbled in, though this was not included in his accounting.

Lawyers, Les Hills, Public Trustee and Pat Henderson, Public Guardian continue to fight tooth and nail not to allow anyone access to receipts in regard to the Passing of Accounts. Hills said in court that that no family member should be given full accounting with receipts & detailed accounting of any of the matters including the sterilization monies.

“It is the law”.

July 16/01, Mr. Hills made an undertaking to file an affidavit in regard to these matters and serve all counsel. He has failed to do so.

At the July 16/01 hearing, Judge Perras (perhaps because there was media present) stated that in fact there were discrepancies. These accounts would have been quickly passed in May, had there not been public questioning, scrutiny and strong opposition. Judge Perrras stated the following:

“Some of the figures with respect to the traveling don’t add up. I can’t make the two coincide, it’s not just a matter of small amounts, it’s substantial”

Emma is an 81 year old who is happy with her coloring book and pencil crayons. Emma is a sterilization victim who has been assessed as:

“Gravely disabled, global, cognitive impairment related to Downs Syndrome”.

She is an insulin, dependent diabetic, cannot walk and therefore wheel chair bound, suffers from advanced vascular disease of her legs and is overweight. As is typical in nursing homes, no one bras these people. She has ugly ulcerous, draining lesions on her legs, which is an infection known as cellulitis. Cellulitis is a serious illness which should be treated with antibiotics and bed rest. These infected tissues could easily become gangrenous and require amputation. Her legs resemble red, angry looking stovepipes. How has this serious condition been allowed to advance to the stage at which it now is? Presently both legs are bandaged.

Unfortunately, it is typical in nursing homes that physicians fail to look under the covers of their residents. But they do faithfully sign the patient’s nursing file on a weekly basis which guarantees their pay. This explains why nursing home elderly often have severe complications such as Emma’s advanced cellulitis or others who have advanced gaping, bed sores. Frequently elderly die of complications of these injuries. It is furthermore difficult to understand how a responsible physician (Dr. Shepherd of Fort Saskatchewan) could have allowed Emma to go on these lengthy flights.

Emma has been taken on lengthy airplane trips which necessarily exacerbates her severe condition. This elderly diabetic said that she recently had to get up early and get on several airplanes before breakfast. However when there, she said she was left in the room. She was not able to recall the names of the persons who accompanied her. Apparently Mrs Eleanor Low, RN, Administrator of the Rivercrest Nursing Home did accompany her on at least one of the trips.

What does an 81 year old diabetic, who has no teeth, eat when she attends elaborate Dinner Theater buffets or when she is shlepped across the country on airplanes and taken to all kinds of restaurants? If she eats, she is physically harmed. If she is disallowed to eat rich foods and gorgeous deserts from elaborate desert tables, she is harmed emotionally. Apparently she lacks the mental insight to comprehend her illness

“Emma is a diabetic. She does not understand the importance of diet”, neverthless it would strongly appear that Eleanor Low is the one who facilitates and participates in many of these activities with Emma.

Noted are some of the excessive expenditures which are quickly dissipating Emma’s estate. Estate and for which solicitor Leslie Hills refuses to give details and for which Public Trustee Officer Leslie Hills authorized payment.

• 08/19/99 – River Dance Tickets, taxi & meals – $263.50
• 11/25/99 – Dinner Theater – $153.70
• 01/11/00 – Dinner Theater – $191.82
• 02/29/00 – Dinner Theater – $192.54
• 01/05/01 – Dinner Theater – $172.56
• 02/23/01 – Dinner Theater – $173.45
• 02/27/01 Ice Skating tickets, taxi and food – $163.25
• Disney Land 04/06/99, – Sand and Sea Travel – $5,998.00
• Kelowna – 02/04/99 Sand and Sea Travel – $4,598.25
• Vancouver, BC, vacation costs – March/00 – $2,818,13
• 3 airline tickets Kelowna – Sand & Sea Travel -04/14/99- $439.50
• 1 airline ticket to Kelowna – 04/28/99
• June 16//99 – expenses Kelowna – $2,656.50
• Alaska Cruise – Sand and Sea Travel -06/01/00 – $6,064.44 + vacation costs $300. + spending funds $200. + insurance for staff $100. + video & camera $39.57 + camera $15.92 + various dinners and lunches (there was some reimbursement on this one $1,380.17 from a Grace and Charlene Bonneville)
• Three air flight tickets to Vancouver & expenses – 06/07/00 – $1,933.76 Emma does not believe she went to Alaska.
• Trip to Las Vegas – Sand and Sea Travel – 02/11/00 – $6,235.00 Who spent the money?
• Vancouver, BC, vacation costs – March/00 – $2,818,13
• Vancouver, BC, July 7/00 – car rental – $560.37
• Vancouver, BC – July 19/00 – airport fees, and family meal expenses – $132.72
• Trip to Nashville, Tennessee – April 19-26/01, – $7,560.82 (Probably a 12-14 hr. trip plus the travel from Fort Saskatchewan to Calgary) Not all costs of this trip are included in this statement.
• Regular payments to Compassion Canada of $372.00 – who authorized that payment?
• Regular payments to Telus communications, however Emma had no phone.
• No explanation for such expenditures as candy, considering that she is insulin dependent. Noted on Page 25, date 01/27/99 and 03/08/99 code #365 and Page 26,

Eleanor Low – date 05/05/99 code # 369 – Easter Candy $23.85 – Ref No.1144800 & other entries.

A noteworthy Hendersonism is as follows, when it was stated at the last hearing that Emma would be on an extremely restricted diet:

“And sir, on that point I can advise apparently she, while a diabetic, can still eat a wide variety of foods. She just has to watch foods on a high sugar content. It’s not a severe diabetic problem”.

Emma was injured by the Provincial Government in the matter of the sterilization, therefore the Office of the Public Trustee and the Office of the Public Guardian of the provincial government, are in conflict of interest.

Because of the interest in this matter, the Public Guardian, lawyer Pat Henderson, has now put forward a 2nd, affidavit which contradicts her April 23/01 affidavit putting forward the name of a niece. Previously the Public Guardians Application was to renew the Application For Guardianship by the Public Guardian. It strongly appears Ms. Henderson does not know what she is doing. She brought forward the niece and said niece was applying, however there was no accompanying affidavit filed, nor did niece Karen have a lawyer and no formal application had been made to the court.

The Honourable Mr. Justice D. Perras disallowed participation of interested persons as allowed pursuant to the Dependent Adults Act Section 5 and also evicted a sibling, Harold Frank from the court who had been vocal. The elderly sibling died August 13/01, less than a month after the hearing. Judge Perras also threatened Clifford Frank with costs before any application for guardianship was heard.

There is strong evidence of inappropriate and inadequate care and and even deliberate harm to the dependent elder.

Ms. Henderson had questioned the presence of media, alleging that it was in contravention of the Dependent Adults Act. Indeed, Ms. Henderson, the court is the people’s court and is intended to be an open forum for the protection of the very people which it allegedly serves. The Public advocates are failing to protect the vulnerable.

The intent of Mr. Hills and Ms. Henderson was to have the Accounts passed on the following Monday Morning which they were. No questions asked though a number of persons were watching closely as to how Judge Perras dealt with these questionable matters.

We allege that The Office of the Public Trustee namely Mr. Leslie Hills has either disregarded or participated in the unethical behavior of members of the professional and caregiving staff of the Rivercrest Nursing Home and failed to act in the best interests of the very dependent adult?

We further allege that the monies of Emma Mathilda Frank are not accounted for by the accounting of Mr. Les Hills.

WHO has benefitted by this process?

We allege that the excessive expenditures and questionable behavior of participants which are identified within the Application For the Passing of the Accounts dated April 18, 2001 demand an independent audit and inquiry by the Law Society of Alberta.

We allege that Mr. Charles Cousineau, lawyer, is culpable in this unsavoury matter in that during this process he failed to demand that this matter be honourably and honestly dealt with. He failed to demand an accounting by the Office of the Pulbic Trustee as represented by Mr. Leslie Hills, during the 22nd October, 2001 hearing.

By his silence, Mr. Cousineau allowed Mr. Hills to carry out the unethical process. He failed in his duty as an Officer of the Court.

Prepared by

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

May 23, 2002

cc.
The Honourable Mr. David Hancock QC, Minister of Justice

News on Sterilization

Affidavit Submitted to the Courts

COURT FILE NUMBER DA03-5303

COURT Court of Queens Bench of Alberta (Surrogate Matter)

JUDICIAL DISTRICT Edmonton

PERSON IN RESPECT OF WHOM Emma Mathilda Frank

THE APPLICATION IS BEING MADE

PROCEDURE Object to the Application to pass Accounts.
Request Independent Inquiry into matter
Discharge Restraining Order against Harold Frank
Request a copy of the passing of accounts for 1995.
Request the discharge of the Public Guardian and
appoint Harold Frank, Clifford Frank and a member of
Elder Advocates of Alberta as joint guardians.
Appoint interim co-trustees of the the Public Trustee, namely Harold Frank and Ruth Maria Adria of Elder Advocates of Alberta.

DOCUMENT Affidavit

DEPONENT/S NAME Ruth Maria Adria, Elder Advocates of Alberta

DATE OF AFFIDAVIT June 14, 2001

The deponent swears under oath that the following information is within the deponents knowledge and is true. Where the information is based on advice or information and belief, this is so stated.

1. The following information is attached:
   • Copies of the objections to the Passing of Accounts by Joseph Green, Ruth Maria Adria, Clifford Frank, and Harold Frank, which were filed at the court on May 11, 2001.is attached as Exhibit A
   • A copy of a Notice of Hearing dated April 19, 1991 is attached as Exhibit B.
   • Copy of District Court Hearing dated August 27, 1947 is attached as Exhibit C
   • Last Will and Testament of Lydia Hougland (Frank) April 27/77is attached as Exhibit D
   • Last Will and Testament of Melankton Hougland April 27/77 is attached as Exhibit E
   • Power of Attorney in favour of Harold Frank February 9/81 is attached as Exhibit F.
   • Correspondence from Minister of Health dated April 24/89 is attached as Exhibit G
   • Correspondence from Pam Barrett, NDP dated September 13/89 is attached as Exhibit H
   • Certificate of Title re: Frank Mineral Rights is attached as Exhibit I
   • Correspondence to Harold Frank fromMcCuaig Desroches is attached as Exhibit J
   • Order September 18/89 re: Guardianship and Trusteeship of Emma is attached as Exhibit K
   • Tehama County Department of Social Welfare correspondence re Richard Wylie, Officer of the Office of the Public Trustee is attached as Exhibit L
   • Part Two, Substantial Benefit Information – signature Eleanor Low is attached as Exhibit M
   • Letter to Alberta Association of Registered Nurses re: registration of Eleanor Low is attached as Exhibit N
   • Response from Alberta Association of Registered Nurses dated May 28/01 is attached as Exhibit O
   • Consent of Guardian April 5/01 signed Shirley Peleshytyk is attached as Exhibit P.
   • Schedule Form I re: Emma Frank signed by Dr. Melanie Robles is attached as Exhibit Q.
   • E-mail letter of Kevin Darroch regarding Emma Frank is attached as Exhibit R
   • Restraining Order re Harold Frank dated September 16/91 is attached as Exhibit S
2. Background and chronology information.
   1. I represent Elder Advocates of Alberta. We advocate for the frail, dependent, sick voiceless elderly and therefore have an interest in this matter. I am registered with the Alberta Association of Registered Nurses and presently have associate status.
   2. We were notified of the Application for Passing of the Accounts of Emma Mathilde Frank by Harold Frank. On the advice of Harold Frank, Elder Advocates of Alberta brought this matter forward, prepared the objections to the Passing of the Accounts and assisted, Clifford and Harold Frank, Joseph Green and Kevin Darroch to file their objection at the court. We also directed them to counsel. We are attaching copies of objections of Ruth Maria Adria, Joseph Green, Harold Frank and Clifford Frank. Please note Exhibit A
   3. Emma Mathilde Frank (Emma) is one of five children born to Lydia Rudolph Frank. The oldest is Emma born in 1920, then Ruth who died at 9 months, Norman, Berniece, Harold 1927, and then Cliff born in 1928. Norman and Berniece are also deceased.
   4. Emma has been severely handicapped since birth. The Superior Court of California described Emma as “gravely disabled, Organic Brain Syndrome with dementia”. Please note Exhibit B
   5. The family had limited means, primarily because Mr. Frank had a drinking problem. He died in a barn fire on April 11, 1942, at that time Harold was 15, Cliff 14 and Emma, though older was mentally handicapped and totally dependent.
   6. In the document, District Court of Northern Alberta, settling the estate of Mr. Rudolph Frank, it should be noted on page # 3, the Guardian’s Office, Administrator, took a fee of $50.00 from this struggling family. This was a considerable sum in those days. Throughout, the Public Guardian or Trustee, Administrator, as they were considered in those days, did not offer any services to the handicapped Emma, the underage children or the single mother. They took the money and turned their back on this bereaved family and the disabled Emma. Please note Exhibit C.
   7. Harold Frank recalls that they were tough times. In those days, they had hardly enough to eat. There were no government hand outs, not like now.The mother remarried because of dire need, Emma was sent to Alberta Hospital Oliver for care.
   8. Harold Frank (Harold) , the fifth child, purchased second hand clothing for Emma and attended to other of her needs at the hospital. He bought second hand clothing because that was all he could afford and even that, was more than he could afford in those days.
   9. Emma was physically abused and even beaten in the mental hospital. Conditions at Alberta Hospital were harsh in those days. Harold believes that as a result, Emma suffers from back problems. At no time did the Public Guardian’s (Administrators) Office intervene.
   10. Because of the mistreatment of Emma at Alberta Hospital, her mother and her husband Mel, took Emma home and supported her on their less than adequate pension. This was prior to the days of AISH.
   11. Harold applied to the Office of the Public Trustee (Mr. Richard Wylie) for assistance for his sister. The Office of the Public Trustee again refused assistance and again turned away from Emma’s needs. This happened about 1957.
   12. Harold then appealed to the Sherwood Park office of Social Services for some sort of welfare for his sister but was able to obtain very little. He persevered and was able to obtain a more substantial amount. About two years later, AISH was made available and Emma became a recipient.
   13. In 1977, both the mother Lydia and her husband Melankton Hougland made a will. Please note Exhibit Dand exhibit E.
   14. The Wills were prepared by Mr. Percy L. Herring QC of the Law Firm of Milner and Steer. The wills contained a stirpes restriction which caused some consternation with the inlaw members of the family.
   15. In reviewing the wills it is obvious that the parents entrusted Harold to care for and be responsible for the totally dependent Emma. Both parents named Harold as Trustee even though at the time he was not the oldest of the children.
   16. It is also significant to note that on February 9, 1981, Both Melankton and Lydia Hougland gave Power of Attorney to Harold Frank. Please note Exhibit F.
   17. Mrs Lydia Hougland became ill and was hospitalized. She was under the care of Dr. Shepherd of Fort Saskatchewan who did not allow her to return home and suggested she be admitted to the Rivercrest Lodge and Nursing home. Harold had to return home to sign the papers for her to be admitted because he had the Power of Attorney. Because Emma also needed care, she also was admitted to the Rivercrest Lodge Nursing Home.
   18. When Emma became a senior, she could not qualify for pension because she had no birth certificate. Therefore, Harold went to the Moravian Church in Bruderheim and obtained a copy of the Baptismal Certificate which stated the date of birth.
   19. Harold made a number of complaints to the Alberta Health Department concerning the care of Emma at the Rivercrest Lodge Nursing Home. He also complained to Vivian Lai on April 11,1989, Director of Nursing Homes Operations. The Minister of Health, Nancy Betkowski responded concerning some issues at the Rivercrest Nursing Home and promised an investigation by the Health Facilities Review Committee. Please Note Exhibit G
   20. Pam Barret, MLA, wrote an insightful letter concerning questionable practices at the Rivercrest Nursing home. Emma was not being served fresh fruit as part of her diet. Pease Note Exhibit H. However, Harold continued to advocate on behalf of his sister and the matter of the improper diet was ultimately remedied.
   21. The Frank family, had never sold their mineral rights in the Lamont area. Please Note Exhibit I.
   22. Harold, by considerable effort managed to wrest the major control of the family mineral rights from Canadian Occidental Petroleum which was an accomplishment. According to Harold, they had previously only had 121/2 % of the shares. Whereas after he broke the lease with the oil company they had 100% of the shares. Harold had 51% of the shares and the other four siblings the remainder. This caused dissension. There was also dissension over the interpretation regarding the wills of the parents and the matter of the sale of the family house which had been determined to be for Emma.
   23. It also appears, that when the dependent Emma was sixty nine years of age, finally, the Office of the Public Guardian and Trustee indicated a strong concern for this seriously disabled adult. Please note correspondence date August 28/89. Exhibit J.
   24. At the beginning of September, 1989 Harold took Emma to a physician who informed him that if he did not cut her water pils (diuretic) in half, she would be dead in six months. Harold then took her to another physician who suggested that he should cut even those in half.
   25. Harold had to go to the U.S. for medical reasons and therefore because he was concerned for her welfare and because he had been assigned trustee of Emma by both parents, determined to take Emma with him. He left September 15/89.
   26. After one month, the Public Trustees Office (Mr. R.Wylie) cut off Emma’s pension cheques. So it again fell to Harold to support Emma which he did for twenty months.
   27. In 1989, Justice DR.Matheson ordered Emma, in absentia, to be placed under interim guardianship of the Public Guardian and interim Trusteeship of the Public Trustee. Please note Exhibit K.
   28. During this period Mr. Richard Wylie, Office of the Public Trustee, was aware of the whereabouts of Emma but did not offer assistance to Emma or Harold. Please note Exhibit L.
   29. Emma was returned to Fort Saskatchewan in the spring of 1990. She was seventy years old. Harold was ordered not to visit Emma. Please note Exhibit S.
   30. The outdated functional assessment, signed by the Administrator of the Rivercrest Lodge Nursing Home, Ms. Eleanor Low, has indicated her professional status as “RN, Registered Nurse”, giving us the impression that she is presently registered with the the professional association. Please note Exhibit M. Please note Exhibit N and Exhibit O, which declares that this is not presently accurate.
   31. Please note Exhibit P, Consent of Guardian, signed by Shirley Peleshytyk for the Public Guardian. This document, dated April 5/01, states that 80 year old Emma is to be encouraged to: “become capable of caring for himself/herself and of making reasonable judgements in respect of matters relating to his/her person”.
   32. We question the ethical, validity of Ms. Peleshytyk’s sworn statement, having observed Emma, preoccupied with her coloring book, and crayons and taking into account the attached Schedule Form I, February 16/01, Exhibit Q, which identifies Emma as having ” Global , cognitive impairment related to Downs Syndrome”,
   33. The Statement of Account states that Emma has been taken to hotels, restaurants, planes, dinner theater and places where rich, lavish meals are the order of the day. Meals, which are totally contraindicated for a medication, dependent diabetic.
   34. If in fact Emma was denied the lavish meals which those acompanied her were eating she would suffer emotional harm, if she participated, she would suffer physical harm.
   35. What does this 81 year old person, who has no teeth and who is a diabetic eat when she attends these elaborate buffets? We have been informed that she lacks the mental insight to comprehend her illness and the importance of diet. And if she is taken there on a regular basis, it is not surprising to note that she has health problems which may be related to her diabetes. On page 3 of 4 of Functional Assessment, Ms. Eleanor Low makes the statement in regard to the dependent adult: “Emma is a diabetic. She does not understand the importance of diet”.Apparently Eleanor Low is the one who facilitates the attendance at these outings.
   36. Diabetes is a serious disease which is first and foremost treated by diet, a very restricted diet, no sauces, no gravies, no sugar. Neglected diabetes can quickly result in severe complications.
   37. There were a number of entries for such expenditures as candy, noted on Page 25, date 01/27/99 and 03/08/99 code #365 and Page 26, date 05/05/99 code # 369 – Easter Candy $23.85 – Ref No.1144800 and other entries.
   38. It is to be noted that Emma suffers from vascular disease of her legs, which if not carefully treated, results in ulcers and cellulitis. Emma apparently has cellulitis. Cellulitis is an infection of the tissues of the extremities. Ultimately, with venous insufficiency of this nature, there is the ever present threat of gangrenous changes to the tissues which can only be dealt with by amputation of the affected limbs. Please note Exhibit R which is an E-mail of Kevin Darroch
   39. Those of us who frequent nursing homes often see elderly amputees which most often is the result of understaffing and inadequate ethical nursing care.
   40. It is widely understood that air flights are dangerous for persons with circulatory problems and vascular disease. It places them at risk for further difficulties.
   41. Nevertheless, Emma was shlepped across the country on planes to a distant location, boarding several planes “before breakfast”. She must have been hungry to remember that. It is noteworthy that she does not recall that they packed snacks which are routine and necessary for diabetics, never mind having breakfast.
   42. She states that when there, she was left in the room.
   43. Concerning such a trip, an airline informed us that one would have to leave at 6:50 AM from Calgary and arrive in Nashville, Tennessee at 4:30 PM, our time, 8:30 PM. Of course they had to leave Fort Saskatchewan, some hours prior to that and fly to Calgary. We believe that they may have been underway for 12 to 14 hours or even much longer.
   44. According to the Account Statement, a payment is being made to Telus on a monthly basis. Unfortunately, several of us found the phone to be non-existent.
   45. The Public Guardian’s Office, as late as a few days ago, ordered to have Cliff Frank and a friend removed from the Rivercrest Nursing Home Lodge. They were carrying on a pleasant visit with Emma.
   46. When we visited Emma Frank, she informed us that she had recently made a trip, she had to get on several planes, for which she had to get up early before breakfast. She was not able to recall the names of the persons who accompanied her on the trip that she had made some days previously. She said that she would go on holidays where Mrs Low and her son wanted her to go. She informed us that Mrs Low’s son wishes to marry her.
   47. Emma also stated that she would very much like to see her brother Harold. Denying her access to her brother is in violation of the Protection For Persons in Care Act. Please note Exhibit R S.
   48. During our visit on May 5, 2001, Emma was occupied with a coloring book and a box of sharp pencil crayons.
3. I believe that:
   1. Members of the professional and caregiving staff of the Rivercrest Lodge Nursing Home, with the full knowledge of the Office of the Public Guardian and the Office of the Public Trustee have by their actions or inaction;
      1. allowed and caused neglect of the dependent adult.
      2. caused harm to the dependent adult.
      3. by their actions or inaction, have placed the gravely disabled adult at risk.
   2. Have administered inappropriate, inadequate and less than ethical nursing care to this medication, dependent diabetic who suffers from severe complications of diabetes and vascular disease .
   3. There has been unethical behavior on the part of members of the professional and caregiving staff of the Rivercrest Lodge Nursing Home which has been either disregarded or participated in by the Office of the Public Guardian and the Office of the Public Trustee.
   4. There have been excessive, inappropriate expenditures which are rapidly dissipating the dependent, adult’s estate.
   5. The affidavit of the Officer of the Public Guardian, Shirley Peleshytyk fails to accurately portray the professional status of the Administrator of the Rivercrest Lodge Nursing Home.
   6. The affidavit of the Officer of the Public Guardian, Shirley Peleshytyk fails to accurately portray the health status of the dependent, adult Emma Frank.
   7. The sworn information, concerning the ability of Emma Frank to self advocate by the Officer of the Public Guardians Office, Shirley Peleshytyk, could be interpreted as an attempt to mislead the court in regard to the decision making capabilities of the dependent adult.
   8. Mr. Wylie’s filed affidavit identifies Clifford Frank as the dependent adult’s next of kin when in fact the older brother, Harold Frank is her next of kin.
   9. No detailed accounting was included in the Application For the Passing of Accounts, as to the total amount of monies awarded or received on behalf of Emma by the sterilization suit, or to the fees charged by Mr. Jon Faulds of the Law Firm of Field Atkinson and Perraton.
   10. Emma was injured by the Provincial Government in the matter of her sterilization. Therefore the Office of the Public Trustee and the Office of the Public Guardian, servants of the provincial government are in conflict of interest when serving as her guardian and trustee.
   11. The Rivercrest Lodge Nursing Home was in contravention of the Protection for Persons in Care Act Chapter P-19,5 when they ordered a family member and a friend who were quietly visiting the dependent adult to leave with the threat that the police would be called. The Act defines abuse to include: 1(a) ii “Intentionally causing emotional harm. . . . . coercing or restricting from appropriate social contact “.
   12. An Officer/s of the Office of the Public Guardian and Officer/s of the Office of the Public Trustee and professionals and other caregivers of the Rivercrest Lodge Nursing Home have failed to act in the best interests of the gravely disabled, 81 year old dependent adult, Emma Frank. I make this affidavit in support of an Order For:
       1. An immediate, independent physical examination of the dependent adult by a medical practitioner specialist who specializes in the treatment of vascular disease and its’ complications.
       2. An in-depth inquiry by an independent body in regard to the expenditures and behavior of all participants of this matter including but not limited to:. The expenditures as noted on the Application For the Passing of the Accounts dated April 18, 2001, including a copy of all receipts and payments made on behalf of Emma Frank including but not limited to, airline tickets, hotel receipts, restaurant receipts, taxi rceipts, dinner theater tickets receipts. A submission of the full names, occupations and professional status of all persons who accompanied Emma Frank on any of the noted holidays, dinner theater outings, restaurant meals and other outings. A total and detailed accounting with receipts and information of persons who accompanied Emma on the most recent eight day trip to Nashville, Tennessee on April 19 – 26, 2001 of which full accounting does not appear to have been included in the statement of account. That all information, explanations, receipts, and other information found during the investigation be made available to the Siblings of Emma Frank, namely Harold Frank, Clifford Frank and the Senior’s Advocate of Alberta, Ruth Maria Adria.A copy of the Accounts as Passed in 1995 and all expenditures prior to that date which have been made on Emma Mathilde Frank’s behalf. A total and detailed accounting concerning the monies received to date on behalf of Emma regarding the sterilization of Emma, including but not limited to such matters as lawyer’s fees.
       3. Dismiss the restraining Order against Harold Frank who is now an elderly person. A person who sought the best interests and faithfully met the needs of the dependent Emma Frank for forty years. He did so at a time when few cared about this seriously handicapped sister.
       4. Discharge the Public Guardian. Appoint the siblings of Emma Frank, Clifford Frank and Harold Frank together with the Senior’s Advocate of Alberta, Ruth Maria Adria RN (assoc.) as interim Co-Guardians until such time as these matters can be thoroughly canvassed by an independent inquiry.
       5. Appoint Harold Frank together with the Senior’s Advocate of Alberta, Ruth Maria Adria RN (assoc.) as interim Co-Trustees with the Office of the Public Trustee until such time as these matters can be thoroughly canvassed by an independent inquiry, with the restriction that no costs can be approved without written consultation.
       6. No person can be removed or deterred from visiting the dependent adult without the authority of a court order.
       7. A list, of all caregivers of the dependent adult, including but not limited to, doctors, nurses, social workers, physiotherapists, mental health workers, nutritionists which dates back six months to the Application for the Passing of the Accounts.

Sworn or affirmed before me at Edmonton, Alberta

June, 2001 Ruth Maria Adria

Elder Advocates of Alberta

Court Order submitted to the court

COURT FILE NUMBER DA03-5303

COURT Court of Queens Bench of Alberta (Surrogate Matter)

JUDICIAL DISTRICT Edmonton

PERSON IN RESPECT OF WHOM Emma Mathilda Frank

THE ORDER IS BEING MADE BEFORE JUSTICE ON MONDAY JUNE 18TH 2001 IN CHAMBERS, EDMONTON ALBERTA.

ORDER

THIS MATTER HAVING COME BEFORE ME IN CHAMBERS AND HAVING HEARD WHAT WAS ALLEGED BY THE APPLICANT AND THE INTERESTED PERSONS, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. An immediate, independent physical examination of the dependent adult by a medical practitioner specialist who specializes in the treatment of vascular disease and its’ complications.
2. An inquiry by an independent body in regard to the expenditures and behavior of all participants concerning this matter.
3. Restraining Order against Harold Frank be discharged.
4. Grant a copy of the Passing of Accounts for 1995.
5. The Public Guardian be discharged.
6. Harold Frank, Clifford Frank and a member of Elder Advocates of Alberta, Ruth Maria Adria be appointed as interim Co-Guardians.
7. Harold Frank and Ruth Maria Adria of Elder Advocates of Alberta be appointed as interim Co-Trustees with the Office of the Public Trustee (No costs to be approved without prior written consultation)
8. No person can be removed or deterred from visiting the dependent adult without the authority of a court order.
9. A list be issued, naming all caregivers of the dependent adult, including but not limited to, doctors, nurses, social workers, physiotherapists, mental health workers, nutritionists which dates back six months to the Application for the Passing of the Accounts.

APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT ENTERED THIS 18TH DAY OF JUNE, 2001

Gregory Carter, Psychological Associate pleaded guilty Tuesday to charges of professional misconduct. He faces criminal charges, including fraud, perjury and obstruction of justice, related to this case and two others. And there are additional complaints about him before the College.

COLLEGE FAILS TO EXACT ACCOUNTABILITY FROM COLLEGE MEMBER

However, it is deeply troubling that although the College of Psychologists of Ontario suspended Carter from working for three months and ordered him to be supervised for a year, he will return to the job.

A Whitby father who lost a custody battle for his two sons broke down in tears Tuesday after the so-called doctor who inappropriately diagnosed him with a psychiatric disorder pleaded guilty to professional misconduct.

“It doesn’t undo the problems that he has caused,” said the father who can’t be named to protect the identity of his children, aged 7 and 9.

The College of Psychologists of Ontario found Gregory Carter, a psychological associate, guilty of straying beyond the scope of his profession in diagnosing the father, whom he had never even met, with “narcissistic personality disorder.”

A psychological associate is a step down from a psychologist. While psychologists have doctorates, associates have only master’s degrees and some, like Carter, are strictly prohibited from diagnosing mental disorders unless supervised by a psychologist.

Carter has a legitimate Master’s degree, but his Ph.D. is from Pacific Western University, which has been denounced by the U.S. government as a “diploma mill.” He tried but failed to get registered with the College of Psychologists as a psychologist, but the regulating body declined to recognize his doctorate.

PROFESSIONAL DECEPTION

Carter, referred to himself as a doctor.

His 2006 letterhead identified him as “Dr. Gregory Carter, Practice in Psychology”, letters from an Oshawa legal clinic were addressed to “Dr. Gregory Carter, psychologist,” and on several insurance claim forms, he was identified as a “Clinical Psychologist.”

“Every case Carter has ever worked on should be reopened, ” said a Durham-area grandfather, who was one of the first to blow the whistle on the so-called shrink.

The grandfather, who can only be described as Mr. B to protect the identity of his granddaughter, lost custody of the girl, now 11, in 2008 on the strength of a custody and assessment report by Carter

He was thought to be a psychologist by officials with the Durham Children’s Aid Society and by many judges and lawyers in the region’s family court system.

In the fall of 2008, the Whitby father was embroiled in a nasty custody battle with his ex-wife and two custody and access assessments were produced – one by Carter and one by a “real” psychologist. The real psychologist diagnosed the ex-wife with borderline personality disorder.

But the judge in the case accepted Carter’s report as more “balanced” and said the real psychologist’s assessment was biased in favour of the father. The mother was given primary custody and the father now has only visitation rights.

“Big deal, so they have given him time out but they didn’t make him clean up this mess,” said the father after Tuesday’s hearing. He said he is worried for the well-being of his sons.

CARTER DELIBERATELY MISLEAD THE COURT

Not only did Carter have no business diagnosing mental disorders, but the one he rendered in this case was not based on current or reliable information, college counsel Jennifer McKendry argued.

“This is a very serious act of misconduct,” she said, adding that Carter’s conduct was “disgraceful, dishonourable (and) unprofessional.”

Adapted from the Toronto Star, June 22, 2010

An elderly B.C. man says a provincial health authority stripped him and his wife of their legal and financial rights after he complained bitterly about his wife’s care in the long-term care wing of a local hospital.

“She would have been far better at home,” said George Brent, 83, of his wife’s care at the Kootenay Boundary Regional Hospital in Trail, B.C. “But, I’m strapped by legalities set forth by government.”

Brent’s 81-year-old wife, Dolores, was admitted to the hospital in Trail, which is in southeastern B.C. near the border with Washington state, in August 2009 after suffering a heart attack.

After she recovered, her husband told hospital staff he wanted to take her back to their home in nearby Montrose.

Instead, the hospital moved her into its long-term care wing, saying she was too frail to leave.

“She would ask me every day. ‘When can I get out of here?’” said Brent. “They stated that I wouldn’t be allowed to take her home.”

In the long-term care wing, Dolores Brent’s health deteriorated. She suffered a stroke, and dementia set in.

“For me, that was just another pin in my heart — a reminder of my inability to do anything for her,” Brent said.

Husband complained repeatedly

Brent and one of his daughters, Gwyn, said they were very upset about what they called the “substandard” care Dolores Brent received at the Kootenay hospital.

Brent would visit every day, and he and his daughter said they often found Dolores Brent parched, cold, tied to her wheelchair and even sitting in her own waste.

“I told the head nurse, and they said, ‘We are too busy to change her’,” said Gwyn Brent. “So, they didn’t change her, and she didn’t eat. How can you eat when you are sitting in your own waste? That’s how it is there.”

“If a child was treated in the same way … the parents would have the children taken from them,” said George Brent.

“Sixty-four years we have been together. And we fought for each other. To see her mistreated is horrific.”

George Brent said he complained repeatedly and told staff he still wanted to take his wife home. When the Interior Health Authority, which is responsible for the hospital, began billing him for his wife’s stay in long-term care, Brent decided to protest the standard of care by not paying the bill.

“In a family meeting, [staff] were talking about Dad not paying, and I said ‘Well why don’t I just pay?’ And I was told Dad needed to learn he has to pay his bills,” said Gwyn Brent.

Public Guardian steps in

Hospital physicians then assessed Dolores Brent’s deteriorating mental state, and an administrator from the health authority signed a form declaring her incapable of managing her affairs.

The certificate of incapability, as it is known, automatically put B.C.’s Public Guardian and Trustee in charge of her finances instead of her husband even though she had signed an enduring power of attorney appointing George Brent to look after her affairs if she became incapable to do so.

“To get Dolores the support she needs, it is our intention to issue a certificate of incapability,” said a letter from the health authority addressed to George Brent in March. “The Public Guardian and Trustee will plan with Dolores to best meet her financial and legal needs.”

Gwyn Brent says the health officials’ actions were a direct response to her father’s complaints about her mother’s care at the Kootenay hospital.

“I think he stepped on too many toes in that place,” she said. “They were just fed up with him.”

The Public Guardian then sent a letter stating, “We have now obtained the authority to act on behalf of Dolores … Please note that any power of attorney … is suspended until further notice from this office.”

Since then, said George Brent, thousands of dollars have been withdrawn from the couple’s joint bank account to pay for Dolores Brent’s care. The province has also staked a claim on the couple’s home and receives the tax bills for the property.

Not ‘something we do lightly’: health authority

In B.C., health authorities were given the power to issue a certificate of incapability and have the Public Guardian suspend an individual’s power of attorney so they could move quickly to protect an elderly person if they suspected a family member was mismanaging or stealing the person’s money.

“Involving the office of the Public Guardian and Trustee isn’t something we do lightly or very often,” said Cindy Kozak-Campbell of Interior Health. “It does need to be serious reasons around abuse and neglect and financial issues.”

Kozak-Campbell said she couldn’t speak directly about the Brent case, because of privacy issues.

“We stay focused on the person in care,” she said. “So, although the family may have wishes, it is going to be the safety and comfort of that person in care. And we look for a clean, safe living environment for them.”

The Brents have nine grown children. Not all of them agreed that their dad should take their mom home from the Kootenay hospital. Shannon Harrigan, a daughter who lives in Oregon, said she voiced her concerns to hospital staff.

“Nobody wants to see their loved ones in a place like that,” said Harrigan, “But, the reason [some of us] wanted to keep her in the hospital was because dad would talk about how if she were at home, they could just die together.

“He couldn’t afford the kind of care she would have needed at home. She needed help to do everything. She would have ended up back in hospital.”

George Brent still insists he would have taken better care of his wife than the health authority did.

“I’m sure I could have,” he said. “We had other help that would have come in.”

He stressed that his wife had appointed him, not their children, to make the decisions on her behalf.

“She is the wife of my youth and the blind passion of my youth,” he said tearfully. “And no hospital and no government can affect that. We will always be together.”

New laws could have helped couple

Two laws passed in B.C. in 2007 could have given the Brents more rights. The B.C. Ministry of Attorney General said Bill 26 and Bill 29 were passed in a package to give seniors and other vulnerable citizens more say over their health and financial affairs.

However, a spokesperson from the ministry said the implementation of the reforms was put on hold because of the economic downturn.

“That means we’re still stuck with the old archaic laws that George [Brent] has such a problem with,” said Laura Watts of the Canadian Centre for Elder Law.

“I think a lot of seniors feel like they don’t have enough rights, and I think that’s probably because, mostly, they don’t.”

Watts said Bill 26 spells out that health care facilities can’t keep someone if they want to go home. If they are deemed incapable, the facility has to get permission from a relative or a legal guardian to keep them in the facility.

She said Bill 29 essentially says a health authority can’t remove a person’s financial or legal rights without getting formal approval from the Public Guardian’s office first. That did not happen in the Brent case. Rather, it was the health authority that launched the process of stripping George Brent of his power of attorney, and the Public Guardian merely signed off on it.

“If these laws aren’t proclaimed, if we leave the legislation the way it is, in my view you are going to see more and more difficult situations, and nobody wins,” said Watts.

Ironically, Watts said, other provinces adopted the models set out in the new B.C. laws, but those provinces have gone further and actually put the laws into force.

Ombudsperson dismisses complaint

George Brent filed a complaint with the B.C. Ombudsperson about the standard of his wife’s care but not about his loss of power of attorney.

After looking through health authority records, the Ombudsperson concluded his complaint was not substantiated.

“It appears that [Interior Health Authority] took your concerns seriously,” wrote Sandra Chan of the Office of the Ombudsperson. “The documentation … suggests that IHA provided you with an adequate and appropriate response to the concerns you raised regarding the care provided to your wife.”

Gwyn Brent remains convinced her father was simply brushed off, because he caused problems for staff in the facility.

“What a sad world we live in — how we treat the elderly,” she said. “Just because you are elderly, you have no rights anymore? Pretty sad.”

This summer, Dolores Brent was moved, at the family’s request, to a privately run care home in Trail called Rosewood Village, which has a contract with Interior Health. Her husband said the standard of care there is much higher.

He said he would like to sell their house and move into another part of the same facility to be closer to his wife if and when a room becomes available.

However, he said, since the Public Guardian now has a stake in his home, he may not be allowed to do that.

“I’m amazed that I have lived through this year,” George Brent said. “Because I get stressed right to the moment of no return, worrying about Dolores and how she is doing.”

Courtesy Kelowna.com

Letter

July 9, 2010

The Honourable Ms. Alison Redford QC,
Minister of Justice and Attorney General
403 Legislature Building

The Honourable Ms. Mary Anne Jablonski
Minister Seniors and Community Support Services
# 227, Alberta Legislature Building

Ms. Brenda Lee Doyle

Provincial Director
Office of the Public Guardian

Edmonton Provincial Office
Room 330,
10405 Jasper Avenue, Edmonton AB T5K 4R7

Apprehension of Mrs Myrtle Hofer # 249, 6 mile Common, S. Lethbridge.

On June 16, 2010, Ms.Tobi-Dawn McRae, Public Guardian Officer, Lethbridge made an ex parte Application to the court for the apprehension of Mrs. Hofer.

On June 18, 2010, Mrs Hofer was apprehended at Linden, AB, (not at her domicile in Lethbridge) by the RCMP and Calgary Public Guardian Officers and taken to a care facility in Lethbridge, The View. The Public Guardians, Mohinder Bajwa and an unnamed guardian and the RCMP failed to advise Mrs. Hofer of her rights according to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Frightened and crying on the shoulder of a young friend who was present and also crying, she was then led away to a government van and taken to Lethbridge.

Not only was Mrs Hofer seized but also her estate was seized, denying her all access to her money.

On July 6, 2010, Mr. Scott C. Paul, Ascent Legal Centre, brought an Application before the Queens Bench Court, Surrogate, for the guardianship and trusteeship of Mrs. Hofer. The Application was made on behalf of the Office of the Public Guardian and the Office of the Public Trustee.

At the court, Mrs. Hofer was not represented by counsel, although she had requested counsel, she was not allowed to be present, she had no voice at the court.

We therefore stepped forward at the court to advise the Honourable Judge of relevant facts which were being withheld from him. Facts such as, that 87 year old Mrs Hofer had been apprehended by the RCMP and the Office of the Public Guardian, that she had not been advised of her rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, that she had been stripped of her cell phone and was being isolated from family and friends.

The Guardian’s Office had moved her to Raymond, to the Good Samaritan Prairie Lodge where she was being essentially hidden. However, on July 7, 2010, **** phoned the Lodge concerning Myrtle Hofer, she was informed that Mrs. Hofer was not allowed visitors, was being held under guard and disallowed to communicate, she had no phone.

Finally, we have been informed that the apprehension and detention of Myrtle Hofer has been carried out under the protocol of the new Adult Guardianship and Trusteeship Act.

Please be advised and advise your staff that Mrs. Myrtle Hofer is a Canadian citizen and therefore should be privy to all rights of citizenship.

We would be grateful to be in receipt of your response in regard to this troubling matter by the 20th July, 2010

Thank you.

Yours truly,

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

cc. Mrs. Myrtle Hofer, The Good Samaritan Society Prairie Ridge,
# 328 Broadway S. Raymond, AB.T0K 2S0
Registered letter.

Responses

HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

COMPLAINT UNDER THE ALBERTA HUMAN RIGHTS ACT

We, the Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

COMPLAIN AGAINST

Guardians of Helen Tiedemann DOB 1938, March 12
Mrs Vera (John) Heitman Mr. Ralph Tiedemann

Alleging that since October 2008 until the present, the Guardians of Helen Tiedemann have disallowed Helen Tiedemann to go for a walk.

Helen Tiedemann is a resident at the Vegreville Care center, Vegreville, AB.

Particulars:

This 73 year old year old handicapped lady is being detained pursuant to the Adult Guardianship and Trusteeship Act.

Helen Tiedemann is a Canadian Citizen and therefore has inherent rights. Nevertheless, those detaining her have sharply suspended and curtailed her civil and Charter rights.

Dated at Edmonton, AB

August 20, 2010

This Statement is true to the best of my knowledge. I hereby authorize the Alberta Human Rights Commission to investigate the above mentioned complaint and take whatever steps it considers necessary to effect settlement of the said complaint.

Helen Tiedemann is being disabled. She is not allowed to leave the facility to go for
a walk. We submit that she is being disabled, whether deliberately or by default.

Helen Tiedemann can no longer walk from bed to bathroom without the aid of a walker. She sits on her bed all the time. This is a woman who prior to being detained, walked all over Tofield, to church, to dinners, to the Golden Age Club and is now virtually handicapped because she is being held in a room with no recreation or exercise. She wishes to walk down town. This would distract her from her grief of being detained away from community and friends.

There is no physical or medical reason that would justify the prohibition of healthy exercise. There are available options:

1. Allow her to go for a walk.
2. Family or staff take her for a walk.
3. Hire someone to do so. After all, thousands of dollars of Helen’s hard earned money is being spent on lawyers, courts and lengthy cognitive assessments.

It is cruel and inhumane what is being allowed to happen to her now. Helen desperately needs that exercise not only for healthier body but also for better frame of mind. Presently she is like a prisoner in “stir”. She is suffering. She is seriously depressed. We hear her anguished cries, many times, daily, on the telephone.

In a Protection For Persons in Care Preliminary Report dated April 27, 2010 from Bobby Murphy RN, a Health Care Aid was cited as saying:

“She could hear her on the phone and could hear her crying. The resident is frequently on the phone crying so she did not think anything of it”.

Helen has told us many times, “I can’t take it anymore”. “I want to go to my grave”. “I want Jesus to take me Home”.

Helen is a person who was sent home from school when in grade three and never received further schooling. She is perceived to be handicapped, however has an incredible memory and plays a mean game of cards usually winning over her opponents. In October 2008, she was totally detained in the Vegreville Alzheimer unit for eight months, like a maximum security prisoner, never allowed to leave the facility, even for coffee with friends.

The animal rights people would never allow such abuse of an animal. But the abuse and neglect of Helen Tiedemann is happening in the presence of professional doctors, nurses, social workers, mental health workers and others.

Filed: August 20, 2010

Complaint Number: 218313

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

Response

August 10, 2011

Dr. Vince Visconti, MD.
78 Athabascan Ave
Sherwood Park, AB T8A 4E3

Dear Dr. Visconti:

Reference: Geriatric Assessment scheduled for August 30, 2011 @ Glenrose Rehabilitation Hospital.

When I recently showed you a copy of the Glenrose letter dated June 30, 2011, you offered no information concerning this assessment (attached)

Regarding the above referred to assessment:

1. Who will pay for the assessment?
2. How much is it to cost?
3. Who is scheduled to interview me?
4. What is the purpose of the assessment?

I would also be grateful if you would send me a copy of the referral which you sent to the Glenrose in regard to this matter.

I would further be grateful to be in receipt of your response in regard to this matter by the 20h of August, 2011.

Thank you.

Yours truly.

J.M.

Attachments

Response

No response from the Dr Visconti

This formal complaint is a recent development in the ongoing history of Dora Cinciruk.

December 28, 2012

Dr. Douglas Faulder, Medical Director, Capital Care Norwood

Chief of Police, Mr. Rod Knecht Edmonton Police Service,

Dr. Chris Eagle CEO Alberta Health Services

Re: Dora (Eudokia) Cinciruk – UNLAWFULLY CONFINED

Resident # 219 2 N. Capital Care.
Norwood Care Center, Edmonton, AB.
- detained under close guard, since October 27, 2009
Moved to St. Michael’s Care Center September 2012.

COMPLAINT

Mrs. Dora (Eudokia) Cinciruk has been detained behind locked doors in an Alzheimer unit, since December 2009. Prior to that she was detained at the University Hospital.

We allege that no valid, scientific, ethically administered Capacity Report exists which declared Mrs. Cinciruk incompetent and unable to manage her affairs. We suggest that Dora Cinciruk has been unlawfully confined.

SYNOPSIS

Dr. Craig Buchholz, Psychiatrist, on December 7, 2009, allegedly assessed Mrs. Cinciruk and declared her diagnosis as “objectively documented dementia”. The court rejected this diagnosis because it could not be substantiated. Despite having allegedly carried out a thorough professional assessment, Dr. Buchholz had not even learned that Mrs Cinciruk was totally illiterate.

The Court declared the Buchholz assessment invalid and ordered that Mrs. Cinciruk undergo another capacity assessment. On July 28, 2010 Dr. Kevin Lawless, psychiatrist, met with Mrs. Cinciruk for 80 minutes. He stated in a 4 page report: “Mrs. Cinciruk had no difficulties in comprehending the questions posed”. However, Dr. Lawless completed his report stating that he had not conducted a capacity assessment. “a capacity assessment was not conducted”.

HISTORY

Mrs. Eudokia Cinciruk was admitted to the University of Alberta Hospital on October 27, 2009 for treatment of a foot injury. At the Hospital she was seen by numbers of psychiatrists. Dr. Craig Buchholz declared her incompetent and disregarded the fact that this woman is totally illiterate in English and speaks only a very colloquial English. She speaks Ukrainian, German and Russian.

Because of her difficult life, she had not at any time attended school even when she was young because of war time. Her mother and father died and then orphaned, she had to fend for herself and her siblings.

We submit that she must be an amazing woman and very intelligent in that she lived alone in her Bonnie Doon home. She has never mismanaged her finances, she has always paid all her bills and taxes; functioned well in the community; she grew a large garden and had an abundance of lovely flowers in the front of her home. She managed well. She lived carefully on her pension, saved her money and gave thousands and thousands of dollars to her children.

Presently, she dresses herself, feeds herself, washes her own clothes in the sink and hangs them over the bed rail, she directs her own care. Yet she has been detained in a long-term care, Alzheimer unit.

Dr. Lawless, in his report, referred to her as a “delightful lady”. We concur. She is not incompetent and those who know her well affirm that she is not incompetent. She takes an interest in the world around her. We have a letter from a professor at the University of Alberta who speaks Ukrainian and has written a statement that this woman is not incompetent but very articulate in Ukrainian. We know of many others who share this professor’s validation of Dora.

Since admitted to the Alzheimer unit in 2009, Mrs. Cinciruk was held under close guard.

This little woman was transferred to the locked Norwood Center by three University Hospital security staff. She laughed about the bizarre transfer, commenting, where could she have gone with a bandaged foot, denied her shoes, in the midst of winter.

It has been reported that she has been interviewed by numbers of Psychiatrists;

• Dr. Jorge Perez-Parada,
• Dr. Brian Stonehocker,
• Dr. Rena LaFrance,
• Dr. Heidi Wilkes,
• Dr. Kathleen Collinson,
• Dr. Craig Buchholz,
• Dr. John Morrissey
• Dr. Darryl B. Rolfson.

Some saw her more than once, some up to eight or nine times. Despite all the visits and interviews and alleged assessments, no one recognized / understood, that this woman is totally illiterate in every language, including English.

On the strength of the flawed assessment, Dr. Buchholz appointed Anna Wegner, daughter, as “decision-maker”. Because Dr. Buchholz’s Capacity Report was rejected by the court and found to be invalid, we submit that the appointment of Anna Wegner could not be considered valid. She was appointed pursuant to the Adult Guardianship and Trusteeship Act. She actively denied her mother, her rights.

Mrs. Cinciruk’s was accused of hoarding and having an unclean house. We had not seen the inside of her house. However, while at the University Hospital, we examined her spring jacket and winter jacket, (photographed them) which were both clean and did not have a smell. Her clothing in the closet did not appear soiled or have a smell. She was out and about in the community and was not perceived as a “bag lady type”. She carried on her business and paid her bills. She had not mismanaged her finances.

On January 4, 2011, we were informed by Dora Cinciruk, that appointed “decision-maker” Anna Wegner did not take Dora out for Christmas dinner or visit Dora at Christmas at all, nor did she send any gifts. As a matter of fact Dora had no Christmas visits or gifts from the daughters who the previous year applied for guardianship or trusteeship of their mother.

Anna Wegner wrote a Directive in May 2010, which was held at the nursing desk, restricting her mother’s visitors, directing that only family be allowed to visit Dora. Visitors of Dora’s choice were to be denied access. Visitors were insulted and ordered to leave. For close to a year she was denied to attend Mass which was held in the same building. She was given permission to attend after a complaint was

made to the Alberta Human Rights Commission.

During a visit to Mrs. Cinciruk, we were threatened by nursing staff and informed that if we failed to leave, we would be physically removed by the Edmonton Police Service. The professional nursing staff acted as jailers and enforcers.

On May 3, 2010, Mrs. Cinciruk was denied the right to attend her court hearing held at Queens Bench Surrogate Court @ 2:00 PM, Edmonton Court House, Application DA03 15488, despite a letter to the nurse, Administrator of Norwood.

Mrs. Cinciruk was denied the right to fresh air outside the building. She has seldom been allowed outside since her detention of October 2009.

Physicians and nursing staff have subjected this intelligent, creative, wonderful human being to mind-numbing enforced idleness.

“I am a Canadian citizen. How can the government allow this to be done to me? I worked hard all my life and was not a burden to anyone. I did not steal, cheat or murder anyone. I paid all my debts. I was a good citizen.” –Dora Cinciruk

Indeed. Mrs. Cinciruk is a Canadian Citizen & has inherent rights. Nevertheless, physicians, psychiatrists, nursing staff, social workers, security personnel have sharply suspended and curtailed her civil and Charter rights.

On October 15, 2012, the Honourable Justice D.J. Manderscheid ordered that a Capacity Report of Mrs. Cinciruk be carried out.

We allege that this Canadian citizen has been unlawfully confined.

Yours truly,

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

cc.

The Honourable Mr. Fred Horne, Minister of Health
College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta

Response

Letter of Complaint

REGISTERED MAIL

December 16, 2012

Dr. Chris Eagle, Alberta Health Services
Office of the President & CEO ?7th Street Plaza, ?14th Floor, North Tower ?10030 – 107 Street NW ?Edmonton, Alberta T5J 3E4

Chief of Police, Mr. Rod Knecht
Edmonton Police Service,
9620 – 103A Ave.,
Edmonton, Alberta T5H 0H7

The Honourable Mr. Frank Oberle,
Assoc. Minister of Human Services
402 Legislature Office,
10800 97 Avenue
Edmonton, AB. T5K 2B6

Reference : Patrick McManus, Public Guardian Representative, Office of the Public Guardian, Court Appointed Guardian of S. M.

Re: S. H. detained Aspen House, Morinville, AB. Alberta Health Services Facility. Admitted to University Hospital Edmonton, then transferred to Aspen House, 9706 100 Avenue, Morinville AB. T8R 1T2.

This matter was brought to the attention of the Elder Advocates of Alberta Society.

Throughout this matter we shall refer to Patrick McManus as the Guardian and S. H. as the client.

COMPLAINT

The Guardian:

• Fails to exercise his authority in the best interests of the client.
• Fails to convey important decisions to the client made by the guardian for the client.
• Fails to act diligently
• Fails to act in good faith
• Fails to act responsibly for the client’s well being and safety.
• Fails to authorize, provide and monitor ethical, medical health care
• Fosters neglect
• Fails to properly diagnose a condition
• Fails to promptly respond to symptoms
• Fails to foster dignity and respect for the client
• Treats the client with indifference and disregard.
• Disregards his duty of care to the client.

SYNOPSIS

Our complaint against the Guardian chronicles disregard, isolation, bullying, inhumane treatment. We allege, that throughout, the alleged “care and support” of the Office of the Public Guardian, the client has been subjected to elder abuse and neglect.

The Office of the Public Guardian has usurped control of the client, having taken the rights of Agency from the daughter by means of a dishonest, untrustworthy Court Application. The Guardian has subjected the client to neglect and malpractice.

Under the Guardian’s direction, the client was confined to a facility :

1. in the care of nursing staff who appear to lack patient assessment skills which are the cornerstone of being a proficient nurse.
2. in the care of staff who appear to have not been given authority to act in the absence of senior managerial staff
3. that exercises lax and questionable nursing practices
4. that is environmentally unsuitable for vulnerable, elderly persons

The Guardian has denied the client her human rights, citizenship rights and Charter Rights, all under the guise of protection.

HISTORY – CHRONOLOGY

February 12, 2012

The client was drugged and without her permission or knowledge was transported from the University Hospital to Aspen House, Morinville, AB.

Thus it was difficult for her to receive visits from daughter, family and friends.

The Public Guardian had given a directive that during a visit from daughter, the client was not allowed to visit with daughter in her room but had to sit on an uncomfortable bench in the open area. After the allotted two hour time limit was over, the visiting daughter was ordered to leave Aspen House property and in a blizzard, wait for her ride.

Since November 21, 2012, Client’s daughter has emailed Guardian a number of times requesting his permission to spend Christmas Eve and Christmas Day with mother. Guardian has not responded.

Friday November 30, 2012

Client informed Aspen House staff that there was blood in her urine. No urine specimen was taken nor in any way was a remedy provided.

The client believes that she has become subject to bladder infections, for the reason that the room is often uncomfortably cold. LPN accused client that she was causing too much laundry. Client alleges that she has difficulty controlling bladder due to chronic bladder infections.

Saturday December 1, 2012

@ 9:30 AM A massive hemorrhoidal prolapse occurred. The prolapse was about 6” in length and 2” in width.

The client’s room was cold which has been an ongoing issue at Aspen House. @ 1:49 PM, the LPN promised to bring in a heater.

@ 2:30 PM client again requested heater and was informed by LPN, there was no heater. Client informed LPN, that she had been given a heater two days ago. LPN then informed client that she had to wait for 15 minutes.

@ 4:00 PM, client was informed she could not have a heater.

Sunday – December 2, 2012

Client is nauseous, has bladder infection.

Bath day – LPN was to check if the water was warm enough for the weekly bath. (Sometimes Aspen House water is cold due to flawed plumbing).

LPN left the bathroom and client was not given a bath.

@ 1:45 PM first urine specimen finally taken

Sunday afternoon client’s daughter called Dr. Norman McDonald concerning client’s situation.

7:30 PM –

1. LPN required another urine specimen and
2. administered first dose of Cipro (antibiotic for urinary tract infection)
3. administered pain medication.

From Friday to Sunday, client’s situation worsened, experiencing more pain and discomfort.

No doctor visited.

No registered nurse on site.

Client was crying and in pain, said she wished she was home with daughter where she could be compassionately cared for.

Client was crying, in pain, suffering from massive prolapse, told staff she felt gravely ill and asked to have an ambulance called to go to hospital.

LPN told daughter, by phone, that she could not take client to hospital.

LPN informed client, that she will take action if client leaves Aspen House, she will call police.

Because client was in great pain, client again pleaded with LPN to be allowed go to a hospital for care and pain management.

LPN summarily left room.

Approximately 9:00 PM, client called 911. An ambulance came.

Paramedics carried her to the ambulance where they immediately -

1. administered oxygen
2. started intravenous
3. administered injection for pain
4. took her vital signs, found her to have very high blood pressure.

Client was transported alone to Sturgeon Hospital. No one accompanied her.

Sunday, December 9, 2012

We visited with the client who appeared gravely ill.

Her condition appeared shocking.

Thursday, December 13, 2012

Surgery, Sturgeon Hospital, St. Albert, AB.

Moved to Intensive care (ICU)

Sunday, December 16, 2012

Client remains in intensive care (ICU)

We respectfully ask that our concerns be investigated.

Thank you.

Yours truly,

Elder Advocates Of Alberta Society

cc. The Honourable Minister of Health, Mr. Fred Horne

Letter call to action

December 21, 2012

The Honourable Mr. Frank Oberle,
Associate Minister of Human services
402 Legislature Office,

Dear Mr. Minister:

Patrick McManus Public Guardian Representative, Office of the Public Guardian, Edmonton

Reference Ms. H., Detained at the University Hospital, Edmonton, AB. since October, 2011 & at Aspen House, Morinville, AB. since September 12, 2012.

We have been informed that Patrick McManus, Office of the Public Guardian, has directed that Ms. H who presently continues in ICU at the Sturgeon Hospital St. Alberta, be returned to recover post surgically at Aspen House, Morinville.

Ms. Hamilton has been seriously neglected and abused at Aspen House (note our attached correspondence dated December 16, 2012). It is deeply troubling that any one would suggest that she be returned to this Alberta Health Services Facility.

We respectfully ask for your intervention in regard to this matter.

Thank you.

Yours truly,

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

Affidavit

I, Dennis Joseph Riopel, of the City of Calgary, in the Province of Alberta, MAKE OATH AND SAY THAT:

1. I am a Canadian citizen, presently detained at the Peter Lougheed Hospital, Unit # 52, Rm. 18, Calgary, AB. and as such have knowledge of the matters herein deposed to, except where stated to be based upon information and belief, and where so stated I do verily believe same to be true.
2. I have had the opportunity to review the Application for Trusteeship, filed July 20, 2012 by Cameron Scott of the Office of the Public Trustee, which he states is based on the capacity assessment report completed by Dr. Wakefield.
3. Included in the documents for service is a Form 4, Capacity Assessment Report signed by Dr. J. Scott Wakefield which is an alleged assessment relating to the decision making capacity of me as related to my personal and financial matters.
4. Catherine Christopher QC of the Office of the Public Trustee refers to Section 43 of the Adult Guardianship and Trusteeship Regulation, Alberta Regulation 219 / 2009 as authority for this protocol.
5. I allege that Dr. Wakefield breached CMA CODE OF ETHICS and STANDARDS OF PRACTICE when he signed the Form 4. He exhibited insufficient professional knowledge.
6. Dr. Wakefield signed an official form, Form 4 dated May 31, 2012, which appeared to render a professional opinion that he knew would be used as evidence in a judicial proceeding. A proceeding which would have implications for Mr. my legal rights. In breach of the College’s professional standards Dr. Wakefield did so without direct and substantial professional contact with or a formal assessment of that person.
7. Dr. Wakefield failed to carry out a capacity assessment before he signed the Form 4.
8. There is no indication in Dr. Wakefield’s five page Form 4, that any limits on information were identified.
9. Dr. Wakefield fails to provide any documented evidence in his five page Report.
10. Dr. Wakefield’s Form 4 Report contained factual inaccuracies
11. Dr. Wakefield’s Form 4 contains fabrication.
12. In Item 10, Dr. Wakefield states that: “Pt. has Korsikoff’s dementia; he (Mr. Riopel) does not have adequate insight with respect to these realms”. I deny that I exhibit symptoms of Korsakoff’s dementia. Dr. Wakefield’s assessment of me as indicated in Item 10, (below) confirms this.
13. Item 10, Page 4 of 5, Dr. Wakefield indicates that I: a. am capable of participating in social activities b. may participate in any educational or vocational or other training c. have capacity for employment
14. Dr. Wakefield failed to provide and include evidence of past relevant intervention, progress, any test results, any basic test data from which results were derived. Item 12 is untruthful and contradicts Item 10, (iv) (v) & (vi). His form 4 indicates that no detailed information concerning a capacity assessment is included.

Critical Review of Dr. Wakefield’s Evaluation

Dr. Wakefield’s evaluation which was a filed court Application fails to provide sworn, documented evidence to the court.

The Dr. Wakefield assessment provides no evidence that I mismanaged my finances.

The Office of the Public Trustee has applied to assume trusteeship over a limited estate? The Office of the Public Trustee is maintained by taxpayer dollars.

Dr. Wakefield’s Form 4 fails to provide any reasonable cause under the law, why I should be placed under the authority of a guardianship or trusteeship order.

In Item 2, Dr. Wakefield states that the reasons for the request for the capacity assessment are: 1) “Requires supported living & guardian / trustee”

On June 15, 2012, Psychiatrist, Dr. Nadeem Hussein Bhanji, threatened me, stating that he will “have him placed behind locked doors and denied all visitors.”

I am allowed to leave the Peter Lougheed Hospital, Unit # 52 at will? I am permitted to do so on a daily basis returning only for meals and sleep.

I deny that I am a danger to myself or to others.

If I were a danger to myself or others, surely ethical, responsible professional physicians and professional nursing staff would not permit this me to wander around the streets of Calgary, at all hours, unsupervised.

Prior to the July 20, 2012, court Application, I, Dennis Joseph Riopel prepared the following CONDITION STATEMENT and presented it to physicians and social worker.

Condition Statement

This is to inform I will accept nothing less than the following conditions. * A complete discharge. * Restore my competence with no mind tests. * Contact all Government agencies to restore my pensions, subsidy’s as well as the TD Bank. * Contact the housing authorities to have Dr. Samis statement reversed for accommodations. * Have all my funds, pensions property damage deposit returned that were Appropriated (MY Daughter) * Restitution’s for loss of time institutionalized for inconveniences for life I was accustomed to. * Any cost to have to have my property returned, to an apartment located for me. * Any loss or damage to my property. * Cost of any hook ups for services to the apartment. * All loss of funds, property, pensions subsidies on discharge. * Restocking my apartment with all perishables. * Copies of all transactions conducted to my doctor, Dr. Gordon Melling.

Dennis Joseph Riopel

Dated July 4 2012

It is clear and obvious that I am not a danger to myself or a danger to others. This current series of involuntary hospital treatment has long outlived its usefulness and has become a hassle to my well-being and mental health. I do not qualify under the law for guardianship or trusteeship.

The current proceedings for guardianship and trusteeship are dishonest, unjust, frightening and anti-therapeutic for me.

I have been detained in an active treatment bed for the last nine months at taxpayer dollars.

I have been bulled and threatened. There has been failure to treat me, a Canadian citizen with dignity and respect. My charter rights have been violated.

Drs Wakefield and Samis wish to strip me of my rights? They wish to have me placed in a senior’s home when allegedly there is a shortage of such spaces? They have strongly inferred that I will be detained behind locked doors?

I submit that Dr. Samis and Dr. Wakefield’s lengthy detention and treatment of me in an active treatment hospital indicates a bias, if not an open hostility towards me that renders these doctor’s opinions highly suspect.

Dr. Wakefield’s Form 4 is dishonest and it strongly appears that the intent thereof is to mislead the court.

I make this affidavit in opposition to the Application by the Office of the Public Trustee for trusteeship and in support of an Order directing the court to dismiss the Application of the Office of the Public Trustee and reinstate my rights and be allowed to walk free from this court.

Letter of Complaint

HAND DELIVERED

August 28, 2012

Honourable Mr. Neil C. Wittmann
Chief Justice of the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta
Calgary, AB.

To the Honourable Chief Justice:

Court of Queen’s Bench, (Surrogate matter) Room 1002,
August 27, 2012 @ 2:0o PM
Madam Justice Adele Kent, presiding

Reference Dennis Joseph Riopel, DA01-012-729

1. The court disregarded the fact that the Office of the Public Trustee (OPT) had filed an untruthful affidavit. The Application was flawed and untrustworthy.
2. Accepted a document prepared by Joanna New of the Office of the Public Guardian which had not been disclosed to Mr. Riopel.
3. Disregarded the elder abuse of Daughter who is abusing his finances and had emptied his apartment, discarding his furniture, leaving him homeless.
4. Overlooked and even sanctioned the fact that Mr. Riopel, who had filed his own affidavit, attended at the court by LRT, presented himself admirably before the court, impeccably attired – takes up an active treatment bed at the Peter Lougheed Hospital.
5. Granted the Application to OPT.

Thank you.

Elder Advocates Of Alberta Society

cc. The Honourable Ms. Alison Redford, Premier

Response

Premier Alison Redford has raised the cap on seniors long-term care accommodation by five per cent.

During the Tory leadership race,  Redford mused about removing the cap altogether, an idea she abandoned during the spring election.*

After the election, Health Minister Fred Horne and Seniors Minister George VanderBurg studiously avoided questions about whether the cap will be removed, saying only that the policy discussion is underway.

In a news release issued by Horne’s press secretary Thursday afternoon, the government announced a fee increase of five per cent across the board.

A previous version of this blog post suggested the cap was being removed, and that this amounted to a broken election promise. As it turns out, I misunderstood the press release.

“We’re not removing the cap, the cap remains in place,” press secretary Bart Johnson told me in a phone conversation right after the release was issued. Only the fee haa been increased.

The increase will raise rates by five per cent across the board:

• Private room – $58.70 per day from $55.90, a maximum increase of $2.80 per day (for a maximum monthly charge of $1,785, up from a maximum of $1,700);

• Semi-Private room – $50.80 per day from $48.40, a maximum increase of $2.40 per day (for a maximum monthly charge of $1,545, up from a maximum of $1,472); and

• Standard Room – $48.15 per day from $45.85, a maximum increase of $2.30 per day (for a maximum monthly charge of $1,465, up from a maximum of $1,395).

This means, for example, that a senior living in a semi-private room will pay an additional $73 a month, or $876 a year. The total fees will increase to $18,540 annually, from $17,664.

There are roughly 14,500 seniors living in long-term care in Alberta, and roughly 6,200 will pay the increased fees. The remaining 8,300 receive provincial subsidies.

My colleague Elise Stolte is writing a story for tomorrow’s paper on the increase. In the meantime, here are some previous stories and blog posts.

Courtesy Edmonton Journal.

April 18, 2013

VIA Facsimile – 780 415 8738

The Honourable Mr. Frank Oberle,
Associate Minister of Human services
402 Legislature Office,

Attention: Debra

We request a meeting with the Minister concerning the following matter.

Reference: [the client] We shall refer to her as the client.

Public Trustee Representative, Wendy Babichuk, Office of the Public Trustee, Edmonton, AB. Wendy Babichuk is [the client's] Public Trustee Representative. We shall refer to her as Trust Officer.

History:

Trust Officer has determined to sell client’s home at [removed] and informed client of same.

Client is in great anguish at the prospect of being evicted from her domicile. She has told us that she does not wish to leave her home, her neighborhood, her friends. Trustee Officer has been strongly insisting that client immediately sign a lease.

The TD Bank has been most helpful and has even contacted Trustee Officer in regard to the following.

A line of credit against the home of $ 219,580.72 can be amortized over 25 years which would require a payment of $1026.83 monthly. The proposed town house, which would be suitable for two persons which client has viewed and at the urging of trust officer has put a deposit, on would require payment of $1774. monthly – close to $9,000 more per year.

There are many advantages other than financial, for the client to remain in her home and be supported to stay in her home.

Her home is much more spacious than the town house, allowing a family member to live with her. She also has pets to which she is deeply attached. They provide therapy for her.

Client lives in a community where neighbors know each other, shovel the sidewalk for her, leaving only the driveway for her. She visits with neighbors. She alleges that they look out for her.

We often visit individuals who have had their homes sold out from under them, living in public housing. They are like lost souls grieving the loss of their roots.

Public Advocates have a duty of care to act in the best interests of the client.

We wish to meet with the Minister’s Office in regard to this issue.

We wish to again exercise a complaint against Trust Officer, which we have reported to the Minister’s Office this morning shortly after 10:AM. Part of the bullying conversation reported to us was as follows: “Make sure you pay your bills or you’ll be out on the street”

Trust Officer threatened her and told her that she would be put under the guardian’s office and “They’ll tell you where to live.”

Thank you.

Yours truly,

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

HAND DELIVERED

September 13, 2012

Dr. Chris. Eagle, CEO, Alberta Health Services
Office of the President & CEO ?Manulife Place,
700 – 10180 101 Street,
Edmonton, AB T5J 3S4

Chief of Police, Mr. Rod Knecht
Edmonton Police Service,
9620 – 103A Ave.,
Edmonton, Alberta T5H 0H7

Ms. Shirley Hamilton DOB July 11, 1936, resident of Brampton, Ontario Detained at stn. 5G2, University of Hospital, Edmonton, AB. since November 2011.

As told to us by Joanne, daughter of Shirley Hamilton, At 7:00 PM, September 12, 2012, Joanne received a phone call from her mother. Hamilton was sobbing, saying she did not know where she was and that she was very frightened. She told her that she was in a room with another lady.

She told daughter that at 8:30 AM, that morning, on Unit 5 G2, University Hospital, her physician injected her twice, two needles / injections. Then, still in housecoat, was taken in a wheelchair down to a waiting taxi. By the time she was in the taxi, she told Joanne that she felt numbed and could no longer speak. She was accompanied by a social worker.

During the said phone call, the lady in the room told Shirley Hamilton that they were at Aspen House in Morinville, AB, At that point, a person (nurse?) entered the room, seized the phone from Shirley Hamilton and strongly told her, “You have no phone privileges.”

When later, daughter attempted to phone the facility, she was told that her mother has “no phone privileges.”

Earlier on that same day, September 12, 2012, about 9:00 AM, daughter of Shirley Hamilton was unable to reach her mother by phone, detained at Unit 5G2.

Subsequently she was informed by the desk person and Sheila Fogel, Social Worker at the University Hospital, that Hamilton’s phone was not functional because they were trying to fix the radios and this resulted in interference.

Daughter then phoned the Hospitality Office which supplies phone service to patients and was informed that the Public Trustee had not made payment for Hamilton’s phone service past Tuesday, the 11th of September, 2012.

In this matter, we allege: 

• Elder abuse
• Aasault – unwarranted drugging
• Kidnapping – the schlepping to rural Alberta in night clothes – without Hamilton’s knowledge, against her will
• Unlawful confinement – the power to determine where Shirley Hamilton should live, which was granted by the Court to the Office of the Public Guardian, is based on a corrupt court hearing.

At 2:30 PM, daughter was informed by Aspen House staff, who had intervened on behalf of the Hamiltons. Shirley Hamilton will be allowed to speak to her daughter every day after lunch with the stipulation by the Public guardian, that the call must be monitored by Aspen House personnel.

Thank you.

Yours truly,

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

cc.
the Honourable Mr. Frank Oberle
the Honourable Mr. Fred Horne, Minister of Health & Wellness
Shirley Hamilton

Complaint Report

Letter of Complaint

September 25, 2012
via Facsimile 780 415 8611

Protection For Persons in Care File # 7689
We object to the following complaint being dismissed.

To the Protection For Persons In Care Act File # 7689
Complaint against

Dany-Ann Fournier, RN, Care Manager,
J.P. Decosse Long term Care Center, St. Paul, AB.

Reference – Resident – Annie Dupuis
On August 1, 2012, @ 10:10 AM – 100 year old Annie Dupuis was: – found with the door to her room closed – found strapped to a toilet seat, by means of a transfer belt

Tying old people to a toilet for the convenience of nursing home care staff is unacceptable to us and it is troubling that your office apparently condones such practices. It is even more troubling that the J.P.Decosse Long term Care Center of St. Paul, AB. allows such dangerous, abusive protocol.

In the past we have knowledge of an older person who was tied to a toilet and who slipped through the restraint. The elder suffered a fractured hip. This happened in the Drayton Valley area.

We ask you to review this matter. Thank you.

Elder Advocates Of Alberta Society

cc. The Honourable Mr. Frank Oberle, Assoc. Minister of Human Services

February 20th & 21st, 2014 @ 10:00 AM Thursday & Friday EDMONTON COURT HOUSE – Court of Queens Bench

APPLICATION BY COVENANT HEALTH FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW OF FREEDOM OF INFORMATION (FOIP) ADJUDICATOR’S DECISION.

Shauna McHarg, who is the subject of banning in regard to her parents who are residents at the Covenant Health Edmonton General Long Term Care Centre, has not been allowed to see her father for close to two years and is allowed to see her mother for one hour each day, Monday to Friday, between 3:00 PM & 4:00 PM.

No exceptions are permitted for Christmas, Easter, Birthdays or any special occasions. Attending at the court as observers will be individuals who have also been disallowed to visit loved ones.

This is a big issue in the care of the elderly, that family & friends are often disallowed to attend to their loved ones. If they persist, believing they have a right to visit a publicly funded institution (after all this is Canada), Peace Officers, Police or RCMP are called and the visiting person may be treated like a common criminal, may be issued a Trespass ticket ($275.), handcuffed and removed. Under the TRESPASS TO PREMISES ACT no reason has to be given for the banning.

A verbal order by a security officer is enough to totally ban an individual for five years. The Act is used to control, bully and abuse.

Elder Advocates Of Alberta Society

March 18, 2015 Via Facsimile (780) 415 8611

To the Protection For Persons In Care Act abuse line:

Complaint against: Patrick McManus, Public Guardian Representative

Office of the Public Guardian

Reference: Client – Laura Guna Finlay- DOB February 23, 1922

Good Samaritan Wedman House, 10525 19 Ave NW, Edmonton, AB T6J 6X9

In the Act “Abuse” means

(a) “abuse” means

(ii) intentionally causing emotional harm, including, but not limited to, . . . restricting from appropriate social contact.

COMPLAINT:

1) We allege that the client is being denied to have visitors.

2) The client is not being allowed contact with her many friends either

by phone or in person.

3) The client is being denied a visit by her Pastor.

4) The client was stripped of her cell phone in early January.

5) We allege that the client is being isolated.

We ask your office to investigate our concerns. Thank you.

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society,

Duties and responsibilities of guardian

35(1) A guardian shall exercise the guardian’s authority

(a) in the represented adult’s best interests,

(b) diligently,

(c) in good faith,

(d) in a way that encourages the represented adult to become, to the extent possible, capable of caring for himself or herself and of making decisions in respect of matters relating to his or her person, and

(e) in the least intrusive and least restrictive manner that, in the opinion of the guardian, is likely to be effective.

(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), where a guardian has been granted authority with respect to a personal matter with respect to which a personal directive of the represented adult contains instructions, the guardian shall exercise the guardian’s authority in accordance with any clear and relevant instructions in the personal directive.

(3) A guardian shall comply with any conditions, limits or requirements set out in the guardianship order.

(4) On the making of a guardianship order, the guardian shall, promptly and in a manner that the represented adult is likely to best understand, inform the represented adult of the guardian’s appointment, the extent of the guardian’s authority and any conditions, limits or requirements to which the guardianship order is subject.

(5) Subject to the regulations, a guardian shall, within a reasonable time and in a manner that the represented adult is likely to best understand, inform the represented adult of important decisions made by the guardian for the represented adult.

Elder Advocates Of Alberta Society

May 5, 2015

Via Facsimile (780) 422 6051

Letter to follow.

The Office of the Public Guardian

Attention Charlotte LaRose, Complaints Officer.

Complaint against: Patrick McManus, Public Guardian Representative

Office of the Public Guardian

Reference: Client – Laura Guna Finlay- DOB February 23, 1922

Good Samaritan Wedman House, 10525 19 Ave NW, Edmonton, AB T6J 6X9

We wish to appeal the dismissal of our complaint as stated in your letter dated

April 9, 2015.

1) We allege that the named Guardian is in breach of the Protection for Persons Act as follows. In the Act “Abuse” means

“abuse” means

(ii) intentionally causing emotional harm, including, but not limited to, . . . restricting from appropriate social contact.

2) We allege that the Guardian Officer has failed in his duties & responsibility as a court appointed guardian.

He has failed to act

(a) in the represented adult’s best interests,

May 5, 2015

Office of the Public Guardian

Page 2

(d) in a way that encourages the represented adult to become, to the extent possible, capable of caring for himself or herself and of making decisions in respect of matters relating to his or her person,

(e) in the least intrusive and least restrictive manner that, in the opinion of the guardian, is likely to be effective.

(4) He has failed . . .. inform the represented adult of important decisions made by the guardian for the represented adult.

We know that if informed that she was to be totally isolated, she would have strongly objected.

We ask your office to investigate this injustice.

Thank you.

Yours truly

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society,

May 29, 2015

Via facsimile – 780 422 9136 –

Letter to follow

Mr. Les Hills, Acting Alberta Public Trustee,

Office of the Public Trustee

4^th Floor, Brownlee Bldg.

10365 97 Street, Edmonton, AB. T5J 3Z8

Dear Mr. Hills:

Reference:

Estate of Lewis Clarke and Ruth Clarke – 10946 154 Street, Edmonton, AB. T5P 2J9

My father passed away in 1988. His estate had not yet been completed when my

mother disappeared at the end of October 1990. Subsequently, the Office of the

Public Trustee became involved to manage their estates. Mr. Ned Frohlich, Trust

Officer was the person who gathered up their assets plus managed the case for

well over a decade. When he received a promotion the file was passed to another person.

In order to settle the estate, I have approached numbers of lawyers who after some

Investigation have refused to act for me. A lawyer whom I approached most recently

Informed me that I had, had a chance to get the estate. That the Office of the Public

Trustee had told her that I had gotten Lawyer, Mr. Christopher Head to prepare all the

needed documents and then that I had refused to sign them. This is not true.

As every lawyer that I have contacted has called the Office of the Public Trustee, it

would make sense that this misinformation has prevented me from obtaining council

in order to settle the estate.

Please advise me in regard to this matter.

I would be grateful to be in receipt of a response in regard to this long standing

matter by the 15^th of June 2015.   Thank you.

Yours truly,

XXXXXXXXXXX

June 24, 2015

Hand Delivered

The Honourable Mr, Irfan Sabir

Minister of Human Services.

Room # 402, Legislature Buiding.

10800 97 Avenue, Edmonton, AB. T5K 2B6

Dear Mr. Minister:

Reference:

Estate of Lewis Clarke and Ruth Clarke – 10946 154 Street, Edmonton, AB. T5P 2J9

My father passed away in 1988. His estate had not yet been completed when my

mother disappeared at the end of October 1990. Subsequently, the Office of the

Public Trustee became involved to manage their estates. Mr. Ned Frohlich, Trust

Officer (who was charged with fraud and jailed in 2013) was the person who gathered

up their assets plus managed the case for well over a decade. When he received a

promotion the file was passed to another person.

In order to settle the estate, I have approached numbers of lawyers who after some

Investigation have refused to act for me. A lawyer whom I approached most recently

Informed me that I had, had a chance to get the estate. That the Office of the Public

Trustee had told her that I had gotten Lawyer, Mr. Christopher Head to prepare all the

needed documents and then that I had refused to sign them. This is not true.

I have sent the attached letter to Mr. Les Hills, Acting Public Trustee of the Office of

the Public Trustee. He has failed to respond. Therefore I am asking your Office to

investigate this matter.

I would be grateful to be in receipt of a response in regard to this long standing

matter by the 15^th of July 2015.   Thank you.

Yours truly,

XXXXXXXXXXX

July 23, 2015

HAND DELIVERED

The Honourable Mr, Irfan Sabir

Minister of Human Services.

Room # 402, Legislature Buiding.

10800 97 Avenue, Edmonton, AB. T5K 2B6

Dear Mr. Minister:

Reference: Estate of Lewis Clarke and Ruth Clarke – 10946 154 Street,

Edmonton, AB. T5P 2J9

Thank you for your correspondence of July 14, 2015. I respectfully suggest that your

letter of response fails to address the issues: I shall attempt to articulate them for you.

COMPLAINT:

1) Continued interference by the Office of the Public Trustee.

2) Million dollar estate is allegedly now worth only $57,000, my mothers and

father’s estate.

REMEDY SOUGHT

1) Investigate interference by Office of Public trustee.

2) Shortfall of estate value be investigated

HISTORY

1) My father passed away in 1988. His estate had not yet been completed when my

mother disappeared at the end of October 1990. Subsequently, the Office of the

Public Trustee became involved to manage their estates.

Ned Frohlich, Trust Officer, upon the disappearance of my mother, had been placed

in charge of my mothers (and fathers) estate. Mr. Frohlich was

placed in charge of gathering up the assets. He was the Trust Officer for this file for

well over a decade, from approximately 1993 to about 2008. When he received a

promotion the file was passed to another person.

2) Mr. Frohlich was subsequently charged and convicted of fraud and jailed in 2013.

. . . . / 2

3) According to Office of the Public Trustee documents provided to me, only about

several $100,000 was gathered up and placed into the account.

4) The Office of the Public Trustee pressured me to retain Counsel Christopher Head or

I would not have a lawyer. However, I did not seek the services of Mr. Head.

5) I retained Mr. Ron Hop, counsel, who had an office at the Law Building.

He directed me to sign “for receiving the money”. He told me that if I did not sign that I

would “lose everything”.

6) Subsequent to this, I received a Court Order in the mail, containing my signature, that

which I had signed, which released the Office of the Public Trustee. I received no money.

7) In order to settle the estate, I have approached numbers of lawyers who after some

Investigation have refused to act for me. Most just simply refused to act, however,

a lawyer whom I approached most recently kindly Informed me that I had, had a chance to

get the estate.

She told me that the Office of the Public Trustee had told her that I had retained lawyer,

Mr. Christopher Head to prepare all the needed documents. However, then I had refused

to sign them. This is not true.

8) I surely believe that the estate should be worth approximately one million dollars.

I am told that there is now only $57,000. at the court

9) Mr. Les Hills, Acting Public Trustee of the Office of the Public Trustee has failed to

Respond to my concerns.

I am asking your Office to investigate this matter.

I would be grateful to be in receipt of a response in regard to this long standing

matter by the 6^th of August, 2015. Thank you.

Yours truly,

Ronald Clarke

10946 154 Street, Edmonton, AB. T5P 2J9

c.c. Ms. Sarah Hoffmann, Honourable Minister of Seniors

Mr. Ric Hilborn, Alberta Law Society.

Ruth Maria Adria, Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

February 6, 2008
VIA FACSIMILE 780 422 9138
Office of the Public Guardian
9942, 108 St. 4th Floor, Edmonton, AB. Canada

Attention: Patrick McManus, Public Guardian Officer

Dear Mr. McManus:

Reference – Pre-Admissions Medical Report re. Flora l’Heureux

Yesterday morning Flora L’Heureux inquired of Dr. Gerry Schwalfenberg who was making rounds at Lynwood, as to the whereabouts of the said Report.
He apparently gave her a vague response telling her that it may be with the guardian or with management. She then contacted Social Worker
Jim Thompson with no success.

When she called you, you informed her that you have the document in your possession. But when she asked you to send the Report to her lawyer,
you told her that you did not know if the guardian would permit you to send it. So what was your plan, to hold the Report in your file? That
was before noon yesterday. You have failed to respond to her in regard to this most urgent matter. You know how important this is to her.
It strongly appears that she has to beg and grovel in regard to everything.

We have not forgotten the Terra Losa affair where you attempted to deceive her and place her in a low functioning unit with residents who
could not even find their way to the dining room.

Thank you. We shall be awaiting your reply and be grateful to be in receipt of such reply by 11:00 this AM, Wednesday, February 6, 2008.

Yours most truly,

c.c. The Honourable Greg Melchin, Minister of seniors and Community Supports
The Guardian, Brenda Lee Doyle
______________________________________________________________________________

TOFIELD LODGE GIVES EVICTION NOTICE TO SENIOR RESIDENT.
Senior ordered to be evicted – one weeks notice.
If the resident rented an apartment, would have to be given 90 days
notice.
However seniors have limited rights, are not included under Alberta
Human Rights Legislation, Section # 4, therefore their rights can
be abused. 08/03/16

MEDIA INFORMATION
Apprehension of Mrs Myrtle Hofer, 87 years of age – # 249, Six Mile
Common, S.Lethbridge
Mrs. Hofer is being detained in Room # 227 (storage area) Good Samaritan
Prairie Ridge Long Term Care Centre, Raymond, AB. Stripped of her cell
phone, her visitors sharply restricted, Penny Clark and two senior ladies
were the only persons allowed access. Good Samaritan staff strongly enforce
restrictions.
The Public Guardian did not allow Myrtle Hofer to attend the recent funeral
of her sister-in-law which was held in Lethbridge. Her estate has been seized,
she has no access to money.
The Office of the Public Guardian and Office of the Public Trustee have
totally suspended the civil and Charter rights of Myrtle Hofer.

On July 16, 2010, Tobi-Dawn McRae, Office of the Public Guardian, made an
ex parte Application to the Lethbridge Court for the apprehension of Myrtle
Hofer.

This morning we submitted a complaint to the Lethbridge Regional Police Service as
follows:
We allege that on July 16, 2010, Tobi-Dawn McRae, Public Guardian Officer,

1) suppressed evidence of allegations of financial abuse
2) mislead the court,
3) knowingly and deliberately made utterances and submissions to the
court in an attempt to obstruct justice.

AN UNBELIEVABLE ACCOUNT OF COLLUSION AND ELDER ABUSE

MEDIA INFORMATION
Court of Queens Bench, Surrogate Court Lethbridge
Tuesday August 17, 2010 @ 10:00AM

Myrtle Hofer, 87 years old

The government has seriously bullied Mrs. Hofer, apprehending / abducting her,
18, 2010, with two RCMP officers and detaining her for the past two months as
if she was a dangerous criminal. The Office of the Public Guardian & the Office
of the Public Trustee have totally suspended the civil and charter rights of
Mrs. Myrtle Hofer.

Mohinder Bajwa & Rosaline Pakpahan, Public Guardian Calgary who apprehended her
should be sharply disciplined for their behavior in this matter. Also Tobi-Lyn
Dawn McRae & Grant Harker, Public Guardian Office, Lethbridge who directed to
have Mrs. Hofer DETAINED UNDER GUARD, on an Alzheimer ward in a room designated
for storage, at the Raymond Good Samaritan Prairie Ridge Care Centre. Stripped
of her cell phone so that no one could contact her, visitors restricted, all
under the guise of protecting her.

We submit that she has been made to suffer unimaginable, frightening emotional
trauma. However this elderly woman, despite this ordeal, was able to recall
the cell phone number of her friend & former Pastor, George Walters. She called
him a number of times from the nursing desk phone, pleading with
him to free her. A Directive by the Public Guardian named him as a person
disallowed to visit her.

Has the imposed, frightening treatment been discussed with her? Myrtle Hofer
has stated that she wants to manage HER money. Have her wishes been considered
or even heard per the PRINCIPLES of the Adult Guardianship and Trusteeship Act?

This Canadian citizen was totally self sufficient prior to the egregious
intervention into her life. She planned for her future, a Personal Directive &
Power of Attorney prepared with Krushel Farrington, Law Firm of Lethbridge,
April 23, 2010. Prior to this, on, April 21, 2010, she had sought a cognitive
assessment by her long time physician Dr. E. Lewke – Bogle BA, MD, CCFP, FCFP,
& had an almost perfect score of 29 /30 on her Foulstein mini-mental exam.
She was also able to perfectly copy the design on the exam.
Subsequently, Dr. E. Lewke – Bogle wrote:
“I feel very confident in indicating this 87 year old lady is indeed
very competent and able to handle her financial affairs and does not need a
Trusteeship or Guardianship at this time”
“Government, lawyers & courts should not be allowed to further devastate this
woman’s life. We have strongly objected to Counsel by letter, to the suggestion
that the Public Trustee be appointed. APPOINTING THE OFFICE OF THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE
AS HER TRUSTEE, WOULD BE THE ULTIMATE INJUSTICE IN THIS MATTER”.