Filial Responsibility: VERY IMPORTANT STUFF!

Read the decision, this guy had more money than he knew what to do with.
http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Superior/out/A36025_11.pdf
He just didn't want to pay. If you have 85K in disposable income (after all your expenses) and you won't show the judge your bank statements, you lose.

The judge said he had the means, therefore he must pay. I would guess he got the house put in his name, she was a life tenant and after her death he sold the house and kept the money. I'd really like to read the entire decision, I have a feeling something is left untold.

Debra - you mean THESE archaic laws! 30 states have them on the books as of 11-30-13. More then half of the states in the USA.

In the PA case, the nursing home went directly to the son, bypassing any input from Medicaid, and they WON!!! because if the law.

The probable loophole is that the laws are based on the offspring's financial ability to pay. Folks who can afford legal and financial assistance to set up trusts and other instruments, may be able to make the majority of their money undiscoverable.

From what I've read, look for states to do not have these laws in place to start passing them. They I think the boomer generation is a cash cow that may be able to offset some of the medical expenses of the aging generation.

A good definition of archaic is old and outdated. The powers that be are clearly not looking at these laws as archaic.

Is this what future adult children have to face? This is a archaic law of national disgrace. The only way to save your self is to move to a state that doesn't have these archaic laws or start claiming child abuse on a grand scale! Guarantee if these states start enacting these archaic laws, a loud outcry from the adult children will have legistlation scrambling to change or rescind this outdated law from the 17th century.