In Sykes it did not matter whether she was competent or not – it was a foregone conclusion orchestrated by an agreement between between the two guardian ad litem and the attorney for the plenary guardian. (Gloria received an e mail from Adam Stern admitting this fact – I wonder if that e mail was a target of the ‘theft’ of her work product accomplished by the eviction). However, in reviewing a bunch of the victim complaints it appears that the medical examination most notably ignores the following:
2) body chemistry – i.e. it is possible to drug the subject
3) illness (either physical or mental)
4) consultation with treating doctors (Dr. Shaw is reported to have testified that he did not bother to even examine Mary)
The great genius talks to the subject for a few seconds, listens to the scenario of the possible abuser and/or exploiter and writes of a report. In the report on record in the Sykes case the ‘medical practicioner’ wrote the Mary was delusional when she described activities that she actually engaged. He learned that Mary was imagining from the candidate for plenary guardian who just happened to be the subject of a pending Petition for a Protective order and had informed her mother after finding $4000 in her mother’s account that she was investing the same in an IRA.
Professional Regulation (and the ARDC, the States Attorney, the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, the State Police et al) should be investigating this situation of ‘rubber stamp’ medicine. The current procedure in Illinois (and in many other states) for the appointment of a guardian is replete with examples of total avoidance of all protections for the senior citizen targeted so that there would be no hinderance by the family of you, me, Gloria, Senator Kirk, President Obama, et al to their being declared disabled and having CT appointed their plenary guardian. No one charged with protecting the seniors cares! Ask Mr. Wyman, the two Mary’s, Gloria Sykes, Janet Phelan *****and the hundreds of family and friends of the senior victim.
If a professional complains he/she can expect that he is the subject of a professional investigation! Even medical professionals are not immune.
What society needs if it wants to protect its senior citizens is a complete, honest, and comprehensive investigation of the Sykes case and similar cases by law enforcement – and enforcement of the law.
I agree that the fact that Dr. Shaw wrote down Mary was delusional because she was doing the following: 1) writing checks and paying bills, 2) driving and had a driver’s license; 3) walking to her bank and doctor and then CT lying and saying she wasn’t and Dr. Shaw never investigating further is very troublesome.
Again, the entire case was railroaded, the file was peppered with packs of lies, and these lies were rubber stamped by AS, CF and the Probate Court in a “done deal.”
Does anyone have the right to protest against the railroading of incompetency? Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and history will tell you that when the government wants to cover up fraud, let the politically elite steal with impunity, the first thing you do is start throwing people into mental institutions where they have no right to counsel or a hearing and the panel is rigged. It works very well in Banana Republic countries, the mideast and has worked well in the USSR.
Is this the new age of the US? No one can call for an investigation? Are we all incompetent for suggesting that the court and the authorities might steal? Is this the reason why Chicago-Cook County is easily the most corrupt area in the US, hands down, a margin of 2 to 1 over the next most corrupt jurisdictions?
Attorney Black, please enlighten us on this one. How is it that numerous attys take good note of strongly suspected corruption, but then groundless complaints are lodged against the honest attorneys–the ones not making a profit from the corruption, and those complaints are not automatically dismissed and the miscreants dance away with impunity? You have been sent the record from the trial court. No discovery, plenty of railroading, the ward can’t appear in court, blah, blah, and yet this continues as an ordinary snafu of the Probate Court.
More good questions than answers, I am afraid.