On isolating senior wrongfully by claiming a beloved friend or relative “aggitates them”

One notable thing which is often done in a guardianship is saying that a beloved relative or friend–one that has been a part of family life for years and years, suddenly can no longer see the senior!  It’s hurtful and cruel and definitely a pattern in the Sykes case, Wyman case in others.

In Wyman, the isolation on the direction of the abusive father AND the Sharon Rudy and Kim Timmerwilke McKenzie kept the loving, caring children away from mom and knowing that the nursing home was horrific and abusive.  Carol Wyman–who was not incompetent at all–then kept a daily diary of the abuse, which included physical beatings and mental abuse by the staff.  While she managed to escape (the nursing homes prevent this by using psychotropic drugs not intended for seniors to tranquilize them!  John Howard witnessed the staff physically holding down his mother and injecting her with Halodol one day when she wanted to go home!) she had been concealing the fact she was not taking her meds.  This was a nightmare, but could have been avoided if heresay, innuendo and bogus standards for keeping these loving, caring children away had never happened.  A nightmare.

One type of tort that would provide relief to these seniors is: loss of consortium between parent and child.  But there are few cases on this tort in Illinois, and the few that do mention it say that it is not currently recognized because this has to be done by the state legislature.

Ken’s idea is to plead loss of consortium and then combine that to the right of free association in the US and Illinois constitutions to prevent this.  I think we can put it in a federal law under the ADA–a law which clearly needs to be expanded to protect the disabled.
Read on:  From KDD:

More interesting ‘stuff’.   The word ‘stuff’ is used to connote relevant legal materials.
The importance of the material that I sent you is that it provides a solid basis for people like Gloria, Aunt Yolanda, Bev Cooper, et al to go to Court and say that we have ‘skin’ in the game and our liberty rights are being violated by this isolation of our loved one.    As I said previously if you look at 11a – 18 the actions of the Sykes defacto GALs in aiding and abetting the isolation is contrary to the statutory mandate.    I reiterate – give me one single factual or legal basis that would even suggest that Mary’s 83 year old sibling should not have frequent unsupervised visitation with Mary free and clear of the prying eyes of the plenary guardian appointed by a Court lacking jurisdiction.
In my opinion what has happened in the Sykes is black letter elder abuse.    The isolation and the drugging are clear examples of elder abuse.       I read that persons required to report ‘elder abuse’ who do not do so are in real trouble.    The best case to demonstrate this elder abuse is the the 18 month deprivation that Gloria suffered.     Gloria is a respected journalist and published author.   Not that the Guardian ad litem has made some defamatory statements concerning Gloria, which were patently untrue, to attempt to justify his role in the isolation of Mary.    He cannot prove any miscreant conduct on the part of Gloria or Aunt Yolanda – nor can anyone else.     Thus, in my opinion his role is at  best disingenuous.    Ms. Farenga has a similar problem.    The plenary guardian cannot justify her position.
That said, the consortium right provides standing to contest the actions of the guardians who act ultra vires to deprive a senior citizen of his/her rights, privileges and immunities.   It also affirms that 11a -17 and 11a -18 are being blatantly violated by Stern, Farenga, CT, and PS by their isolation of Mary.    It is my opinion that in the civil rights lawsuit that is being drafted the consortium damage claim should be added to the 42 USCA 1983 claims.    (As the Sodini requirements were not met and the Tiffany proof requirements were not met, the Court was without jurisdiction and the actions illegal.)     The plaintiffs who were isolated from their siblings or their parents should receive compensation for their loss.
As I mentioned previously Article 1 Section 12 is the Illinois mandate.     (as the Isolation of Mary Sykes continues the Statute of Limitation has not started to run.   watch the statute as to the other cases.     I believe the statute of limitation can vary from State to State on a civil rights action)
Ken Ditkowsky

1 thought on “On isolating senior wrongfully by claiming a beloved friend or relative “aggitates them”

  1. Thank you so much for your article .
    I hope you can proceed with the Federal DOJ , OCR ADA and HHS OCR ADA with loss of consortium .
    As a layperson , The wording i have use In my DOJ & HHS OCR Complaints is Discrimination & violation of Condtitutiom, civil rights , us supreme ct olmstead , 504& 508 rehab act , due process, free association …. ; isolation , segregation , chemical & physical restraints ,
    This has been going on for 4-10 yrs in Ohio and AZ .
    New kid on the NAGSA block in Ohio
    Nancy Vallone Rn Bsn msn Cns
    Nvallone1@gmail.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s