FishingMOM's right on this one. Having been through the 'protective' experience with a public trustee, I can honestly say I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. (Mom had mental problems, public trustee stepped in to protect her assets... kids, what kids, Dad had it worse than being a single parent, and still had to run a business that Mom shared ownership. That business payed the bills.. using money generated by Mom's assets..) Public trustees are akin to Govt Tax Auditors, accountable to no-one, and they can do stuff that is intended to 'enhance' their resume by saving those in need of saving. Watch some W5 type tv shows on the Govt Auditor fiascos and you might get an idea of what can happen... these people have amazing power. In our case, their focus was on Mom's assets, not Mom, not the kids, not the family... maybe you get my drift.. Dad couldn't but toilet paper without the Trustees' approval. FishingMOM probably couldn't get access to the funds to put bracess on the kids teeth or put glasses on his eyes if she needed to. Effectively, the kid doesn't exist until he is 18, but his assets exist and 'must be protected'.. My sympathies FishingMOM. Obviously there are horror stories for the other side, but a Public Trustee is not a 'protective' experience. Sign me BTDT.
|