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

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

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

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

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

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

According to court documents, in the months before she died, she spent her days locked in a chicken-wire “jail cell” and left to sleep in a feces-smeared tent. Her sister, Denise Scriven, and her sister’s husband, Mike Scriven, face charges manslaughter, unlawful confinement, and two counts each of assault. They are due to appear in court July 7/10.

Adapted from the Edmonton Journal June 28/10

There are many unanswered questions in regard to this matter. Was she an AISH recipient? Were they benefitting financially by keeping her in their alleged care? She must have been known to Social Services. Who monitored the care of this person who was known to be dependent & severely handicapped?

Betty Anne Gagnon, 48, was blind and mentally handicapped. She died alone under horrific, unthinkable circumstances. Marilyn Lane, 42, who from childhood suffered from Downs Syndrome, burned to death in an unlicensed, unmonitored Capilano group home. Both, were not under the protection of the Public Guardian or under private guardianship.

However, in our world, we continue to witness an epidemic of persons being detained, placed under guardianship & trusteeship, all in the name of protection and care. It is noteworthy however, that these detained persons are seniors, all of whom have estates and bank accounts, some have massive bank accounts.

Both Gaumont and Lane were penniless, they had no estate. They had no economic value to prospective guardians, not even to government*.

*The Office of the Public Guardian and Public Trustee, does not accept persons who have less than $10,000.

HAND DELIVERED

May 12, 2010

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

The Honourable Ms. M. Jablonski,
Minister of Seniors and Community Supports

The Honourable Mr. Gene Zwozdesky,
Minister of Health and Wellness,

Dr. William Johnston, MD, FRCS (C)
Site Medical Director, U of A Hospital

Dr. Kathleen M. Collinson, Psychiatrist,
Admitting Physician.

Re: Mr. Nelson Struk, 80 yrs. detained University Hospital Emergency Ward.

On Monday evening, May 10, 2010, we received a call for help from Mr. Nelson Struk.

On Tuesday, May 11, 2010 @ 10:30 AM, we were shocked to find Mr. Struk detained in D4, a small, white windowless room, which appeared to be a holding cell. It was dirty and garbage littered the floor. When he requested a pillow, he was given a folded bed sheet. Apparently when he arrived, he was told to strip and told to put on an open backed, open shouldered, IV friendly night gown. At evening he was instructed to take pills /drugs, he refused.

He informed us that early that morning, 5:00AM, he had to go to the Bathroom and had to bang on the locked door until 6:00AM in order to be allowed to go to relieve himself.

This senior is a law abiding Canadian citizen who pays his taxes, was functioning, maintaining his home in impeccable condition, nevertheless, was arrested and stripped of all rights by Edmonton City Police on the behest of a neighbor. Then, professional staff of the University Hospital detained him in a locked, windowless room which had no call bell. Furthermore, he is taking up an active treatment bed, paid for by our tax dollars, that is now not available, for Albertans who need it.

Later that day, Mr. Struk was moved to an emergency room cubicle but continued to be held under close observation by a guard seated next to his emergency room cot.

Shortly, before noon, Dr. Alice Cojocaru, Psychiatrist, asked us to leave because she wished to meet with him. We mentioned to her that he had not been ‘served’, to which she responded, “What is that?”

At 1:35 PM, Mr. Struk inquired of the Charge Nurse as to who was keeping him there. She went to the nursing station and returned and told him it was Dr. Brand/t (phon) and Dr. Chan (phon).

We find it troubling that professional doctors / psychiatrists attend, visit, make consultations, assessments, make life decisions for individuals, strip persons of their rights but fail to give any identification or business card to the client / patient.

When we left the emergency unit at 4:30 PM, Mr. Struk had not been served, pursuant to the Alberta Mental Health Act, RSA 2000 Section 14, (1) (a) & (b) although he had already been detained well over 24 hours.

We submit that this Canadian citizen should be immediately released and have his rights restored.

Thank you.

Respectfully submitted, we would be grateful to be in receipt of your responses in regard to this matter by the 17th of May, 2010.

Yours truly.

Elder Advocates Of Alberta Society

Dr. Brendan Leier, University Hospital Ethicist.

Mr. Tony Vandermeer, Beverly – Clairview, MLA

Mr. Nelson Struk

Letter from EEAS

HAND DELIVERED

May 14, 2010

The Chief of Police, Mr. Mike Boyd,
Edmonton Police Service,
9620 – 103A Ave, Edmonton, Alberta T5H 0H7

Re: Mr. Nelson Struk, 80 yrs. of age, detained Alberta Hospital Edmonton, Unit 12-1

We find it unconscionable that Mr. Struk has again been apprehended by the Edmonton Police Service.

On Monday May 10, 2010, Mr. Struk complained about the vandalism of neighbors and was told , “You are under arrest”, by one of the same Police Officers, Badge 2366, who arrested him last August 3, 2009. May 12, Wednesday evening, he was strapped to a stretcher and transferred by ambulance to Alberta Hospital where he is being detained behind heavy locked doors. He had been retained at U of A for 33 hours where he was never informed (legally served) why or who was holding him there.

In August of last year, he was held under guard at the University of Alberta Hospital Psychiatric Ward for a month, also on the behest of neighbors. When on the second day, he put on his clothes and wanted to leave, security guards were called, he was made to again put on pyjamas and made to take a needle (takedown).

Three days later, August 7, 2009, Dr. Christine Froehlich, Psychiatrist, faxed an Admission Form to Alberta Hospital Edmonton addressed to Dr. Kevin Lawless and Dr. John Andrew McCahill with the intent to have him detained at Alberta Hospital. However a registered nurse became aware that this man was not mentally ill, intervened on his behalf and he was released.

Yesterday evening we viewed the vandalism caused by neighbors @ 3:45 AM on Monday morning. There are those who have made troubling allegations about this unusual, ongoing situation and the vicious treatment accorded this Canadian citizen.

Respectfully submitted, we would be grateful to be in receipt of a response in regard to this matter by the 27st. May, 2010.

Elder Advocates Of Alberta Society

Letter attached – dated May 12, 2010 – 2 pages

cc. The Honourable Mr. Frank Oberle, Solicitor General & Minister of public Security.

Mr. Nelson Struk

Response

Letter

HAND DELIVERED

May 19, 2010

Dr. Brendan Leier
Clinical Ethicist,
Professor Dossetor Health Ethics Center
1F1.56 Walter C Mackenzie Center
8440 112 Street, Edmonton, AB T6G 2B7

Dear Dr. Leier:

Re: Mr. Nelson Struk, 80 yrs. detained 12 (1) Alberta Hospital Edmonton.

Further to our meeting of May 11, 2010, at the U.of A. emergency ward, with the above named Nelson Struk.

The following evening, May 12, 2010, after 7:00 PM, Mr. Struk was strapped to a stretcher and transferred by ambulance to Alberta Hospital where he is being detained behind heavy locked doors. He had been detained under guard at the U.of A. for 33 hours where he was never informed or legally served, why or who was holding him there.

We have been informed that early this morning, Mr. Struk had not yet been served, pursuant to the Alberta Mental Health Act, RSA 2000 Section 14, (1) (a) & (b) although he had already been detained in close detention, well over a week. Physicians and

professional staff of the University Hospital and the Alberta Hospital Edmonton have a duty of disclosure to Mr.Struk, which they have disregarded.

Mr. Struk is a law abiding Canadian citizen who pays his taxes, was maintaining his home and property in impeccable condition. Nevertheless, he was arrested and stripped of all rights by Edmonton City Police at the behest of a neighbor.

What has been done to assist Mr. Struk?

Thank you. Respectfully submitted, we would be grateful to be in receipt of your response in regard to this most troubling matter by the 25th May, 2010.

Yours truly.

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

Letter

HAND DELIVERED

May 15, 2010

Dr. Assad Brahim, MD, Director
Alberta Hospital Edmonton

Dr. Michael Buchinski, Psychiatrist,
Dr. David Richards MD
Alberta Hospital, Edmonton

Ms. Donna Tchida, CEO, Site Director
Alberta Hospital Edmonton

Cognitive Assessments, Nelson Struk, 80 years of age, 12 (1) AB. Hospital Edmonton.

Mr. Struk has already been assessed at the Alberta Hospital Edmonton despite having been assessed a number of times by professional psychiatrists at the University Hospital.

Obviously there are great difficulties with cognitive assessments or professionals would not continue to assess seniors again and again. We have documented a litany of untrustworthy,assessments.

One such example, a professional physician declared a senior to have “no evidence of capacity” and then the senior went on to Norquest College to win an award. In 2006, a gerontology specialist declared a senior to suffer from agnosia, apraxia, alzheimer disease and to be so incompetent that he could not instruct a lawyer. For three years, he was detained in an Alzheimer unit. Last summer, he was moved out of the locked unit into the open area.

It had been a “mistake”. To date, no one has apologized to this Canadian citizen for this grave injustice. Far too many seniors are being unjustly stripped of their rights, money and are being unlawfully detained.

Therefore we submit that any capacity assessment of Nelson Struk be recorded and transcribed. That a Certified Realtime Reporter be present, to transcribe the complete assessment. When completed, the Reporter should as soon as possible, make the certified transcription directly available to Mr. Struk and to his Counsel without delay. If followed, this protocol would protect the integrity of the assessment process.

Furthermore a friend of the senior’s choice should be invited to be in attendance throughout.

Mr. Struk is a citizen, an exemplary man who loves and maintains his impeccable home and yard, pays his taxes and was not costing taxpayers any money.

It is a travesty of injustice that this Canadian senior citizen continues to be held in detention behind locked doors.

An immediate release would be in order.

We shall be awaiting a response and be grateful to be in receipt of your response by the 25th of May 2010.

Respectfully submitted,

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

cc. The Honourable Minister of Health, Mr. Jean Zwozdesky
Mr. Nelson Struk

Letter

May 26, 2010

Dr. Michael Buchinski, Psychiatrist,
Clinical Director Geriatrics, Alberta Hospital, Edmonton

Mr. Nelson Struk, 80 years of age, 12 (1) AB. Hospital Edmonton.

You are detaining Mr. Struk, a law abiding, tax paying citizen behind locked doors and restricting his visitors.

On Thursday, May 20th, having been detained well over a week, he was able to contact a lawyer who spoke strongly to staff giving them a 2:00 PM dead line in regard to service of documents.

Immediately, Mr. Struk was:

1. Given necessary medication for his blood sickness.
2. Served partially, pursuant to the AB. Mental Health Act, Section 14, (1) (a) & (b)
3. Served copy of correspondence which we had hand delivered four days earlier, Sunday, May 16, 2010.
4. Promised a copy of the Review Panel Appeal process by Dr. Robert Granger.

This man has been apprehended by police, locked in a windowless, cement room D4, at the University of Alberta Hospital, then within two days, transported by ambulance to a mental hospital.

Mr. Struk’s forefathers fled the Ukraine, immigrating to Canada, to escape just such tyranny.

Respectfully submitted, we would be grateful to be in receipt of your response in regard to this urgent matter by the 3rd June, 2010.

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

cc. College of Physicians and Surgeons
The Honourable Minister of Health, Mr. Jean Zwozdesky.
Mr. Vandermeeer, MLA
Mr. Peter Goldring, MP
Mr. Nelson Struk

Response

Notes from the Mental Health Act of Alberta

Although the Act appears to have frightening powers to hold you against your will and force you to accept treatments you do not agree to, the Act does have the protection of your rights written into it. First, any apprehension, detention or admission must meet the prescribed steps, or you cannot be held. Second, the Act directly states several of your rights.

You have the right to:

• Information
• Confidentiality
• Communications
• Visitors
• Legal representation
• Refuse treatment
• Appeal
• Have an advocate

Source: Mental Health Act of Alberta [PDF - 12]

Letter

HAND DELIVERED

May 27, 2010

Dr. Bill Johnston Dr. Dylan Taylor
Co-Site Medical Director Co-Site Medical Director
University of Alberta Hospital, University of Alberta Hospital
Stollery Children’s Hospital & Stollery Children’s Hospital &
Mazankowski Alberta Heart Institute Mazankowski Alberta Heart Institute

Office of the Site Medical Directors
1F1.23 Walter C. Mackenzie Center
8440 – 112 Street, Edmonton, AB T6G 2B7

Mr. Nelson Struk, 80 years of age – detained University Hospital D4 & Emergency Ward.

We thank you for your immediate response concerning the detention of Nelson Struk at the University Hospital.

Mr. Struk was apprehended on Monday the 10th of May, 2010 and detained under close observation, first in a locked, windowless cement unit, D4 and then the hospital emergency ward On the evening of Wednesday May 12th, 2010, he was taken by ambulance to the Alberta Hospital Edmonton.

During the time of his detention at the University of Alberta Hospital, Mr. Struk was not served pursuant to the Alberta Mental Health Act, RSA 2000 Section 14, (1) (a) & (b) although he had already been detained well over two days.

Legislation exists to protect the rights of citizens and regulate those who would act unfairly. We submit that there was a serious breach of the Alberta Mental Health Act by professional persons who unlawfully detained Mr. Struk and stripped him, a Canadian citizen, of all rights and even dignity.

Respectfully submitted.

Yours truly.

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

First Apprehension – August 3, 2009

Letter from Mr. Struk

Response

Letter from Mr. Struk

Response

Letter

October 2, 2009

Dr. Helen Frank MD
Long Term Care Center,
Vegreville, AB.

Mr. Courtney Ohlhauser, Public Guardian Officer
Office of the Public Guardian, Red Deer, AB.

Ms. Laurel Wyllie RN, Director of Care
Vegreville Long Term Care Center, Vegreville, AB.

Ms. Michelle Duncan, RPN, Director,
Alberta Mental Health Services,
Camrose, AB.

Re: Helen Tiedeman, Secure Unit, Vegreville Long Term Care Center.

Helen Tiedman has told us this morning that it is one full year since she has been detained. I responded to her that it is October 1, 2009, she replied, “No, October 2nd”. As usual, she is totally oriented to date and time.

Tiedeman continues to be stripped of all rights and unlawfully detained in a locked unit. She is disallowed to even walk down the public sidewalk. When we have encouraged her to take a walk out in the court yard, she has told us, “I am not going to walk around there like a penned up animal”.

She is obviously seriously depressed informing us that she wishes she was dead, suggesting that the lifesaving surgery should not have been performed.
This Alberta senior was gainfully employed for thirty five years, she was a responsible tax paying citizen. Now she is being detained in a locked unit with less rights than a prisoner at the Remand Center. She is being given no money by trustees or guardians.

There are those who disparage her, however there are something like 220 names in her guest book of friends who continue to visit her, months after she has been removed from their midst. The round trip to Vegreville from Tofield takes over an hour and a half.

We submit that if a lodge vacancy comes up and her name is next on the list, she should be immediately placed.

It is unconscionable that professionals, public advocates and other caregivers have been aware of this unjust situation and to date nothing has been done to rectify this troubling situation.

Thank you.

We shall be awaiting your reply and be grateful to be in receipt of
such reply by the 15th of October, 2009.

Elder Advocates Of Alberta Society

cc. The Honourable Ms. Mary Anne Jablonski, Minister Seniors and Community
Support Services

Ms. Barb Martini, Director Public Guardian Office, St. Paul. Alberta.

Ms. Helen Tiedeman

Response

Letter

March 8, 2010

REGISTERED MAIL

Mrs Vera (John) Heitman
Mr. Ralph Tiedemann
51318 Range Road 212
5135 52 Avenue
Sherwood Park, AB. T8G 1G1
Viking, AB. T0B 4N0

Reference: Helen Tiedemann

Many individuals, especially from the Tofield area, are strongly aware that it has caused great distress to Helen Tiedemannn, (over whom you hold guardianship and trusteeship), to have been detained for close to two years.

For a whole year, she was detained in a locked unit with individuals who suffer from advanced cognitive impairment. Some of these persons who cannot communicate, wandered into her room causing her to keep her door closed, even locked, especially at night to protect herself from demented,helpless persons.

For close to eight of those months, October 2008 to May 2009, she was totally restricted to this locked unit, like a maximum security prisoner. After a year, October 2009, she was moved out of the secure unit, but is restricted to three outings a week. All this has been devastating for her.

She has told us that she has an organ which she bought after she was working.When we asked her who taught her how to play, she told us that she taught herself. We all know how she loves music.

We urge you to return her organ to her. The organ may help to ameliorate her difficult existence and alleviate her daily expressed anguish and distress of being detained and away from community and friends. And we trust that this terrible inequity which has been wrought against her, will soon be brought to an equitable close. Thank you.

We would be grateful to be in receipt of your response by March 14th, 2010. Thank you.

Yours truly,

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

cc. Ms. Helen Tiedemann
The Honourable Minister of Seniors, Mrs. M. Jablonski
Ms. Brenda Lee Doyle, Director, Office of the Public Guardian

Letter

March 15, 2010

HAND DELIVERED

The Honourable Premier, Mr. Ed Stelmach,
Legislature Building, Edmonton, AB.T5K 2B6
MLA Fort Saskatchewan – Vegrevile

CONSTITUENT – Helen Tiedemann, 4832 57 Avenue, Tofield, AB.
Now a wrongly detained two year Resident Long Term Care Center, Vegreville, AB.

Dear Mr. Premier:

Helen Tiedemann worked for thirty five years at the Tofield Hospital. Day after day, month after month, she faithfully served the community. Then after a heart attack and a pacer implant, she was placed under guardianship and trusteeship despite the fact that she had not been negatively affected by the heart attack. She was assessed as incompetent and stripped of all rights and money by Dr. N. Flook and Social Worker Elizabeth Gottschalk, at the Misericordia Hospital. Helen then, was detained for two months at the Tofield Hospital and then eight months in the Vegreville Care Center, locked dementia unit, maximum security, never allowed to leave the locked unit. Nor did her Guardians ever take her out. After an outcry from the senior’s community (Tofield) , she was reassessed and found to have been wrongly assessed and wrongly placed. However her Guardians did not move her out of the locked unit for an entire year until we intervened by means of a complaint.

In the Fall of 2004, prior to these happenings, she had put in her name at the Tofield Senior Citizens Lodge. She gave her name and Forms (filled out and signed by Dr. Richard Hackett), to Jan Valliere, Lodge manager. Helen told us that when she was in the Tofield Hospital in May 2008, she inquired of Dr. Hackett if he remembered filling out those Forms for her, he said he did. The Application had been accepted by Valliere. Now, Valliere is denying access to Helen.

On October 1, 2008, @ 1:30 PM, seven persons of the Elder Advocates of Alberta Society met at the Tofield Lodge with the Lodge manager, Jan Valliere and a Lodge Board member, Bob Young to discuss the matter of Helen being admitted to the Tofield Lodge. At the said meeting, Valliere stated she would not accept Helen, she did not appear to be willing to discuss the matter. She said a vote had been taken.

During the meeting, duration of about an hour, Valliere said unkind things about Helen Tiedemann, which could be considered defamatory in that we were complete strangers.

When at the meeting I stated that Helen often phones me, Bob Young commented he would have her phone taken from her (paraphrased).

We have inquired as to the professional/ educational status of the lodge manager and have learned that Valliere was a long time employee of the lodge prior to becoming manager, possibly doing the same kind of work that Helen Tiedemann carried out at the Tofield Hospital for long years.

We find it disturbing and irresponsible that both Ms. Valliere and Mr. Young spoke in a derogatory manner about this senior citizen. Perhaps they are not well suited to be in the care of elderly persons.

This is a public, tax supported facility and Valliere has assumed power to determine who will reside in the lodge and who will not. We have also learned that Valliere is a good friend of Helen’s Guardian (see attached letter). Also, a nephew of the Guardian is on the lodge board.

This is a human rights issue. Helen has been horrifically abused by the system and presently is acting out against those who are imprisoning her. She continues to be detained at the Vegreville Long Term Care Center although she does not require long term care. She is distressed and angry. She is suffering. She has been abused and continues to be abused.

As her MLA, we urge you to go to bat for Helen and assure her, her right to return to her home in Tofield where she faithfully worked and served for many years and allow her to live out her days in peace and comfort. This is a public facility and she has a right to be there. Thank you.

Respectfully submitted, we would be grateful to be in receipt of your response in regard to this urgent matter by the 1st. April, 2010. Thank you.

Yours truly,

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

Att: Correspondence addressed to Guardians of Helen Tiedemann 12/ 03/ 10
cc. Helen Tiedemann

Response

Letter

April 20, 2010

VIA FACSIMILE 780 415 8611

Complaints Officer, Ms. Charlotte La Rose
Complaint under the Adult Guardianship and Trusteeship Act (AGTA)
Re: Guardians and trustees of Helen Tiedemann

Mrs Vera (John) Heitman
Mr. Ralph Tiedemann
51318 Range Road 212
5135 52 Avenue
Sherwood Park, AB. T8G 1G1 Viking, AB. T0B 4N0

Reference: Helen Tiedemann, 4832 57 Avenue, Tofield, AB.

A wrongly detained two year Resident of Long Term Care Center, Vegreville, AB.

We thank you for your correspondence of April 15, 2010. You again state that our correspondence of March 8, 2010 was received on March 25, 2010. If you check the faxed date on our fax letter, you will see that your office must have received said letter on March 8, 2010. A that time, you called us an hour later questioning whether it was a two or three page letter and therefore we re-faxed the letter. We find it somewhat troubling that you have no recall of your phone call to us.

Further to the matter of Helen Tiedemann. The office of the Public Guardian has been made aware of this abusive situation since its’ beginning. Helen has informed us that, in May 2008, after she after was discharged from the Misericordia Hospital and detained at the Tofield Hospital, she was totally denied all rights by her guardians. She was disallowed to attend “anywhere”, (community functions or even attend church). She was held as a virtual, maximum security prisoner.

An appeal was made to the Office of the Public Guardian, May 2008 by Leony Gomez and Pastor Kevin of the Lutheran Church. A meeting was held in the Family Room of the Tofield Hospital. Mr. Courtney Ohlhauser, Public Guardian representative was in attendance. At that meeting, a list was made of some of the functions Helen would be allowed to attend such as floor curling at the Mennonite church, church attendance at her own church, etc. and from thereon, she was allowed to attend those functions while she remained at the Tofield Hospital.

However, when in October 2008, the guardians moved Helen Tiedemann to a locked unit of the Vegreville Care Center, the guardians again curtailed all her rights and held her in total lockdown, not allowed to leave the facility. Nursing staff were the enforcers.

Early in 2009, we, the Elder Advocates of Alberta Society, were widely publicizing the unjust Adult Guardianship and Trusteeship Act. Many Citizens of Tofield and area became aware of this legislation and began calling us to say that they knew of a person from their community who was being denied, all rights and being wrongly detained. They told us of Helen Tiedemann who was being detained in a locked unit.

Not because of us, but because of the outcry by persons in the Tofield and surrounding Area, Helen was reassessed in June 2009 and was found to have been improperly placed. The first assessment at the Misericordia Hospital was found to be in serious error. However, her guardians continued to detain her in the locked unit.

On October 2, 2009, we made a telephone appeal to the Office of the Public Guardian, Courtney Ohlhauser, 1-403 3405564. He said was not prepared to do anything to ameliorate Helen’s bizarre situation.

On October 2, 2008, we also made a written appeal to Mr. Ohlhauser which was also made to:

Dr. Helen Frank MD, Helen’s physician at the Care Center.
Ms. Laurel Wyllie RN, Director of Care, Vegreville Long Term Care Center,
Ms. Michelle Duncan, RPN, Director, Alberta Mental Health Services, Camrose, AB.

This correspondence was copied to:

Honourable Ms. Mary Anne Jablonski, Minister Seniors and Community Support Services and

Ms. Barb Martini, Director Public Guardian Office, St. Paul. Alberta.

The only person who responded to this appeal was Dr. Helen Frank, her faxed letter of October 15, 2009 strongly stated:

“We at the Vegreville Care Facility agree that Ms. Tiedemann’s placement with us is inappropriate”.

Dr. Frank then restates: “…we agree that Ms. Tiedemann was placed inappropriately and if you could aid in her being placed somewhere else, we would greatly appreciate it”.

We have also made several complaints to the Protection For Persons in Care (PPCA). After an October 2009 complaint to the PPCA abuse line concerning a staff caregiver, within days, she was moved out of the locked unit into the long term care but continued to be severely restricted to three outings a week. Only five persons could take her out, not even her beloved Pastor who visited her and made the hour and a half drive from Tofield. If on a Sunday she was taken to Tofield for a church service, she had to be back at the locked unit by 2:30 PM. Why?

We have also made a lengthy appeal on her behalf, to her MLA, the Honourable Premier, Mr. Ed. Stelmach. His Office has been given misinformation by the Office of the Public Guardian who apparently have said that the Guardianship Applicants are affiliated with us.

On March 1, 2010, two persons from the Tofield Lutheran church made Application to the Surrogate Court, Queen’s Bench for the guardianship and Trusteeship of Helen Tiedemann. The Court dismissed the Application, twice applauded the performance of the present Guardians and seized the file. Brenda Feehan of Family law,representing the Office of the Public Guardian was asked to address the court.She recommended to the court, that Helen have another assessment.

Two failed assessments and a CAT scan. Now there is a call for another major assessment! An assessment which may cost Helen her hard earned dollars anywhere from $5,000. to $7,500. For what?

She is frightened of another assessment and so she should be. We have a litany of documented, wrongful assessments, of seniors who have been stripped of all access to their money and rights. The account of Flora L’Heureux who year after year,assessment upon assessment was denied her rights despite attending Norquest College and winning an award. Inga Dorcea Sondrup, and others come to mind.

One Albertan, was locked up for three years with severely, cognitively impaired persons in a secure unit until he was released this past summer.He had been diagnosed with Alzheimer disease in 2006 and many times was told by his family’s that he was being detained because he had Alzheimers. In the locked unit caregivers told him that he did not belong there.

That senior had been assessed twelve times in sixteen months by physicians /psychiatrists/ psychologists / professors of Gerontology, who had signed either a Form 1, a certificate, a Personal Directive Form 2 or letter after having allegedly assessed the cognitive state of this man.

In another matter, a physician wrote ‘Alzheimer Disease’ on a senior’s driving document. On the behest of a son, the elderly man was apprehended by the RCMP, and detained for a month in an active treatment hospital. A lawyer intervened and he was freed. However on discharge, despite having been assessed many times while in hospital, and the assessors having been unable to declare him incompetent while in hospital, the attending physician / gerontologist, made him promise he would attend at an appointment for a major psycho-neurological assessment, which she had made for him at Glenrose Hospital.

Another senior was detained in the dayroom of a Calgary active treatment hospital for a year.There was a sign on the window of the dayroom to not close the venetian blinds. It took $10,000 in legal fees to free him and return him his access to his money.

A lady who speaks three languages, but poor English, who does not read or write English, failed an assessment and is confined in a hovel 6’1/2′ by 11′. She had come to hospital for care and was never allowed to leave because she was subjected to a competency assessment which of course she failed. She had been functioning well in the community, paid her bills, her taxes, planted a huge garden.

These accounts constitute not only horrific abuse but are criminal acts perpetrated against Canadian citizens.

We submit that the process of assessing competency is a pseudo science and could be perceived as an industry, a lucrative, non-regulated industry.

Helen, does not belong in a long term care space. She pays approximately $1,700 for room and board and could be well placed in the community for that money. She begs to return to her home and personnel community, Tofield.

We reiterate in recent months she often states “I can’t take it anymore”. She also says, “I want to go to my grave”.

The Office of the Public Guardian has been aware of this abusive situation since the very beginning.

This is a shameful, shocking story happening in Canada, an alleged democratic state. As noted, the plight of Helen Tiedemann is not an isolated incident.

Yours truly,

Elder Advocates Of Alberta Society

P.S. Today we had encouraged Helen to go out for a walk. She just told me, that when she attempted to go, she was stopped at the door. Why? She is to be allowed out only in the fenced courtyard. She refuses to go in the courtyard, says she feels like a penned animal there. She desperately needs that exercise not only for better body but better frame of mind.

Honourable Ms. M. Jablonski, Minister of Seniors and Community Supports
Mr. Robert Bhatia BA, Deputy Minister, Seniors and Community Supports

Letter

April 21, 2010

VIA FACSIMILE 780 415 8611

Complaints Officer, Ms. Charlotte La Rose
Complaint under the Adult Guardianship and Trusteeship Act (AGTA)
Re: Guardians and trustees of Helen Tiedemann

Mrs Vera (John) Heitman Mr. Ralph Tiedemann
51318 Range Road 212
5135 52 Avenue
Sherwood Park, AB. T8G 1G1
Viking, AB. T0B 4N0

Reference: Helen Tiedemann, 4832 57 Avenue, Tofield, AB.
A wrongly detained Resident of Long Term Care Center, Vegreville, AB.

Dear Madam:

Further to our correspondence of yesterday, April 20, 2010, we wish to add a copy of correspondence that was sent by registered mail to the guardians and copied to Brenda Lee Doyle, Director of the Office of the Public Guardian.

We reiterate, that the Office of the Public Guardian, on numerous occasions, was made aware of the horrific abuse of Helen Tiedemann. As a matter of fact it is deeply troubling that also numbers of professionals have been made aware of this situation and to date, nothing has changed. Everyone is on the taxpayer payroll, but no remedy is forthcoming.

The Guardians, on receipt of our March 8, 2010 letter, immediately announced to Helen that she could have many more rights. However, yesterday when she wished to go for a walk around the block, she was stopped at the door by a PCA.

This is a shameful, shocking story happening in Canada, an alleged democratic state. As noted in yesterday’s letter, the plight of Helen Tiedemann is not an isolated incident, the violation of the rights of seniors is epidemic.

Yours truly,

Elder Advocates Of Alberta Society

Attn: Letter to Vera Heitman & Ralph Tiedemann, March 8, 2010, copied to Office of Public Guardian, Brenda Lee Doyle

Letter

April 21, 2010

Mrs Vera (John) Heitman
Mr. Ralph Tiedemann
51318 Range Road 212
5135 52 Avenue
Sherwood Park, AB. T8G 1G1
Viking, AB. T0B 4N0

Reference: Helen Tiedemann

We speak in defense of vulnerable seniors and therefore have interest in this matter.

Yesterday, April 20, 2010, during a phone conversation with Helen, we encouraged Helen to go out for a walk. Apparently after Bingo, because it was a lovely day, she took her walker and prepared to go for a small walk. She informed me, that when she attempted to go, she was stopped at the door. Why?

Have you put out a directive / instructed staff, that she is not allowed to go for a walk? Obviously, she was under the impression that she was free to go.

An LPN then told her she is to be allowed out only in the fenced courtyard. She refuses to go in the courtyard, she says she feels like a penned animal there.

Helen desperately needs that exercise not only for healthier body but also for better frame of mind.

Please clarify this matter for us and for Helen. Thank you.

We would be grateful to be in receipt of your response by May 7th, 2010.

Yours truly,

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

cc.
Ms. Charlotte LaRose, Complaints Officer, Adult Guardianship and Trusteeship Act
Ms. Brenda Lee Doyle, Director, Office of the Public Guardian

Response

Letter

July 28, 2010

Mr. Rod Urquijo, Capacity Assessment Policy Analyst,
Office of the Public Guardian, Acting Adult Guardianship & Trusteeship Act Complaints Investigator,

Ms. Brenda Lee Doyle, Director, Office of the Public Guardian
Ms. Charlotte LaRose, Complaints Officer, Adult Guardianship and Trusteeship Act
Ms. Barb Martini, Director Public Guardian Office, St. Paul, AB.

Re: Guardians of Helen Tiedemann, Vegreville Long Term Care Center, Vegreville AB.
Mrs Vera (John) Heitman Mr. Ralph Tiedemann

Helen Tiedemann is being disabled. She is not being allowed to leave the facility for a walk.

Is this is a deliberate intent to handicap and immobilize her?

Presently she cannot walk, without the aid of a walker from bed to bathroom. She sits on her bed all the time. This is a woman who 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. Her Guardians, Vera and Ralph have said that she cannot walk safely on the sidewalk. We therefore submit options:

1. Come and take her for a walk which to this date, they have never done.
2. Hire someone to do so. After all, the guardians are spending thousands of dollars of Helen’s hard earned money on lawyers, courts and lengthy cognitive assessments.

It is inhumane what is happening 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”. It is unspeakably cruel what you are allowing the guardians to do to her. 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”. We urge your immediate intervention in this matter. We would be grateful to be in receipt of your response by August 10, 2010.

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

Response

Letter

April 15, 2010

Via Facsimile 780 427 1349

The Honourable Premier, Mr. Ed Stelmach,
Legislature Building, Edmonton, ABT5K 2B6
MLA Fort Saskatchewan – Vegrevile

Attention Ms. Donna Rogers, Constituency Assistant

CONSTITUENT – Helen Tiedemann, 4832 57 Avenue, Tofield, AB.
Wrongly detained Resident of the Long Term Care Center, Vegreville, AB.

Dear Madam:

Further to our telephone conversation of Tuesday, April 13, 2010. You stated to us that the Office of the Public Guardian had indicated to you that the Applicants for Guardianship and Trusteeship in the Tiedemann matter were part of the Elder Advocates of Alberta Society. Please call us to clarify exactly what information was given to you in order that we may make an objection to the Public Guardian Office in regard to this apparent misinformation.

Has the Premier been made aware of the horrific abuse that his constituent has suffered and continues to suffer? Has he read our letter of Appeal?

Thank you for your assistance in this matter.

Yours truly.

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

Att: Correspondence addressed to Guardians of Helen Tiedemann 12/ 03/ 10

cc. Helen Tiedemann

Response

HAND DELIVERED

February 26, 2010

Dr. William Dickout, Medical Director
Dr. N. Dean, MD
Dr. Gary Goldsand, Clinical Ethicist
Ms. Rebecca Fagan BA, Bsc, RSW
Ms. Paulette Stayco RN, Ward Manager,
Royal Alexandra Hospital, Edmonton.
1240 Kingsway Avenue, Edmonton, AB T5H 3V9

We find it troubling that seniors are being detained in active treatment beds.

Many are given little or no nursing care. They have no recreation, they are never taken out of doors and are not allowed to leave the ward for a cup of coffee. No one speaks to them, they are given little or no mental stimulation but spend their days in a poorly lit, somewhat less than pleasant room. We have been told that often the rooms are cold and the beds are ill fitting and uncomfortable. We have learned that it is ‘policy’ to keep these seniors clothed in pyjamas. In a number of instances, they are being closely guarded, by security guards/ or staff posted at the door.

Seniors are not being served with the documents which are keeping them detained, in breach of legislation. Family members, even lawyers have been denied access to documents. We have a document from a Capitol Health employee which informed a lawyer that documents would not be released.

Criminals at the Remand center are given full disclosure as to why they are being detained. Professional doctors, nurses, social workers all cooperate in this bizarre process.

One senior who had been detained for a month, finally was released after we retained a lawyer for him. The lawyer told ward staff that they had no right to hold him. They didn’t. But if a lawyer had not intervened, he might still be detained. The gentleman was able to return to his warm comfortable home and bed.

They paid their taxes, they have had no conflict with the law. They are taking up active treatment beds, paid for by tax dollars, that should be available for sick Albertans.

We would be grateful to be in receipt of a response in regard to our concerns by the 10th, of March, 2010. Thank you.

Yours truly,

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

Response

Letter

HAND DELIVERED

May 26, 2010

Mr. Gene Zwozdesky, the Honourable Minister of Health & Wellness,
Dr. William Dickout, MD, Medical Director
Dr. N.Dean, MD, Unit # 53
Dr. Gary Goldsand, Clinical Ethicist,
Royal Alexandra Hospital, Edmonton.
1240 Kingsway Avenue, Edmonton, AB T5H 3V9

Dear Sirs:

Reference – Mr. Peter Radesh

Further to our correspondence of March 18, 2010, we continue to find it troubling that seniors are being detained in active treatment beds at the Royal Alexandria Hospital.

On December 3, 2009, Mr. Radesh entered hospital for care and has never again been allowed to leave.

Why is Mr. Radesh being held under guard on Station 5309 # 2 since December 3rd, 2009?

Why is he never allowed to leave the unit? He is being given virtually no nursing care, is provided no recreation. He is never taken out of doors and not allowed to leave the ward for a cup of coffee.

He is being given little or no mental stimulation but spends his days in a poorly lit, somewhat less than pleasant room. He is being closely guarded, by security guards/ or staff posted at the door.

He has been declared a confidential patient.

We submit that Mr Radesh is being detained under Section # 89, of the Adult Guardianship and Trusteeship Act, which allowed a Royal Alexandria Hospital physician, probably Dr. N. Dean to appoint a Decision Maker who has power to deny Peter Radesh all his rights.

We would be grateful to be in receipt of a response in regard to our concerns by the 15th of June, 2010. Thank you.

Yours truly,

Elder Advocates of Alberta Society

cc. Mr. Peter Radesh