The Hidden Cost of Guardianship: When Protection Becomes Control

An investigative look into how America’s legal system meant to protect vulnerable seniors too often strips them of autonomy, dignity, and wealth

The Silent Crisis Facing America’s Aging Population

When 76-year-old Eleanor Washburn handed her son Thomas power of attorney after her husband’s death, she thought she was ensuring her financial security and peace of mind in her golden years. The retired school teacher from Vermont had always been methodical and forward-thinking. Despite a mild heart condition, she was independent, sharp-witted, and determined to age with dignity in the home she had shared with her husband for over four decades.

“Mom has always been the planner in the family,” Thomas Washburn told our investigative team. “She organized everything from family vacations to my father’s medical care during his final years. It was completely in character for her to have her affairs in order.”

What Eleanor couldn’t plan for was how quickly her careful arrangements would unravel—not because of her health or cognitive decline, but because of a little-known legal mechanism that affects an estimated 1.3 million Americans: adult guardianship.

Eleanor’s journey into the shadowy world of court-appointed guardianships began innocuously enough. After a minor fall resulted in a brief hospital stay, her daughter-in-law Melissa—Thomas’s wife of six years—suggested that Eleanor move in with them “temporarily” while she regained her strength. Viewing it as a practical short-term solution and touched by the offer, Eleanor agreed.

“It seemed like the sensible thing to do at the time,” Eleanor explained during our interview at the modest one-bedroom apartment where she now lives—far from the spacious Colonial home she once owned. “I never imagined I was walking into a trap that would cost me nearly everything.”

The Perfect Storm: Family Dynamics, Legal Vulnerabilities, and Financial Incentives

Adult guardianship—also called conservatorship in some states—is a legal arrangement designed to protect individuals deemed incapable of managing their own affairs. A judge appoints a guardian to make personal, medical, and financial decisions for the “ward”—the person placed under guardianship. In theory, this system exists to protect vulnerable adults. In practice, experts warn it can be weaponized to exploit the very people it claims to safeguard.

“We’re seeing an alarming trend of unnecessary and exploitative guardianships, particularly involving seniors with assets,” explains Dr. Naomi Levin, director of the Elder Justice Initiative at Columbia University. “The legal threshold for imposing guardianship varies widely from state to state, but once established, it’s extraordinarily difficult to reverse—even when there’s compelling evidence of abuse or exploitation.”

For Eleanor, the nightmare began three months into her stay at Thomas and Melissa’s home. What started as occasional comments about Eleanor’s medication management (“Mom, did you forget your pills again?”) escalated to more serious accusations about her decision-making abilities.

“I noticed Melissa would exaggerate any normal senior moment I had,” Eleanor recalled. “If I misplaced my reading glasses, she’d exchange meaningful looks with Thomas. If I took an afternoon nap, she’d comment about how I was ‘confused all the time now.'”

According to Eleanor, the narrative being constructed around her supposed decline coincided with increasing questions about her financial assets—particularly her mortgage-free home valued at approximately $675,000 and her investment portfolio worth just over $1.2 million.

“Melissa began suggesting I should sell the house since I was ‘never going back there,'” Eleanor said. “When I resisted, saying I wanted to return to my home once I felt stronger, the atmosphere in their house became noticeably chilly.”

Thomas, who had initially supported his mother’s independence, gradually aligned with his wife’s assessment of the situation. “I started to worry when Thomas began referring to my ‘confusion’ too,” Eleanor explained. “It was as if they were reading from the same script, documenting every normal forgetful moment as evidence of dementia.”

Dr. Carlton Richards, a geriatric psychiatrist who reviewed Eleanor’s case for our investigation, notes this pattern is consistent with what elder law attorneys call “grooming the record”—creating a paper trail of supposed incompetence to justify legal intervention.

“What many people don’t realize is how easily common age-related changes can be pathologized,” Dr. Richards explained. “Needing a nap, occasionally forgetting where you put something, or taking a moment to recall a name—these are normal experiences that can be weaponized to suggest cognitive decline, especially when presented selectively to healthcare providers or judges.”

The Legal Machinery Activates

The situation escalated when Eleanor announced her intention to return to her own home. Three days after expressing this desire, she found herself being evaluated by a physician she had never met before—arranged by Thomas and Melissa without her prior knowledge.

“This doctor asked me odd questions, like who the president was and what year it was,” Eleanor recalled. “I answered everything correctly, but he seemed more interested in Melissa’s accounts of my ‘confusion’ than in my actual responses.”

Two weeks later, Eleanor was served with legal papers. Thomas, with Melissa by his side, had petitioned the court for emergency guardianship over his mother, citing concerns about her “rapidly deteriorating cognitive state” and “inability to make sound financial decisions.” The petition specifically mentioned Eleanor’s “irrational insistence” on returning to her home to live alone.

“I was blindsided,” Eleanor said, her voice breaking even now, nearly three years after the fact. “My own son was telling a court I was incompetent. The papers made me sound like I had advanced dementia.”

This scenario is far from uncommon, according to Maria Reynolds, an attorney specializing in elder law with the National Elder Rights Center. “Emergency guardianship petitions are particularly problematic because they often move forward with minimal evidence and limited due process,” Reynolds explained. “They’re designed for truly urgent situations, but we’ve seen them abused as a tactical move to catch the alleged incapacitated person off guard.”

Within 48 hours of the petition being filed, Eleanor found herself in a courtroom, where a judge appointed a temporary guardian—not Thomas, as he had requested, but a professional guardian named Patricia Harwood. The judge also ordered a comprehensive evaluation of Eleanor’s capacity and scheduled a full hearing for the following month.

“I thought, ‘Good, now a neutral professional will see that I’m perfectly competent,'” Eleanor recalled. “I had no idea that this was just the beginning of a Kafkaesque nightmare.”

The Guardian System: Following the Money

While professional guardians like Patricia Harwood are ostensibly appointed to protect vulnerable individuals from exploitation, critics argue the system itself creates perverse financial incentives. Guardians typically charge hourly rates of $100-250 for their services, all paid from the assets of the person under guardianship—often with minimal court oversight.

In Eleanor’s case, Harwood immediately took control of her finances, including access to her bank accounts, investment portfolio, and the ability to make decisions about her home.

“The first thing Ms. Harwood did was inform me that she would be billing my estate $175 per hour, including travel time and phone calls,” Eleanor said. “The second thing she did was tell me I couldn’t return to my home because she hadn’t assessed it for ‘safety.'”

Within the first month of her appointment, Harwood had billed Eleanor’s estate for nearly $14,000—all before the court had even made a final determination about whether a guardianship was necessary.

“The temporary guardian had complete control over my life and my money, despite the fact that there had been no finding that I actually needed a guardian,” Eleanor explained. “And every time I objected or asked questions, it was treated as further evidence of my supposed incapacity.”

Dr. Levin explains that this catch-22 is endemic to the guardianship system: “When wards object to their treatment, it’s often characterized as ‘resistance’ or ‘lack of insight’—further ‘proof’ that the guardianship is necessary. It’s a nearly perfect system for silencing dissent.”

The Questionable Evaluation Process

The capacity evaluation ordered by the court should have been Eleanor’s opportunity to demonstrate her competence. Instead, it became another bewildering chapter in her ordeal.

Eleanor was evaluated by Dr. Julian Mercer, a neuropsychologist selected by the guardian. According to records reviewed by our team, Dr. Mercer spent approximately two hours with Eleanor, administering various cognitive tests.

“He asked me to draw a clock, remember sequences of numbers, and identify pictures of objects,” Eleanor recalled. “I felt like I did well, but he never told me how I performed or what his conclusions were.”

What Eleanor didn’t know was that Dr. Mercer had multiple phone conversations with Thomas and Melissa before the evaluation—a fact disclosed in the billing records but not in his final report. The evaluation also heavily weighted input from Thomas and Melissa about Eleanor’s daily functioning, while minimizing Eleanor’s own account of her capabilities.

Dr. Richards, who reviewed the evaluation methodology, noted several procedural concerns: “The evaluation appears to have placed excessive weight on informant reports from family members who had a clear conflict of interest, while dismissing the subject’s own reports as ‘lacking insight.’ This creates a fundamentally biased assessment.”

The neuropsychologist’s final report concluded that Eleanor suffered from “mild to moderate cognitive impairment” and “impaired executive function” that rendered her “vulnerable to financial exploitation” and “unable to make sound decisions regarding her living situation.”

Armed with this report, the temporary guardian petitioned for permanent guardianship. At the subsequent hearing, Eleanor found herself facing an impossible battle.

“I had hired my own attorney, but the judge seemed dismissive of our arguments,” Eleanor said. “When I tried to speak for myself, I was told to let my attorney handle it. When my attorney argued that one medical opinion wasn’t sufficient, the judge cited the ’emergency nature’ of the situation. It felt like the decision had been made before we even entered the courtroom.”

Despite testimony from Eleanor’s longtime physician that he had observed no significant cognitive decline and Eleanor’s own articulate self-advocacy, the judge granted the petition for permanent guardianship, with Patricia Harwood appointed as both guardian of person (controlling where Eleanor lived and her medical decisions) and estate (controlling all financial matters).

Within weeks, Eleanor’s life was completely transformed—against her will and contrary to her carefully made plans.

The Systematic Dismantling of a Life

With the guardianship in place, the dismantling of Eleanor’s carefully built life proceeded with startling efficiency.

First came the decision about Eleanor’s living arrangements. Despite her repeated expressions of wanting to return to her own home, Guardian Harwood determined that Eleanor should be placed in an assisted living facility, claiming her house “could not be made safe for independent living.”

“No one even visited my home to assess it,” Eleanor pointed out. “The decision was made based entirely on my age and the guardian’s assumptions.”

Next came the liquidation of assets. Without consulting Eleanor, Harwood listed her home for sale, engaged a company to auction most of her personal possessions, and began restructuring her investment portfolio—incurring fees and tax consequences that reduced the overall value of Eleanor’s estate.

“I begged her not to sell the house,” Eleanor said. “That home represented 45 years of memories with my husband. Every corner of it held part of our history together.”

Nevertheless, the house was sold for $645,000—somewhat below market value due to what was described as an “expedited timeline” for the sale. Eleanor was permitted to select only a few personal items to keep; the rest were sold at auction or donated.

The financial toll of the guardianship mounted with alarming speed. Court records obtained by our investigation revealed that in the first year of guardianship alone:

• Guardian Harwood billed 237 hours at $175/hour ($41,475)
• Legal fees for the guardian’s attorney totaled $28,350
• The neuropsychologist’s evaluation cost $3,200
• The court investigator charged $2,850
• The assisted living facility cost $78,000 annually
• Various administrative fees, including property management, appraisals, and filings, added another $14,000

In total, the first year of guardianship depleted Eleanor’s estate by approximately $167,875—not including the reduced value from the expedited home sale and tax consequences from liquidating long-held investments.

“The system is devouring my life’s savings,” Eleanor observed. “At this rate, despite having been financially secure, I’ll be impoverished within a decade.”

Perhaps most disturbingly, Eleanor’s relationship with her son deteriorated dramatically once the guardianship was established.

“After the guardian was appointed, Thomas visited less and less frequently,” Eleanor said. “It’s as if once he realized he wouldn’t control my assets directly, he lost interest in the whole situation.”

Thomas and Melissa declined multiple requests to be interviewed for this article. Through their attorney, they stated only that they “acted out of genuine concern for Eleanor’s wellbeing” and “support the court’s determination regarding her needs.”

The Larger Pattern: Eleanor’s Story Is Not Unique

Eleanor’s experience, while heartbreaking, reflects a pattern that elder rights advocates have been warning about for years. The U.S. Government Accountability Office has identified significant concerns about the guardianship system, noting that “we found hundreds of allegations of physical abuse, neglect and financial exploitation by guardians in 45 states and the District of Columbia between 1990 and 2010.”

More recently, a 2018 study by the National Center for State Courts estimated that guardians control over $50 billion in assets nationwide, with minimal oversight in many jurisdictions.

“The guardianship system in America represents one of the most complete deprivations of civil liberties allowed under the law,” explained Dr. Sam Sugar, founder of Americans Against Abusive Probate Guardianship. “Once you’re under guardianship, you typically lose the right to vote, marry, choose where to live, make medical decisions, manage your property, or even choose who you associate with. You effectively become a non-person in the eyes of the law.”

What makes cases like Eleanor’s particularly concerning is that she, by all objective measures, did not fit the profile of someone needing this extreme intervention. Before the guardianship, she had:

• No diagnosed cognitive impairment
• A comprehensive estate plan including advance directives
• A decades-long relationship with her primary physician
• A strong social network in her community
• No history of financial mismanagement
• Clear and consistent expressions of her wishes

Yet none of these factors prevented the guardianship machine from activating and overwhelming her autonomy.

Dr. Levin notes this reveals a fundamental flaw in how we approach elder care: “As a society, we’ve created a binary where older adults are either completely independent or need to surrender total control. There’s very little recognition of the vast middle ground where most seniors actually exist—capable of making their own decisions but perhaps benefiting from targeted support in specific areas.”

Fighting Back: Eleanor’s Ongoing Battle

Three years into her guardianship, Eleanor continues to fight for restoration of her rights. Now 79, she has been forced to adapt to life in an assisted living facility where most residents have far more significant impairments than she does.

“I volunteer in the facility’s library and help other residents with technology because I’m perfectly capable,” she said. “The staff often ask me to assist with activities because they can see I’m not cognitively impaired. It’s ridiculous that I can help care for others but am not permitted to make decisions about my own life.”

Eleanor has undergone two subsequent evaluations by neuropsychologists she selected independently, both of whom found her to be cognitively intact and capable of managing her affairs with minimal support. Despite these findings, her petitions for termination of guardianship have been denied.

“The court seems extremely reluctant to admit a mistake might have been made,” said Jonathan Miller, Eleanor’s current attorney. “There’s an institutional bias toward maintaining guardianships once they’re established, even when the evidence supports termination.”

Miller notes that judges often defer to the original guardian’s opinion about the ward’s capacity—creating another problematic conflict of interest.

“Ask yourself: What professional guardian is going to eagerly agree that their services—and the significant fees they generate—are no longer necessary?” Miller pointed out.

Nevertheless, Eleanor remains determined. Her latest strategy involves a limited guardianship proposal, which would restore some of her rights while maintaining oversight in specific areas.

“At this point, I’m willing to compromise just to get some of my autonomy back,” Eleanor explained. “I know I may never see my home again or recover the possessions that were sold, but I want to be able to decide where I live, how I spend my money, and who I associate with.”

Preventing Guardian Abuse: Expert Recommendations

For those concerned about protecting themselves or loved ones from unnecessary or exploitative guardianships, experts recommend several proactive measures:

1. Comprehensive advance planning “Everyone should have not just a will, but durable powers of attorney for both healthcare and finances, with carefully selected agents,” advises Reynolds. “These documents, when properly executed, can often prevent the need for guardianship entirely.”

2. Enhanced documentation of capacity Dr. Richards suggests that older adults with any family conflicts consider getting baseline cognitive assessments while clearly capacitated. “Having documentation of your cognitive status from an independent professional can be invaluable if your capacity is later questioned,” he explained.

3. Letter of intent “A detailed letter expressing your wishes for various scenarios, shared with multiple trusted individuals, can serve as powerful evidence of your preferences and planning,” Reynolds noted. “While not legally binding like a power of attorney, it creates a clear record of your wishes that courts should consider.”

4. Careful selection of fiduciaries “The hard truth is that financial exploitation most often comes from family members,” Dr. Levin pointed out. “Selecting the right people to serve in fiduciary roles is crucial, and sometimes that might mean professional fiduciaries with proper oversight rather than family members with conflicts of interest.”

5. Regular legal checkups Just as seniors have regular medical checkups, Reynolds recommends “legal wellness checks” with elder law attorneys every few years to ensure documents remain current with changing laws and circumstances.

6. Building a strong community network “Social isolation is a significant risk factor for exploitation,” noted Dr. Levin. “Maintaining strong connections with friends, faith communities, and activities outside the family provides both support and potential witnesses if problems arise.”

Legislative Reform Efforts Gain Momentum

Eleanor’s story, and thousands like it, have begun to generate attention from lawmakers. Currently, 17 states have enacted or are considering significant guardianship reforms, including:

• Higher evidentiary standards before imposing guardianship
• Mandatory consideration of less restrictive alternatives
• Enhanced due process protections for proposed wards
• Better training and qualification requirements for guardians
• More rigorous financial reporting and court oversight
• Criminal penalties for guardian misconduct
• Easier paths to terminating unnecessary guardianships

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts) and Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) recently introduced the Guardianship Accountability Act, which would create a national resource center to publish best practices and provide training, collect data about guardianship cases, and facilitate background checks for potential guardians.

“The guardianship system is designed to protect vulnerable Americans, but it can be exploited by unscrupulous individuals who use their position of power for their own gain,” Senator Collins stated when introducing the legislation.

While these reforms represent progress, advocates argue they don’t address the most fundamental issue: the extraordinary power that guardianship grants over individuals who often have done nothing wrong beyond growing old.

“Even with better oversight, the problem remains that guardianship typically removes all rights rather than providing targeted support in areas of genuine need,” explained Rick Black, director of the Center for Estate Administration Reform. “We need to shift toward a supported decision-making model that preserves autonomy while providing protection.”

The Path Forward: Dignity, Autonomy, and Appropriate Support

For Eleanor Washburn, the future remains uncertain. Her next court hearing is scheduled for October, where she will again present evidence of her capacity and request restoration of at least some of her rights.

“I don’t know if I’ll ever be completely free of this system,” she reflected. “But I have to keep fighting, not just for myself but for all the other people trapped in guardianships who don’t have a voice.”

She paused, looking around the small apartment that has become her world—so different from the home she created over decades with her late husband.

“I want people to understand that this could happen to anyone,” she continued. “One day you’re living your life, making your own decisions, and the next day everything can be taken from you—your home, your savings, your basic human dignity—all under the guise of ‘protection.'”

As America’s population ages, with 10,000 people turning 65 every day, the tension between protection and autonomy will only intensify. How we balance these competing concerns will reveal much about our values as a society and our commitment to the fundamental rights of our oldest citizens.

“In the end, this isn’t just about legal systems or cognitive assessments,” Dr. Levin concluded. “It’s about recognizing that aging doesn’t diminish personhood—that even as capabilities change, the right to self-determination and dignity remains. Our challenge is creating systems that protect the vulnerable without stripping them of their essential humanity.”

For now, Eleanor Washburn continues her daily routine at the assisted living facility, participating in book clubs and technology classes, helping other residents with their tablets and smartphones, and meticulously documenting her ongoing cognitive wellness—all while watching her carefully built financial security gradually diminish under the weight of guardian fees and institutional care costs.

“Sometimes I wonder what my husband would think if he could see what’s happened,” she said, tears forming in her eyes as she held a small framed photo—one of the few possessions she was allowed to keep from her former home. “He worked so hard to make sure I would be secure after he was gone. He never imagined the greatest threat wouldn’t be illness or loneliness, but the very legal system that was supposed to protect me.”

If you or someone you love is concerned about guardianship issues, resources are available through the National Center on Law and Elder Rights (ncler.acl.gov) and the Center for Estate Administration Reform (cearjustice.org).

This article was produced as part of our ongoing “America’s Invisible Crisis” investigation into elder justice issues. For more information, including state-specific resources and guides to advance planning, visit our website.