The Ombudsman received a phone call from a man who knows the Ombudsman from our regular visits to the nursing home where he resides. He called as a result of his court appointed guardian making the decision to move him from his home to a different nursing home. The man shared that he has friends at the nursing home and these relationships are meaningful to him. He also expressed that the nursing home staff know him and he feels safe with them providing his care.
The guardian had made arrangements for his move without ever visiting him or discussing the matter with him. The right to determine, to our best ability, where we live and with whom we are friends is fundamental. The man asked the Ombudsman to help him remain in his home.
During a meeting with the Ombudsman the man stated that at one time he was quite ill and needed to have someone make decisions on his behalf, however, he has recovered his health and his ability to make decisions and doesn’t believe that he needs a guardian anymore. The Ombudsman informed the man that he could request a re-evaluation of his guardianship status by the county probate court where he was adjudicated incompetent and appointed the guardian. The Ombudsman also shared that the guardian, per the county guardianship handbook, should allow him to participate in decisions if capable.
![]()
The man decided that he wanted to address the situation directly with the county probate court. He dictated a letter to the social worker of the nursing home with the Ombudsman present. The man provided specific reasons as to why he did not agree with the action the guardian was taking and that the guardian did not include him in the decision-making process. He also requested the court to re-evaluate his competency and his future need for a guardian.
Prior to the hearing a psychiatrist with the nursing home visited the man for an evaluation and determined he no longer needed a guardian. The county probate court held a preliminary hearing with the man and the guardian present. The guardian then understood that the client did not want to move. The magistrate decided the man would remain in his current home while a decision about the competency was made. The county probate court magistrate also ordered a competency evaluation and scheduled a hearing date.
The Ombudsman and staff from the nursing home attended the hearing with the man. The final outcome was that the guardianship was terminated.
Source:
Resident Fights Guardian's Decision to Move Him
The guardian had made arrangements for his move without ever visiting him or discussing the matter with him. The right to determine, to our best ability, where we live and with whom we are friends is fundamental. The man asked the Ombudsman to help him remain in his home.
During a meeting with the Ombudsman the man stated that at one time he was quite ill and needed to have someone make decisions on his behalf, however, he has recovered his health and his ability to make decisions and doesn’t believe that he needs a guardian anymore. The Ombudsman informed the man that he could request a re-evaluation of his guardianship status by the county probate court where he was adjudicated incompetent and appointed the guardian. The Ombudsman also shared that the guardian, per the county guardianship handbook, should allow him to participate in decisions if capable.
Prior to the hearing a psychiatrist with the nursing home visited the man for an evaluation and determined he no longer needed a guardian. The county probate court held a preliminary hearing with the man and the guardian present. The guardian then understood that the client did not want to move. The magistrate decided the man would remain in his current home while a decision about the competency was made. The county probate court magistrate also ordered a competency evaluation and scheduled a hearing date.
The Ombudsman and staff from the nursing home attended the hearing with the man. The final outcome was that the guardianship was terminated.
Source:
Resident Fights Guardian's Decision to Move Him