Florida Statute 825.103 Exploitation Laws : Why Are They Not Enforced?
(1) "Exploitation of an elderly person or disabled adult" means:
(a) Knowingly, by deception or intimidation, obtaining or using, or endeavoring to obtain or use, an elderly person's or disabled adult's funds, assets, or property with the intent to temporarily or permanently deprive the elderly person or disabled adult of the use, benefit, or possession of the funds, assets, or property, or to benefit someone other than the elderly person or disabled adult, by a person who:
1. Stands in a position of trust and confidence with the elderly person or disabled adult; or
2. Has a business relationship with the elderly person or disabled adult; or
(b) Obtaining or using, endeavoring to obtain or use, or conspiring with another to obtain or use an elderly person's or disabled adult's funds, assets, or property with the intent to temporarily or permanently deprive the elderly person or disabled adult of the use, benefit, or possession of the funds, assets, or property, or to benefit someone other than the elderly person or disabled adult, by a person who knows or reasonably should know that the elderly person or disabled adult lacks the capacity to consent.
---------------------------------------
These are the 'LAWS" Why are the people who are paid our tax dollars, Looking the 'OTHER WAY'?
1 comment:
(b) Obtaining or using, endeavoring to obtain or use, or conspiring with another to obtain or use an elderly person's or disabled adult's funds, assets, or property with the intent to temporarily or permanently deprive the elderly person or disabled adult of the use, benefit, or possession of the funds, assets, or property, or to benefit someone other than the elderly person or disabled adult, by a person who knows or reasonably should know that the elderly person or disabled adult lacks the capacity to consent.
This provision is important because, unlike paragraph (a), it doesn't require "deception" (fraud) or "intimidation". It is important because, as Detective Roubicek points out in his book, neither "deception" nor "intimidation" is needed when exploiting a person who lacks capacity.
Unfortunately, even (b) is inadequate. Why? Because, as Dr. Perr recognized in his article "Wills, Testamentary Capacity and Undue Influence", a person can have the capacity to consent but not the capacity to withstand undue influence. (b) does not hold accountable the perps in such cases.
The Florida statute needs to be amended to correct this oversight. However, amending the Florida statute to correct this oversight would not be enough. It also needs to be complemented by statutes requiring other safeguards, including the use of ICD-9 codes (as suggested by Irene Masiello) and protocols (as I advocate) .
Post a Comment