“There is something rotten in the French guardianship’s system”
Kaminsky : une de mes premières enquête et cela se voit! De même qu'apparaît le choix nonchalant du sujet provoqué pas tout à fait par une actualité brûlante mais par le fais que l'école nous avait envoyés dans des tribunaux, dans mon cas d'instance, pour voir comment la justice fonctionnait. Avec le juge qui me surveillait, outre le droit de parcourir les dossiers (généralement des impayés de crédits ou de loyers), nous avions eu une longue discussion sur sa seconde affectation : les tutelles. Par ailleurs, ma tante en a fait son métier. Cependant, il manque à ce papier du reportage, des entretiens avec des personnes mises sous tutelle et leurs famille sans compter une source officielle du ministère voire un syndicat de magistrats ou une assoc au minum. A éviter aussi le titre qui repren très facilement du Shaekspeare comme des millions de scribouillards avant moi. Erreurs de jeunesse quand tu nous tiens!
NB : ce fut le texte que je présentai au Prix Daniel Pearl 2005
Actors of the French guardianship’s system have the blues, the system is undergoing a deep crisis.
On Sunday night this January, Colette Saintville is nervously rummaging through the papers scattered on her desk. From the heap, she digs out two notifications from the tribunal informing her that she has been chosen by the judge to take care of two new guardianship cases. Colette is in fact a professional guardian, her job is to take care of and to manage the fortune of elderly or disabled people who have lost their autonomy, their sense of reality and are not able to look after themselves when the family has relinquished all its responsibilities or no longer exist. But this time, Colette has made up her mind: she is going to turn down the request even if it means that she has to lie to justify her refusal.
“I know what lies beneath this offer, this is a poisoned chalice. I’m being given these two “protégés” because their previous guardian has asked to be taken off of their cases which may indicate that they were rather painful to deal with”. And her mind is still reeling with the memories of her last two wards, who were also a parting gift from another guardian. “The first one is a slightly retarded man in his fifties, who is still living at his parents’ place near la Porte d’Orléans. But they can’t bear it anymore, they are about to move him in to an old folks home, his brother and sister don’t want to be in charge of him, they prefer to keep him out of things because they are afraid that he will squander the familial inheritance. When I first met him, the flat, which was more of a squalid hole, was in a horrendous state, full of dust, with curtains blackened by dirt, sagging chairs covered with cigarette’s burns. His financial situation is disastrous as well, he suffers from excessive debt. He only earns 1000€ per month but he owes 8800€ to his bank and several credit institutions, which debit him of 1200€ each month. How am I ever supposed to find him another accommodation?”
On the same day, she visits an eighty years old lady who might suffer from Alzheimer’s, has a debt of 4000€ and lives in a small flat (25m²) that has not been renovated since the Thirties! When she knocks on her door, a shaggy man all skin and bone, dressed in pyjama opens it and she catches a glimpse of the woman, who remains prostrated on her stool, her gaze unfocussed. She assumes he is the woman’s gigolo. He’s much younger, does not work and consequently sponges off her. Colette asks him some questions but he does not remember his age, his birthplace or whether he has already had a job. Apparently, they don’t go out more than once in a week and eat when there is a distribution of free meals. Eventually, the she decides to hospitalise them both for malnutrition and gives them 150€ from her pocket to provide for their basic needs. This is not the first time and it left her with a bitter taste in her month. “What is the point of spending money to have a job, to get new cases? And it is all the more senseless that I perfectly know I won’t be reimbursed, I’m paying to look after cases in deficit! If I was able, I would happily give up my job! And I know I’m not the only one!”
The reason behind this anger ? Salary. professional guardians don’t receive one because they are not recognized as a profession. They get paid once a year according to the annual revenues of their protégés. It can go down to 68, 60€ per case if the income is below 2286€ per year! And in the best hypothesis, a guardian may hope to receive 1% of the income of his protégé if it is above 6860€. “This is madness! For each case, I devote 6 hours per month and more than 10 when the case is really difficult and that I have to beg the administration for every kind of allowance and believe me good cases are seldom! And for all this hard work, I’m given peanuts! For this occupation to be profitable, I must at least manage 60 cases which is impossible, I do only 40. Last year, I only obtained 30.000€ and once I had paid my tax and my expenses, I was left with 15.000€ for the year”. Colette complains
The same weariness is perceptible with the judges, who appoint the guardian and annually verify the accounts of the protected people. “Controlling efficiently the guardianship system is tough. In my district, the ninth arrondissement, I’m supposed to check my 2000 cases and it is a bit disheartening when you notice that some guardians have not cared for their ward for ten years or visit him only once in a year: they have to slack their jobs in order to run more cases or sometimes are completely overwhelmed with the complexity of the administrative procedure, they lack the appropriate training.” confesses Laurence Mousseau. Like Colette Saintville, she is asking for a reform of the system. This call for help is not isolated, numerous Professional private guardians associations such as FNAGTP (Fédération nationale des associations de gérants de tutelles privées )and specialized associations have been lobbying the minister of Justice for a decade.
At the core of the French state guardianship’s crisis, is the exponential increase of people under the care of a guardian and an outdated legislation, which dates back to 1968.
Since the last decade, the number of protégés has climbed up. From 80.000 cases in 1968 to 700.000 in 2004, in other words more than 1% of the French population. The system has reached its level of saturation. Only 80.000 out of 160.000 requests for a guardianship have been accepted this year. There are too few guardians.
Another issue is the law, which has not been able to keep up with the evolution of society. For André Boivin from the FNAGTP, the system has not been able to anticipate the rise of life expectancy and the aging of the population. Among other factors, there are pauperisation, addictions to alcohol or narcotics, the growing pressure of the professional and private life leading to depression, the dissolution of the family when the children live in a city and their parents have remained in the country or the rise of individualism. Another unseen development was the evolution of the private guardian’s job. Until recently, it was mainly a second job for retired military, civil servants or barristers consequently no legal frame has ever been defined. But now it has become a full-time and professionalized job and it is time to end up this anarchy!.
André Boivin’s top claims are no surprise concerning the legal definition of his profession. “We are in dire need of a professional status which ought to prescribe what a guardian is and does. All guardians should be registered on a list reviewed and agreed by the Public prosecutor as is the case for doctors. A standard decent monthly remuneration system should be established according to our workload and competence and not by the wealth of our protégés. Finally the access to the profession must be regulated with a specific formation: three years higher education, a deep experience with administrative and accounting management and a compulsory traineeship with an experienced guardian”.
He and Laurence Mousseau also demand that the press stops giving a bleak image guardian and judge. “It is very infuriating to always read in the newspapers that the world of guardianship is full of thieves that rob old ladies from all their money. Ok there are dishonest persons and embezzlements but this a minority. Journalists don’t know half of the efforts we make everyday to help these people in distress” regrets André Boivin. Similarly Laurence Mousseau rejects all suspicions of stinginess “It is utterly false to write that we leave people under a guardianship in poverty. Yes they are not given much “pocket money” but what can be done when a protégé receives only 500€ per month and has his/her rent to pay, only a small amount of money can be spared and given back! It is the system that does not work, it is not the judge or guardian’s failure, it simply means that the system has broken down”
However, recent news may indicate that the system is not doomed to crumble. In December, Dominique Perben, French minister of Justice has announced that the long awaited reform of the guardianship system is finally underway. The procedure is going to change: people will be able to design their guardians, an advocate will be allowed to help the “protégés” and guardians will have to subscribe to a responsibility contract. For André Boivin, that’s a good start but that’s not enough. The main issues have been left out: not a word on the definition of a professional status, the financing of the reform, and the necessity for the Chancellery to consult often with the associations of private guardians as well as with the specialised guardianship associations. The fight still goes on…
1350 words
Constance Jamet
On Sunday night this January, Colette Saintville is nervously rummaging through the papers scattered on her desk. From the heap, she digs out two notifications from the tribunal informing her that she has been chosen by the judge to take care of two new guardianship cases. Colette is in fact a professional guardian, her job is to take care of and to manage the fortune of elderly or disabled people who have lost their autonomy, their sense of reality and are not able to look after themselves when the family has relinquished all its responsibilities or no longer exist. But this time, Colette has made up her mind: she is going to turn down the request even if it means that she has to lie to justify her refusal.
“I know what lies beneath this offer, this is a poisoned chalice. I’m being given these two “protégés” because their previous guardian has asked to be taken off of their cases which may indicate that they were rather painful to deal with”. And her mind is still reeling with the memories of her last two wards, who were also a parting gift from another guardian. “The first one is a slightly retarded man in his fifties, who is still living at his parents’ place near la Porte d’Orléans. But they can’t bear it anymore, they are about to move him in to an old folks home, his brother and sister don’t want to be in charge of him, they prefer to keep him out of things because they are afraid that he will squander the familial inheritance. When I first met him, the flat, which was more of a squalid hole, was in a horrendous state, full of dust, with curtains blackened by dirt, sagging chairs covered with cigarette’s burns. His financial situation is disastrous as well, he suffers from excessive debt. He only earns 1000€ per month but he owes 8800€ to his bank and several credit institutions, which debit him of 1200€ each month. How am I ever supposed to find him another accommodation?”
On the same day, she visits an eighty years old lady who might suffer from Alzheimer’s, has a debt of 4000€ and lives in a small flat (25m²) that has not been renovated since the Thirties! When she knocks on her door, a shaggy man all skin and bone, dressed in pyjama opens it and she catches a glimpse of the woman, who remains prostrated on her stool, her gaze unfocussed. She assumes he is the woman’s gigolo. He’s much younger, does not work and consequently sponges off her. Colette asks him some questions but he does not remember his age, his birthplace or whether he has already had a job. Apparently, they don’t go out more than once in a week and eat when there is a distribution of free meals. Eventually, the she decides to hospitalise them both for malnutrition and gives them 150€ from her pocket to provide for their basic needs. This is not the first time and it left her with a bitter taste in her month. “What is the point of spending money to have a job, to get new cases? And it is all the more senseless that I perfectly know I won’t be reimbursed, I’m paying to look after cases in deficit! If I was able, I would happily give up my job! And I know I’m not the only one!”
The reason behind this anger ? Salary. professional guardians don’t receive one because they are not recognized as a profession. They get paid once a year according to the annual revenues of their protégés. It can go down to 68, 60€ per case if the income is below 2286€ per year! And in the best hypothesis, a guardian may hope to receive 1% of the income of his protégé if it is above 6860€. “This is madness! For each case, I devote 6 hours per month and more than 10 when the case is really difficult and that I have to beg the administration for every kind of allowance and believe me good cases are seldom! And for all this hard work, I’m given peanuts! For this occupation to be profitable, I must at least manage 60 cases which is impossible, I do only 40. Last year, I only obtained 30.000€ and once I had paid my tax and my expenses, I was left with 15.000€ for the year”. Colette complains
The same weariness is perceptible with the judges, who appoint the guardian and annually verify the accounts of the protected people. “Controlling efficiently the guardianship system is tough. In my district, the ninth arrondissement, I’m supposed to check my 2000 cases and it is a bit disheartening when you notice that some guardians have not cared for their ward for ten years or visit him only once in a year: they have to slack their jobs in order to run more cases or sometimes are completely overwhelmed with the complexity of the administrative procedure, they lack the appropriate training.” confesses Laurence Mousseau. Like Colette Saintville, she is asking for a reform of the system. This call for help is not isolated, numerous Professional private guardians associations such as FNAGTP (Fédération nationale des associations de gérants de tutelles privées )and specialized associations have been lobbying the minister of Justice for a decade.
At the core of the French state guardianship’s crisis, is the exponential increase of people under the care of a guardian and an outdated legislation, which dates back to 1968.
Since the last decade, the number of protégés has climbed up. From 80.000 cases in 1968 to 700.000 in 2004, in other words more than 1% of the French population. The system has reached its level of saturation. Only 80.000 out of 160.000 requests for a guardianship have been accepted this year. There are too few guardians.
Another issue is the law, which has not been able to keep up with the evolution of society. For André Boivin from the FNAGTP, the system has not been able to anticipate the rise of life expectancy and the aging of the population. Among other factors, there are pauperisation, addictions to alcohol or narcotics, the growing pressure of the professional and private life leading to depression, the dissolution of the family when the children live in a city and their parents have remained in the country or the rise of individualism. Another unseen development was the evolution of the private guardian’s job. Until recently, it was mainly a second job for retired military, civil servants or barristers consequently no legal frame has ever been defined. But now it has become a full-time and professionalized job and it is time to end up this anarchy!.
André Boivin’s top claims are no surprise concerning the legal definition of his profession. “We are in dire need of a professional status which ought to prescribe what a guardian is and does. All guardians should be registered on a list reviewed and agreed by the Public prosecutor as is the case for doctors. A standard decent monthly remuneration system should be established according to our workload and competence and not by the wealth of our protégés. Finally the access to the profession must be regulated with a specific formation: three years higher education, a deep experience with administrative and accounting management and a compulsory traineeship with an experienced guardian”.
He and Laurence Mousseau also demand that the press stops giving a bleak image guardian and judge. “It is very infuriating to always read in the newspapers that the world of guardianship is full of thieves that rob old ladies from all their money. Ok there are dishonest persons and embezzlements but this a minority. Journalists don’t know half of the efforts we make everyday to help these people in distress” regrets André Boivin. Similarly Laurence Mousseau rejects all suspicions of stinginess “It is utterly false to write that we leave people under a guardianship in poverty. Yes they are not given much “pocket money” but what can be done when a protégé receives only 500€ per month and has his/her rent to pay, only a small amount of money can be spared and given back! It is the system that does not work, it is not the judge or guardian’s failure, it simply means that the system has broken down”
However, recent news may indicate that the system is not doomed to crumble. In December, Dominique Perben, French minister of Justice has announced that the long awaited reform of the guardianship system is finally underway. The procedure is going to change: people will be able to design their guardians, an advocate will be allowed to help the “protégés” and guardians will have to subscribe to a responsibility contract. For André Boivin, that’s a good start but that’s not enough. The main issues have been left out: not a word on the definition of a professional status, the financing of the reform, and the necessity for the Chancellery to consult often with the associations of private guardians as well as with the specialised guardianship associations. The fight still goes on…
1350 words
Constance Jamet
posted by Andrea @ 2:23 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home