Does filial responsibility apply to me?
The term filial responsibility refers to legislation in thirty states that establishes a duty for adult (nonindigent) children to pay for their elderly parents' care. Current Filial Responsibility laws are based on the reciprocal contract theory: one has a moral responsibility to support one's parents because the parents reared and provided for this person as a child. Proponents argue that these laws foster family harmony and service to one's parents. However, consistent with the reciprocity theory, if a parent failed to support the child as a minor, the adult child should not be responsible for the parent's health care bills.
The following is a synopsis of a Pennsylvania case: John Pittas' mother sustained injuries in a car accident. After her rehabilitation was completed she was transferred to Liberty Nursing and Rehabilitation Center where she lived for five months before relocating permanently to Greece. She did not pay the $93,000 nursing center bill. Although she had applied for Medicaid, the application was pending. The nursing home sued Mr. Pittas for the unpaid balance under Pennsylvania's Filial Responsibility Law.
A Pennsylvania Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court's decision holding John Pittas liable for his mother's $93,000 nursing home bill under Pennsylvania's Filial Responsibility' Law in May 2012. Health Care & Retirement Corporation of America v. Pittas (Pa. Super. Ct., No. 536 EDA 2011, May 7, 2012).
Pennsylvania is one of 30 states with statutes that hold an adult child liable for the medical bills of the parents. The Pennsylvania statute provides a few exceptions to the filial responsibility: (1) the adult child does not have sufficient financial ability to support the parent or (2) adult child was abandoned for a period of ten years while a minor by the parent in question. 23 Pa.C.S.A. � 4603. Yet, Colorado is one of the 20 states that does not have a Filial Responsibility statute. In 1987 the Colorado Supreme Court held that "a child has neither a common law nor a statutorily imposed duty to support his or her parents." In re the Marriage of Serdinsky, 740 P.2d 521 (Colo. 1987). States that have Filial Responsibility laws, in one form or another, are Alaska, Arknasas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massechuets, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennesse, Utah, Vermont, Virginia and West Virginia.
Proponents of enactment and enforcement of Filial Responsibility laws view these laws as a way to address the increasing demand for Medicaid to pay for long -term care. According to MetLife's annual survey of long-term care costs, in 2011 the average daily rate for nursing homes in Colorado was $207/day for a semi-private room (approximately $76,000/year). In 2010 the average social security recipient received $1,176/month or $14,000/year. The Pittas case is not unusual. In 2008, a Pennsylvania court held a man responsible for his mother's $8,000 nursing home bill even though he was out of work and deeply in debt. To complicate matters, the mother had the ability to pay the nursing home through her pensions and social security payment, but simply refused to do so. Because the mother's sources of income could not be garnished, the nursing home sought and received a judgment against the son.
A family law practitioner suggests that the federal government should create incentives for states to create Filial Responsibility laws and mechanisms for effective enforcement across state lines. This argument has led supporters of Filial Responsibility laws to compare adult children to deadbeat parents who fail to provide child support.
This comparison, and the idea of "deadbeat children" is a misleading and erroneous simplification of the issues at stake. First, adults make the decision to have children and therefore have a responsibility to provide for their well-being. The sheer cost of long-term care can easily overwhelm most families, and Filial Responsibility laws may render adult children destitute. The type of care adults need as we age can be physically and mentally demanding. For example, it is not uncommon for an adult with advance dementia to become physically aggressive, incontinent or require constant supervision. Retirement-aged adults may not have the ability to provide the necessary care and oversight. Finally, over a long lifetime, relationships can become complex. We would all like to think of loving parent-child relationships built on mutual responsibility and respect. However, we know that many families drift apart for a myriad of reasons. These laws would make children responsible for parents even when the bonds of trust and care are long gone.
As we live longer, lawmakers will continue to explore ways to pay for care needs of the aged. Filial Responsibility laws are viewed as a "solution" to pay for that care. Yet many people are unaware that they could be held responsible not only for their debts, but for those of their parents.