[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 585: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 641: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
Permanent stress with Mother-in-Law - Page 4 - Carers UK Forum

Permanent stress with Mother-in-Law

Share information, support and advice on all aspects of caring.
hi Jolanta
Such a complex push-pull of emotions and frustrations and apron strings.
POA for finance i would say is essential and for welfare, however under the circumstances for the latter, it could work in your husbands favour not having POA because the authorities would call the shots and put her in a home if they deemed it necessary and he wouldn't be able to stop it, they would be acting as her agents in her best interests.
If she is accusing the carers of stealing from her, it could be a good time to raise the issue of POA for money for him to look after her finances for her. but don't hold your breath if she is so stubborn.
Glad to hear he has set some boundaries and I hope there isn't creepage ending up back to the previous satus quo.
Breezey wrote:
Fri Jul 01, 2022 6:34 pm
hi Jolanta
Such a complex push-pull of emotions and frustrations and apron strings.
POA for finance i would say is essential and for welfare, however under the circumstances for the latter, it could work in your husbands favour not having POA because the authorities would call the shots and put her in a home if they deemed it necessary and he wouldn't be able to stop it, they would be acting as her agents in her best interests.
(edited by moderator to separate quote from Jolanta's post)


Thank you very much for your reply Breezey. I'm not sure if I understand the POA issue here. Do you mean, if my husband does NOT have POA, then Social Services have more room for manoeuvre if MIL is unable to decide in her best interest? So it would be better for him not to have POA so he does not have to make difficult decisions about his mother? She hesitated about POA, she was too scared to trust her son (she has had trust issues for years with many people). At the end of the day, she is now probably too frail to be able to appoint POA herself.
My meaning was that if he does not have POA and she needs to go into a home but is refusing, then the authorities can intervene and place her in a home if she doesn't have capacity, thus he wouldn't have to be trying to coax or convince her to go or fighting the authorities to get her placed.
She will be their responsibility for her best interests.
That is the impression I got and my understanding of POA/no POA.
My apologies if it wasn't clear, my dyslexia sometimes works against me there.
Breezey wrote:
Fri Jul 01, 2022 6:34 pm
hi Jolanta
Such a complex push-pull of emotions and frustrations and apron strings.
POA for finance i would say is essential and for welfare, however under the circumstances for the latter, it could work in your husbands favour not having POA because the authorities would call the shots and put her in a home if they deemed it necessary and he wouldn't be able to stop it, they would be acting as her agents in her best interests.
edited by moderator to separate quote and Jolanta's post


Thank you very much for your reply Breezey. I'm not sure if I understand the POA issue here. Do you mean, if my husband does NOT have POA, then Social Services have more room for manoeuvre if MIL is unable to decide in her best interest? Yes, especially if she refusing but he won't have any say in anything for her.

So it would be better for him not to have POA so he does not have to make difficult decisions about his mother?
No, that's his mother and POA would be great so he can make decisions for her no matter how easy or difficult they are or how much she blames him for them.

She hesitated about POA, she was too scared to trust her son (she has had trust issues for years with many people). At the end of the day, she is now probably too frail to be able to appoint POA herself.
Frailty is not an issue, if she the capacity to make the decision she can do it, the trust issue is the problem.

If he can get POA done all the better because he can have control and decision making as best as he can in her best interests. Without them he is powerless, next of kin, son, counts for nothing when the authorities are making their decisions in her interests.

If he can play to her fears and get her trust in him to protect her interests against the authorities and do the POA all the better, but then he will need very broad shoulders to carry the can and all the blame for decisions, some of which may be out of his hands, that have been made for her welfare.

You can take a horse to water....
If she flatly refuses and he never manages to get POA, he tried and did his best, it was her choice and her decision to have the authorities make decisions for her instead of her son.
Breezey wrote:
Fri Jul 01, 2022 10:03 pm
My meaning was that if he does not have POA and she needs to go into a home but is refusing, then the authorities can intervene and place her in a home if she doesn't have capacity, thus he wouldn't have to be trying to coax or convince her to go or fighting the authorities to get her placed.
She will be their responsibility for her best interests.
That is the impression I got and my understanding of POA/no POA.
My apologies if it wasn't clear, my dyslexia sometimes works against me there.
Not at all Breezey.
English is my second language so my understanding is sometimes messed up. I've got your idea of the POA. Sure my husband's right to make decisions about his mum is limited. She blames him for "putting her in hospital" and for inviting carers to her home. This is not an easy one. She wants to have what she had before: my husband coming for a couple of hours for lunch and sometimes more. But she is definitely frailer now, that would not be sustainable. I hope SSerivces will be able to convince her to accept at least 2 visits of carers a day.
Thank you for your replies again.
hey no worries Jolanta

It is not an easy situation for either of you
I hope you saw my other reply to you which made my response clearer.
Breezey wrote:
Fri Jul 01, 2022 11:00 pm
hey no worries Jolanta

It is not an easy situation for either of you
I hope you saw my other reply to you which made my response clearer.
Yes, I saw it. It's very informative, thank you.
Jolanta_1901 wrote:
Fri Jul 01, 2022 10:47 pm
Breezey wrote:
Fri Jul 01, 2022 10:03 pm
My meaning was that if he does not have POA and she needs to go into a home but is refusing, then the authorities can intervene and place her in a home if she doesn't have capacity, thus he wouldn't have to be trying to coax or convince her to go or fighting the authorities to get her placed.
She will be their responsibility for her best interests.
That is the impression I got and my understanding of POA/no POA.
My apologies if it wasn't clear, my dyslexia sometimes works against me there.
Not at all Breezey.
English is my second language so my understanding is sometimes messed up. I've got your idea of the POA. Sure my husband's right to make decisions about his mum is limited. She blames him for "putting her in hospital" and for inviting carers to her home. This is not an easy one. She wants to have what she had before: my husband coming for a couple of hours for lunch and sometimes more. But she is definitely frailer now, that would not be sustainable. I hope SSerivces will be able to convince her to accept at least 2 visits of carers a day.
Thank you for your replies again.
Your English is great Jolanta
I love your name, it is very nice and I am sure I wouldn't do anywhere near as well writing in your first language!

I am not sure, you will need to google it, but social services or the GP might be able to override POA to place a person in a home, I could be wrong but it's worth doing a search.

If she absolutely adamant about not having POA, it needs to be clear to hear what happens without it.

He needs to have the forms ready in the car to sign just in case she agrees to it but there also needs to be an independent person who has known your mother for more than 2 years to double check she knows what it means and she isn't doing it under duress and has the capacity to make that decision.
That needs to be done as soon as possible after she agrees and signs the forms so she doesn't get cold feet and change her mind.

Then if she is still opposed to it, she has made her choice and it is out of your husbands hands.
We're in a slightly different POA situation but I thought it might help to explain the options to her. At the end of the day, SOMEONE has to look after her finances & property (leaving aside the Health ad Welfare one for now). She can either choose someone to appoint now, while she can, or she can leave it in the lap of the gods if time runs out. She can also opt to continue managing her own finances but revert to her attorney at such time as she loses capacity - you can't do it in retrospect.

If she chooses to wait until it's too late the courts will appoint a guardian which could be her son if he wants to but it could be an organisation that specialises in these things & might not really get to know her. Either way the court supervises and oversees the dealings by way of regular reports etc. If she's a bit paranoid about people in her business, this is probably not what she wants.
Breezey wrote:
Sun Jul 03, 2022 10:14 am
Jolanta_1901 wrote:
Fri Jul 01, 2022 10:47 pm
Breezey wrote:
Fri Jul 01, 2022 10:03 pm
My meaning was that if he does not have POA and she needs to go into a home but is refusing, then the authorities can intervene and place her in a home if she doesn't have capacity, thus he wouldn't have to be trying to coax or convince her to go or fighting the authorities to get her placed.
She will be their responsibility for her best interests.
That is the impression I got and my understanding of POA/no POA.
My apologies if it wasn't clear, my dyslexia sometimes works against me there.
Not at all Breezey.
English is my second language so my understanding is sometimes messed up. I've got your idea of the POA. Sure my husband's right to make decisions about his mum is limited. She blames him for "putting her in hospital" and for inviting carers to her home. This is not an easy one. She wants to have what she had before: my husband coming for a couple of hours for lunch and sometimes more. But she is definitely frailer now, that would not be sustainable. I hope SSerivces will be able to convince her to accept at least 2 visits of carers a day.
Thank you for your replies again.
Your English is great Jolanta
I love your name, it is very nice and I am sure I wouldn't do anywhere near as well writing in your first language!

I am not sure, you will need to google it, but social services or the GP might be able to override POA to place a person in a home, I could be wrong but it's worth doing a search.

If she absolutely adamant about not having POA, it needs to be clear to hear what happens without it.

He needs to have the forms ready in the car to sign just in case she agrees to it but there also needs to be an independent person who has known your mother for more than 2 years to double check she knows what it means and she isn't doing it under duress and has the capacity to make that decision.
That needs to be done as soon as possible after she agrees and signs the forms so she doesn't get cold feet and change her mind.

Then if she is still opposed to it, she has made her choice and it is out of your husbands hands.
Thank you, that's very kind of you.
As for POA, I think there may be some doubts if MIL is in capacity to do that. She is usually of quite a sound mind, but not always. She has had months of in and out of delirium (infections), that's why she was deprived of liberty at hospital. I think her GP would have doubts. So the time for independent decisions is gone, most probably.