Roselvr: If you sent an email, it did not arrive. I had the phentolamine test about a year ago. Since it has to be done in an OR setting, that may be why more drs. don't do it. This was a double-blind test. The nurse administering the drugs thru IV injection was the only one who knew what drug was given and when. I can't remember the name of the other drug they used. Since I had a remission, I did not have to go thru the nerve block procedure. As it is, there are five nerves that control the foot and they run down the spine against the vertebrae. Hitting the wrong nerve could have left me with more damage than what I had. I'm so thankful that I didn't have to go thru it. Since pain is a subjective issue and your pain level is different from another's, doctors are cautious when it comes to treating it, especially back pain. With RSDS, the brain reroutes nerves and blood supply around the injured area. That's why it is so difficult to treat. Once the brain goes into repair mode, it can rewire other simple injuries. It is a very strange situation. Upon reflection, my ankle was the second episode for me. The first was after a breast biopsy and I thought the pain I experienced for months was from scar tissue forming. Both surgeries required metal implants of some sort. The biopsy required a wire to be implanted prior to surgery to mark the abnormal tissue. With the bunion surgery, I had a steel pin projecting from the instep into the bone they severed to shorten the big toe. I had to deal with that for seven weeks. I am senstive to all metals except gold so I wonder if that triggered the rewire response. As for the situation here, the population has thinned out dramatically. The caregiver's last day was last Friday. Dad flew to Montana the next day. It is so quiet around here now. I have a ton of work to do to get the place back in shape, but I don't have to deal with "them" anymore. No more insurance or employer paperwork, no more go-fer runs to the pharmacy or dr. appts 35 miles away. I may have one casualty : my tv is on the fritz. Probably not used to being off so much! Had two appointments with different real estate agents to try to put the property on the market again. One had to turn down the opportunity. Don't know the reasons yet. The other is waiting to set an appointment with my infamous vanishing brothers. To top it off, Lil Bro almost blew himself up when a can of black powder he uses for his home-made cannons blew up in his face. I don't know the full extent of his injuries. I offered to help and he got nasty so I removed myself from the situation. I wonder if I'm living in a soap opera! H&K's to all! Carol

>>The big problem with living trusts is that to get any real benefit (other than the perceived benefit of avoiding probate), the person making the trust has to give up all control over his or her estate.This may be true in New England but it is certainly not true in CA. We have a Revocable Living Trust as does my widowed MIL, and have full control of the assets in both cases. In an IRREVOCABLE Living Trust, such as an ILIT (Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust), you do indeed lose control of the assets. Also underrepresented in the current craze to sell the middle-class on getting RTs is the fact that unless the trust originators spell out some non-standard instructions, most lawyers use a standard software to produce an RT. This can in fact create problems - for example, my MIL is allowed to draw down the principal of her deceased husband's share of the estate for health, education, and maintenance. This is EXTREMELY unusual, yet most middle class people would assume they could do this. Not so, unless your trust is set up this way. As for probate not being a problem, I beg to differ. I settled my sister's estate - a simple one with no real estate, just a car and some art assets. It took a full 18 months to get through probate and three different lawyers (the first two were incompetent and lazy; the third was a gem and wrapped it up in less than 2 months). Probate in CA costs a percentage fee to both the lawyer and the executor, plus expenses. On average it's about 1.5% (a big change from the 6% it used to be!). So on a $1M estate that's $15K to the lawyer and $15K to the executor, plus expenses. OTOH, a trust passes without probate, and trustees don't get paid unless specified in the trust, or unless you have specified a professional trustee. If you name a spouse, family member, or friend, they DO NOT GET PAID. They can get reimbursed for expenses but that is all, unless the trust originators have specified they can be paid on an hourly basis, at the current professional rate (about $65-70 hr here in the SF Bay Area). The fee of $2500 to set up the trust (don't forget, we are in one of the most expensive-to-live areas of the country, so our costs are always higher than most places) included pour-over wills, durable healthcare Power of Attorney with HIPAA releases, Power of Attorney docs, and the title transfer of our property into the trust, for both of us. Our MIL got the same pkg, which is important in her case because the original RT she and her husband set up was 25 yrs out of date. It was critical for us to arrange a way to change the successor trustee and contingent beneficiary lists to reflect the many changes that had happened in the last quarter century. The lawyer spent hours with us and my MIL, over a series of three meetings, making sure my MIL understood all the changes we were making and why. This lawyer was a bargain at any price and did an outstanding job for this small flat fee.

This is a subject so terribly fraught with spectres of greed, avarice, controversy that it's often difficult to be really honest when discussing it. I tip my hat to Nancy in Mich. for stepping up to the mike and asking me WHY my brother and I arrived at the decision we did. It's important that those questions be asked and that they be answered. I worry a lot about this. I worry that Mum will deteriorate to such an extent that she cannot remain with me or my brother, in a setting that is familiar to her, surrounded with things and pets that she "remembers". I have seen the interior of nursing homes and "rehabilitation" facilities 3 times. Only one of the 3 was "acceptable", the other two were so pathetically inadequate I wouldn't send a hated enemy there. And it wasn't for lack of funding... (heaven knows Mum was a "cash cow"! spry, pleasant, and cooperative)it was for lack of QUALIFIED staffing. Those workers "in the trenches", were largely immigrant, working for minimum wage (probably without any benefit package, too), and barely able, with their broken English, to communicate with wards barely able to comprehend the spoken word, let alone that spoken with a thick accent, no matter how affectionately! THEY were the real treasures! they were attentive, affectionate, and virtually ignored by more "educated" staff. The most PATHETIC employees were the vaunted RNs, PTs... no kidding! I have, NEVER, in my life met a more arrogant, selfish, unwilling cadre of "caregivers". I was embarrassed for THEM; they were nearly universally unwilling to do ANYTHING that remotely required "hands on" work. "I'll call an aid"; "I have other duties to attend to...". "Could you call me later?" (needless to say they didn't "do" e-mail). Oh, I've heard it all. And that's why Mum is with me and my brother and NOT in one of those hell-holes. $60-80K/yr. for THAT? I rather think not. But families willing to do the work to keep them at home can't be compensated? HUH?! Welcome to life, corporate America runs this country, make no mistake about it. But consider this: you wouldn't have wanted to be the RN on "duty" (eating her doughnut behind the counter at "reception"!) when my brother arrived at 11:30 AM on Saturday morning, the day after Mum was transferred. She was lying in bed, soaked in urine (failed urostomy appliance), unfed. He coolly told the RN to get her ass in the room and take care of it. He went next to the administrator's office. From that day on, he and I went to visit Mum EVERY SINGLE DAY for 5 weeks to "check up" on her care. I HAD TO TEACH THOSE RNs HOW TO CHANGE AN UROSTOMY APPLIANCE. (Wingate) There is one level of employee I hold in greater contempt, though. And that's the SOCIAL WORKER. Never, in my life, have I seen a greater waste of payroll than they. I have had the (dis)pleasure to deal with 7 in the past 3 years. ONLY ONE of them was helpful in any meaningful way. Frankly, the other 6 could have been nicely replaced with a WEBSITE. The one that was helpful is someone with whom I still maintain contact. She has remained a tried, true, and good friend. When you find a good one, stick with them! Am I angry? You bet. Why? because the whole system is set up to milk families of their assets even as they "tell" families they can't possibly "take adequate care" of much loved elders. The entire system is stacked against those of us who are willing to care for our families. Mark my words, this is the coming battleground and I'll be well finished with it in a few short years. Me? I've joined the Hemlock Society!

murredduo Here is a thought to avoid simply walking away and having the lender foreclose. Simply give the lender the house. Have a deed prepared transferring it the lender as the new owner. Record the deed. By certified mail send the deed and the keys to the lender. Check with a real estate lawyer in RI to see if you can do that. Had it work here. The contract is if you don't pay, they can take the house --- so short-circuit it and give it to them. After you sign the deed and record it and send it, you no longer own it - the lender does and there is no one to foreclose against. (1) Thought you would qualify for the Medicare Savings Program through Medicaid - means the Medicaid program pays your Part B premium and picks up the deductibles and copays. Also your Part D (prescription plan) should have 0 premiums so long as you pick certain plans (make sure your drugs are covered by the plans) and you copays will be in the $5 or $6 range. (2) If you are getting a lump sum, paying off the credit cards and buying a small house with no mortgage is an excellent plan. (3) BUT - and here is a big 'but' - the idea of putting it solely in your wife's name (and your son ....a minor?) is not a good idea. Statistically 65-73% of people who become disabled end up divorced. The sudden poverty of disability destroys many marriages - even long term strong marriages have trouble withstanding poverty due to a spouse's disability. The better way would be to (a) Keep a life-interest in the property for you and (b) have your wife and son on the deed as the owners of the estate in the entirety interest with a reversion to you if they died before you. (That means you have the right to the property while you live and when you die, it goes to them and if you die first, it is theirs.) You really really really need to talk to an estate planning lawyer about how to title any property. If you have a life interest, no creditor will go after it -- can't sell that. If it is just tilted to you and your wife straight up and your wife is on the deed at all, they can file a lien against your interest in the new home but will have trouble foreclosing to collect on the lien because they have to give half of the money from a sale to her. If your son is on there, they only get a 3rd - not worth the trouble unless you all went to sell the house. (4) I seriously doubt that your wife can get a credit card in her name. She has not been on the mortgage and she doesn't have - and has not had - any income. She has to have a credit rating in HER name - not yours - to get a credit card. To have a credit rating that means she has had to have been on car loans or house loans to show she pays her bills. She also MUST have a source of income - your SSDI will not count for her income. About all she can get in the way of credit cards until she has an income and credit history would be 24%++ interest cards with annual fees of $75 -120 a year and credit limits of $300 -500. It will take her 4 - 5 years to even get up to a $2500 with credit limit increases. That is why not working, staying home and not having an independent financial life is a seriously bad idea for women. Something happens and they have to show a credit history or income to do something and they don't have it --- they do NOT exist in the financial world. Bottom line is she really needs to get a job -- it can be McDonalds, clerk in a gas station, retail clerk etc working part-time but work she must. If she does not work, she can not get credit for credit cards or loans. She also needs to be named on all accounts - like car payments etc (utilities aren't good enough for a credit rating). BTW having her on your accounts - 2nd card for a family member thing - does NOT get her a credit rating. The account is not in her name. Might be better to pay off the cards, keep them in your name and lock them in a drawer for emergencies. Just use them enough to keep them from getting cancelled for non-use like this month pay the electric with the card and them immediately pay off the card out of your income with the amount budgeted for electric. --- When the kids are all 18, your household size will drop to 2 people for the purposes of food stamps and a $25000 SSDI income will put you ABOVE the income limits for the Medicaid savings program and Medicaid and Food Stamps with a household of 2. (Assuming that is all straight SSDI and does not include dependent's benefits for minor kids.) Now when she is 65, imagine trying to pay for Medicare B for 2 people ($122 per person - $244 a month), Part D prescription plan ($45 a month per person -$90 per month), Medigap to cover copays but not deductibles ($135 per person -$270 per month) and the Part A and B deductibles (around $1447 per year per person - $2894 a year.) That will be $604 a month in just premiums and over $10142 for all premiums and deductibles (and not including drug copays.) That will be nearly 41% of your $25000 income leaving you only $1238 a month for food, dental & vision, clothing utilities, cars etc. Now if as I suspect that the total SSDI of $25000 includes dependents benefits for minor children - anywhere from 50% to 80% of what you are getting is for the kids - that changes when they hit 18 (or finish college at 21-22). So then when they are 18 (or until out of college at 21-22), your SSDI will probably drop to maybe $13888 -16666 a year or an average of $1272 a month. With just that income she could stay on Medicaid and you could stay in the Medicare savings program and both on Food stamps. At 62 she can draw a spousal benefit - but will take hit of around 25% less because she is not full retirement age (around 37% of what you get). At 66 she would get the full spousal benefit of 50% of what you get - and even if your SSDI drops because of the kids turning 18, her spousal benefit would send your income back up to over the limits for Medicaid, Medicare savings program and food stamps. Say she waits until age 66 to draw the spousal benefit * if the $25000 is just your SSDI and no dependents, then your combined income would be $37500 -- and you have to pay all the Medicare premiums, copays etc for both of you out of that. You are way over the income limit for Medicaid, Medicare Savings and Food Stamps of 135% of FPL for 2 people (right now $FPL is $16020 for 2 so multiple it by 1.35) * if the $25000 is, say, 65% higher than it would be because of dependents. when they are over 18 and she is 66, then your combined income would be $22727 - again above the income limits fore Medicaid, Medicare savings and food stamps --- and you have to pay all the Medicare premiums, copays etc. ($25000 divided by 1.80 = SSDI without kids + 50% of SSDI for her spousal benefit = $22727 vs Medicaid income limit of 135% FPL for 2 people of $21627) It is situations like this that cause what is called a "Medicaid divorce" so that people can keep their eligibility for Medicaid and get medical care because they can not afford the costs of other insurance. When you are planning, you have to think about how it will be in 10, 15 or 23 years. If you die before she reaches age 60 she has ZERO income. Nothing nada zip. Your SSDI will not continue except for any kid under 18 and then for the kids it would only be around 75% of what your BASE SSDI (not including extra for the kids) and are getting right now. At 60 as a widow she could get 75% of what your SSDI is (without the additional for the kids.) At 66, as a widow she would get your full base SSDI (assuming no additional for minor kids.) Right now you are at maximum income and benefits - Medicaid, food stamps, Medicare Savings Program etc --- kids leave SSDI will probably go down and she reaches the age for spousal benefits it goes up......and it can all affect whether or not you have to ante up the Medicare costs for 2 people. ANd again she needs to work if for no other reason than to stash what she makes in a retirement account for the future. If you have 2 adults and 3 minor children in the house, Medicaid cut off eligibility would be 135% of Federal Poverty Level - $28440 is FPL for 5 people. 135% = $38394. She could make $1000 -1050 a month (or $220 a weekly pay period) and not affect Medicaid & Food Stamps. That would mean $11000 or so to stick in the bank. If she does that for 22 years, you all would have saved $242,000 plus any interest. (Note her gross - not after-tax -earnings can't be anymore than that $1000-1050 in a month or Medicaid eligibility is affected for that month. If paid weekly, there will be 4 months with 5 pay periods and if paid every 2 weeks, there will be 2 months with 5 pay periods. Those are the typical pay periods for unskilled work - only kind she can get .She would just have to watch how many hours she is working a month - can't be full time) Bottom line is when you became disabled, life as you and she knew it ended -and that included the luxury of staying home with the kids and never working in a job. They can go to public school and she really needs to get a job. She is going to have to step up and get a job to help keep the family provided with electric, clothes and other basics. Living below poverty level (where you all are) is really hard. By getting a part-time job, she can ease that a lot - like increasing household net income by over 42% without effecting Medicaid and Food Stamps. Add in what would she do it if you died before she was 60 (some 16 years from now) and she only got $900 or so a month in SS benefits for the kids under 16 or got ZERO because there were no minor kids? Job - now - anything will do even stocking shelves. You are gonna need that money down the road. BTW adult kids living with you do not count in your household for figuring Federal Poverty Level.