One makes a Power of Attorney to insure your wishes and instructions are followed if you can no longer act for yourselve.
In my mothers case that was the rather odd decision to appoint all her 4 children as attorneys but to require that a majority agree to any decision. In retrospect not including a dispute resolution mechanism was a mistake, as was not writing more of her instructions down.
On numerous occasions Michael and Andrew took actions that affected Mom’s care without the authority outlined in her Power of Attorney. For instance they instituted in home washing. Had Michael and Andrew truly thought in home washing care was important they should have contacted all attorneys, informed them and gotten approval.
Both know the approval of a majority of attorneys is required for all personal care issues. It’s impossible to see washing by a third party, or changing the location of one primary residence as anything other that the most personal of personal care issues.
This action was very similar to the action they took with Mrs. Childs doctor. Again acting without the approval of a majority of attorneys, they contacted the doctor, asked for a recommendation based on only information they thought was important.
Both cases seem to me to be a premeditated attempts to circumvent the Power of Attorney by surreptitious action when discussion and proper approval is needed.
To leave decisions taken outside the process outlined in the Power of Attorney uncorrected leaves Mom in ongoing risk whose scope cannot be calculated – as unrestrained action could have no bounds.
Michael’s position on the Power of Attorney can be summed up by his statement
all attorneys have been kept fully informed as to the basis for that difference of opinion.
Apparently, he and his lawyer believed that although Mrs. Childs’s Power of Attorney says decisions require the agreement of a majority of attorney’s if they have and control Mom all they needs was to inform a majority of attorneys – then do as they wished.
That was they position they too regarding Mrs Childs property.