This is a sad tale.
This thread concerns my sister(M)'s care for my late mother(I.D).
After many years of my sister trying to convince my mother to live her my mother succumbed. This is despite my mother almost begging my other sister(V) and me not to let M take over her life. My mother's determination to remain at home included her having a stair-lift installed (which M had removed) and a downstairs W.C. built (arranged by V) (about which M was furous!) Then it reached the point when it was becoming increasingly obvious that I.D was showing early signs of dementia. I offered to live with her and look after her, V offered to have her live at V's house V and I suggested several other solutions; a live-in companion for example. But Mum had done a complete volte face and was now determined to live with M. V and I were bewildered until V worked it out. M was becoming stressed out with her work and I.D wanted to live with M to look after her! This situation continued for 16 months when my mother died of heart failure, due to a weak heart (the result of Rheumatic Fever as a young woman). This was in turn caused by my mother contracting hypothermia whilst at my sister M.'s. Am I justified in feeling bitter about this?
I was never wecome at M's house and M made it increasingly difficult to go there by various means on which I wont elaborate. V had similar, although fewer problems.
I have discovered discrepancy in my mother's financial affairs. First I should describe 'the deal'. The deal was that Mum should live at M's for free. Mum was to allow M's son B to rent her house at 50% rent of £600 (i.e £300) and pay all of his bills except food - which didn't amount to much less than the £300 she was receiving. So for all intents and purposes my mother's Post Office account have increased by the amount of pension she received each week (£175) for 69 weeks - about £12,000. It didn't. M had her card and PIN number and used to drain the account dry every other week or so. When I confronted her she claimed that money was to pay her and her husband for caring for her. This is completely outside the original agreement and unless being 'caring' incorpotates being so remiss as to allow my mum to get so cold then I have misundersttod its meaning. Finally the last time I saw mum she broke down. M must have convinced her I'd abandoned her. I cannot walk more than 50 yards or so - I was barredffrom M's house - even my tel. number was barred - so I could not even 'phone her. But it was not only that - it was obvious that as soon as I was out of the picture mum's 'care' declined. She confided in V and me when she had settled down that she rarely saw M - not even to pop her head 'round the door on the way to bed. She died two weeks later - I was ill for that period and, indeed, missed the funeral - not that mum would have minded - she had no sentimenality re death
Maybe I am so angry with M that I cannot think clearly. I know this shouldn't be about the money - but should I allow M to get away with sqirreling away £12,000?
PS All of this is provable - there is no libel here.
This thread concerns my sister(M)'s care for my late mother(I.D).
After many years of my sister trying to convince my mother to live her my mother succumbed. This is despite my mother almost begging my other sister(V) and me not to let M take over her life. My mother's determination to remain at home included her having a stair-lift installed (which M had removed) and a downstairs W.C. built (arranged by V) (about which M was furous!) Then it reached the point when it was becoming increasingly obvious that I.D was showing early signs of dementia. I offered to live with her and look after her, V offered to have her live at V's house V and I suggested several other solutions; a live-in companion for example. But Mum had done a complete volte face and was now determined to live with M. V and I were bewildered until V worked it out. M was becoming stressed out with her work and I.D wanted to live with M to look after her! This situation continued for 16 months when my mother died of heart failure, due to a weak heart (the result of Rheumatic Fever as a young woman). This was in turn caused by my mother contracting hypothermia whilst at my sister M.'s. Am I justified in feeling bitter about this?
I was never wecome at M's house and M made it increasingly difficult to go there by various means on which I wont elaborate. V had similar, although fewer problems.
I have discovered discrepancy in my mother's financial affairs. First I should describe 'the deal'. The deal was that Mum should live at M's for free. Mum was to allow M's son B to rent her house at 50% rent of £600 (i.e £300) and pay all of his bills except food - which didn't amount to much less than the £300 she was receiving. So for all intents and purposes my mother's Post Office account have increased by the amount of pension she received each week (£175) for 69 weeks - about £12,000. It didn't. M had her card and PIN number and used to drain the account dry every other week or so. When I confronted her she claimed that money was to pay her and her husband for caring for her. This is completely outside the original agreement and unless being 'caring' incorpotates being so remiss as to allow my mum to get so cold then I have misundersttod its meaning. Finally the last time I saw mum she broke down. M must have convinced her I'd abandoned her. I cannot walk more than 50 yards or so - I was barredffrom M's house - even my tel. number was barred - so I could not even 'phone her. But it was not only that - it was obvious that as soon as I was out of the picture mum's 'care' declined. She confided in V and me when she had settled down that she rarely saw M - not even to pop her head 'round the door on the way to bed. She died two weeks later - I was ill for that period and, indeed, missed the funeral - not that mum would have minded - she had no sentimenality re death
Maybe I am so angry with M that I cannot think clearly. I know this shouldn't be about the money - but should I allow M to get away with sqirreling away £12,000?
PS All of this is provable - there is no libel here.
