Eldercaring Coordination
Portia B. Scott, J.D., L.L.M. • May 1, 2021

Where to turn when no one agrees on what to do.

There have been pilot programs running in eight of Florida’s judicial circuits (our local circuit, the 19th, is not one of them) which were aimed to try to lessen conflict and strife between conflicting family members of a vulnerable adult.

 

The idea is that in “high conflict” families, such as families whose members cannot agree on what is the best treatment going forward for a loved one, the skills of a neutral person should be employed. “Employed” is the exact term, of course, as there is a fee along with duties including confidentiality, impartiality and integrity. 

 

The goals are to include the vulnerable adult in the process as much as possible, eliminate (or, at least reduce) the hostility which can erupt between otherwise loving family members when the choice of care for their vulnerable adult is not unanimous and, ultimately, allow the vulnerable adult peace at the end of life.

 

Presently, this Eldercaring Coordination may only be implemented through a court order. Thus, it appears the utility of the program may be limited to Guardianship matters before a Guardian has been appointed, as once a Guardian is appointed, there is little motivation to relinquish the authority granted by the Court to the Guardian.

 

Critics of Eldercaring Coordination point to possibility of reduction in the authority of the Court-Appointed Guardian, of the requirement of agreement and concomitant issues with enforcement, and the potential abuse limiting the Court’s involvement where the Court’s historic role has been that of Super-Guardian, that is, the supervisor of the Guardian.

 

The pilot programs were aimed at gathering the information before the drafting of a Statute of implementation, a recognition of the problems of Florida’s initial attempt at a similar style of authority granted under the State’s Parent Coordination laws.


Now, House Bill 441 and Senate Bill 368 are drafted and ready for full Legislative consideration.

 

The bill, presumedly, will allow a Court who is facing a family in conflict over the proper care for their elderly loved one who cannot make decisions for him or herself, to appoint a “coordinator” who will be empowered to evaluate the situation and provide recommendations to the Court on how best to enrich the elderly person’s life.

 

So, the coordinator may recommend that the fighting siblings only visit on alternate days; may recommend a one of them to take over the finances with the elderly person’s consent and direction, may even recommend family counseling. Everything would be less restrictive than the alternative: Guardianship.

 

When dealing with the elderly, it is always best to have options.  

 

Please see Florida Chapter of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts for more information.

 

Share this article

By By Portia B. Scott, J.D., L.L.M. • September 24, 2026
The time for using unregulated Lady Bird Deeds might be ending.
By Portia B. Scott, J.D., L.L.M. • July 22, 2026
One of the most absurd things for law students to grasp in that all-important first year, is the idea of what can be considered "ambiguous." (Ambiguity is "an uncertainty of meaning or intention, as in a contractual term or statutory provision.") If language is deemed "ambiguous," what happens next depends on where this ambiguity is found. The ambiguity can be subject to interpretation of a Court - if it is in a statute. If the Court has to use interpretation, there are several tools they can use to derive meaning and intent from the writers of the statute. This search for "Legislative intent" is sometimes easy if there is a part of the statute stating specifically what the Legislature was trying to do. Without that, however, judges will look at what the plain and simple language would mean. If that does not help, then they can look at the surrounding language, the other terms, what might be excluded, what would make the language harmonious with the other laws on the topic... All kinds of factors are examined to determine what the law is trying to say. However, if the ambiguity is found in a contract, the options are different and depend on whether the ambiguity is an obvious mistake ("Art is the Buyer" and then, later "The Buyer, Bert" is written in the same contract) or whether it is a more sneaky ambiguity. Here is where the comma comes into play. The Tariff of 1872 misplaced a comma, resulting in fruits not being subject to the tax. The tariff was trying to say that fruits and fruit plants would be subject to the tariff, but, by placing a comma where it did not belong, fruits become tax free and only fruit-bearing plants were subject to the Tariff. Another is a case where there would be no overtime payments for work done for "...drying, marketing, storing, packing for shipment or distribution" of foods. Because there was no comma between "shipment" and "distribution," the Court found it questionable if "shipment and distribution" were one joint act or two separate ones. The result? Workers got their overtime payments. Now, we have a case, decided July 22, 2026 by our appellate court, that a comma found between "construed according to the laws of the State of Florida" and "with venue in Collier County," created an ambiguity allowing venue to be set in another County (Martin). The comma controlled and there is an ambiguity, allowing the action to be filed in Martin County, rather than Collier. The benefits of filing in one county verses another, well, that would be an entirely different article.  Just remember: Watch those punctuation marks folks! Ambiguities may be found everywhere!