Thousands of Ohio's most vulnerable residents are trapped in a system that was created to protect them but instead allows unscrupulous guardians to rob them of their freedom, dignity and money. Even judges who oversee the system acknowledge that it is broken, that it has ripped apart families, rendered the mentally ill voiceless, and left some elderly Ohioans dying penniless in nursing homes.

Thousands of Ohio�s most vulnerable residents are trapped in a system that was created to protect them but instead allows unscrupulous guardians to rob them of their freedom, dignity and money. Even judges who oversee the system acknowledge that it is broken, that it has ripped apart families, rendered the mentally ill voiceless, and left some elderly Ohioans dying penniless in nursing homes.

Anyone could end up in this system that currently controls the lives of 65,000 Ohioans, especially decisions about medical care and personal finances. And almost anyone can become a guardian � a loved one, a close friend, a stranger, even a felon.

One Columbus lawyer proudly proclaims that he likely is guardian of more wards than anyone in the country � about 400 people.

This system, which is supposed to look out for the health and well-being of the elderly, the mentally disabled and children, is directed by probate judges in 88 counties. And for lack of detailed guidelines from the state, the counties have 88 different ways of overseeing guardians and their wards.

The Ohio Supreme Court recognized the problems and assigned a committee nearly eight years ago to come up with rules. This year, the committee finally put forward a plan that falls far short of national standards and what advocates say is necessary to protect vulnerable Ohioans.

Meanwhile, probate court dockets are overloaded.

The courts also handle other family matters, such as adoptions, marriage licenses, wills and disputes over estates. And the demand for guardianships will grow as the number of people 65 or older in the U.S. doubles by 2050.

Without significant changes in the guardianship system, Ohioans will see more neglect and abuse of those who are supposedly being protected. A yearlong Dispatch investigation found many such cases:

� A severely autistic man ballooned to 513 pounds because his guardian � his mother � allowed him to gorge on junk food and microwave dinners despite repeated warnings from his caseworkers.

� After 45 years of marriage, an elderly couple was separated for months in their final year because of a guardian�s failures.

� An eccentric woman forced into guardianship against her will was left broke and homeless because she looks and talks differently from most people and let her house deteriorate.

� A mentally disabled man brought home paychecks after long hours of lugging drywall and plywood at Home Depot only to have his legal guardian � his mother � pocket some of his money for herself.

Ohio�s system has allowed some lawyers appointed as guardians to ignore elderly and mentally ill people while placing them in the lowest-rated nursing homes.

It also has allowed some lawyers to bill their wards, many of whom they never see, thousands of dollars in questionable legal fees for such routine tasks as paying utility bills or buying wards Christmas presents with their own money.

Broken system

When presented with T he Dispatch �s findings, many advocates and probate judges across the state, including Franklin County Judge Robert G. Montgomery, said the system is broken or in need of significant changes.

A Dispatch survey of Ohio�s probate courts, for example, found that nearly 90 percent do not require a credit check for prospective guardians. And as many as 61 percent do not require criminal-background checks, opening the door for felons to become guardians entrusted with the assets and care of vulnerable people.

Guardians are required in most counties to submit paper status reports about their wards only every two years. Other courts require an annual report. There is no requirement that probate courts independently verify the information on those updates, and many don�t.

Ohio does not require guardians to visit wards. A few counties require monthly visits that mirror national model standards, but more than three-quarters of Ohio�s probate courts do not require that guardians meet with the people they make decisions for. Ever.

More than 80 percent of Ohio probate courts do not conduct financial audits or random in-home inspections, according to 72 of 88 counties that responded to the Dispatch survey last fall.

More than two-thirds of the counties do not track cases that had been investigated for possible wrongdoing or that had been forwarded to local law-enforcement agencies � cases that likely deserve extra scrutiny.

The lack of standards and accountability for guardianships puts Ohio far behind other states, such as Indiana and Tennessee, which recently enacted laws to strengthen their guardian systems.

But in Ohio, if adults in guardianship receive little attention from the courts, minors receive even less. In many cases, courts never check on children after appointing a guardian unless the child has assets, which means the guardian must file a statement of financial accounts.

Call for reform

Attorney General Mike DeWine said he was appalled and disgusted by abuses revealed by the Dispatch investigation and the lack of court oversight.

�I think it�s certainly crying out for reform,� he said. �And some sort of standards are certainly very, very much needed.�

DeWine�s office and the FBI raided the former Mahoning County probate judge�s office and house in February looking for records of campaign finance reports and lists of donors.

Mark Belinky, 61, a Democrat, resigned from the bench and pleaded guilty this month to tampering with records for failing to disclose campaign contributions, expenses and loans in amounts ranging from $7,500 to $150,000. As part of a plea agreement, he surrendered his law license, and prosecutors recommended probation for him.

Sources close to the Belinky case told The Dispatch that the investigation is ongoing and includes possible misconduct involving guardianships.

The Ohio Supreme Court subcommittee�s discussion of adult guardianships during nearly eight years came to a head a few months ago, after Dispatch reporters began attending its meetings and questioning committee members.

The group of lawyers, judges and guardians put forward its ideas for more oversight, including the central tenet that courts should require guardians who are not relatives to meet with wards at least twice a year.

Julia R. Nack, one of two nationally certified master guardians in Ohio, and a former probate court investigator, said the proposed rule changes are better than nothing but don�t go far enough.

The Supreme Court is to decide on those recommendations after a 30-day period for public comment ends on June 25. For information on commenting, go to the court�s website at www.supremecourt.ohio.gov.

Old problem

The Dispatch reviewed more than 700 adult guardianship cases opened in 2007, 2008 and 2009 in Franklin County. Those years were chosen because the cases had numerous annual reporting deadlines and because they passed through the hands of the last four county probate judges: Lawrence A. Belskis, Alan Aker, Eric Brown and now, Montgomery.

The newspaper also reviewed more than 400 cases of children placed under guardianship since 2000.

The bulky adult case files detail a system overwhelmed by the increasing number of mentally ill people and an aging population. The cases also show that those needing the most help were treated mostly as names on a page and never seen by the court.

In nearly half of the cases reviewed, The Dispatch found signs of trouble � judicial admonishments, complaints or financial issues that judges in some other counties said would raise red flags.

The newspaper investigation also included the review of an additional 500 cases in the county and across the state in which the court or a third party raised concerns about a ward�s case. The vast majority of the concerns centered on guardians who failed to give the court written updates about their wards� well-being or account for their finances.

The most prominent players in Franklin County�s guardian system are a handful of lawyers. The court has relied heavily on them, rather than on volunteers, as some other counties do.

�The lawyers have been the ones holding this together,� Montgomery said .

He said that attorney-guardians are deemed trustworthy because they swear to follow a strict code of conduct or face sanctions by the Ohio Supreme Court for dishonest behavior.

�They�re officers of the court,� he said. �When a lawyer signs something, we�re not supposed to have to check that.�

But there is evidence that these lawyers need oversight.

The same day in April that Montgomery spoke with reporters, for example, the attorney general�s office reported the arrest of a lawyer in Preble County who was accused of stealing more than $208,000 from four wards in his care from 2007 to 2013. The lawyer, 38-year-old James Thomas Jr., also was charged with three counts of falsification � accused of filing false annual reports with the court about his wards.

Montgomery said lawyers generally do a fine job, but he wants to work with local social-services agencies to recruit and train volunteer guardians.

Ill-prepared guardians

Even when family members become guardians, it doesn�t guarantee a ward will fare well, as with the case of Tommy Croft.

Croft, 28, has a mild mental disability and attention-deficit disorder, but customers at the Home Depot near Powell mainly know him by his eternal smile and willingness to help. He earns about $10 an hour working full time at a job he has had for about seven years.

When a Probate Court investigator said Croft needed a guardian in 2007 because his mental disability would make him a �risk for exploitation,� the court�s investigator couldn�t know that Croft�s own mother would be the one exploiting him. She was appointed guardian of her son in April that year.

Two years later, Tommy Croft moved in with his grandparents after his unemployed mom lost her home. His grandmother discovered some oddities in his checking account � a withdrawal for a cellphone bill, but Tommy didn�t have a cellphone. Money had been taken to pay a baby-clothing store, but Tommy doesn�t have children.

The Franklin County Board of Developmental Disabilities investigated and found that at least $1,206 � equal to about three weeks� pay � had been withdrawn from Tommy�s account without his permission.

His grandmother decided against pressing charges, but a magistrate with the Franklin County Probate Court removed Tommy�s mother as his guardian in December 2009.

�She kept taking Tommy�s money, and grandma wanted to make sure it never happened again,� said Aileen Burnside, Tommy�s developmental-disabilities-board caseworker. �It�s wrong for anyone, but it�s even worse to take advantage of someone you are supposed to be protecting from just that kind of behavior.�

His mother did not return phone messages seeking comment.

Court records show that wards are routinely mistreated by family members, even as they file reports saying all is well.

Their actions often are motivated by greed and easy access to cash.

The Dispatch reviewed cases in which a daughter was accused of a spending spree with her dad�s credit cards shortly after becoming his guardian, where siblings fought over the profits of a home sale before their mother was placed in a nursing home, and where family members challenged one another to be guardian of an estate worth more than $1 million.

One large factor is the lack of guardian training. Some family members weren�t aware that they couldn�t buy things such as a car with the ward�s money unless approved by the court.

Nearly 60 of the Ohio probate courts surveyed do not require training to be a guardian. In counties that do, training programs vary from 30 minutes to eight hours.

In Franklin County, the training is a 90-minute video.

Today, Tommy Croft can still be found smiling near the contractor loading dock at Home Depot. He continues living in a home with his grandparents, but now he has two lawyers who are co-guardians to help him handle his pay.

Tommy maintains a relationship with his mother but has no idea that she was removed as guardian or was spending his money without permission.

�I love my mom,� he said. �I�m lucky people help take care of me.�