The spend down policy is broken

When we retired we set aside money to travel. Due to unforeseen circumstances, my wife developed mobility issues. The money continued to accumulate, and I decided that I would give it to various charitable organizations. And have been doing so for the last 15 years.

After speaking with an elder care lawyer I found out that a division of assets would be required. The state would take basically half of our savings, which is fine because our savings was earmarked to take care of us in our declining years. Had I spent any portion on goods and services, that would be fine, but because I donated to charities and received nothing material in return, the state would essentially take all of our savings by spending down the entire amount leaving nothing for me in my declining years.

The take away from this is it appears that the state would prefer people to spend frivolously then to help support those most in need. I have always tried to live simply so that others may simply live. I guess it is true that no good deed goes unpunished. This is a policy that the state does not advertise until it is too late to do anything about it.

GREG STEINER, Cape Girardeau