While rarely enforced, filial responsibility laws still remain a law in many states including Massachusetts. With budgets tightening and political landscapes shifting, these laws could see renewed attention. As federal discussions around healthcare and Medicaid continue, states may face financial strain and may look to these old statutes to hold children liable for their parent’s care needs.
It’s important to note that these statutes carry real consequences. In Massachusetts, failure to comply can result in civil liability for unpaid care costs and even criminal penalties, including fines or jail time.
Filial responsibility laws were originally intended to prevent individuals from becoming a public burden, especially when families could help take care of their aging family members. However, modern realities make this even more critical. Today, many households rely on both individuals working, leaving less time for family caregiving. As a result, reliance on third-party caregivers has grown significantly. In Massachusetts, for example, the average cost of home care through an agency is approximately $40 per hour—a figure that can quickly add up, community level care starts and ranges from $6,000 to $18,000 a month in Massachusetts.
The statute is very ambiguous and provides the court with a lot of discretion which makes determining when the statute will be or could be applied very difficult. The statute states that for filial responsibility to apply, a parent must be considered indigent and cannot have caused their financial hardship through fault or misconduct. This is where things get complicated: if a parent gave away assets, mismanaged investments, or failed to save adequately, could that be considered “causing” their own misfortune? If so, could a child argue they are not liable because of mom/dad’s failure to plan for long-term care? With care costs constantly increasing is not preparing for care “causing” your own misfortune. As you can see the ambiguity makes it hard to know what requires a child to then be responsible for their parents care. But the court can also use its discretion if a child faces financial hardship—such as paying their own medical bills or college tuition—the court is unlikely to require them to use limited resources to support a parent. Also what happens if there are multiple children but only one child has the means to pay for mom/dad’s care that now makes them solely responsible. The statute does allow that even if the other kids cannot support, if one child can support mom and dad that one child could be held liable while their siblings are not.
Also it’s important to understand that filial responsibility laws and powers of attorney (POA) are very different. Being named as someone’s POA does not automatically make you personally liable for that person’s expenses or debts, unless you explicitly agree to assume financial responsibility. This is why, when acting as POA, it is critical to sign documents on behalf of your parent as “POA” and never in your individual name. Doing so helps prevent any misunderstanding about who is financially responsible for the obligation. However, even though a POA does not create personal liability, filial responsibility laws can still apply and may make adult children legally responsible even when they are or are not serving as POA for the cost of a parent’s care under certain circumstances.
So what can families do to protect themselves? The most important step is to start conversations early. Children should talk with their parents about whether a plan is in place if care becomes necessary, keeping in mind these old filial responsibility statutes and the potential liability they could create for adult children. This discussion should include exploring options such as long-term care insurance or other financial strategies designed to cover the cost of care. Proactive planning can help avoid unexpected expenses and reduce the risk of legal exposure.
This can all be confusing. If you have any questions, go ahead and give us a call at 508-202-1818.