Can changes my Dad made to his estate plan be invalidated if it's proven he was mentally ill?

Conflict of interest or not, it sounds like a messy situation, dadwasNPD. I hope you get some answers and some sort of resolution on this.

Well, churchmouse, as someone who holds four degrees and uses the scientific method, I have a little different definition of true expert. As Sam Vaknin points out in one of his videos, there are a lot of people who claim to be experts but have no qualifying academic background (witness the anti-climate change "experts"). As for the conflict of interest, in three and a half years, I have found several articles by legal professionals on conflict of interest. And, yes, if you stand to benefit by someone else's death and then have an involvement/say in whether or not that person will have resources to pay for it (or, as in my case) might have to take a pass because of limited funds, that is by definition a conflict of interest. I can even scan and send you a copy of the trust atty's letter wherein SHE calls it a conflict of interest although her attempt at logic to explain it leads to red herrings and begging the question.

Um. Conflict of interest isn't pertinent to this. Many trust advisers, most executors, most people with POA for that matter, are family members with expectations of any estate in question.

I can never help musing a little to myself when people say that they are looking for "true" experts - by which they mean the ones who agree with them - as opposed to those charlatans and idiots - i.e. the ones who don't agree with them.

Anyway, nitwit attorneys for the trust didn't think my life-or-death dilemma was/is significant enough to seek a court's interpretation/amendment even though the Third Restatement of Trusts says trustees have a duty to seek court action if there is a "circumstance that could cause substantial harm" to the trust or beneficiary. I.e. dying from lack of medical care?
After two or three months of saying there's no language in the trust to ask for that amendment (who made HER the final arbiter, eh?), she said they could ask those second cousins of my father's (who are also remainder beneficiaries if I die before they do). They declined to sign the amendment! Can you say CONFLICT OF INTEREST? DUH!
The atty for the trust's response to that was "Well," (you can see her filing her nails behind her desk) "the conflict of interest existed when your father made them trust advisers." Does that obviate the conflict of interest and the legal, not to forget MORAL/ETHICAL, issue at stake? Those trailer park trash second cousins should NOT have ANY SAY in an issue like that!
Now, it might be used to reduce paying back that 90K...
Stay tuned!

Hi rr4terps,
(I'm a linguist and still trying to decode your handle...)
Well, I've found another true expert, I hope, and will see if I can get an opinion from her on the three finance/economics "decisions" my father made and how LIKELY it was his NPD "poisoned his affections and perverted his sense of right" (throwing their own legalese back at them!). Hopefully, I'll get something from her by mid-week. I'm hoping it'll be strong enough that I can stick it under everyone's noses back there and say: See, I told you this was important!
To keep you entertained/bewildered in the meantime, here's another chapter that keeps me looking out for Rod Serling in the shadows...
The first trust advisers were MY cousins from my mother's family. They bowed out when Dad spouted off at their mother's funeral. So... what did wise old Dad do? He nominated HIS second cousins, who had been named in the original trust document four years before as secondary/remainder beneficiaries if I predecease them, they were named trust advisers as well. Well...
Still working from the original trust, there was a line after the bit about my getting a monthly stipend that "no further payments out of principal" will be paid to yours truly. The problem is: health care costs are MUCH CHEAPER in my adopted country BUT someday soon I will have a heart attack or stroke or something and, because saving money with one pre-existing chronic condition is already difficult, I might not have enough money to afford the ER for those major events (even though they might be $15K to 20K here).
Right after he died, I saw this as an issue of capacity (though not recognized as NPD yet). He helped me with my medical bills for years, but he did not think of my likely need for a discretionary payout to pay for a heart attack or stroke? Mom would have twisted his ear severely and reminded him... (continued)

JessieBelle: You're right on the money on that. The caregiving child is also the one that the parent blames and uses as the scapegoat to cover up his/her own shirking of responsibilities to a spouse. My father (aka "The devil's spawn") slandered and libeled me to his estate atty, his drs, and to the Tucson police and the Arizona atty general's office-- and not one of them bothered to question his false statements about me. They fell for his lies hook, line, and sinker and made judgements about me without ever having met me, all on the basis of his lies. This is what made it so easy for his estate atty to allow him to write me out of his part of my parents' estate plan and what allowed his financial adviser, CPA, and other associates to try to lie to me. He had portrayed me as being stupid, naive, and like a teenager (all BS) and they figured they could get away with stuff. But, little did they know that I'm none of those things. When, in going through the trust accounts with a fine tooth comb, my husband (who is very good at financial stuff) discovered that the devil's spawn and his financial adviser had invaded the principle of my mother's estate (of which I was the heir), my Arizona atty told the trustee of the devil's spawn's estate that this was a breach of fiduciary responsibility on both his and his financial adviser's parts and that I was seriously considering suing both the financial advisor and the devil spawn's estate and that, given that we had documented proof of the invasion of the principle, we would win the case. That made the trustee's atty back off real quickly and state that they wouldn't pursue trying to get me to pay the accrued income that I allegedly owed the spawn's estate-- that was also very suspicious. There were other things that were discovered and I ended up coming out ahead. But, even though I helped my parents and was there for them, the devil's spawn treated me like sh*t and was so quick to point the finger of blame and use me as his scapegoat and write me out of his part of my parents' estate plan. He tried to write me out of my mother's part of the estate, but couldn't because she was already dead. And, even if she had still been alive, she was demented and couldn't have understood enough to have given permission to have me written out. So, I was fortunate from that perspective. But, the hanky panky that went on with the estate plan and with the tangible items was disgusting. The beneficiary was the devil's spawn's financial adviser-- a real conflict of interest--- and she wouldn't give me all of the tangibles I asked for given that I was my family's sole survivor. She refused and lied to me about the tangibles, even though she knew she was the beneficiary and had told me at the devil's spawn's deathbed that I should be given all of the tangibles as my family's sole survivor. So, sometimes it's better to just walk away, turn your back on an evil parent who falsely accuses you of stuff and treats you like crap, even if it means that you're cut out of a will and even if it means that harm comes to them. Sometimes, it's just not worth it to put up with a parent's BS and is better to just let nature takes its course and handle the parent however it's going to happen. In my case, I was in a no-win situation because with my mom being demented and being mentally and verbally abused, I couldn't in all good conscience turn my back on her. It was either turn my back on her to avoid dealing with the devil's spawn and have feelings of guilt and remorse later on or help her out and take the consequences of the devil's spawn's wrath at me. I decided to do the second, knowing that the spawn would likely find an excuse to write me out of the estate since he was upset that I didn't kiss his feet and treat him like a god and fall for his BS hook, line, and sinker like his stupid associates and others in Tucson. This angered him and when he'd get angry and go into one of his usual rages, he often did stupid things that he later regretted (even his financial advisor told me this). So, this is why I advise people with NPD parents to abandon them and severing the relationship as soon as the parent starts falsely accusing them (the adult child) of stuff and lying to others about this stuff, even if it means getting written out of a will. It's sometimes just not worth the hassles and heartbreak. dadwasNPD, though, has a totally different situation that it sounds like he should pursue. And maybe, he'll raise awareness enough that tests of testamentary capacity will be changed-- who knows.

I've always thought it a bit strange that the caregiving child is often the one who receives the least from their parent. I bet they're also the one cut out of the will most often if a parent gets upset with them.

amendment: Oh, he didn't change the trust, but he decided to stick it to me by taking my name off the acct, making it difficult for me to claim that 90K check two weeks later was on an acct with my name on it. Meanwhile, that very month, I was cutting my asthma meds in half to make them last and stay alive, and so we'd have money to buy food. THE WORST financial crisis of my life, and he was tipping hospice staff for wiping his nose, making anonymous donations to widows at church through the USPS, and GIVING his cousins 100K when they already had a home, land, vehicles, Social Security, Medicare, all of which I am unlikely to ever have, so that 100K would have helped me get to an ER when I have a heart attack or stroke and still pay for my daughter's education over here.
I'd like to think that he's somewhere where my mother and his mother are slapping the ever-loving daylights out of him...

hi rr4,
Dad didn't change his trust. Actually, he screwed up when he amended it before his cancer diagnosis. Originally, if I predecease those cousins of his, they get what's left, nothing until. If I outlived them, then what's left of the PRINCIPAL after I die, would go to the ALS Foundation (the disease which killed my mother before he did his will/trust). Then, six years later, he amended with the final beneficiary, if I outlive the cousins in their mid-60s, was unnamed. Stupid outside atty FOR THE TRUST decided my wife and daughter should be named, STILL PROTECTING THE PRINCIPAL TOO DAMNED MUCH. Oh yeah, that's great, give my wife and her financially incompetent culture 200 grand when they barely make 200 bucks a month here; meanwhile, I fight the trust to have an amendment added to pay out of principal if/when I someday have a heart attack or stroke (which would cost about 15 to 18 grand here, but more than I have saved up because I'm paying for my seven daily meds and regular ER visits for asthma out of my own pocket. Wish I could turn into the Incredible Hulk and open a door or two and make people sit down and listen to the facts.
A snag: the nationally known expert in IL says he doesn't take American Express and I don't have Visa or MasterCard, and he says he might not get to my 5 page letter (12 min to read!) and write a response for a few weeks. I have to get something soon to be a Sword of Damocles over the cousins' heads before statue of limitations runs out. My atty is suggesting I take a settlement FROM THE TRUST for the total amt of HIS fees, so I don't lose anything there, and a bit on top of that and a 5K CD that was still in my name when Dad died but the trust snapped up and I didn't learn about until three years later.
I'm not too keen on a settlement because it might be the difference between, say, 19K and 90K. I believe, if I could get a true expert (not one of these fakes) who has written a few articles/books and has a video presence online, then maybe I could stick that under the trust's, the cousins' and the lawyers noses, and say: NPS poisons affections, perverts sense of right, just like your precious Banks VS Goodfellow on testamentary capacity states is a precondition.
Time to hit the hay here IF I can sleep. I'll probably get up after a few minutes and search for contacts for a couple more true experts.
As before, thanks for the feedback and thoughts and... stay tuned...

dadwasNPD: One other thing: One characteristic (among the many others) of NPD is the associated anger expressed as fits of rage. You saw that with your father when you had that conversation with him in which you stated that you'd probably precede him to the grave and then he went and changed his estate plan and wrote you off of his bank accounts. My father did similar things. The other thing is that NPD people are very rigid in their thinking. Once they've decided that someone is bad or a situation is whatever they perceive in their distorted reality, they delude themselves into believing these things and will not change their thinking. So, because there were times I confronted my father with his mental abuse of my demented mother or didn't unquestioningly believe him because he had lied to me so many times, he decided that I was a bad person and no matter what wouldn't change his thinking about me. There was also the matter of his sabotaging my mother's care because he felt the need to continue abusing her and also be in control. Realizing that he was afraid of losing his independence, I was compassionate toward him and treated him with respect, even when I knew he was lying to me. But, he used my compassion to make me his scapegoat. And, as is so common with NPD people, he was very easily able to convince so many people that I was evil, stupid, and mentally abusive toward him. Without ever having met me (I live 1500 miles away), these idiots in Tucson made judgements about me solely on the basis of my father's lies about me without even having talked to me or having talked to me for only a very short time. I agree with you that NPD and other mental illnesses need to be put in the guidelines for tests of testamentary capacity. The current tests of testamentary capacity are useless because they don't tell an estate atty anymore than that a person knows his/her name, birthdate, current date, current president's name, etc, but doesn't get into the pathological thinking that impairs judgement and causes them to make decisions not based on logical thinking. It's just a travesty. But we also know that many (and maybe most) estate (and probably other types of) attorneys are more interested in making a quick buck than doing the extra leg work to determine how legit the request is. They do no more than the minimum required of them, which is the rudimentary and useless testamentary capacity test. That test needs to be changed. Interestingly, too, my father's trustee refused to release his individual trust, indicating that he wanted it kept from me. This begs the question of what he was hiding, whether or not there was even anything in there about the tangible property items, and why he would care whether or not I saw this trust once he was dead. Did he expect that I'd go after him after he was dead? This shows an illogical thinking pattern that his stupid estate atty didn't even question because after all, she remembered him from 7 years previous (never really knew him as a person since he was good at hiding his mental illness) and assumed that nothing had changed. So, as in my case, you're also dealing with uninformed attys who really don't go the extra mile to question things. They're basically incompetent criminals in my opinion.

Hi dadwasNPD: Interesting points about comparing severity of the claim against scapegoats to distance. Given that my mom had dementia, her input wouldn't have counted. All of this gave my father unlimited ability to lie. But, I'm pretty sure he was lying even before my mom became demented. She was the chief enabler and just went along with his lies. For example, he forged his Ph.D diploma from Columbia Teacher's College (in New York) and had people believing it. I was immediately suspicious when I saw that it was a Xeroxed copy and not an original with raised seal. My mom must have seen that, as well, but was so enmeshed in my father's pathology that she just went along with it and defended him on all of his lies and even the fights he used to start with people when they didn't agree with him (dating from when I was a young child), always siding with him because she believed she had a duty to be loyal to him. She confided in me 21 years ago that she couldn't stand him but only stayed with him out of loyalty and because she didn't think he could make it on his own (a hostile dependence). My mother was always the "boss", or so she thought, so my father couldn't be too controlling. However, he was mentally abusive to her, as well as to my sister and me. But, once my mom became demented, not only did he become mentally and verbally abusive to the point where my mom's care manager filed a report on him with Adult Protection Services (APS) in Tucson because she feared he would also start physically abusing my demented mom, but he also became a control freak. If his estate atty, the Tucson police, and the assistant atty general had been smart enough, they would have vetted any statements he made-- whether it was checking with his drs (they would have learned he was under psychiatric care) or checking records in Tucson (they would have seen the report to Adult Protection Services filed against him)-- they would have seen that he was a liar and severely mentally ill. My mother's caregivers, staff at facilities she lived in after she became demented and was removed from his care as a result of the report to APS, plus her care managers and others knew that my father was mentally ill, was doing everything he could to sabotage her care, and was a liar to boot. But, with the atty and the legal authorities not checking this, he got away with murder. As with most NPDs, he was able to get their pity and use me as his scapegoat to hide the fact that he had shirked his legal responsibilities to my mom. She once told me that he was so good at taking all the credit when things went wrong, but so quick to point the finger of blame when things went wrong with things that had been his responsibilities, but that he always came out smelling like a rose. If his estate atty had done some investigation and questioned why, at age 91, he wanted to change my parents long-standing estate plan and why he would write his daughter out, she would have discovered that he was under psychiatric care, was NPD, had been reported for mental and verbal abuse on a vulnerable adult (my mom) and that generally he was a pathological liar. Then, she may have barred him from changing the estate plan. A 91 year old changing a long-standing estate plan should have raised major red flags. And, further proof of his decreased mental status was that at age 92 he took out a life insurance policy on himself, then died 4 mos later. Why would a sane person take out a life insurance policy when in their 90s? Since he didn't name a beneficiary, the money (a small amount) went to me. But, his trustee and her atty tried to tell the insurance company that I wasn't entitled to it. The insurance company told them to get lost. And then, because they were so greedy, they demanded to know how much money was involved. The insurance person told them it was none of their business and to get lost. With the NPD behaviors your father and mine exhibited (plus probably early dementia in my father's case), there's needs to be guidelines and discussions between psych and legal professionals to educate legal professionals about this stuff. I'm glad you've written the article and hope that these people take it seriously. I'll also be interested to hear what the counselor/NPD expert tells you.

Hi rr4,
Interesting that you connect your father's NPD with your mother's health and passing. I've thought, since my mother passed away 13 years ago from Lou Gehrig's, that his controlling wore her out too. The biggest fight (not much of one really since he was a passive aggressive) was when they still thought she'd outlive him: she'd heard about probate taking a long time and sought to discuss with him their US Savings bonds which had AND between their names. OR would have made things easier for her if he'd gone first, but he had to CONTROL things and would not even discuss it. I will always remember the extremely exasperated way she said his name "But Roy!" when he considered the issue closed. Later, he shut down any discussion of something I wanted/needed to do in the same manner.
On the NPD manipulating and conning, we'll hope that my article when finished can generate a discussion among the legal and psych professionals. I'm addressing it to the lawyers as something they need to consider in that initial questioning to "verify" testamentary capacity. I found several places where more questions are suggested, BUT I am pointing out that people like my father (and perhaps yours) will LIE, and the trick is to compare the severity of the claim (against scapegoats) and the distance proportional to what it would take to verify it. For example: my mother (and yours it seems) was no longer around to give her input--giving the Narc unlimited ability to lie.
Sending the counselor/NPD expert my email this morning. Will let you know what comes of it...

Hi dadwasNPD: I hope that you'll be able to get the info you've learned about NPD out to estate attorneys. They sure need to know about this. The problem, though, is that NPD people are so manipulative and such adept liars that they're able to sway people into unquestioningly believing their BS. That's why many of them make such good politicians and used car salespeople. NPD people have raised manipulation and lying to an art form. My father, who was a high school teacher, would have been more suited to having been a used car salesman. He would have made a fortune off of his lies and sleazeball techniques-- he certainly was able to do this once he and my mom retired to Tucson, AZ. An NPD gets a population of idiots and the idiots, including people in a legal system and even attorneys, unquestioningly fall for the NPD person's BS, hook, line, and sinker. Had the people of Tucson (not only my father's associates, but medical and legal people there, as well) both had any smarts and common sense and had been honest, upstanding citizens instead of trying to exploit an elderly person, my father would have ended up locked up in a mental ward in a strait jacket long ago-- either that or in an orange jumpsuit for the number of people whose reputations and careers he decimated with his lies and manipulations (he was active in various things in Tucson). He certainly wasn't a fine and upstanding person with a good character or integrity-- quite the opposite. His NPD behaviors wore my mom down mentally and physically and very likely significantly contributed to her health issues and subsequent demise. His behaviors and your father's behaviors are so typical of an NPD person's MO. NPD people, in my opinion, are evil and criminally-minded people. It's unfortunate that they're not locked away before they can do the harm that they do to so many people. And unfortunately, when they pull the crap that your father and mine pulled, they leave a terrible legacy for their families -- we're the ones who suffer in many ways from their gaslighting long after they're gone. I'm working on cutting those slave-like bonds of gaslighting, etc, that resulted from having grown up with an NPD parent. My father just isn't worth my time and energy to get caught up in the damage he caused so many people over such a long time. He did what he did and now he's gone and the world is such a better place without his ilk. Good luck to you.

Hi rr4. I really do appreciate your taking time to respond knowingly about my story.
If/WHEN I get my mess cleaned up (maybe before, just to keep myself busy), I do think I can drop some info in the laps of a few estate lawyers I've been reading about online and get them discussing NPD and capacity. I just lucked into finding that quotation of the original Banks vs Goodfellow decision, and there are so many phrases in it (no disorder of the mind shall poison his affections, pervert his sense of right,) that make me say Wow! Yep! Right there, that's NPD!
Last night, I came across a video on YouTube wherein a true expert describes Covert Narcs, like our fathers. If I can get an opinion back from him (via email) that NPD was VERY LIKELY behind the removal of my name from the accts, the absence of trust language to allow discretionary payouts to help with major life-threatening medical, and the "tell me how great I am for 90K at the expense of my son's future" THEN maybe we can get the psych and law professionals' attention to start talking about testamentary capacity. LOL, the ego in ME is saying: I'll get 'em by the cajones with their own language in that 1870 decision.
Well, stay tuned.... Thanks again for the feedback; it helps me with the gaslighting he's managing to do via proxy four years after!

Hi dadwasNPD: Wow! What a complicated mess! Even though the cousins didn't take your father to an atty, only to the bank, the fact of their accompanying him there could be exploitation. But, from what you stated about the confrontation you had with him and his going to the bank right after checking out of the hospital (sounds like the cousins probably weren't in on this decision or influence him in any way, right?), that sure sounds like something that my father would also have done. He wrote me out of his half of the estate and tried to get me taken off of my mother's half as well (but couldn't because she was already dead and couldn't have signed anything even if she had been alive because she was demented) because I had severed the relationship with him over his lies to Arizona legal authorities and the ensuing threats from them. He went around telling people he had disowned me, rather than it being my having cut it off with him, and then deluded himself and others into believing his BS and then took me off of his part of the estate plan/trust. This was all driven by his NPD-- he caused the problem but wouldn't own up to being the cause of the alientation (NPD people can never be seen as being at fault and always have to have scapegoats and point the finger of blame), acted like he was my victim(rather than vice versa) and got the pity he was always so obsessed with getting. In fact, in his last 4 - 5 years before I severed the relationship with him, he couldn't even tell me he loved me, telling others that they were his family and he loved them and only giving me a cold, detached "thank you" when I told him I loved him. Your father's and my father's behaviors are very typical of NPD people. They don't give a crap who the hurt or whose toes they step on because it's all about them. I find it reprehensible that he would have left nothing to your wife and daughter. But, I'm also not surprised. In writing me out of his part of my parents' estate, my father left nothing to my 3 kids and rhey had done nothing to him and had been nice and respectful to him all along (as was I even when he was treating me like crap. His lies to Arizona legal authorities and the ensuing threats, etc, and his total disrespect for me after I had been there to help him and my mom through bad times were the last straw for me-- I just wasn't willing to have anything more to do with him). .Yet, he thought nothing of punishing my kids by also leaving them out of his part of the trust because as is so typical with NPD, this was all about him and he had to make himself look good in other peoples' eyes so he'd get pity and praise and also look like either the victim and/or that he had initiated the severing of our relationship so others would look up to him and admire him. He often told me how often people looked up to and admired him. Yet, I saw signs over the last 4 or so years of our relationship that this wasn't the case and that he was delusional. I feel sorry that you're having to go through this and that the outside trust attorney and even the bank officials appear not to be on the up-and-up with this. I hope that your own attorney can get to the bottom of this and get you the 90K, in addition to a settlement from the trust. Thanks for the update on this.

This is third of three new posts!
Oh, there's so much more I wish I could put here. But, to relate to your question and what people reading this might need, I firmly believe that testamentary and otherwise capacity CAN be diminished by NPD. I am sending right after finishing this the story to a true expert in IL to get a brief opinion from him on how much NPD should be considered in an arbitration--though the lawyers all and the trust are suggesting I take a settlement FROM THE TRUST, ie the cousins would likely keep the 90K. This is suggested in part because the pour over clause of the trust might let IT claim the 90K. To me, the check written on an acct where my name was removed should have THAT question answered first.
Anyway, thanks for your feedback and well wishes. It's nice to be able to share this crazy stuff with someone who gets it--more than the actors and players in the actual story I've been dealing with! Stay tuned...

Cousins did not take Dad to atty (as I led you to misunderstand) but to the bank the DAY AFTER my last phone call from half-way around the world in the worst financial situation of my life: needed asthma meds or could possibly die, needed to buy food and pay rent for my family. My net worth when Dad died when I was going to turn 50 was ZERO! Last thing I told Dad was I might make it to the pearly gates before him. That ticked him off I guess and in his narcissistic rage, he was checked out of post-op recup hospital and went to the bank and took my name off the accts, NOT doing anything while there to send me a little (a grand) to get me thru to my next paycheck a month and a half later.
No written note saying he was giving HIS cousins 90K, but apparently a bank employee believes she can testify he did so willingly. BS! All of this can be explained by NPD! He was a compulsive "giver" (not a virtue but a sickness to try and get praise; i.e. not a genuine, from the heart gift) and like all Narcs, he'd rather stick it to his nearest and dearest and give to those who fall for his ACT.
continued...

Hi rr4, Thanks again for the crossed fingers.
If we could only communicate directly, I could send the whole write up to you.
Dad was 81, and it does not seem like anyone is looking at how he did stuff AFTER he got his prognosis of 4 wks to 4 mos. Let me try to outline...
Trust done in 2005 after he and I had head on collision about his behavior and AFTER Mom had died and was not around to check him on his sh--.
Cousins were made secondary beneficiaries: if I predecease them, they get what's left and my wife and daughter get nothing. If cousin and his wife predecease me... wife and daughter will get what's left after I die. I am STUCK with the 1500 per month and stupid outside atty in original state is taking "No further payments" to mean I should not get discretionary even in case of ER visit for heart attack. Actually, Dad did not mention my family in anything; stupid outside atty did that when she had to seek court adjustment to pay me out of principal when cash assets ran out after three months (DUH! another indicator of incapacity?)
Since Dad moved to another state before he died, trust in AR had to hire atty in GA to handle probate; same atty is still the one dealing with issues now.
The 90K was not out of the trust, it was out of the checking acct that Dad had added me to the last time I saw him 2.5 yrs before he died.
continued next post...

dadwasNPD: Thanks for the update. It looks like there may be some good news for you after all. And it appears that the attys may also be questioning your father's testamentary capacity at the time he "gifted" this money to the cousins. Are the attorneys even questioning your father's mental capacity on the basis that his terminal illness could have clouded his mental capacity, rather than the NPD playing the larger role? If nothing else, the nature and course of the terminal illness seems like it would have put him into the vulnerable adult category, open to suggestion and exploitation and clouding his mental ability to make reasonable decisions or impairing his executive functioning abilities , more so than his NPD. While NPD doesn't necessarily equate to or result in a lack of testamentary capacity, the delusions and other manifestations of the disease (i.e., pathological lying that leads to the NPD person deluding him-/her- self into believing his/her lies), could have clouded your father's ability to make clear decisions (ie, impaired his executive functioning abilities). Given the cancer and the NPD, is there any possibility of your father's changed trust could be invalidated altogether? I guess, with him now gone, his drs would have to vouch for that and they may not be willing to stick their necks out that far. Re: having the cousins pay you the back the money: Seems like the original trust attorney (i.e., the atty inside the trust) should have a better idea whether that money should go to you vs the trust. Also, is there anything in writing and signed from your dad indicating that he had explicitly gifted this money to the cousins? Seems like if there's nothing in writing from your father, the cousins shouldn't be able to claim it as a gift and should repay everything instead of it going into the trust. Are the attorneys even pursuing the line of exploitation since the cousins seem to have taken your father to the outside atty and not the one who had drawn up your father's trust? Have your attorneys been in contact with that original atty? And, have they asked the trust's outside atty who accompanied your father to the meeting when he changed the trust? Seems like there should be questions of undue influence on your father by the cousins to change his estate, especially since he went to a different atty who probably didn't know your father as well as the estate atty who had originally drawn up your father's trust before the changes and therefore, didn't question the change. How old was your father when he changed the estate plan? If he was fairly old (80s or beyond), this should have raised major red flags. In my father's case, he was in his early 90s when he changed his estate plan. Yet, this didn't raise any red flags with his estate atty because she stated that she knew him from 7 years previous and didn't take into account that his mental status had changed in that time period and didn't do anymore than a cursory test of testamentary capacity-- and, my father was easily able to answer questions about what his name and birthdate were, the current date and who the US president was. My father's atty should have questioned why a 91 year old man would suddenly want to change a long-standing estate plan at his advanced age. She should have required not only a psych exam but also statements from his drs as to his mental capacity. He was under psychiatric care at the time that he changed the estate. And, if the estate atty had required that, on the basis of advanced age, my father present a note vouching for an intact testamentary capacity, she would never have allowed him to change the estate plan. But, as far as she was concerned, it was just money in her pocket to make the change and she didn't care to heed any red flags. The whole thing was corrupt, and my atty is also pretty sure there was exploitation involved. I sure hope that your own attys are pursuing these lines of investigation and aren't just going to roll over and take a settlement on the basis that the outside trust atty can't determine if the money would go to you vs the trust. Something doesn't smell right with this whole thing. I hope these people are exposed and you get the whole trust. In my case, there were so many things that would have just made the case go on and on that I decided to settle. But, I suspect that if I had wanted to go on and invest more money in atty's fees, the exploitation and decreased mental capacity would have been uncovered and possibly the money in his trust coming back to me (no guarantees) or there having been a big settlement on the basis of exploitation. But, proving exploitation is a lengthy and expensive process. Keeping my fingers crossed for you.

Hi rr4,
Well, as I thought, the cousins are trying to claim it was a gift. Seems no one else is sure about the taking my name off the accounts the day after my last phone call and most desperate circumstances. But, to me, NPD can explain ALL of that AND question his "capacity" to make those decisions. It's been proposed by the trust's outside atty that perhaps I could take a settlement from the trust because even if the cousins paid the money back, the question would be whether it would go into the trust or to me. However, to me the taking my name off the accounts can clarify who that 90K should go to if, as I believe, that was done under the influence of NPD.
I have a 4 page write up to send to a true NPD expert, asking how much my father's Narcissism should be taken into consideration in those actions. Will probably try to contact him again and pay for consultation before I take any action with the oblivious attys and cousins... Stay tuned...

In my first sentence in the above post, I meant to say that even if the NPD person shows the delusional, etc. behaviors to family members or others who know them well and spend alot of time with them, they're good at hiding it from non-family members who don't know them well or haven't spent big blocks of time with them.

Hi dadwasNPD: I hope the conference call happens soon and that you'll have some answers or, at least, know what the status is. It's hard to be a half a world away trying to deal with this. I was fortunate in that I was only about 1500 miles away and that was bad enough.

Thanks for including the Banks vs Goodfellow definition of testamentary capacity. The biggest thing with NPD people is that, even if they show their delusional behaviors, perverted sense of right, and they basically have no affection for anyone but themselves, they're also very, very adept at hiding that from non-family members and do so through pathological lying, manipulation, presenting themselves as the victims and slandering/libeling those they're actually victimizing, raising these behaviors to an art form. My father, whose profession before retirement was a teacher, could have easily had a career as a used car salesman and could have sold people a piece of junk without them even realizing it so great were his powers of manipulation. In fact, at his deathbed, his manipulation powers were so strong they were almost tangible. I was both amazed and appalled at the profound stupidity of his associates in falling for him. But, this is how NPD people operate and how they're able to get away with presenting themselves as perfectly sane and normal for their estate attorney. The questions that an estate attorney asks to test for testamentary capacity are very rudimentary and don't go far enough to test for executive functioning and mental impairments such as delusional behavior or other things that would raise red flags. Nor is there apparently a law requiring that a person considered to be in a vulnerable category, whether by virtue of age, a disease, etc, either have a psychological evaluation and/or have a person's dr's sworn/notarized statement testifying to their testamentary capacity. An estate attorney simply asks the person wanting to change their will their name, age, birthdate, the current date, who the president is, and things along those lines. So, someone who is delusional or has reduced executive functioning or other mental illnesses and who isn't moderately-to-severely demented, can easily answer these types of questions because their basic mental capacity isn't impaired. And, with an NPD person being so wily at hiding things, this sort of stuff is a piece of cake. And, the estate attorney is often very naive and doesn't want to take the time to look a little farther. And certainly, the estate attorney is only going to do the minimum test of testamentary capacity required by law, not go and require a note from a person's dr or a psychological exam. Why should an estate attorney do that when he/she can get away with the minimum and still pull in the fee for dealing with an estate.

And again, even with your father's NPD playing a huge role in this, there still may have been exploitation on your cousins' parts. Your comment about your father having turned and removed you from the accounts after you told him you were in bad straits financially is very typical of an NPD person. My father constantly did just the opposite of anything I suggested or slandered and libeled me in general if he didn't agree with me or saw that I might have had a need. NPD people are more than annoying and are very sick people. But, it's hard to have compassion for them when they treat their own flesh and blood like shit and then laugh at you. My father did just that when I told him I had been threatened with criminal prosecution on the basis of his lies to Arizona legal authorities about me. He's gone now and I'm glad. He suffered terribly in his last months and I can't even be compassionate. I can only say that he got what he deserved in the end-- what went around came around.

Please keep me posted on how your situation unfolds. Keeping my fingers crossed that it plays out in your favor.

last post "you own" should be YOUR OWN

Hi rr4,

Woke up this morning with nothing in my email box about the conference call among the lawyers, which was supposed to happen last night (I'm 12 hours ahead here in Asia), so I guess I have to wait another day.

In the meantime, here's a cut and paste of a bit of that infamous Banks vs Goodfellow which outlined testamentary capacity 145 years ago. Actually, when I read it with NPD in mind, it seems to me NPD does NOT fit with capacity!

"It is essential to the exercise of such a power that a testator shall understand the nature of the act AND ITS EFFECTS; shall understand the extent of the property of which he is disposing; shall be able to comprehend and appreciate the claims to which he ought to give effect; and with a view to the latter object, THAT NO DISORDER OF THE MIND SHALL POISON HIS AFFECTIONS, PERVERT HIS SENSE OF RIGHT, OR PREVENT THE EXERCISE OF HIS NATURAL FACULTIES--THAT NO INSANE DELUSION SHALL INFLUENCE HIS WILL IN DISPOSING OF HIS PROPERTY AND BRING ABOUT A DISPOSAL OF IT WHICH, IF THE MIND HAD BEEN SOUND, WOULD NOT (HAVE) BEEN MADE."

Uh-huh! The grandiosity of Narcs often leads them to believe they have more money than they really do (i.e., a delusion). Poison his affections? How about smear campaigns against us scapegoat immediate family members? The LIES about us? Pervert his sense of right? OMITTING trust language AND "giving" away a sh--load of money when you own, only child might not have money to afford the ER in the event of a heart attack or stroke? Sense of right? Taking my name off the accounts the day after I called in my worst financial crisis ever? (I do think his NPD played a major role in that even with the cousins' involvement and taking advantage of a sick, elderly man.

Stay tuned!

Hi dadwasNPD,
Keeping my fingers crossed for you that your attorney and you close in on the answers and that the ruling is in your favor. What you stated about NPDs not being able to take criticism (plus never being able to admit wrongdoing ) and surrounding themselves with sycophants and not being able to see anybody else's needs as real (or even care about anyone else's needs but their own) is exactly what I saw with my father. Hopefully, all 3 attorneys will be able to sort this out and shed light on things. Still seems like your father may have been exploited by the cousins. Seems like if the "No further payments beyond the monthly stipend...." is in his current trust, you're owed those monthly payments for life. It sounds like a very complex situation. Mine was a little more straight- forward, except for the testimentary stuff and the exploitation. Re: how your mom would have reacted to all this if she had still been alive: Mine would have done more than smack some sense into my father. She probably would have committed an act of violence on him. Basically, she also probably would have agreed with my opinion that his actions on the family trust were ground for justifiable homicide.

There may be a way to get the website and the write-up your doing etc, to me, but I'm not sure. I think you can have private posts on your wall in this forum, but not sure. If so, maybe that would allow you to post an email address since t would be a private posting? We'll figure this out. I'm interested in seeing the things you've researched and found. Thanks.

Hello again rr4,
I do have the trust, and my atty is in the US. We are closing in on answers. Keep your fingers crossed for me. There's to be a phone conference with my atty, the atty for the trust in situ and the atty for the trust in the state where my father died and HIS cousins lived.
Dad and I had a head on collision about his actions two years after my mother died and ten months before he did his trust and will. Of course, Narcs can't take any criticism; that's why they surround themselves with sycophants like his cousins, people who fall for the NPD act!
In our last phone call, I desperately needed some financial help. Absolutely broke and could not buy my 7 daily meds to stave off the asthma AND to feed and pay rent for my family over here. No frills. Why did he take me off the accounts? My last words to him were that I might make it to the pearly gates before him (my asthma is VERY BAD). Narcissistic rage--but to my mind evidence of his NOT being of sound mind.
NPDs cannot see someone else's needs as real, so I think that's why the trust doc (I have) says "No further payments beyond the monthly stipend for life." Affected cognitive abilities? You betcha! Mom would've hauled off and smacked him for that AND for saying (after she was gone) that my wife should abort his own first and only grandchild. Sick, sick, sick. NOT of sound mind?
The 90K issue. There is a lot online about some narcs being compulsive givers. That Sam Vaknin has an excellent video on that. See also the vid where he talks about Experts Spew Nonsense (ignore the politics at the beginning of the vid if you wish). EVERYTHING I have read and seen shows me true malignant Narcs (like our fathers) are NOT of sound mind--and therefore easily exploitable, especially this compulsive giving (NOT!) to get attention and TRY to find the love that they never knew. (Look also for Narcissism Survivor's channel)
To relate all this to this website and your original capacity question (same as mine), I do believe legal professionals dealing with will and trust drafting (as well as those of us who are likely beneficiaries) need to learn about how NPD negatively affects those actions. I'd like to share with you a write up I'm doing, but the web master here won't let me post my email.

dadwasNP/Tim: Interesting bit of info. you found in your research on NPD and cognitive ability and delusion, etc. I saw all of this with my father. Plus, pathological lying, manipulation, the obsessive need for attention, praise, and pity from others and acting like he was being victimized when it was vice versa. It's amazing how stupid people are, even legal authorities, and how easily they fall for the NPD person's lies and BS. Many legal authorities tasked with protecting the elderly are nothing more than narcissists themselves, more interested in promoting themselves and their careers than doing right by the people they're tasked with protecting. They're a bunch of self-righteous a**holes who do more harm than good.

Your situation sounds like a mess and very, very frustrating-- even more so than mine was. However, it also sounds like your cousins exploited your father. They accompanied him to the bank and he changed the accounts to write you off of them-- that's just too coincidental. My attorney would say that's exploitation. Who did your father put on those accounts-- your cousins? Is your attorney in the US or overseas? If in the US, perhaps he/she can look into this on your behalf-- i.e., your attorney could contact the bank and talk to the person your father met with and find out if someone sat in with him on those sessions. If he suddenly signed over those accounts to the second cousins who accompanied him to the bank, then they are very possibly part of the exploitation. Also, your attorney may want to talk with his dr or hospital to find out if your father signed out of the hospital of his own volition against his dr's recommendation or if the dr had actually released him. If the first, is it possible that these cousins signed him out or exploited him into believing he should sign out with the sole purpose of getting him to go to the bank to take you off of his bank accounts? Is there anything in his trust which indicates/stipulates that there would be these pay outs to you on some regular schedule? Or, was that part of the trust changed, as well? If the trust was changed, did your cousins accompany him to the meeting with his estate attorney to change that? And, what tests of testimentary capacity did his estate attorney do? If his trust stipulated/stipulates a scheduled pay out to you, even if he took you off of his bank accounts, I believe that the stipulations of his trust still need to be followed and honored. And, if those stipulations are still in effect and not being honored, his trust terms have been violated. Also, is the estate attorney one your father had been using all along or is this person new and one that your cousins may have set up for him to see? That could also be seen as exploitation. Again, your attorney can better advise you on this than I can. But, from what you've written, it sure sounds like exploitation on the part of your cousins. Were you and your father on decent terms or was there some problem where, during your last conversation with him, he and you had a falling out that may have led him to get angry at you and take you off of the accounts? Or, given that you live overseas and he developed a terminal cancer, was it your cousins who took care of him in those last months? If so, did they convince him that since you, as his son weren't taking care of him in his last days, you were being a bad son and that they should be named as his heirs instead of you? Again, smells to me like exploitation. I would think that by virtue of his terminal illness, setting aside his age, he would have been in a vulnerable adult category where his mental capacity may have been somewhat clouded by his illness and made him more vulnerable to suggestion and exploitation, with an impaired decision-making ability, something that his estate attorney failed to fully delve into. In my case, I basically cut ties with my father. But, his estate attorney was irresponsible in not further questioning him and vetting his testimentary capacity. She based everything on the fact of her remembering him from 7 years previous and assumed that his mental capacity was still the same. And, she never questioned why he would write out his own flesh and blood. But, even if she had, he was such a lying and manipulative piece of shit that she, like all of the other stupid people of Tucson, AZ, would have unquestioningly believed him anyway. In the end, I still got my mother's part of the estate, didn't have to pay the accrued income, and got several of the tangible items that were hers, although there was more of her stuff that I didn't get. But, any money and tangibles that my father had his hand in, I consider to be dirty and evil like him and decided I wanted nothing to do with. But, your situation is very different from mine in that you were/are depending/dependent on your father's money. So, that's where you really need the help of your attorney to determine exploitation and other things.

Hello again, rr4terps,
I've had a quick look at your answers and will go back and read them more carefully.
Yes, I've had an atty for over a year now. The main things I'm looking at are those characteristics of NPD and how they affect cognitive ability/delusion/decision making. I've watched dozens of videos on NPD and believe that the legal system could sit up and learn a few things. I too am interested in testamentary capacity and have found some stuff online trying to improve on that Banks vs Goodfellow from over 100 years ago.
One thing that caught my attention is that Sam Vaknin (a self aware narc and author) talks about compulsive lying going along with the false self. THAT caught my attention because the supplemental questions for testing testamentary capacity ask things like: How will your decisions affect beneficiary A? etc. Well, you probably know as well as I do, that Covert Narcs can LIE through their teeth. Usually, in a will or trust, it's taken for granted that the will maker is honest and looking out for the welfare of their heirs. But Narcs likely see lying to even a stranger/estate atty as a way to get that PITY they feed on.
I'm also looking at how the sadistic and destructive nature of Narcs was a role in some of his decisions. I am an only child. My mother predeceased him by 10 years so she was not around to check him on his "choices." He set me up to get some money every month the rest of my life BUT blocked any discretionary payouts to help me with major uninsured medical. Someday I might have a stroke or heart attack and have to pass from lack of funds for the ER.
Another bizarre yet interesting story: The last time I talked to him, I found out he had cancer and 4 wks to 4 mos left I live overseas to afford my asthma meds I was flat broke and needed a little to help me through till the next paycheck over a month away. THE NEXT DAY he was checked out of the hospital by his second cousins back in the US and went to the bank. What did he do there? Did he ask the bank staff to send his flesh-and-blood some money to buy meds and food? No, he took my name off the accounts he'd added them to two and a half years before. How was I going to take money from those accts myself? I was/am half-way around the world and don't even have the account numbers?!! The 90K comes in two weeks after I last talked to him and less than two weeks before he died, a check (which he probably naively, stupidly presigned) went to those second cousins back there who took him to the bank.

*inside training should be inside trading.

Parmstegma: I reread your last comment relative to elected officials and CEOs and had to laugh. About 6 or 7 years ago, "The Wall Street" journal had an article about inside traders on Wall Street and their narcissistic and sociopathic behaviors. What the author described very accurately also described the behaviors of the CEOs at the large computer company I was working at at the time. At the end of the article, the author then stated that the behaviors he had described not only pertained to Wall St inside traders, but also to CEOs. I burst out laughing and my first thought was "Ya think?" LOL. The author also stated that these personality types, when in public positions or positions like inside training, often end up in orange jumpsuits (i.e., prison). Maybe there's some hope for us on this after all? :-)