# Review of CEAR (Center for Estate Administration Reform)
As someone who has personally navigated the complex and often heartbreaking world of probate court battles, I had high hopes for CEAR (Center for Estate Administration Reform). Their mission to educate and seek justice for those affected by probate, trust, and guardianship fraud initially seemed promising.
My experience with CEAR, however, fell far short of expectations. During my three-year fight for guardianship of my mother in Wayne County Probate Court, CEAR's involvement was minimal. They participated in a couple of phone calls and sat in on two Zoom hearings. While any support can be valuable in such trying times, their impact on my case was negligible.
The true disappointment came after my legal battle had concluded. Having finally gained guardianship of my mother (albeit after she suffered a debilitating stroke), I took to social media to connect with others who had faced similar struggles. It was then that the founder of CEAR chose to comment on my post in a manner I found deeply inappropriate and hurtful.
For an organization that claims to advocate for vulnerable individuals and their families, this behavior was shockingly unprofessional. It felt less like the actions of a supportive non-profit and more like an attempt to elevate their own profile at the expense of those they claim to help.
In conclusion, while CEAR's stated mission is admirable, my personal experience suggests a significant gap between their words and actions. I would caution others to carefully consider their interactions with this organization and to seek out multiple sources of support when dealing with probate and guardianship issues.
The day my mother returned home, "overwhelmed" and "stressed" barely scratched the surface of my emotional state. After fighting tirelessly to protect her, accumulating over $200,000 in legal fees (a battle I'm still waging in court), seeing her come back so broken was utterly devastating.
Despite this, my successful efforts as a pro se attorney in securing her return ignited a passion to help others facing similar struggles. Over three years, I built a significant presence on social media and within the guardianship community across the United States. I partnered with an advocate in New York, appeared on news segments viewed by millions, and testified multiple times before Michigan's Senate and House judiciary committees. My goal was to share our guardianship nightmare, push for reform, and support new legislation to protect the elderly.
However, amidst these efforts and the ongoing care for my mother, I faced unexpected opposition from Rick Black, the founder of CEAR (Center for Estate Administration Reform). He publicly criticized me on social media, calling me "dramatic" and demanding an apology. This compounded my already fragile emotional state. Previously, he had also attacked legislation I was promoting with senators and advocates, labeling me as uninformed and unwilling to include CEAR in the process.
To be clear, I didn't draft the bill; my sole aim was to expose the fraudulent guardianship practices I had experienced and to save my mother. It seemed that without credit, Black wouldn't support the effort and instead chose to undermine it. He dismissed it as a "band-aid bill" and claimed its promoters were ill-informed, apparently trying to hinder our progress and the crucial media attention needed to expose these atrocities. The situation became so intense that I filed a complaint against CEAR just to get some respite.
After two years of silence, Black resurfaced, commenting on one of my posts and portraying himself as the victim of harassment. This felt like another gut punch, especially given his large platform and devoted following who were unaware of his behavior towards me.
I caution anyone dealing with CEAR and Rick Black to be wary. In my experience, his primary goal seems to be maintaining his position at the top of the advocacy hierarchy, regardless of the cost to others. For someone already battling the probate court system—often the fight of their life—facing such heartless and cruel opposition from a supposed advocate only compounds the trauma.
While I acknowledge that Black may have helped others, garnering their devotion, my experience was the antithesis of compassion. He consistently belittled me, criticized my efforts, and sabotaged my work with legislators and media to promote guardianship reform, often in an attempt to insert himself into the spotlight.
For those hanging by a thread in their fight against fraudulent guardianships, such behavior from a purported ally can be not just disheartening, but potentially devastating to their cause and well-being.