I didn't know anything about this till I read the article, which pretty much presents only the husband's side.
But just judging from the few "facts" that are presented, it seems like the sons, though long neglected by their mother, are in fact trying to take care of her. There is a mention of a loan at some point, but other than that I don't see evidence that they were trying to get her money--merely keep the husband from going through it. And if once they got together they were suddenly exceeding her usual $300,000 a year expenses, there's good reason to worry about that.
And as for Phyllis's point (and Besty's rebuttal) about getting a job: yes, he's her sole caretaker now, but that needn't have been the case. I don't see why he shouldn't have been working to help care for his wife earlier.
They keep trying to present it as Ms. Holm wanting to regain control of her life, but if he's not even letting her answer questions put to her, it's hard to see him as an aid to her autonomy.
Updated On: 7/4/11 at 10:38 AM