No. This is the single most important guardrail on an elder-law site, and the system prompt is explicit. Medicaid eligibility depends on the state's specific rules, the full financial picture, transfer history, spousal protections, and exemptions that a paralegal would not assess casually, let alone a chatbot. SleekAI declines eligibility math politely, explains that it requires attorney review, and books the consultation. The line holds even when prospects push for a quick yes-or-no, because giving a wrong yes is worse than refusing.

Yes, and this is one of the most valuable conversations the bot handles. A surprising share of adult-child callers use the words interchangeably. The bot patiently explains that Medicare covers limited rehab after a hospital stay and almost nothing for long-term custodial care, while Medicaid is the program that funds ongoing nursing home care for those who qualify financially. The explanation comes from your educational pages, not invented framing, so the answers stay aligned with how your attorneys describe it.

Configure those as separate practice areas in your content and the bot routes accordingly. Guardianship intake is different from Medicaid intake because the threshold question is the parent's capacity status and whether powers of attorney are already in place. The bot asks about existing documents, whether the parent is contesting, and the state, then books with the attorney who handles guardianship rather than the Medicaid planner.

Yes. Use display conditions to surface state-specific bots based on URL pattern, and configure each state's content separately. Florida's homestead and Medicaid rules are not Ohio's, and a Connecticut crisis case is not a Texas crisis case. Multibot lets each state page have an assistant tuned to that state's content, which matters because the worst answers in elder law are the ones that import the wrong state's rules.

Conversations live in your WordPress database and are not yet attorney-client privileged communications. The initial widget message should make that clear: privilege begins after formal engagement. Most firms set a retention window of 30 to 60 days on conversation logs, forward summaries to the consulting attorney before the call, and align the retention policy with their engagement-letter records-management terms.

Yes. Special-needs planning has very specific SSI, Medicaid, and ABLE-account considerations that a generalist intake would miss. List it as a separate practice area, and the bot recognises signals like a disabled adult child, an inheritance about to land, or a personal-injury settlement, and routes to the special-needs attorney. The intake captures the beneficiary's age, benefit status, and trust type before the call rather than during it.

The system prompt recognises urgency language (hospital discharge, eviction from facility, immediate placement) and surfaces same-day or next-day consultation slots, plus information on emergency Medicaid filings if your firm offers that service. Speed matters in crisis intake; the bot will not slow the caller down with a routine intake script when the placement decision is happening in 72 hours.

The bot does not advise on gifting strategies. Specific transfer recommendations require attorney review of the state's look-back rules, exempt-transfer categories, and the family's full asset picture, and they are exactly the kind of question where a wrong answer creates a real penalty period. The bot explains that asset-protection strategies exist within legal boundaries, declines to enumerate them, and books the consultation where the attorney can review and recommend within the rules.