Is "The eviction process coincided with the deterioration of John's, Vlad's son, health." correct?

1. The eviction process coincided with the deterioration of John's health, Vlad's son.

or

2. The eviction process coincided with the deterioration of John's, Vlad's son, health.

The second sentence seems cumbersome to me. Vlad's son is to be a parenthesis only, to remind the reader who is John, in case the reader forgot his introduction several paragraphs before. Are both sentences correct?

Solution 1:

The possessive clitic ’s can be applied to whole phrases (i.e. “the Queen of England ’s hat”), including appositive phrases like in the example, even including phrases which themselves contain possessive clitics (“the sound coming from his wife’s brother’s new car’s engine”). In spoken English, the sentence would be as follows, and is perfectly grammatical, at least to my ears:

The eviction process coincided with the deterioration of John, Vlad’s son’s, health.

Unfortunately, the combination with the appositive makes punctuating it awkward. Logically, the ’s should come after the comma, but you can't put commas in the middle of words, so I would reorder slightly to avoid needing to use commas:

The eviction process coincided with the deterioration of Vlad’s son John’s health.