Trends in Guardianship Reform: Implications for the Medical and Legal Professions

Black's Law Dictionary 635 (West, 5th ed 1979).

Horstman Peter M. , “Protective Services for the Elderly: The Limits of Parens Patriae”, 40 Mo L Rev 215, 218–221 (1975).

Id. at 221.

See id.; Alexander George , “Premature Probate: A Different Perspective on Guardianship for the Elderly”, 31 Stan L Rev 1003, 1004 (1979).

Indeed, some statutes listed “advanced age” as a basis for a finding of incompetence, even though the link between old age and dysfunction is highly controversial. See Alexander , 31 Stan L Rev at 1009 (cited in n. 4); Horstman , 40 Mo L Rev at 215–216 (cited in n. 2).

Mitchell Annina M. , “Involuntary Guardianship for Incompetents: A Strategy for Legal Services Advocates”, 12 Clearinghouse Rev 451,460 (1978).

In some states, the guardian was given the power that a parent has with respect to an unemancipated minor child. For example, ND Cent Code 30.1-28-12.1 (1976); Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.455(1) (1980).

See, for example, Alexander , 31 Stan L Rev at 1005–1006 (cited in n. 4); Nolan Shapiro Bobbe , “Functional Evaluation of the Elderly in Guardianship Proceedings”, 12 L, Medicine & Health Care 210 (Oct 1984).

Dudovitz Neal , “Protective Services and Guardianships: Legal Services and the Role of the Advocate”, Representing Older Persons 77 (National Senior Citizens Law Center, 1985).

Preamble to Florida Guardianship Law, Fla Stat Ann 744.101 et seq (1989).

Mitchell, 12 Clearinghouse Rev at 460 (cited in n. 6).

Reported in Abuses in Guardianship of the Elderly and Infirm: A National Disgrace, a report by the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Health and Long-Term Care of the House Select Committee on Aging, House of Representatives, 100th Cong., 1st Sess, (Dec 1987).

In this article, the person who is the subject of guardianship proceedings may be referred to as the “proposed ward,” “alleged incapacitated person”, or “respondent.”

Many of these reforms parallel the recommendations of the July 1988 National Guardianship Symposium, reported in ABA Commission on the Mentally Disabled and Commission of Legal Problems of the Elderly, Guardianship: An Agenda for Reform (1989).

The District of Columbia guardianship law states that “[a] finding… that an individual is incapacitated shall not constitute a finding of legal incompetence.” DC Code 21–2004 (1989).

Although these reforms are not specifically addressed in this article, they may have important implications, especially for attorneys for proposed wards. See pp. 26–27.

Seen. 16.

These laws may be found, respectively, at: DC Code 21–2001 et seq. (1989) (effective Feb 28, 1987); Fla Stat 744.101 et seq. (1989) (effective Oct 1, 1989); Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.441 et seq. (1989 Supp) (effective March 30, 1989); NM Stat Ann 45-5-301 et seq. (1989) (effective June 16, 1989); ND Cent Code 30.1-26-01 et seq. (1989 Supp) (effective July 1, 1990). Unless otherwise indicated, all subsequent statutory citations are to 1989 volumes or supplements. A number of noteworthy bills have been introduced in other states, but will not be examined in this article.

Mich Comp Laws Ann 703.1(4) (1980).

NM Stat Ann 45-5-101.F (1978). This definition is very similar to the definition contained in the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws' 1969 Uniform Probate Code. See Mitchell, 12 Clearinghouse Rev at 456 n 47 (cited in n. 6).

Nolan , 12 L, Medicine & Health Care at 210 (cited in n. 8).

Hafemeister Thomas L. and Sales Bruce D. , “Interdisciplinary Evaluations for Guardianships and Conservatorships”, 8 L & Human Behavior 335, 338 (1984).

ND Cent Code 30.1-28-04.2.a.

DC Code 21–2011(11), (15), (16).

Fla Stat Ann 744.102(10).

NM Stat Ann 45-5-101.F,G,H. But see NM Stat Ann 45-5-401 B(1) (in a conservatorship proceeding, incapacity must be evidenced by “gross mismanagement of his income and resources” attributable to a cause such as mental illness, mental deficiency, or chronic intoxication).

Preamble to the Florida Guardianship Law, Fla Stat Ann 744.101 et seq.

DC Code 21–2044. See also DC Code 21–2055 (conservatorship); Fla Stat Ann 744.1012; Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.444(2),(3); NM Stat Ann 45-5-303.1; ND Cent Code 30.1-28-04.1 (almost identical to provision in DC Code).

This point is discussed further below.

NM Stat Ann 45-5-301.1. See also Fla Stat Ann 744.331(5); ND Cent Code 30.1-28-04.5.

ND Cent Code 30.1-28-04.3.

Hommel Penelope A. and Lisi Lauren Barritt , “Model Standards for Guardianship: Ensuring Quality Surrogate Decision Making Services”, 23 Clearinghouse Rev 433 (1989).

Horstman , 40 Mo L Rev at 227 (cited in n. 2).

Id at 228–229.

Jost Dean Timothy , “The Illinois Guardianship for Disabled Adults Legislation of 1978 and 1979: Protecting the Disabled from their Zealous Protectors”, 56 Chi Kent L Rev 1087, 1100 (1980). See also, for example, Horstman , 40 Mo L Rev at 225–230 (cited in n. 2); Alexander , 31 Stan L Rev at 1016–1018 (cited in n. 4).

For example, Hafemeister Thomas L. amd Sales Bruce D. , “Interdisciplinary Evaluations for Guardianshps and Conservatorships”, 8 L & Human Beh 335 (1984); Scogin Forrest and Perry James , “Guardianship Proceedings With Older Adults: The Role of Functional Assessment and Gerontologists”, 10 L & Psych Rev 123 (1986). See also Goodenough Gerald K. , “The Lack of Objectivity of Physician Evaluations in Geriatric Guardianship Cases”, 14 J Contemp L. 53 (1988).

Horstman , 40 Mo L Rev at 229 (cited in n. 2).

Id.; Nolan, 12 L, Medicine & Health Care at 211 (cited in n. 8).

For example, Nolan , 12 L, Medicine & Health Care 210 (cited in n. 8); Scogin and Perry, 10 L & Psych Rev 123 (cited in n. 36).

Nolan , 12 L, Medicine & Health Care at 211 (cited in n. 8)

Id. at 211 (emphasis in original). Nolan cautions, however, that functional assessments could infringe on subjects' rights because of the intrusive nature of their inquiries. Id. at 214.

Fla Stat Ann 744.331(3)(a). The old Florida law also provided for an examining committee, but it was to be composed of “one responsible citizen and two practicing physicians”. Fla Stat Ann 744.311(5)(a) (1984).

On the other hand, the committee must consult with the attending or family physician if s/he is available for consultation.

NM Stat Ann 45-5-303.D, 45-5-407.B (conservatorship).

NM Stat Ann 45-5-101.T.

Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.443 (3), (4).

Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.8 (4).

Scogin and Perry , 10 L & Psych Rev at 125 (cited in n 36).

Fla Stat Ann 744.331 (3)(b)-(d). Under the former law, the examining committee was to ascertain the person's “mental and physical condition”. If the committee considered the person to be incompetent, it was to “determine his age, whether his condition is acute or chronic, and the apparent cause of this condition”. 744.331(5)(b) (1984).

NM Stat Ann 45-5-303.D; 45-5-407.B (conservatorship); Mich Comp Laws ann 700.443(5); ND Cent Code 30.1-28-03.5.

NM Stat Ann 45-5-303.D, 45-5-407.B (conservatorship).

DC Code 21–2041, 21–2054(a) (conservatorship); Fla Stat Ann 744.107 (called “court monitor” rather than “visitor”), Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.449; NM Stat Ann 45-5-303.E; ND Cent Code 30.1-28-03.3.

NM Stat Ann 45-5-101.V.

Mich comp Laws Ann 700.449. See also ND Cent Code 30.1-28-08 (nursing or social work).

For example, Fla Stat Ann 744.107; NM Stat Ann 45-5-101.V; Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.449.

DC Code 21–2033(c).

ND Cent Code 30.1-28-03-6.

Mitchell , 12 Clearinghouse Rev at 453 (cited in n. 6); Nolan, 12 L, Medicine & Health Care at 210 (cited in n. 8).

Indeed there was no guarantee that the proposed ward would actually receive the notice, for methods other than personal service were commonly permitted. Mitchell 12 Clearinghouse Rev at 453 (cited in n. 6).

See id.; Horstman , 40 Mo L Rev at 253 (cited in n. 2). Most statutes required only a notice of hearing, so the proposed ward would learn only that a hearing was to be held on a certain date. For example, Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.451(1) (1980); ND Cent Code 30.1-28-09-1 (1976).

See generally, Hommel Penelope A. and Lisi Barritt Lauren , “Model Standards for Guardianship: Ensuring Quality Surrogate Decision Making Services”, 23 Clearinghouse Review 433 (1989); Horstman , 40 Mo L Rev at 235–236 (cited in n. 2); Mitchell, 12 Clearinghouse Rev at 453–455 (cited in n. 6); Nolan, 12 L, Medicine and Health Care at 210–211 (cited in n. 8).

Horstman , 40 Mo L Rev at 235 (cited in n. 2).

Nolan, 12 L, Medicine & Health Care at 210 (cited in n. 8).

See Mitchell, 12 Clearinghouse Rev at 454–455 (cited in n. 6).

Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.443(7), 700.443a; Fla Stat Ann 744.331(2); DC Code 21–2041(h), 21–2054(a), (e) (conservatorship); NM Stat Ann 45-5-303.C, 45-5-407.B (conservatorship); ND Cent Code 30.1-28-03 (court appoints attorney to act as guardian ad litem, but attorney may act as advocate).

See, for example, Fla Stat Ann 744.331(4) (1984) (right to appointed counsel); Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.443(2) (1980) (right to counsel).

For example, Fla Sta Ann 744.331(6); Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.443a.

Fla Stat Ann 744.102(3). See also DC Code 21–2033(b) (duty of counsel is to “represent zealously (the) individual's legitimate interests”); NM Stat Ann 45-5-303.1 45-5-404.1 (conservatorship).

DC Code 21–2033(b). See also NM Stat Ann 45-5-303.1, 45-5-404.1 (conservatorship); ND Cent Code 30.1-28-03.4.

Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.443(2); ND Cent Code 30.1-28-03.3 (attorney is appointed to act as GAL).

Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.443a(2) – (4); ND Cent Code 30.1-28-03.4.C.

DC Code 21–2033(a).

NM Stat Ann 45-5-303.C and 45-5-303.1, 45-5-404.1 (conservatorship).

NM Stat Ann 45-5-303.1.B, 45-5-404.1.B (conservatorship).

See, for example, Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.443 (1980); NM Stat Ann 45-5-303 (1978).

NM Stat Ann 45-5-303.A.

NM Stat Ann 45-5-404.

Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.443(1).

Fla Stat Ann 744.3201.

Fla Stat Ann 744.334.

For example, Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.451(2); ND Cent Code 30.1-28-09.2.

Generally, DC Code 21–2031; Fla Stat Ann 744.331(1); Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.451; NM Stat Ann 45-5-309, 45-5-405 (conservatorship); ND Cent Code 30.1-78-09.

NM Stat Ann 45-5-309.C, 45-5-405.B. See also ND Cent Code 30.1-28-09.3 (not less than double spaced 12-point type).

Fla Stat Ann 744.331(1). Although the statute does not specify who is to read the notice to the person, it implies that it must be read when it is served. Many of the other statutes further insure that the proposed ward will understand the nature of the proceedings by requiring that court-appointed guardians ad litem explain the hearing procedure, as well as the purpose and effects of the appointment of a guardian. For example, Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.443a(1).

Fla Stat Ann 744.331(4)(a). This statement contrasts with the provision in the former statute that “hearings shall be conducted in as informal a manner as may be consistent with orderly procedure…” Fla Stat Ann 744.331(4) (1984). The new Florida statute lists a litany of rights to which the proposed ward is entitled. Some of these rights resemble the rights of criminal defendants. See 744.1095.

For example, Fla Stat Ann 744.109 (mandatory; if appeal is taken, transcript must be furnished to indigent ward at public expense); NM Stat Ann 45-5-303.I (if requested by proposed ward or counsel or ordered by court), 45-5-407.I (conservatorship; same).

DC Code 21–2041(h), 21–2054(e) (conservatorship); Fla Stat Ann 744.331(4)(b); Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.443(6); NM Stat Ann 45-5-303.F 45-5-407.C (conservatorship); ND Cent Code 30.1-28-03.7.

For example, DC Code 21–2041(h), 21–2054(e); ND Cent Code 30.1-28-03.7.

ND Cent Code 30.1-28-03.7.

Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.443(6); NM Stat Ann 45-5-303.G, 45-5-407.C (conservatorship). See also ND Cent Code 30.1-28-03.8.

DC Code 21–2041(h), 21–2054(e) conservatorship; Fla.; Stat Ann 744.1095(2)-(5); Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.443(7).

NM Stat Ann 45-5-303.H, 45-5-407.H (conservatorship).

DC Code 21–2003; Fla Stat Ann 744.331(4)(c); Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.444(1); NM Stat Ann 45-5-303.H; ND Cent Code 30.1-28-04.2.b.

Matter of Westchester County Medical Center, 534 NYS2d 886, 892 (1988) (a “right to refuse treatment” case).

See Fla Stat Ann 744.331(7) (1984); NM Stat Ann 45-5-304 (1978); ND Cent Code 30.1-28-04 (1976).

Mitchell , 12 Clearinghouse Rev at 455 (cited in n. 6) (although Mitchell considers “clear and convincing” to be a low standard).

Fla Stat Ann 744.331(5)(a); NM Stat Ann 45-5-304.C(1), 45-5-407.F(1) (conservatorship); ND Cent Code 30.1-28-04.2.b(1). See DC Code 21–2044(b); Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.444(1).

NM Stat Ann 45-5-304.C(3); ND Cent Code 0.1-28-04.2.b(2). See NM Stat Ann 45-5-407.F(3) (conservatorship).

Fla Sta Ann 744.331(5)(b); NM Stat Ann 45-5-304.C(4); ND Cent Code 30.1-28-04.2.b(4). See NM Stat Ann 45-5-407.F(4) (conservatorship).

NM Stat Ann 45-5-304.C(2); ND Cent Code 30.1-28-04.2.b(3). See DC Code 21–2044(b); Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.444(1). See NM Stat Ann 45-5-407.F(2) (conservatorship).

NM Stat Ann 45-5-304.C(5), 45-5-407.F(5) (conservatorship).

DC Code 21–2044(c); Fla Stat Ann 744.344; Mich Comp Laws Ann 700.444(2); NM Stat Ann 45-5-304.C, 45-5-407.F (conservatorship); ND Cent Code 30.1-28-04.2–5.

ND Cent Code 30.1-28-04.5.

See n. 30.

See, for example, Fla Stat Ann 744.331(3)(c), which states that the examining committee's examination, while an essential element, is not to be the only element used in making capacity and guardianship decisions. On the other hand, if the examining committee finds no incapacity, the court must dismiss the petition. 744.331(3)(e).

McLaughlin Charles , “’Doing Good;’ A Worker's Perspective”, Public Welfare 29, 30 (Spring 1988).

See generally, Tremblay Paul R. , “On Persuasion and Paternalism: Lawyer Decisionmaking and the Questionably Competent Client”, 1987 Utah L Rev 515; Smith Linda F. , “Representing the Elderly Client and Addressing the Question of Competence”, 14 J Contemporary L 61 (1988).

Olmstead v United States, 227 US 438, 479 (1928) (Brandeis dissenting).