State Guardianship Laws and Supported Decision-Making in the United States After Ross and Ross v. Hatch : Analysis and Implications for Research,Policy,Education,and Advocacy

Abstract

In the last decade, and especially after the 2013 Virginia court case of Ross and Ross v. Hatch, there has been a dramatic increase in knowledge, use, and legal recognition of supported decision-making (SDM) in the United States. SDM is a methodology in which people work with trusted friends, family members, and professionals who help them understand their situations and choices so they may make their own decisions and direct their lives. After the Hatch case, in which a young woman with Down syndrome defeated a petition for permanent guardianship by demonstrating that she uses SDM, this methodology has increasingly been considered and used as an alternative to guardianship to enable people to retain their legal rights and make life choices to the maximum extent possible. This article reviews the guardianship laws of the 50 U.S. states and the District of Columbia. Using criteria we developed, in light of the findings and values expressed in Hatch, we assessed the extent to which those laws recognize or encourage the use of SDM as an alternative to guardianship and as a means to enhance self-determination for people in guardianship. We then offer recommendations for future SDM research, policy, education, and advocacy efforts.

Keywords

supported decision-making self-determination guardianship

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Bar Association. (2016). PRACTICAL tool for lawyers: Steps in supported decision-making. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/law_aging/resources/guardianship_law_practice/practical_tool.html

American Bar Association. (n.d.). WINGS court-stakeholder partnerships. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/law_aging/resources/wings-court-stakeholder-partnerships0/#:~:text=State%20WINGS%20are%20ongoing%20court,efforts%20is%20a%20win%2Dwin.

The Arc of Northern Virginia. (n.d.). Supported decision making resources. https://thearcofnova.org/sdm/

Blanck

. (this issue). Supported decision-making: Emerging paradigm in research, law, and policy.

Blanck

(2020). Disability law and policy. Foundation Press.

Blanck

Flynn

(Eds.). (2017). Routledge handbook of disability law and human rights. Taylor & Francis.

Blanck

Martinis

(2015). “The right to make choices”: The National Resource Center for Supported Decision-Making. Inclusion, 3, 24–33. https://doi.org/10.1352/2326-6988-3.1.24

Cassidy

. (2015). Restoration of rights in the termination of adult guardianship. The Elder Law Journal, 23, 83–122.

Commonwealth Council on Developmental Disabilities. (2017, September). Freed from guardianship. A Kentucky first: Woman wins her rights in court using supported decision-making. Exceptional Family Kentucky, Summer/Fall, pp. 14–15. https://issuu.com/lexingtonfamily/docs/exfam_sumfall_17

10.

Dinerstein

(2012). Implementing legal capacity under article 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: The difficult road from guardianship to supported decision making. Human Rights Brief, 19, 8–12.

11.

District of Columbia Code § 7-2131(11) (2019).

12.

District of Columbia Public Schools, Office of Specialized Instruction. (n.d.-a). Supported decision-making form. http://supporteddecisionmaking.org/sites/default/files/dcps_supported_decision_making_form_0.pdf

13.

District of Columbia Public Schools, Office of Specialized Instruction. (n.d.-b). Supported decision-making in DCPS before the age of majority. http://supporteddecisionmaking.org/sites/default/files/dcps_supported_decision_making_faqs_0.pdf

14.

Downing-Hosten

(2015). Planning for transition by creating a supported decision-making network. http://supporteddecisionmaking.org/sites/default/files/event_files/041615_ppt_handouts.pdf

15.

Emery

(2018, June 13). 28-year-old Jamie Beck makes Indiana history as 1st to regain decision-making rights. Palladium-Item. https://www.palitem.com/story/news/local/2018/06/13/jamie-beck-makes-state-history-1st-regain-decision-making-rights/698874002/

16.

Eyraud

Taran

. (this issue). From substitute to supported decision-making: Participatory action research on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Article 12.

17.

Gooding

McSherry

Arstein-Kerslake

. (this issue). Supported decision-making in criminal proceedings: A socio-legal empirical study.

18.

Hatch

(2015). My story. Inclusion, 3(1), 34.

19.

Hatch

(n.d.). Jenny in her own words. http://jennyhatchjusticeproject.org/jennys_words?q=jenny_speaks

20.

Hatch

M. J.

Crane

S. A.

Martinis

J. G.

(2015). Unjustified isolation is discrimination: The Olmstead case against overbroad and undue organizational and public guardianship. Inclusion, 3, 65–74.

21.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400(d)(1)(A) (2004).

22.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1401(34) (2004).

23.

In re: Ryan Herbert King. Case No. 2003 INT 249 (D.C. Superior Court, Probate Division. October 6, 2016) (final order). T 249 (order terminating guardianship).

24.

Jameson

J. M.

Riesen

Polychronis

Trader

Mizner

Martinis

Hoyle

(2015). Guardianship and the potential of supported decision making with individuals with disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 40(1), 36–51.

25.

Jenny Hatch Justice Project. (n.d.-a). About the Jenny Hatch justice project. http://jennyhatchjusticeproject.org/about

26.

Jenny Hatch Justice Project. (n.d.-b). Jenny in the news. http://jennyhatchjusticeproject.org/jenny-in-the-news

27.

Jenny Hatch Justice Project. (n.d.-c). The justice for Jenny trial. http://jennyhatchjusticeproject.org/trial

28.

Jeste

Eglit

Palmer

Martinis

Blanck

Saks

(2018). An overview of supported decision in serious mental illnesses. Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processes, 81(1), 28–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/00332747.2017.1324697

29.

Khemka

Hickson

Reynolds

(2005). Evaluation of a decision-making curriculum designed to empower women with mental retardation to resist abuse. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 110, 193–204. https://doi.org/10.1352/0895–8017

30.

Kohn

N. A.

Blumenthal

J. A.

Campbell

A. T.

(2013). Supported decision-making: A viable alternative to guardianship? Penn State Law Review, 117, 1111–1157. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2161115

31.

Lisi

L. B.

Burns

Lussenden

(1994). National study of guardianship systems: Findings and recommendations. Center for Social Gerontology.

32.

Maine Rev. Stat. Tit. 18-C Sec. 5-102 (32) (2019).

33.

Martinis

(2014). One person, many choices: Using special education transition services to increase self-direction and decision-making and decrease overbroad or undue guardianship. Quality Trust for Individuals with Disabilities. http://jennyhatchjusticeproject.org/docs/publications/jhjp_publications_draft_article_guardianship.pdf

34.

Martinis

Blanck

(2019). Supported decision making: From justice for Jenny to justice for all! Something Else Solutions.

35.

McDougall

Evans

Baldwin

(2010). The importance of self-determination to perceived quality of life for youth and young adults with chronic conditions and disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 31, 252–260. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932509355989

36.

Millar

D. S.

Renzaglia

(2002). Factors affecting guardianship practices for young adults with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 68, 465–484. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290206800404

37.

Missouri Developmental Disabilities Council and Something Else Solutions, LLC. (n.d.). Supported decision making booklets. https://moddcouncil.org/

38.

Missouri Rev. Stat. 475.075 (2019).

39.

National Council on Disability. (2018). Beyond guardianship: Toward alternatives that promote greater self-determination. https://ncd.gov/publications/2018/beyond-guardianship-toward-alternatives

40.

National Council on Disability. (2019). Turning rights into reality: How guardianship and alternatives impact the autonomy of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. https://ncd.gov/publications/2019/turning-rights-into-reality

41.

National Guardianship Association. (2017). Position statement on guardianship, surrogate decision making, and supported decision making. https://www.guardianship.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/SDM-Position-Statement-9-2017.pdf

42.

National Resource Center for Supported Decision-Making. (n.d.). In your state. http://supporteddecisionmaking.org/states

43.

Pearcy

(2017). Supported decision-making in Tennessee. TASH Connections, 42(3), 28–33.

44.

Powers

L. E.

Geenen

Powers

Pommier-Satya

Turner

Dalton

Drummond

Swank

(2012). My life: Effects of a longitudinal, randomized study of self-determination enhancement on the transition outcomes of youth in foster care and special education. Children and Youth Services Review, 34, 2179–2187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.07.018

45.

Quality Trust for Individuals with Disabilities. (2013). Supported decision-making: An agenda for action. https://www.c-q-l.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/CQL-Supported-Decision-Making-Agenda-For-Action-2015.pdf

46.

Raley

S. K.

Shogren

K. A.

Martinis

J. G.

Wehmeyer

M. L.

(2020). Age of majority and alternatives to guardianship: A necessary amendment to the individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 1044207320932581.

47.

Reynolds

S. L.

(2002). Guardianship primavera: A first look at factors associated with having a legal guardian using a national representative sample of community-dwelling adults. Aging and Mental Health, 6, 109–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607860220126718

48.

Ross and Ross v. Hatch, No. CWF120000426P-03 (Va. Cir. Ct. Aug. 27, 2012) (order appointing temporary guardians).

49.

Ross and Ross v. Hatch, No. CWF120000426P-03 (Va. Cir. Ct. Aug. 2, 2013) (final order).

50.

Schmidt

W. C.

(1995). Guardianship: Court of last rest for elderly and disabled. Carolina Academic Press.

51.

Schnieders

(2019). Supported decision-making and people with psychiatric disabilities: Pioneering research at California’s Saks institute. Impact, 32(1), 40–41.

52.

Shogren

K. A.

Wehmeyer

M. L.

Martinis

Blanck

(2018). Supported decision-making: Theory, research, and practice to enhance self-determination and quality of life. Cambridge University Press.

53.

Shogren

K. A.

Wehmeyer

M. L.

Palmer

S. B.

Rifenbark

G. G.

Little

T. D.

(2015). Relationships between self-determination and postschool outcomes for youth with disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 48, 256–267. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466913489733

54.

Supported Decision-Making New York. (n.d.). Our process. https://sdmny.hunter.cuny.edu/our-process/

55.

Teaster

P. B.

Wood

E. F.

Lawrence

S. A.

Schmidt

W. C.

(2007). Wards of the state: A national study of public guardianship. Stetson Law Review, 37, 193–242.

56.

Tennessee Code § 34-1-127 (2020). Guardianships and conservatorships: Lest restrictive alternative to be imposed.

57.

Uekert

Van Duizend

(2011). Adult guardianships: A “best guess” national estimate and the momentum for reform. In Future trends in state courts 2011: Special focus on access to justice. https://ncsc.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/ctadmin/id/1846

58.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Community Living. (2017). Supported decision making program. https://www.acl.gov/programs/consumer-control/supported-decision-making-program

59.

Vargas

(2013, August 2). Woman with Down syndrome prevails over parents in guardianship case. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/woman-with-down-syndrome-prevails-over-parents-in-guardianship-case/2013/08/02/4aec4692-fae3-11e2-9bde-7ddaa186b751_story.html?utm_term=.388282f441c8

60.

Vargas

(2019, October 12). Her case opened the way for people with disabilities to reclaim their freedom. Now, her words open a book that could help countless more. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/her-case-opened-the-way-for-people-with-disabilities-to-reclaim-their-freedom-now-her-words-open-a-book-that-could-help-countless-more/2019/10/12/957c8580-ec6f-11e9-9c6d-436a0df4f31d_story.html

61.

Wehmeyer

M. L.

Palmer

Agran

Mithaug

Martin

(2000). Promoting causal agency: The self-determined learning model of instruction. Exceptional Children, 66(4), 439–453.

62.

Wehmeyer

M. L.

Schwartz

(1997). Self-determination and positive adult outcomes: A follow-up study of youth with mental retardation or learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 63(2), 245–255.

63.

Winick

B. J.

(1995). The side effects of incompetency labeling and the implications for mental health law. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 1, 6–42.

64.

Wright

J. L.

(2010). Guardianship for your own good: Improving the well-being of respondents and wards in the USA. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 33, 350–368.