From guardianship to supported decision-making: Still searching for true north?
Access status:
Open Access
Type
ArticleAuthor/s
Carney, TerryAbstract
This article argues that asking whether guardianship has changed is the wrong question. It is the wrong question because guardianship does not exist in isolation from other institutions and legal instruments, such as enduring powers and nominee powers, or informal community ...
See moreThis article argues that asking whether guardianship has changed is the wrong question. It is the wrong question because guardianship does not exist in isolation from other institutions and legal instruments, such as enduring powers and nominee powers, or informal community arrangements of support or substituted decision-making. It is the wrong question because archetypical purity of guardianship as substitution and support as autonomy does not reflect real world experience of it as it is always a mixture of both, changing over time and decision type; and because change is very hard to pin down. In place of arid debates about whether guardianship should be modified or abolished, the better question to ask is where guardianship and its associated institutions fit within an ideally configured holistic package of formal and informal measures, and whether there are any indications of progress towards its realisation, or how that might be achieved.
See less
See moreThis article argues that asking whether guardianship has changed is the wrong question. It is the wrong question because guardianship does not exist in isolation from other institutions and legal instruments, such as enduring powers and nominee powers, or informal community arrangements of support or substituted decision-making. It is the wrong question because archetypical purity of guardianship as substitution and support as autonomy does not reflect real world experience of it as it is always a mixture of both, changing over time and decision type; and because change is very hard to pin down. In place of arid debates about whether guardianship should be modified or abolished, the better question to ask is where guardianship and its associated institutions fit within an ideally configured holistic package of formal and informal measures, and whether there are any indications of progress towards its realisation, or how that might be achieved.
See less
Date
2023Source title
Journal of Law and MedicineVolume
30Issue
1Publisher
Thomson ReutersLicence
Copyright All Rights ReservedRights statement
This article was published by Thomson Reuters and should be cited as: Carney, T. (2023). From guardianship to supported decision-making: Still searching for true north? Journal of Law and Medicine, 30(1), 70–84. For all subscription inquiries please phone, from Australia: 1300 304 195, from Overseas: +61 2 8587 7980 or online at legal.thomsonreuters.com.au/search. The official PDF version of this article can also be purchased separately from Thomson Reuters at http://sites.thomsonreuters.com.au/journals/subscribe-or-purchase. This publication is copyright. Other than for the purposes of and subject to the conditions prescribed under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), no part of it may in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, microcopying, photocopying, recording or otherwise) be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted without prior written permission. Enquiries should be addressed to Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Limited. PO Box 3502, Rozelle NSW 2039. legal.thomsonreuters.com.auFaculty/School
The University of Sydney Law SchoolShare