{"title":"Perceptions of District- and School-Level Special Education Leaders on Guardianship and Adult Decision-Making Support","authors":"A. Plotner, Charles B. Walters","doi":"10.1177/10442073211006395","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There are many known barriers facing youth with disabilities as they make the transition from high school to their adult lives. One potential barrier receiving increased attention over the last 5 years is guardianship, the court petition-driven process by which adults with disabilities are declared incapacitated (i.e., unable to make or communicate decisions regarding their affairs). The result of this process is the appointment of a surrogate decision-maker known as a guardian. Depending on the nature of the court order, some rights like entering into contracts might transfer to the guardian, other rights may be retained by the “ward,” and other rights like marrying might be removed altogether. Guardianship has been framed as antithetical to the aims of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and contrary to research demonstrating the importance of self-determination for young adults with disabilities. Few studies, however, have examined the perspectives of professionals in special education leadership roles on issues related to special education, guardianship, self-determination, and alternatives to guardianship. This study surveyed professionals in district- and school-level special education leadership roles (N = 117) to examine their perspectives on what “should” be done and what is actually being done relative to issues surrounding guardianship in their district. Subsequent descriptive and inferential analyses show a stark incongruence between that which professionals value regarding this domain and the current reality of practice in their local areas. Salient findings with important implications for special education policy and future research are presented and discussed.","PeriodicalId":46868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","volume":"32 1","pages":"290 - 300"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/10442073211006395","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10442073211006395","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
There are many known barriers facing youth with disabilities as they make the transition from high school to their adult lives. One potential barrier receiving increased attention over the last 5 years is guardianship, the court petition-driven process by which adults with disabilities are declared incapacitated (i.e., unable to make or communicate decisions regarding their affairs). The result of this process is the appointment of a surrogate decision-maker known as a guardian. Depending on the nature of the court order, some rights like entering into contracts might transfer to the guardian, other rights may be retained by the “ward,” and other rights like marrying might be removed altogether. Guardianship has been framed as antithetical to the aims of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and contrary to research demonstrating the importance of self-determination for young adults with disabilities. Few studies, however, have examined the perspectives of professionals in special education leadership roles on issues related to special education, guardianship, self-determination, and alternatives to guardianship. This study surveyed professionals in district- and school-level special education leadership roles (N = 117) to examine their perspectives on what “should” be done and what is actually being done relative to issues surrounding guardianship in their district. Subsequent descriptive and inferential analyses show a stark incongruence between that which professionals value regarding this domain and the current reality of practice in their local areas. Salient findings with important implications for special education policy and future research are presented and discussed.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Disability Policy Studies addresses compelling, variable issues in ethics, policy, and law related to individuals with disabilities. A major focus is quantitative and qualitative policy research. Articles have implications in fields such as education, law, sociology, public health, family studies, medicine, social work, and public administration. Occasional special series discuss current problems or areas needing more in-depth research, for example, disability and aging, policy concerning families of children with disabilities, oppression and disability, school violence policies and interventions, and systems change in supporting individuals with disabilities.