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

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 REHABILITATION Journal of Disability Policy Studies Pub Date : 2021-07-15 DOI:10.1177/10442073211028586
Jonathan G. Martinis, J. Harris, D. Fox, P. Blanck
{"title":"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","authors":"Jonathan G. Martinis, J. Harris, D. Fox, P. Blanck","doi":"10.1177/10442073211028586","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"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.","PeriodicalId":46868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","volume":"34 1","pages":"8 - 16"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/10442073211028586","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Disability Policy Studies","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10442073211028586","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: 4

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.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
罗斯和罗斯诉哈奇案后美国的州监护法律和支持性决策:对研究、政策、教育和倡导的分析和影响
在过去的十年里,特别是在2013年弗吉尼亚州罗斯和罗斯诉哈奇案之后,美国对支持决策(SDM)的认识、使用和法律认可都有了显著的提高。SDM是一种方法论,人们与值得信赖的朋友、家人和专业人士一起工作,帮助他们了解自己的处境和选择,这样他们就可以自己做决定,指导自己的生活。在Hatch案例中,一名患有唐氏综合症的年轻女性通过证明她使用SDM而击败了永久监护的请愿书。在此之后,这种方法越来越多地被认为是一种替代监护的方法,使人们能够保留自己的合法权利,并在最大程度上做出生活选择。本文回顾了美国50个州和哥伦比亚特区的监护法。根据我们制定的标准,根据哈奇案的发现和价值观,我们评估了这些法律在多大程度上承认或鼓励使用SDM作为监护的替代方案,以及作为增强监护人自决的手段。然后,我们为未来的SDM研究、政策、教育和宣传工作提供建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
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.
期刊最新文献
Trends in Privacy of Adults With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Before and After the Home and Community-Based Services Final Rule Helping the Elderly Live Better With Dementia: Recent Developments in Japan’s Adult Guardianship System and Its Role in Geriatric Social Work Practice A Big Ten Leadership Approach to Service Animal Policy Development in Higher Education Linking Response to Intervention and Identification of a Specific Learning Disability The COVID-19 Impact on Employment for LGBT Individuals With Disabilities: An Examination of the 2021 Household Pulse Survey
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1