Supported Decision-Making Service

59 / 80

59
Supported Decision-Making Service for Persons with Disabilities | Service Model
The Human Rights Center for People with Disabilitis
Supported decision making
The law recognizes supported decision making as a new legal tool (section 67b), which will
come into effect in two years. The law briefly defines the supporter’s functions – help with
obtaining information, help with understanding the information and the available alternatives
and help executing the decision and expressing it to third parties. The law empowers the
minister of justice to introduce regulations that would help formalize supported decision
making, such as establishing who may be appointed as a supporter, what training is required,
the supporter’s duties and responsibilities, when support ends and how to enter a support
arrangement through an agreement. The law emphasizes that a decision making supporter
will not make decisions instead of the supported person, and compels the court to consider
appointing a decision making supporter before opting for guardianship. Though the supported
decision making clause is to enter into effect only in two years’ time, the law does stress (section
53), that the courts may make use of section 68 (which grants the court general jurisdiction
to take the necessary steps). This means that the court may start appointing decision making
supporters now, based on this section.
Guardianship
The law introduces many innovations with respect to the process of considering guardianship
and the rights of persons under guardianship, including:
1. Stringent test for appointing a guardian. The previous law allowed to appoint a guardian for
any person who could not take care of their own affairs. The new law (section 33a(a)), introduces
two major tests that must be passed before a decision to appoint a guardian can be made.
a. The principle of necessity – a determination that without the appointment, the person’s
rights, interests and needs would be harmed.
b. The principle of the less restrictive measure – a determination that no alternatives that are
less restrictive on the person in question can be selected, such as an enduring power of
attorney or supported decision making.
When appointing a guardian, the court is required to provide the reasons for the decision
and the considerations weighed prior to making it (section 33a(h)).
2. Reduced applicability of guardianship law – The new law (section 33a(d)), lacks the option
to appoint a general guardian for a person’s entire affairs, as is the case today. The judge will
have to choose the areas of guardianship – a specific affair, medical matters, personal affairs,
property or a combination of several areas. The judge will be required to restrict guardianship
to the necessary areas only.
3. Reduced guardianship duration – While the law does not restrict the duration of a
guardianship appointment, it does instruct the judge to order the shortest duration required
(section 33a(e)).
4. Deletion of the term “ward” – The new law replaces the term “ward” with the term “a
person for whom a guardian has been appointed” (section 80).
5. Choosing a guardian – A person who is deemed to have legal capacity may define who they
wish to have appointed as a guardian in case a decision to appoint one is made in the future
(section 35a). The law also contains an instruction to consider a person’s wishes when a
guardian is appointed (section 35).
More on the major innovations in the law