Thursday, December 17, 2015
Is a Court-Appointed Guardianship, Using Paid, Private Guardian, "Worse Than Prison"? Latest from Nevada
As we've reported several times over the course of the last year, concerns about cost, misuse of authority, and lack of appropriate oversight of court-appointed guardians for adults in Clark County (Las Vegas), Nevada, have lead to a state-wide inquiry into how better to protect the civil rights of alleged incapacitated persons. According to news reports recent proceedings before the Nevada Supreme Court Guardianship Commission, one judge described past neglect of the alleged incapacitated individual's rights as being "worse than being sent to prison."
A frequent concern raised by family members has been the cost of court-appointed guardians, particularly for individuals or family members who disagree with either the need for a guardianship or the scope of the guardian's powers over the individual or the individual's assets. During the most recent proceedings addressing potential solutions, judges and others argued that a solution to some of the abuses was court-appointment of a lawyer at the outset of any guardianship proceeding to represent the interests of the individual. Thus, there is some irony, that an additional layer of potential costs -- the cost of the appointed counsel -- would be argued as part of the solution. On the other hand, limiting the amount of money such an attorney can charge (whether paid from the individual's estate or from public funds), can have the practical effect of what might be described as "de minimus" representation.
The Nevada proceedings have attracted considerable attention from media nationally -- and from family advocates challenging court-supervised guardianships in other states and who are sharing information about problems and potential solutions. My thanks to Rick Black for sharing news from Nevada.