2 Types of Decision-Making for Court-Appointed Guardians
When court-appointed guardians make decisions on behalf of individuals who cannot do so themselves, they rely on two primary standards: substituted judgment and best interest. Understanding these standards is crucial for ensuring that decisions align with the values and needs of the individual.
1. Substituted Judgment Standard
The substituted judgment standard emphasizes honoring the preferences and values of the individual, as closely as possible. Under this approach, guardians are tasked with making decisions they believe the individual would have made if they were capable. Key aspects include:
Assessing Prior Wishes: Guardians must gather information about the individual’s past preferences, values, and beliefs. This can involve consulting family members, friends, or any advance directives (like living wills) that provide insight into the person's wishes.
Respecting Autonomy: The goal is to respect the individual's autonomy and dignity, even when they can no longer advocate for themselves. This standard is particularly important in decisions regarding healthcare, end-of-life care, and lifestyle choices.
Challenges: While substituted judgment can be empowering, it requires guardians to navigate sometimes ambiguous information about the individual's past preferences, which can be challenging.
2. Best Interest Standard
The best interest standard, on the other hand, focuses on what is deemed to be in the best overall interest of the individual, regardless of their past wishes. This approach is typically applied when the individual's preferences are unknown or unclear. Key components include:
Objective Evaluation: Guardians evaluate options based on objective criteria, such as the potential benefits and risks associated with each choice. The focus is on ensuring the individual's safety, well-being, and overall quality of life.
Professional Guidance: This standard often involves consulting medical professionals, social workers, and other experts to determine what is best for the individual, especially in complex situations.
Protective Approach: The best interest standard is more protective in nature, prioritizing the individual's immediate needs and welfare over their previously expressed desires.
Choosing between the substituted judgment and best interest standards can be challenging for guardians. Ideally, guardians strive to balance these approaches, seeking to honor the individual’s wishes while also making decisions that safeguard their well-being. By understanding these two standards, guardians can navigate the complexities of their responsibilities and advocate effectively for those they serve.