Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 13 (3):381-393 (2016)

Authors
Abstract
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities urges and requires changes to how signatories discharge their duties to people with intellectual disabilities, in the direction of their greater recognition as legal persons with expanded decision-making rights. Australian jurisdictions are currently undertaking inquiries and pilot projects that explore how these imperatives should be implemented. One of the important changes advocated is to move from guardianship models to supported or assisted models of decision-making. A driving force behind these developments is a strong allegiance to the social model of disability, in the formulation of the Convention, in inquiries and pilot projects, in implementation and in the related academic literature. Many of these instances suffer from confusing and misleading statements and conceptual misinterpretations of certain elements such as legal capacity, decision-making capacity, and support for decision-making. This paper analyses some of these confusions and their possible negative implications for supported decision-making instruments and those whose interests these instruments would serve, and advises a more incremental development of existing guardianship regimes. This provides a more realistic balance between neglecting the real limits of those with mental disabilities and thereby ignoring their identity and particularity, and continuing to bring them equally and fully into society.
Keywords Decision-making capacity  Disability  Guardianship  Legal capacity  Supported decision-making
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s11673-016-9727-z
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 59,088
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.United Nations - 2009 - Jahrbuch für Wissenschaft Und Ethik 14 (1):203-226.
Deciding for Others: The Ethics of Surrogate Decision Making.Donald Vandeveer - 1992 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 52 (1):232-237.

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Faulty Judgment, Expert Opinion, and Decision-Making Capacity.Michel Silberfeld & David Checkland - 1999 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 20 (4):377-393.
Moral Authority and Proxy Decision-Making.Anthony Wrigley - 2015 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 18 (3):631-647.
Interactive Capacity, Decisional Capacity, and a Dilemma for Surrogates.Vanessa Carbonell - 2013 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 4 (4):36-37.
Decision Making Capacity Should Not Be Decisive in Emergencies.Dieneke Hubbeling - 2014 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 17 (2):229-238.
Decision-Making Capacity and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.Peter Lucas - 2011 - Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 18 (2):117-122.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2016-06-22

Total views
19 ( #545,799 of 2,427,863 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #324,886 of 2,427,863 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes