A critical assessment of supported decision-making for persons aging with intellectual disabilities.
Supported decision-making is increasingly being promoted as an alternative to guardianship for persons aging with intellectual disabilities. Proponents argue that supported decision-making, unlike guardianship, empowers persons with disabilities by providing them with help in making their own decisions, rather than simply providing someone else to make decisions for them. To evaluate the empirical support for these claims, we reviewed the evidence base on supported decision-making. Our review found little such empirical research, suggesting that significant further research is warranted to determine whether--and under what conditions--supported decision-making can benefit persons with intellectual disabilities. Indeed, without more empirical evidence as to how supported decision-making functions in practice, it is too early to rule out the possibility it may actually disempower individuals with disabilities by facilitating undue influence by their alleged supporters. We therefore suggest several key areas for future research.
Princeton University, Harvard Law School, Professor of Law, Judith Greenberg Seinfeld Distinguished Faculty Fellow, Syracuse University College of Law, Syracuse, NY 13244, USA. Electronic address: nakohn@law.syr.edu.
Nina A
NA
Kohn
Harvard University, University of Pennsylvania Law School, Professor of Law, Syracuse University College of Law, USA.
Jeremy A
JA
Blumenthal
D000375:Aging; D003657:Decision Making; D006233:Persons with Disabilities; D006806:Human Rights; D006801:Humans; D008607:Intellectual Disability; D010358:Patient Participation; D026684:Personal Autonomy
Aging; Guardianship; Intellectual disability; Law; Supported decision-making