February 27, 2025
Nate Crippes / Public Affairs Supervising Attorney
ncrippes@disabilitylawcenter.org
Andrew Riggle / Public Policy Advocate
ariggle@disabilitylawcenter.org
(801) 363-1347 / (800) 662-9080
disabilitylawcenter.org
The DLC appreciates parents and guardians trying to protect their loved ones. However, because guardianship can strip a person of their fundamental freedoms permanently, we have significant concerns about SB 199.
A group of parents, guardians, and attorneys spent the past year working on a request from the courts for a process allowing a guardianship order to be individualized to meet a person’s specific needs by modifying or waiving particular rights in Utah’s Guardianship Bill of Rights. We think the compromise language of HB 334, which is in the senate, balances the needs and wishes of individuals and families in a variety of circumstances, whether they are looking to maximize independence, safety, or find a middle ground.
We believe the definition of “severe intellectual disability” in SB 199 is too broad. Similarly, by not requiring counsel for the respondent under certain conditions when the petitioner is a grandparent or sibling, it’s likely more guardianships will be granted without an attorney to advocate for the needs and wishes of the proposed ward. Likewise, the bill exempts these guardians from reporting requirements and gives them the right to restrict association with relatives, friends, and even clergy. If a guardian is abusive or neglectful, we fear no one will know. On the other hand, studies show a person with greater self-determination is more likely to identify an abusive situation and less likely to experience it.
Finally, SB 199 flips the preference for a limited guardianship to a full one for this subgroup. We think it creates a separate, more restrictive guardianship for a class of people and denies them the same rights as others, without meaningful recourse, solely based on diagnosis. It also doesn’t allow for individualized determinations for this population. If SB 199 passes, the state could face liability for discrimination under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, something the DLC would consider pursuing.
We believe a better approach is ensuring a person with a disability has an individualized assessment of their unique needs, abilities, and limitations before deciding what rights, if any, might be limited or denied. Taking away anyone’s civil rights, including those with disabilities, must not be easy.
While the DLC appreciates the sponsor and stakeholders engaging in discussion, please oppose SB 199. Thank you for your time and considering our perspective.