Guardianships and Supported Decision-Making Agreements Amendments
Summary
HB 334 revises Utah’s guardianship laws and creates a new statutory framework for supported decision-making agreements. The bill updates definitions in the probate code, clarifies the rights of persons alleged to be incapacitated and persons under guardianship, and changes court procedures for determining incapacity and appointing guardians. It also replaces a prior future repeal date tied to counsel for allegedly incapacitated persons, and makes conforming changes across related guardianship, conservatorship, and trust provisions.
A major feature of the bill is the creation of a new Part 7 in Title 75 governing supported decision-making agreements. The bill defines who may serve as a principal or supporter, sets out required agreement terms, establishes supporter duties and limits, allows revocation and termination, and provides that decisions made with authorized support are legally treated as the principal’s own decisions. It also addresses how these agreements interact with guardianships, conservatorships, HIPAA, and other laws, and gives good-faith reliance protections to third parties who accept a valid agreement.
Impact
The bill amends multiple sections of Utah Code, including probate definitions and guardianship/conservatorship procedures, and enacts a new statutory scheme for supported decision-making agreements in Sections 75-5-701 through 75-5-709. It expands and reorganizes the rights of incapacitated persons, strengthens notice and participation requirements in guardianship proceedings, and clarifies when counsel may be required or waived. It also imposes duties on guardians and conservators regarding notice, accounting, and respect for the ward’s preferences, while creating a less restrictive alternative to guardianship for adults with disabilities who can use supported decision making.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have received strong bipartisan support and moved through both chambers with large margins. It received favorable recommendations in committee and passed the House 70-1 and the Senate 27-0, suggesting broad agreement with the overall policy direction. The absence of recorded committee testimony in the provided materials limits insight into detailed debate, but the vote history indicates generally positive sentiment toward the bill.
Contention
The main policy tension in the bill is between expanding autonomy for adults with disabilities and preserving safeguards against abuse, coercion, or undue influence. The new supported decision-making framework allows a principal to receive assistance without surrendering decision-making authority, but it also requires notice to guardians, conservators, or other qualifying persons when their authority may overlap, and it terminates or limits agreements when a court appoints a guardian or conservator unless the court orders otherwise. Another point of potential concern is the bill’s revised guardianship rights language, which preserves many protections but also allows some rights to be waived or limited only on a clear-and-convincing showing of a compelling reason.