S.5, the “Adult Guardianship Equity Act” or “AGE Act,” reorganizes Vermont’s adult guardianship system by moving guardianship proceedings for certain adults with developmental disabilities from the Family Division into the Probate Division of the Superior Court. The bill’s stated purpose is to create a single, more uniform guardianship process with stronger and more consistent procedural protections, including clearer standards for evaluations, notice, hearings, appeals, annual reporting, and review of guardianship status. It also expands the role of voluntary guardianship, making it the least restrictive option when a person qualifies and agrees to it.
The bill repeals 18 V.S.A. chapter 215, which currently governs guardianship services for people with developmental disabilities, and replaces it with new provisions in Title 14. Under the new framework, existing guardianships for people with developmental disabilities would be administered, modified, and revoked in Probate Division under the procedures applicable to other adult guardianships, with the Vermont Supreme Court authorized to adopt supplemental rules so long as they do not reduce protections or options. The bill also preserves and clarifies the ability of the State’s Attorney to petition for guardianship when no suitable private guardian is available, and it allows the Office of Public Guardian to be appointed in appropriate cases.
The bill would materially affect state law by consolidating guardianship jurisdiction and aligning the treatment of adults with developmental disabilities more closely with the Probate Division’s existing guardianship rules. It adds or reinforces requirements for court-ordered evaluations, notice of the right to object, annual reports, final accountings, review of whether a person could move to voluntary guardianship, and appeal rights including de novo review of factual issues and jury trial rights in Civil Division appeals. It also amends policy language to emphasize least-restrictive guardianship and the protection of civil and human rights.
The general sentiment reflected in the bill text is strongly supportive of expanding procedural protections and reducing disparities between guardianship systems. The findings section frames the current split system as inconsistent, outdated, and potentially in tension with the Vermont Constitution’s Common Benefits Clause, and it emphasizes that voluntary guardianship should be available without the stigma of a finding of incapacity. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no documented legislative debate in the supplied materials, but the bill’s structure suggests a reform-oriented, rights-protective approach.
The main point of contention implied by the bill is the existing practice of placing certain guardianship cases involving developmental disabilities in the Family Division rather than the Probate Division. The bill argues that this arrangement denies those individuals protections available to others, such as guardian ad litem appointment, annual reporting, final accounting, and de novo factual appeals. Another likely area of concern is the shift of guardianship administration and oversight into a different court division, along with the repeal of the older chapter governing developmental-disability guardianship services, which could raise implementation and transition questions for the State, the Office of Public Guardian, the Department of Disabilities, Aging, and Independent Living, and affected families and respondents.
The bill would amend Title 14 to centralize adult guardianship proceedings in the Probate Division for persons with developmental disabilities who are currently covered by the separate Family Division framework, while repealing 18 V.S.A. chapter 215. It would create a new section governing the transition of existing guardianships, authorize supplemental court rules, and add procedural requirements for evaluations, hearings, annual reports, appeals, and periodic review for voluntary guardianship eligibility. The practical effect is to replace a dual-track guardianship system with a more unified probate-based process and to expand court oversight and due-process protections for respondents, guardians, and public agencies involved in guardianship cases.
The bill is presented in a strongly favorable light, with the text emphasizing fairness, equal treatment, and stronger due-process protections for adults under guardianship. Its findings suggest that the current system is viewed as outdated and unequal, and the proposed changes are framed as corrective and rights-enhancing. No committee testimony or vote history was provided, so there is no recorded opposition or support beyond the bill’s own explanatory language.
The principal controversy is the bill’s elimination of the separate Family Division guardianship track for certain adults with developmental disabilities and the transfer of those cases into the Probate Division. Supporters of the bill appear to favor the change because it would provide the same procedural safeguards available in other guardianship cases, including annual reports, final accountings, de novo factual appeals, and the possibility of voluntary guardianship. Potential opponents or skeptics may be concerned about the administrative transition, the impact on existing guardianship services, and whether the new structure will adequately account for the needs of people with developmental disabilities and the agencies that currently serve them.