Opinion ID: 2160038
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Lack of a Factual Basis for the Determination of Mollie Orshansky's Needs and Best Interests

Text: In authorizing a court to empower a guardian and conservator to assume responsibility for the person and affairs of an incapacitated individual, the Guardianship Act establishes an elevated benchmark of informed and careful decision making that is commensurate with the gravity of the decision. To appoint a guardian, the court must be satisfied that the individual for whom a guardian is sought is incapacitated and that the appointment is necessary as a means of providing continuing care and supervision of the person of the incapacitated individual. D.C.Code § 21-2044(b). The Act enjoins the court to exercise its authority so as to encourage the development of maximum self-reliance and independence of the incapacitated individual and make appointive and other orders only to the extent necessitated by the incapacitated individual's mental and adaptive limitations or other conditions warranting the procedure. D.C.Code § 21-2044(a). To appoint a conservator for an incapacitated individual, the court must determine that the individual has property that will be wasted or dissipated unless property management is provided, or that [m]oney is needed for the support, care, and welfare of the individual or those entitled to the individual's support and protection is necessary or desirable to obtain and provide money. D.C.Code § 21-2051(b)(1), (2). To guide the court's choice of person to serve as guardian or conservator, the Act lists appropriate candidates in order of priority. See D.C.Code §§ 21-2043, -2057. As has been mentioned, the highest priority is accorded to the nominee of the incapacitated individual to be protected. [21] The following persons (or their nominees) then are entitled to consideration in descending order of priority: the incapacitated individual's spouse, adult child, parent, any other relative with whom the incapacitated individual has resided for more than six months prior to the filing of the petition, and finally any other person. See D.C.Code §§ 21-2043(c), -2057(a). With respect to persons having equal priority, the court shall select the person it deems best qualified to serve. D.C.Code §§ 21-2043(d), -2057(b). The priorities are not absolute. The court, acting in the best interest of the incapacitated [or protected] individual, may pass over a person having priority and appoint a person having a lower priority or no priority. Id. The standard of proof in proceedings for the appointment of a guardian or conservator is set deliberately high: the petitioner or moving party shall present clear and convincing evidence that the appointment... is warranted. D.C.Code § 21-2003. To meet this test, the evidence must be such as to produce in the mind of the trier of fact a firm belief or conviction as to the facts sought to be established. In re D.I.S., 494 A.2d 1316, 1326 (D.C.1985) (internal quotations and citations omitted). The Act also has several other provisions intended to ensure that the court has a firm factual foundation for its decisions. The provisions previously discussed concerning the appointment of a guardian ad litem and the duties of counsel who represents the subject of the intervention proceeding contribute to that end. But of particular note-especially in a contested case such as this one-are the provisions authorizing the court to appoint an examiner and a visitor. An examiner is an individual qualified by training or experience in the diagnosis, care, or treatment of the causes and conditions giving rise to the alleged incapacity, such as a gerontologist, psychiatrist, or qualified mental retardation professional. D.C.Code § 21-2011(7). A visitor is a person appointed in a guardianship or protective proceeding who is an officer, employee, or special appointee of the court and who has no personal interest in the proceeding. D.C.Code § 21-2011(26). The Act spells out in detail some of the duties that a visitor shall perform in order to advise the court: Visitors appointed by the court in guardianship or protective proceedings shall interview the subject of the proceeding, the person who has filed the petition initiating the proceeding, and any person nominated to serve as guardian or conservator. The visitor shall also visit the present place of abode of the subject of the proceeding and the place it is proposed that the individual will be detained or reside if the appointment is made. The visitor shall submit a written report to the court. If a person has been nominated for appointment as a guardian or conservator, the visitor shall investigate whether a conflict or potential conflict of interest should preclude the appointment. If no person is nominated, the visitor shall make a nomination in his or her report to the court.