Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Guardianship Sdm topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Assembly committee hears bill to require courts to consider supported decision making before adult guardianship
Summary
SB346 would require Nevada courts to consider supported decision-making agreements and other less restrictive alternatives before appointing adult guardians and to make findings on why guardianship is necessary when it is chosen.
Carson City — The Assembly Judiciary Committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 346, which would require courts to consider supported decision making and other less restrictive alternatives before appointing adult guardians for people with decision-making limitations.
Senator Neal (presenting the bill) described SB346 as addressing adult guardianship and promoting alternatives that preserve individuals’ autonomy. "What SB346 does is it promotes an alternative ... called supported decision making," the senator said, explaining that supported decision-making agreements are contracts where the person receiving support collaborates with a chosen supporter on decisions such as leases or financial transactions.
Katherine Nielsen, representing the Governor's Council on Developmental Disabilities, walked the committee through the bill’s provisions, saying the measure expands the court’s required consideration of least restrictive alternatives, requires that information about those alternatives be given to individuals, and directs courts to make findings explaining why less restrictive options would be insufficient when guardianship is appointed. "When individuals are moving into our state we don't want them to just automatically be granted a guardianship here because we don't know that their standards are held to the same standards as our state," Nielsen said regarding out-of-state guardianships.
Public testimony included supporters who described real-world benefits for people with disabilities. Maxmillian Lowe said SB346 "provides the alternative to guardianship for the least restrictive environment" and promotes self-determination. Jonathan Norman of the Nevada Coalition of Legal Service Providers said the bill will help ensure "fewer unnecessary guardianships" and cited earlier statutes creating supported decision-making frameworks in Nevada (NRS 162C and related provisions).
Family members and people with disabilities also spoke in favor. Ellen Marquez, a parent of an adult with Down syndrome, urged the committee to recognize supported decision making as a legitimate option: "By adding SDM to Nevada's guardianship law, we can ensure it is recognized and respected ... preventing individuals from being forced into unnecessary guardianships." A 22-year-old witness, Alyssa Marquez, described wanting to make her own decisions and care for her pets.
Committee members did not propose amendments during the hearing and there were no callers in opposition recorded on the public line. The committee closed the hearing without taking final action on the bill.
SB346 references Nevada’s Supported Decision-Making Act (NRS 162C) and related powers-of-attorney statutes cited in testimony. The bill would require explicit court findings when guardianship is chosen over less restrictive alternatives and would subject transferred out-of-state guardianships to the same Nevada review.
