Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Adult Protective Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill seeks to add 'cognitive decline' to APS definitions so at‑risk adults are reported earlier
Summary
House Bill 1081 would expand the definition of disabled adults in Georgia law to include observable cognitive decline so incidents can be reported to Adult Protective Services earlier. Supporters said the change is an observational threshold, not a medical diagnosis, and does not automatically provide additional benefits.
Get email alerts on the Adult Protective Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Representative Veil presented House Bill 1081, saying the measure would expand the statutory definition of a disabled adult to include observable cognitive decline so individuals who are slipping into crisis can be referred to Adult Protective Services (APS) before harm escalates.
"After reviewing a number of options, we have found that expanding the definition of disabled persons to include cognitive decline will accomplish the initial goal of catching people that may fall through the cracks," Representative Veil said, adding that cognitive decline is an observation, not a diagnosis.
Committee members pressed for detail on who would be the observer. Representative Veil and witnesses said family members, frontline officers and social workers — including police social workers who now accompany officers — could make initial observations and refer a case to social services or APS. The sponsor said training and legislative updates would incorporate the new terms so non‑social‑work frontline staff would recognize the signs in reports.
Sabrina Calloway, a clinical social worker with the Clayton County Police Department, told the committee that in her experience APS often intervenes only after severe harm occurs. She described a case in which an older adult spent more than $50,000 to a scammer and said adding an observation‑based category would allow earlier intervention.
The sponsor told the committee that DHS had recommended moving the concept into the APS code rather than guardianship code to avoid unnecessarily expanding powers to remove rights. Lawmakers asked legislative counsel and agency staff for follow‑up to ensure the language balances protections with civil liberties. No vote was taken; the committee requested meetings with DHS and other stakeholders before further action.

