The final day of the 2020 Legislative Session will be on Saturday, March 7, known as “sine die.” Although that is now more than two weeks away, many bills have already been considered by both the Senate and the House of Delegates. If a bill is fully approved and sent to the Governor with more than 10 days left in the session, the Governor has only 10 days to review the bill.
The mission of the disAbility Law Center of Virginia is to advance independence, choice and self-determination; protect legal, human and civil rights; and eliminate abuse, neglect and discrimination of people with disabilities through zealous and uncompromising legal advocacy and representation. With respect to guardianship issues, we promote options and tools that increase an individual’s ability to retain choices and decisions about their own lives to the fullest extent possible. Here is where some important guardianship-related bills stand:
Supported Decision Making
The only supported decision making bill to survive after “cross over” came to an end early this week. Senator Lucas’ SB 352 recognized “supported decision making” in a much less complicated mechanism than other proposals considered this year. Although the bill was approved by the full Senate, the bill was carried over to 2021 in the Behavioral Health subcommittee of Health, Welfare and Institutions, with Senator Lucas’ consent.
Senator Dunnavant’s bill (SB 585) started out as a supported decision making bill, but the Senate Committee on the Judiciary heavily amended the bill to remove all recognition of Supported Decision Making. The bill now contains some amendments to the guardianship laws in Virginia, including strengthening requirements that courts must consider less restrictive alternatives before imposing a guardianship and that guardians must encourage the person to participate in their own decision making. The bill charges the Department of Behavioral Health with convening a work group to study Supported Decision Making. The Behavioral Health subcommittee of Health, Welfare and Institutions approved the bill as amended.
Other Guardianship legislation still active:
SB 1072 (Mason) prohibits a court from appointing a lawyer or firm as guardian if that firm also represents the petitioner seeking guardianship or in any other matter. This bill is in response to media articles describing questionable practices by hospitals, particularly VCU Health Systems, seeking to discharge patients against their will to nursing homes. The Senate Judiciary Committee amended the bill to allow a court to appoint a guardian from the same firm as the petitioning attorney only “for good cause shown.” The bill was approved by the Senate and now goes to the House Courts of Justice committee.
SB 214 (Sutterlien) requires a guardian ad litem to review an IEP when the person in the guardianship proceeding is between 17 and 21. The bill has been approved by the full Senate and by the House Courts of Justice.
HB 1166 (Wampler) and SB 361 (Chafin) make it a civil perjury offense for a guardian or conservator to file a knowingly false statement with the court. Both have been approved by their respective houses. HB 1166 was approved by Senate Judiciary; SB 361 has been approved by the full House. Both bills began with much more serious penalties for false filings.
No longer active
HB 304 (Hope) would have required a petition for guardianship to list certain identifying characteristics of the person for whom guardianship is sought. The bill was amended to address confidentiality concerns and was approved by the House. Delegate Hope then asked the Senate Judiciary Committee to continue the bill until 2021.