Slovenian legislation is in conflict with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (hereinafter: the Concention), which the Republic of Slovenia ratified in 2008. According to Article 12 of the Convention, persons with disabilities should be recognized as having legal capacity on an equal basis with others. In Slovenia, however, individuals are assessed as incapable of making decisions, and out of concern, they are deprived of the right to decide independently about their own lives. This practice is carried out through the imposition of guardianship. Within this measure, another person makes decisions on behalf of the individual in certain (or in all) areas of their life. The institution of guardianship for adults is discriminatory towards persons with disabilities and must therefore be completely abolished and replaced with supported decision-making, as also mandated by the Convention.
In my Master's thesis, I examine the first-hand experiences of people who are or have been placed under any form of adult guardianship. I focus primarily on the circumstances in which people lived at the time of being assigned a guardian, the reasons stated for imposing this measure, how participants evaluate the institution of guardianship based on their own experience, how they assess their ability to make decisions, and what kinds of support they would wish to receive in decision-making if it were available outside the framework of guardianship and chosen by themselves.
Based on interviews with people with experience of guardianship, the review of some of their court orders on guardianship, and discussions with two professionals, I arrived at a rich set of findings. The most important conclusions of my research are that the life circumstances of people prior to being placed under guardianship were similar in that they had not received sufficient support in complex life situations; that none of the participants know why they were placed under guardianship; that due to repeated experiences of disappointment, violence, abuse, and disregard for their wishes, none of them are satisfied with guardianship; that all participants are capable of making everyday decisions and would not require guardianship if, when facing dilemmas, they could turn to people they trust. Participants’ accounts of their relationships with their guardians further confirmed that guardianship violates a wide range of the rights of persons with disabilities, since like everyone else, they may at times face difficulties in making certain decisions.
With these findings, my research makes an important contribution to the otherwise scarce body of studies on guardianship and amplifies the voices of people who are usually unheard.
|
