I am a certified guardianship specialist in Texas. Texas courts have the authority to appoint a guardian with full or limited authority over an incapacitated person. However, a guardianship should be only as restrictive (See Tex. Est. Code § 1001.001(a)):
as indicated by the person's actual mental or physical limitations; and as necessary to promote and protect their well-being.
“The court shall design the guardianship to encourage the development or maintenance of maximum self-reliance and independence in the incapacitated person, including by presuming that the incapacitated person retains capacity to make personal decisions regarding the person’s residence." See Texas Estates Code § 1001.001(b).
There are two types of guardianships. A guardianship of the person, who can make decisions about where someone lives, what medical treatment they receive, etc. And then there is a guardianship of the estate. A person to make decisions about finances and assets.
Although the Code is drafted very conservatively, I have routinely seen the courts just slap a full blown guardianship on people with disabilities. The guardian has to post a bond and make annual reports to the court, but it is unusual to bust a guardianship. Because many of the victims lack the resources or fortitude to take on a court. Many judges feel that removing a guardianship draws scrutiny as to whether the guardianship should’ve been created in the first place.
I didn’t pay much attention to the Brittany Spears case, but she seems to be doing all right. Liking booze and pills is not grounds for a guardianship. Otherwise, 50% of the western world would be under one.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2022, 08:37:19 PM by Pornhubby »
”You can be mad as a mad dog at the way things went. You can swear and curse the fates. But when it comes to the end, you have to let go.” — The Curious Case of Benjamin Button