New York State guardianship law for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities is not built for the spectrum of needs of the population. There are various resources available to assist individuals for whom it may be detrimental to have a guardian; unfortunately, in New York, these alternatives to guardianship are not yet legal. Using a qualitative phenomenological approach, this study examines how advocates came to their decision on guardianship including what motivated them to make their decision, why they felt guardianship was the best decision or not, who provided guidance towards their supportive role, as well as determining the advocates’ understanding of guardianship and its alternatives. The results found and discussed explore how the participants came to their decisions on guardianship, their motivations, and their level of knowledge surrounding guardianship and its alternatives.
Doctoral dissertation, PhD / Open Access (after 2021-10-05)