Category: Uncategorized

As part of the I DECIDE Georgia SDM Legal Community of Practice, the Georgia Advocacy Office and the Atlanta Legal Aid Society are launching a series of peer-to-peer trainings for legal professionals.  These free, web-based trainings will offer resources, strategies, and best practices to enhance the ability of legal professionals to serve people with disabilities.  The Community of Practice is designed to develop and sustain ongoing learning opportunities and build relationships with colleagues across Georgia.  Learn more about the topics and speakers at the I DECIDE Georgia Community.

Calling Legal Professionals!

There is still time to register!  The first webinar is on Supported Decision-Making and will be held on Thursday, May 7, at 12:00 PM Eastern Time.  It will feature Susan Walker Goico, J.D., of Atlanta Legal Aid, and Morgan K. Whitlatch, J.D.

There is still time to REGISTER!

We are thrilled to announce that Youth Ambassadors from the Center for Youth Voice Youth Choice (CYVYC) project have created a Call to Action that should be used to drive and inform future advocacy on the use of alternatives to guardianship going forward!

The Center on Youth Voice, Youth Choice (CYVYC) is a project of the Institute for Community Inclusion at UMass Boston (ICI), in partnership with the Center for Public Representation (CPR), Self Advocates Becoming Empowered (SABE), and the Human Services Research Institute (HSRI), with consultation from experts at the Harvard Law School Project on Disability and the Georgia Advocacy Office. CYVYC supported 11 State Teams (Arizona, California, Georgia, Indiana, Michigan, New Jersey, Oregon, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont, and Wisconsin) across three cohorts to enable youth with IDD to led systemwide reforms and advance alternatives to guardianship, such as supported decision-making (SDM) in their States.

The Youth Ambassador Call to Action was a youth-led initiative within the CYVYC project, where Youth Ambassadors helped to create a document that made recommendations for what needs to happen next to promote alternatives to guardianship for youth with disabilities and who needs to act to make those changes happen. It harnesses the power of Youth Ambassadors’ voices to identify where reform and advocacy are needed the most to ensure that alternatives to guardianship are the first option for youth with disabilities.

The Call to Action is accessible on the CYVYC website, where you can find an introductory video and summary about it.

We encourage you to share this Call to Action widely across your networks and communities, especially with those who advocate to advance the rights and self-determination of people with disabilities!

 

The Center for Public Representation (CPR) is sounding the alarm over a new Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) initiative that purports to authorize VA attorneys to pursue court-ordered guardianship over veterans, including veterans who are homeless or at risk of homelessness.

Guardianship and conservatorship are extreme legal interventions that strip people’s fundamental rights to direct their own lives – rights that many Americans never imagined could be restricted.  Guardianship and conservatorship remove a person’s legal authority to make their own medical, financial, residential, and other personal decisions. They have been described as “civil death” that leave a person with fewer rights than a typical felon.  They also have been linked to unnecessary segregation and institutionalization and can be extremely difficult to get changed or terminated. As such, from a policy perspective, guardianship and conservatorship should be considered a last resort, with less-restrictive options, including Supported Decision-Making (SDM) being prioritized.

“CPR has been working to dismantle pipelines to unnecessary guardianship and conservatorship for years, as have scores of disability justice and SDM advocates,” said Cathy Costanzo, CPR Executive Director.  “Guardianship and conservatorships are already overused in this country, and this VA initiative would only make that problem worse.”

Guardianship and conservatorship are not solutions to homelessness or service access. If there are indeed “hundreds” of veterans in acute care facilities waiting to be discharged, as the VA claims, it is not because they lack guardians, but because there are not enough community services and housing to support them.  Rather than deputizing more attorneys to initiate guardianship proceedings, the VA should instead focus on fulfilling its obligations under federal law to ensure veterans have access to the most integrated settings and to increase its capacity to provide supported housing and community-based services.

On March 25, 2026, CPR and twenty partners submitted a statement for the record in a House Veterans Affairs Committee hearing, opposing draft legislation related to this initiative.

For more information, please contact Morgan Whitlatch at 202-596-6116 or mwhitlatch@cpr-ma.org.  For CPR’s full March 2026 newsletter, please click here.

On February 9, 2026, the American Bar Association adopted Resolution 100, which amended the Model Rule of Professional Conduct for Rule 1.14 for representing Clients with Diminished Capacity (now “Clients with Decision-Making Limitations”). The amendments represent a foundational step forward in tackling the discrimination and bias people with disabilities experience when accessing legal counsel to exercise their legal capacity. The amendments make critical changes to the rule and comments including:

• Replacing the term “client with diminished capacity” with more modernized language “clients with decision-making limitations.”
• Recognizing that decision-making limitations are situational in nature and can vary across time.
• Naming Supported Decision-Making as an accommodation that can help enhance a client’s decision-making ability and eliminate or alleviate concerns about a client’s capacity to make legal decisions.
• Recognizing that clients with cognitive disabilities, including intellectual and mental health disabilities, are capable of making legal decisions.
• Directing attorneys to recognize their obligations to ensure effective communication with their clients and provide the necessary accommodations to do so.
• Encouraging attorneys to explore less restrictive forms of protective action and to keep mind that pursuing or recommending guardianship may be more intrusive than the circumstances require.
• Clarifying that attorneys can ethically represent clients who have guardians or other legal representatives in challenging the terms of that legal representative’s authority.

In 2024, CPR attorney Megan Rusciano was invited to participate in a Working Group tasked with drafting amendments to the Rule, which were proposed to the ABA in April 2025.  CPR submitted comments in May 2025 and August 2025 in support of the amendments as the ABA continued to refine the proposal. You can read more about the changes and the process in this article.

For nearly 50 years, CPR has worked alongside people with disabilities to ensure that they are able to enjoy and exercise their legal rights – the ABA’s amendments represent a crucial step in doing just that!

 

On September 9, 2025, CPR and a coalition of diverse advocates came out in force to show their support for Senate Bill 155 and House Bill 261, which would establish a legal framework for Supported Decision-Making (SDM) agreements in Massachusetts.  At a hearing held by the Joint Committee on Children, Families and Persons with Disabilities, CPR testified alongside other members of the Massachusetts Advocates for Supported Decision-Making (MASDM) Coalition.  People with disabilities and their supporters shared their experiences with how SDM can transform lives.

SDM allows me to choose people I trust to help me think through my decisions, while I remain the decision-maker.  It gives me dignity and the freedom to stay in control of my own life … SDM is not meant to replace guardianship.  It is simply another option.”

Jonathan Gardner, MASDM Co-Chair and cancer survivor

As showcased in CPR’s written testimony, at least 23 states and the District of Columbia have already passed comprehensive SDM agreement legislation.  CPR strongly urges Massachusetts to join them.  To learn more about the many States that have formally recognized SDM in their laws across the United States, visit CPR’s new interactive map.

Speakers on MASDM Panels at Hearing

• Jonathan Gardner, Coalition Co-Chair, SDM User (written testimony)
• Nora Bent, Coalition Co-Chair, The Arc of Massachusetts
• Barbara L’Italien, Disability Law Center
• Morgan Whitlatch, Center for Public Representation (written testimony)
• Nancy Gardner, Supporter (written testimony)
• Joshua Gladstone, Massachusetts Developmental Disabilities Council (MDDC) (written testimony)
• Ryan Horrigan, Self-Advocate (written testimony)
• Alana Russo, SDM Decision-Maker, MDDC
• Amber Pettell, MDDC
• Anna Krieger, Massachusetts Advocates for Children (MAC)
• Jevon Okundaye, MAC (written testimony)
• Lisa Sims, SDM Supporter
• Sandra Heller, SDM Supporter, MDDC (written testimony)
• Cody Rooney, MDDC
• John Ford, Massachusetts Guardianship Policy Institute (written testimony)
• Amanda Jo Benoit, SDM Decision-Maker (written testimony)
• Sandy Dear-Robinson, SDM Supporter, Nonotuck Resources Associates (written testimony)
• Malia Windrow-Carlotto, SDM Supporter
• Maggy Walto, SDM Supporter, Nonotuck Resources Associates (written testimony)
• Beth Kollett, Massachusetts Advocates Standing Strong (MASS) (written testimony)
• Rick Glassman, former attorney from Disability Law Center
• Deborah Dorfman, Mental Health Legal Advisors Committee (written testimony)
• Kim Plaut, MASS

Written Testimony of Other MASDM Supporters

• Justin Bernard, MASS (written testimony)
• Jillian Berube, MASS (written testimony)
• James Cowell, SDM Decision-Maker (written testimony)
• George Fleischner, Nonotuck Resources Associates (written testimony)
• Wynn Gerhard, Massachusetts Guardianship Policy Institute (written testimony)
• Dianne Glennon (written testimony)
• Marie Hennessey, MASS (written testimony)
• Danna Mauch, Massachusetts Association for Mental Health (MAMH) (written testimony)

Are you a family member or supporter of a person with a disability considering their career options? Would you like to learn about how you can support their employment journey?

Supported Decision Making (“SDM”) happens when people make their own decisions with the help of friends, family, professionals, and others they trust.  SDM can be helpful when looking for or keeping a job.  

Disability Rights Connecticut and the Center for Public Representation partnered to create a video training series on SDM and competitive integrated employment for people with disabilities in Connecticut. Join us on Zoom for free viewings of the video training series followed by live Q&As!

REGISTER HERE: www.DisRightsCT.org/SDM-Video-Series

• Session 1: An Overview of SDM
  • Wednesday, September 3, 2025 at 10:00 AM ET or 6:00 PM ET (Q&A includes guest speaker Morgan Whitlatch, the Director of SDM Initiatives at CPR)
• Session 2: Informed Choice and Employment
  • Wednesday, October 8, 2025 at 10:00 AM ET or 6:00 PM ET
• Session 3: The Journey from School to Employment
  • Wednesday, November 5, 2025 at 10:00 AM ET or 6:00 PM ET
• Session 4: The Journey to Employment in Adulthood
  • Wednesday, December 3, 2025 at 10:00AM ET or 6:00 PM ET

ASL and Spanish interpretation will be provided. Additional accommodations may be requested upon registration.

In May 2025, CPR submitted comments in support of two initiatives that would recognize Supported Decision-Making (SDM) as a reasonable accommodation in national model rules of professional conduct and state court rules.  CPR Staff Attorney, Megan Rusciano, was invited to serve as a subject matter expert in both of these initiatives and helped shape the proposed rule amendments.   

Proposed Update to ABA Model Rule 1.14 (Clients with Diminished Capacity) 

CPR submitted detailed comments in support of the American Bar Association’s proposed amendments to Model Rule of Professional Conduct for Attorneys, Rule 1.14.  The proposed amendments are a critical step to dismantling the bias people with disabilities face when accessing legal counsel to exercise their legal rights.  They recognize the pivotal role SDM plays as an accommodation that can eliminate perceived decision-making limitations and afford people with disabilities effective communication so that they can exercise their fundamental rights as legal actors.  The proposed amendments would: 

• Replace the term “client with diminished capacity” with more modernized language “clients with decision-making limitations” 

• Direct attorneys to recognize their obligations to provide clients accommodations they may need, like SDM, to ensure effective communication and access to their services 

• Guide attorneys away from taking restrictive protective action and towards less restrictive options, like alternatives to guardianship and informal supports 

• Clarify that attorneys can ethically represent clients who have guardians or other legal representatives in challenging the terms of that legal representative’s authority.   

Based on CPR’s individual and systemic work, we strongly believe that the time to reform Rule 1.14 is long overdue and see the proposed amendments as essential to supporting people with disabilities in exercising their legal capacity and rights. 

As of June 3, 2025, the American Bar Association is reviewing comments to Model Rule 1.14, will determine whether it will adopt the revisions thereafter.  So stay tuned! 

Update to Maryland Court Rule 1-332 (Reasonable Accommodations for Persons with Disabilities) 

CPR also submitted testimony in support of proposed amendments to Maryland Court Rule 1-332, which will create a streamlined process for Marylanders with disabilities to request reasonable accommodations, like SDM, to access the court system.   

• People with disabilities still face profound obstacles to accessing courts, including denial of their right to effective communication, as well as physical, informational, economic, and other barriers.  Within the court system, SDM can ensure that people with disabilities can effectively communicate and participate in those proceedings.   

• Too often, examples of court accommodations center on physical access needs, interpreters, or basic assistive technology.  By naming SDM as an example of a reasonable accommodation, the proposed amendments are in line with federal and Maryland law.

The Maryland Supreme Court heard testimony on the proposed amendments to Rule 1-332 on June 3, 2025, and adopted all the SDM-related changes.  Megan Rusciano was quoted in the Daily Record:

 “When I think about the first step to ensuring people with disabilities have equal access to the courts, it begins with an accommodation request.  This policy and this change in the rule is so sorely needed to outline that process.”  

In April 2025, CPR and WilmerHale filed an amici curiae (“friend of the court”) brief in support of Plaintiffs-Appellees in La Union Del Pueblo Entero, et. al. v Abbott, a case before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit that challenged Texas’ voter suppression law, S.B. 1, for violating Section 208 of the Voting Rights Act.  Among other points, the brief: 

• Discusses the diversity of voters with disabilities who require assistance, and the broad range of assistance they need and use to vote, including Supported Decision-Making (SDM).   
• Argues that S.B.1 is not only at odds with federal law, but also with Texas’ SDM legislation, which codified that people with disabilities can and should retain their autonomy and right to self-determination and can do so by relying on supporters who they know and trust to make and communicate their decisions.   

Drawing upon Texas’ 2015 SDM legislation, the brief underscores that Texas was at the forefront of a national movement that recognized that people with disabilities have the right to identify and access the assistance they need to make and effectuate their own decisions, including in voting, without government interference.  Texas’ SDM law embodies fundamental respect for the privacy, freedom, and autonomy of people with disabilities, and S.B. 1 should not impose more stringent requirements on voter assistance than it does on SDM supporters.   

CPR and 15 other disability rights organizations signed onto the brief.  

What does it really mean to get guardianship?

What are other options to consider?

What is “Supported Decision-Making“?

Are you a family member or a supporter of a person with disabilities?  Do you want to learn more about ways to support people with disabilities with decision-making about their lives?

In Massachusetts, when people turn 18 years old, they become legal adults.  This means the law says they get to make their own decisions about their health care, education, finances, and other matters.

Parents of people with disabilities may be incorrectly told that going to court to get guardianship is the only way to remain involved in their child’s adult life.  But that is not true.  Getting guardianship is a serious step to take, and it is important to fully understand the consequences first.  There are other options – including Supported Decision-Making – that may work better for people with disabilities and their families.

FREE Trainings in 2025

The Center for Public Representation (CPR) is collaborating with community partners to offer a number of free SDM trainings in 2025 that are geared towards families and supporters of people with disabilities in Massachusetts.  The trainings are scheduled for January, February, March, May, and June.  More information about these educational opportunities is listed below.

• January, February, & March 2025 – The Cambodian Mutual Assistance Association (CMAA) and CPR partnered on a series of three hybrid (virtual and in-person) trainings.
  • The workshops provided education on Supported Decision-Making, with each focusing on a different life area – education, health care, and finances.
  • The workshops were held during CMAA’s monthly support group meetings, with Khmer interpretation provided.
    
  • The workshops were held on:
    • January 25, 10 am – 12 pm ET on “Supported Decision-Making in Education“
    • February 22, 10 am – 12 pm ET on “Supported Decision-Making in Health Care“
    • March 29, 10 am – 12 pm ET on “Supported Decision-Making in Finances“
    • More information is available in this flyer – English and Khmer
    • Training materials (in English and Khmer) are available here.
• March 11 & March 18, 2025 – Conexiones Latinx-MA and CPR partnered on webinars hosted by The Arc of Greater Haverhill-Newburyport in March.
  
  • Entitled “Guardianship is Not the Only Option: Supporting Decisions in Adulthood,” these webinars are tailored to families of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities
  • Training materials (in English and Spanish) are available here
• May 21, 2025 – CPR is partnering with SDM experts Jonathan and Nancy Gardner for a free webinar hosted by Boston Center for Independent Living in May
  • Entitled “Supported Decision-Making: Supporting Youth with Disabilities in Adulthood,” this webinar is tailored for families or supporters of people with disabilities who are approaching adulthood. It is scheduled for May 21, 6-7:30 PM.
    • REGISTER HERE
    • Webinar Flyer
• UPDATED – June 24, 2025 – CPR is partnering on a webinar hosted by the Parent/Professional Advocacy League (PPAL) in January.
  • Entitled “Guardianship is Not the Only Option: Supporting Decisions in Adulthood,” these webinars are tailored to families and professionals who support people with behavioral and mental health disabilities, including people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) who are dually diagnosed.
  • The webinar is scheduled for June 24, from 6-8 pm ET.
  • REGISTER HERE

On September 16, 2024, Morgan K. Whitlatch, CPR’s Director of Supported Decision-Making Initiatives, presented alongside I DECIDE Georgia leaders, including Dana Lloyd, Angad Sahgal, and Grace Sherman, at a session of the annual Reinventing Quality Conference in Baltimore, Maryland.

As a first-generation kid, it was hard. The Virgin Islands is quite behind when it comes to social awareness or acceptance, so my mom and I had no clue what to do when we learned I had autism. We didn’t know what I was going to do in the future.

Grace Sherman, I DECIDE Georgia

The interactive session explored Supported Decision-Making as a person-centered and culturally responsive strategy for overcoming intersectional barriers people with disabilities face when seeking decision-making supports.  It highlighted lessons learned from projects in Georgia and Massachusetts that are seeking to increase access to SDM in underrepresented and underserved communities.  It also showcased the work, experiences, and expertise of youth leaders who are advancing SDM across their states and beyond.

I was born in India where there was little awareness and support for people with Down syndrome. However, I was fortunate to have an incredible circle of support, including my family and even my neighbors. I was the first person with Down syndrome to attend the neighborhood preschool alongside my friends.

Angad Sahgal, LetMeDoIt and I DECIDE Georgia

For more information on this presentation, please see:

• Reinventing Quality PowerPoint Slides
• I DECIDE Georgia
• LetMeDoIt
• The Georgia Advocacy Office
• CPR’s SDM Training and Technical Assistance Center
• Center for Public Representation

The teacher [in Vermont] asked my parents if they wanted me to have a guardian . . . And then my family said I don’t need that because, in my culture, we don’t believe in that . . . [M]e and my family decided I don’t need a guardianship . . . Sometimes people need help from somebody else.  Like it can be your friend or it can be your family, someone you trust.

Hasan Ko, Youth Leader and Self-Advocate