As committee, you have the legal authority to make decisions for an adult who is no longer capable. However, under B.C. law, every individual has the right to take part in making decisions about their own life. This is still true for adults who have been legally declared incapable.
Your role is to ground your committeeship in respect for and dignity of the person you are assisting. To do this, you must foster the independence of the adult for whom you are committee for as much as reasonably possible. You must:
- Foster the adult’s independence
- Encourage and involve the adult in decisions
To guide your decisions, you must balance your role as committee with promoting the adult's independence in ways that matter to the adult. You should try to include the adult's input in decision-making, but you must also have safeguards to protect them from serious risk or loss. To do this, you must explore the adult’s wishes and beliefs. If this is difficult, you can talk to the adult’s friends, family and caregivers to help you understand what the adult might have done when the adult was capable. It will also help you to maintain the adult's independence and input into decision-making to the greatest degree that they are capable of.
This can be a challenging balance to achieve. It's not uncommon for committees to ask themselves if they've supported the adult's independence and wishes too much or too little. We have years of experience and you are welcome to call. We cannot make decisions for you, but we may be able to provide you with advice or resources that can help.
Here are some stories that demonstrate how a committee can foster independence and decision making.
Connecting with the community
Gurpreet is in his late 40s. He has had multiple traumatic head injuries which have affected his speech, impacted his problem-solving skills and, over time, his mobility. He now uses a motorized wheelchair to get around his community. Gurpreet also lives with mental health issues. He enjoys being active in his community, regularly attends a local temple and is proud of his home. Over the years, Gurpreet has been taken advantage of by others, particularly with respect to his money.
Before his accidents, Gurpreet was independent in all aspects of his life. Today, through the daily assistance of community support workers, he lives in his own home. Gurpreet’s brother was recently appointed as his committee to finalize a legal settlement related to his injuries. Frustrated and worried that Gurpreet could be financially exploited, his brother considered only allowing Gurpreet to be involved in the community when supervised by his support worker.
One of Gurpreet’s favourite spots to visit is a local tea shop, conveniently located two blocks away from his home. Gurpreet’s brother identified that the coffee shop could be a safe environment that would allow Gurpreet to remain active in the community. Together, Gurpreet and his brother planned and practiced a safe route for him to navigate the short ride in his wheelchair. Gurpreet’s brother provided the shop manager with his contact information in case of any problems. Gurpreet now drives his wheelchair to the restaurant, where staff greet him by name, and he orders his tea and something to eat. His brother loads a gift card with $50 each week, so Gurpreet does not have to worry about carrying cash and can purchase his favourite items.
This is an example of fostering independence in an appropriate and supportive way, without imposing undue restrictions. In this case, it also saves Gurpreet the extra cost of a support worker for this familiar activity. Debit cards, gift cards and other non-cash options can provide opportunities for purchasing items while limiting risk. They may also provide a record of purchases made with the card, documentation Gurpreet’s brother can use to monitor and account for how Gurpreet’s money is being spent.
Honouring a relationship
Fei, a 24-year old woman with a developmental disability, recently surprised her family with the news she is engaged to be married.
Fei’s parents, who are also her committees, are reluctant to support the idea. They know very little about Fei’s fiancé Anson, and are anxious about Anson’s intentions and the legal implications marriage would have for Fei.
The committees want to support Fei, but also make sure she understands their concerns. They decided the best approach would be to talk to their daughter about how marriage would change her current situation and ask if she and Anson had thought about details like setting a date or where they would live. They also invited Anson to dinner to get to know him better. Although they are aware their authority does not give them the power to decide whether Fei can marry, the committees want to do their best to help Fei make an informed choice.
While the committees’ protectiveness of their daughter is understandable, the decision to marry is Fei’s. As committees, Fei’s parents are required to support her in making the decision she feels is best. They can provide her with advice or guidance they feel will help guide her, but ultimately they must respect Fei’s wishes. To support Fei, the committees could encourage her to participate in premarital preparation programs to support success in her relationship. They could also consider legal counsel to determine how best to protect Fei’s assets. Supporting and involving Fei facilitates the balancing act of honouring Fei and Anson’s relationship with the committees’ responsibility to protect her interests.
Finding a balance
Michael has lived in the same home in a small town in British Columbia since his early-20s. It’s where he and his partner raised their family. Although his partner passed away a few years ago and their three children had all long since left home and moved to the city, Michael can’t imagine living anywhere else.
Now in his mid-70s, Michael has dementia. Andre, his eldest son, was appointed committee and had been managing Michael’s finances from a distance – paying his bills, filing his taxes, and ensuring Michael had access to enough money to live life as he always had. Michael’s neighbours have always kept a close eye on him and have alerted Andre to any issues. Sometimes, he would forget to mow the lawn or collect his mail, but Andre would simply deal with it the next time he visited.
Recently, Michael’s health has noticeably declined, and Andre is increasingly alarmed by the problems Michael is having. A neighbour was visiting one morning and noticed the stove had been left on all night, and a pot had boiled dry. The last time Andre visited, Michael asked to go out for bacon and eggs. When Andre reminded him they had only just finished a big breakfast 20 minutes earlier, Michael laughed it off, but it was clear he didn’t remember. Andre wonders what else is going wrong and is worried about leaving his father on his own. He is thinking about selling the house and moving his father into a facility close to the city that could provide Michael with the assistance he seems to need. It would give Andre peace of mind that Michael was not at risk and it would also mean he could visit his dad more.
Although it seems Andre has Michael’s best interests at heart, the option Andre is considering seems to be the best one for Andre, even though it may not be the best option for Michael. Michael is in the only home he has known for 50 years, and moving could be very disruptive and possibly traumatic. To foster Michael’s independence, Andre could consider whether other options could mitigate the risk of leaving Michael in his home. Has Andre consulted with Michael’s doctor? Can Michael afford in-home support? If he cannot live independently, could he afford to keep the home so Andre could take him back for visits? Andre could also have a frank discussion with Michael about his living situation and Michael’s preferences. Even if he can no longer live in his home, Michael may prefer to move to a facility in his community rather than one near Andre.
A cautionary tale
Frank suffered a traumatic brain injury due to a motor vehicle accident a few years ago. His injuries were severe, and as a result, he was declared incapable, and his daughter Olena was appointed as his committee. The accident resulted in a financial settlement. It provided enough money to support Frank for many years. Frank’s daughter does not live in the same community as his father, so she deposited the settlement funds into his father’s bank account and allowed him to continue using his debit card to access the account for his day-to-day expenses.
Periodically, Olena reviewed the bank statements for anything out of the ordinary. One month, she noticed a sizeable drop in the account balance. The statement detail showed several $500 and $1,000 cash withdrawals, some on the same day. Olena called the bank to put a hold on the account and then called her father to tell him how his account had been compromised. Olena was surprised to learn her father had made the withdrawals. Frank had spent some of the money and had made several loans to new friends (although he couldn’t remember who).
Unfortunately, Frank’s daughter did not fully understand his dad’s vulnerability. As a result, much of Frank’s settlement money was quickly misused by people taking advantage of Frank’s good nature.
In this situation, fostering Frank’s independence and participation in decision-making requires a greater investment of time on the part of the committee as well as some thoughtful actions to reduce vulnerability. This situation could have been prevented if Frank had a different arrangement for access to his money. In this example, a protection could have been to create a separate bank account for Frank with a monthly amount transferred in for his personal use. A prepaid credit card, with a smaller dollar amount loaded onto the card, could also help support Frank’s independence without risking financial misuse.