ESTATE OF CAITLIN

ESTATE OF CAITLIN (15/XXXX) — Petitioner, the father1 of the respondent, Caitlin, seeks to be appointed the guardian of Caitlin's person pursuant to Article 17-A of the Surrogate's Court Procedure Act (Article 17-A). Caitlin is nineteen years old and currently resides with the petitioner. She is diagnosed with seizure disorder and a developmental disability. The petitioner asserts that he commenced this proceeding because, "[Caitlin] is technically an adult and she really is not at the level where [the petitioner] feels that she understands arguments or that she understands the written language well enough, or comprehends what's going on well enough, or comprehends what's going on well enough to make decisions." The petitioner doesn't "want anyone taking advantage of her." He believes "[i]t's as simple as that." As discussed below, an analysis of whether Caitlin's inherent right to make fundamental decisions should be terminated by the grant of guardianship is not "simple" as the petitioner believes. Instead, a determination of whether a guardian for Caitlin is necessary requires a detailed and considerate analysis of her abilities, her environment, her potential, and her desire to participate in the decisions which affect her life.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

ESTATE OF CAITLIN (15/XXXX) — Petitioner, the father¹ of the respondent, Caitlin, seeks to be appointed the guardian of Caitlin’s person pursuant to Article 17-A of the Surrogate’s Court Procedure Act (Article 17-A). Caitlin is nineteen years old and currently resides with the petitioner. She is diagnosed with seizure disorder and a developmental disability. The petitioner asserts that he commenced this proceeding because, “[Caitlin] is technically an adult and she really is not at the level where [the petitioner] feels that she understands arguments or that she understands the written language well enough, or comprehends what’s going on well enough, or comprehends what’s going on well enough to make decisions.” The petitioner doesn’t “want anyone taking advantage of her.” He believes “[i]t’s as simple as that.” As discussed below, an analysis of whether Caitlin’s inherent right to make fundamental decisions should be terminated by the grant of guardianship is not “simple” as the petitioner believes. Instead, a determination of whether a guardian for Caitlin is necessary requires a detailed and considerate analysis of her abilities, her environment, her potential, and her desire to participate in the decisions which affect her life.

Statutory Framework of Article 17-A

ESTATE OF CAITLIN

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal