supported decision-making

As mentioned in guardian section in this blog, the UGCOPAA urges judges in the US to consider “least restrictive alternative” before utilizing guardianship for the vulnerable persons.
　　Above alternatives include various kinds of legal strategies: durable power of attorney (DPOA), health care surrogate (medical power of attorney), living will, testament, and trust. 
Among other things, supported decision-making (SDM) is closely connected with not only the increased self-determination but also amplified personal satisfaction of themselves.

　　Pursuant to Judges’ Journal vol.58 No.1 , as an example of daily usage regarding SDM,  gathering relevant information, explaining that information in simplified language, weighing the pros and cons of a decision, considering the consequences of making–or not making–a particular decision, communicating the decision to third parties, and assisting the person with a disability to implement the decision are enumerated.

　　To tell the truth, SDM is introduced not only in the US but in the national plan for the purpose of promoting utilization of adult guardianship in Japan. 
　　Nevertheless, from my perspective, the significant difference between the two lies in the position of principal. 
In the case of the US, as SDM is used before appointing guardians, the vulnerable persons themselves are able to acquire benefits directly from their acts with supports, whereas in Japan, as they are already subject to guardianship, guardians play a crucial role to make them enjoy the benefits indirectly from fiduciaries’ acts.