지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
A person’s ability to determine their own future and to make choices about their own life and circumstances strikes at the very heart of what it means to be human.
In recent times, these questions have received a renewed attention and focus, propelled by the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (‘the Convention’), which came into being in 2008. In preparing for this presentation today I have reviewed the Korean Civil Act to gain an understanding of the reformed guardianship jurisdiction which came into operation on 1 July 2013. If my understanding is correct, in Korea, applications can be made to the Family Court seeking orders to resolve many of the many questions I have just raised. In Australia, specialist tribunals predominantly exercise the power to answer these questions, using the framework of substitute decision-making. Such matters are only dealt with by the courts in small numbers. However, the existing substitute decision-making model in Australia, a ‘best interests’ model, has been criticised for being too paternalistic and for taking away the right to self-determination too easily.
International law and thinking on the rights of persons with disabilities now favours a model that puts the ‘will, preferences, and rights’ of the person concerned at the centre of the decision-making process. A supported decision-making model is preferred to the current substitute decision-making model, in keeping with the Convention.
I have attempted to provide a brief overview of how questions of impaired decision-making capacity and decision making arrangements are currently determined and how it is proposed that they may be answered in the future in Australia. Whilst all Australian jurisdictions continue to operate legal frameworks entrenched in the appointment of a substitute decision-maker, there has been a significant policy shift encouraging those appointed to these roles to engage in supported decision-making whenever possible. This policy shift is not unique to Australia and is occurring in many countries throughout the world. In my view, this is a transition more than a destination. It is a transition that reflects society’s ever developing views as to the capability and the rights of persons with disabilities.
In recent times, these questions have received a renewed attention and focus, propelled by the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (‘the Convention’), which came into being in 2008. In preparing for this presentation today I have reviewed the Korean Civil Act to gain an understanding of the reformed guardianship jurisdiction which came into operation on 1 July 2013. If my understanding is correct, in Korea, applications can be made to the Family Court seeking orders to resolve many of the many questions I have just raised. In Australia, specialist tribunals predominantly exercise the power to answer these questions, using the framework of substitute decision-making. Such matters are only dealt with by the courts in small numbers. However, the existing substitute decision-making model in Australia, a ‘best interests’ model, has been criticised for being too paternalistic and for taking away the right to self-determination too easily.
International law and thinking on the rights of persons with disabilities now favours a model that puts the ‘will, preferences, and rights’ of the person concerned at the centre of the decision-making process. A supported decision-making model is preferred to the current substitute decision-making model, in keeping with the Convention.
I have attempted to provide a brief overview of how questions of impaired decision-making capacity and decision making arrangements are currently determined and how it is proposed that they may be answered in the future in Australia. Whilst all Australian jurisdictions continue to operate legal frameworks entrenched in the appointment of a substitute decision-maker, there has been a significant policy shift encouraging those appointed to these roles to engage in supported decision-making whenever possible. This policy shift is not unique to Australia and is occurring in many countries throughout the world. In my view, this is a transition more than a destination. It is a transition that reflects society’s ever developing views as to the capability and the rights of persons with disabilities.
목차
[Abstract]
Ⅰ. Introduction
Ⅱ. The Australian context
Ⅲ. Guardianship Statistics - NSW
Ⅳ. Commonwealth - National Decision Making Principles
Ⅴ. Conclusion
References
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
의사결정지원제도의 도입 방안
후견
2019 .07
-
장애인권리협약의 국내 이행에 관한 고찰 - 장애인차별금지법의 한계와 개선 방향을 중심으로 -
입법학연구
2017 .01
-
공공후견 및 의사결정지원 촉진을 위한 입법과제
법조
2021 .01
-
정신장애인의 권익옹호와 의사결정지원 방안
후견
2019 .07
-
빅데이터 특성이 의사결정 만족도와 이용행동에 영향을 미치는 요인에 관한 연구
Journal of Information Technology Applications & Management
2021 .02
-
실질적 자기결정존중의 관점에서의 후견계약의 평가와 의사결정지원방안의 모색
가족법연구
2015 .07
-
Prepare to Make a Decision
인사이트코리아
2017 .06
-
의사결정능력의 판정에 관한 법적 고찰
한양법학
2018 .05
-
유엔장애인권리협약상 장애인의 자립생활과 발달장애인의 탈시설 — 유엔장애인권리위원회의 일반논평 제5호와 탈시설가이드라인을 중심으로 —
사회법연구
2024 .08
-
장애인권리협약과 의사결정지원 제도화를 위한 국제적 모색
법학연구
2019 .06
-
아일랜드의 의사결정지원제도와 우리나라에의 시사점
강원법학
2023 .08
-
일본 법제도에 있어 의사결정대행에서 의사결정지원체제로의 패러다임 전환에 관한 동향
법이론실무연구
2015 .10
-
장애인권리협약에 따른 성년후견제도의 의사결정지원 고찰 : 영국의 Mental Capacity Act 2005를 중심으로
법학연구
2015 .12
-
의사결정지원을 위한 성년후견제도의 평가와 모색
비교사법
2015 .05
-
Continuous Audits Using Decision Support Systems
산경연구논집
2015 .08
-
발달장애인의 지원의사결정에 대한 좋은 실천은 가능한가
한국장애인복지학
2023 .06
-
성년후견과 신탁: 새로운 관계설정의 모색
가족법연구
2017 .07
-
정신장애인의 국제법적 보호와 유엔장애인권리협약의 국내적 이행에 관한 연구
국제법평론
2021 .01
-
Australia’s Strategic Responses to the US-China Rivalry and Implications to Korea
[KIEP] World Economy Brief
2021 .12
-
뷰티전공 대학생들의 전공만족도, 직업가치관, 진로결정 자기효능감의 구조적 관계
융합정보논문지
2019 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0