Guardian of Incapacitated Person is Based on the Best Interests of the Incapacitated Person
In the guardian of an incapacitated person appellate litigation case of In re Scarpelli, PICS Case No. 14-1836 (Pa. Super. Nov. 2, 2014) the Honorable Patricia H. Jenkins, writing on behalf of the Pennsylvania Superior Court, held that because there was no statutory presumption for appointing a family member as guardian, and because non-biological, non-legally related father was determined best capable of maintaining incapacitated daughter’s relationship with her family and providing a stable home life, the trial court properly granted guardianship to father.
Judith Scarpelli, mother, appealed from a decree declaring her daughter, Jordan Scarpelli, incapacitated, and appointing Joseph Stallings, father, plenary guardian of daughter and her estate. Daughter was an 18-year-old who had a diagnosis of Down Syndrome. In 1999, when daughter was three, mother and father began cohabitating, which they continued intermittently until 2005 when their relationship finally dissolved. Mother and father’s relationship resulted in the birth of daughter’s half-sister.
Father and daughter developed a strong bond during mother and father’s relationship and cohabitation, and father has been acting in loco parentis, continuing to play an active role in daughter’s life since the dissolution of his relationship with mother, including attending all of her medical appointments and being involved in her high school education. Daughter was withheld by mother from father and several of daughter’s relatives on both sides of the family, including her half-sister, by virtue of the fact that father had primary physical custody of daughter’s half-sister.
Following a petition filed by father, the trial court entered a decree declaring daughter incapacitated and appointing father plenary guardian of her person and estate. Mother concurred with the adjudication of her daughter as incapacitated, and on appeal raised the sole issue of whether the trial court abused its discretion in appointing father, who was not a biological or legal parent or relative of daughter, over mother, who has cared for daughter since her birth.
The court noted that the Probate, Estates, and Fiduciary Code permitted the trial court broad discretion in appointing as a guardian of an incapacitated person “any qualified individual” or agency, but further stated that the trial court should select a guardian based on the best interests of the incapacitated person.
The court noted that, unlike child custody, there was not presumption in the guardianship statutes for selecting a family member, and that the legislature’s exclusion of such a presumption from the statute indicated that they did not approve of the courts applying such a presumption in guardianship proceedings.
The court further noted that the trial court found that father would best serve daughter’s interests by promoting and maintaining a close network of supportive family members and providing a stable living environment, including supporting daughter’s desire to maintain a relationship with mother, father, and her half-sister. The trial court noted that mother lacked desire to maintain family ties on her side of the family, and concluded that appointing mother as guardian would result in the total exclusion of the father from daughter’s life and would severely limit the time she could spend with her half-sister; the trial court additionally observed that mother’s own family testified that mother’s erratic behavior negatively influenced daughter, and mother had placed her conflict with father over daughter’s desire to maintain a relationship with her half-sister.
The court held that, even though mother would also meet the requirements of being a guardian, father’s pattern of facilitating contact with daughter’s family members advanced daughter’s expressed desire to maintain family ties, and appointing father would be the best way for daughter to maintain contact with both mother and father.
Reference: Digest of Recent Opinions, Pennsylvania Law Weekly, 37 PLW 1128 (November 25, 2014)
Filed Under: Guardianship of Incapacitated Person; Estate Planning: Best Interest of Incapacitated Person
Please visit our Estate Planning website for more information in this topic.