1.    It is presumed the named individual has capacity to enter a supported decisionmaking agreement. This presumption may be rebutted only by clear and convincing evidence.

Ask a will, trust or estate question, get an answer ASAP!
Thousands of highly rated, verified estate & trust lawyers.
Click here to chat with a lawyer about your rights.

2.    A named individual’s use of uncommon methods of communication does not affect the named individual’s capacity to enter a supported decisionmaking agreement.

3.    A named individual may have more than one supported decisionmaking agreement in effect at the same time. If any two of a named individual’s supported decisionmaking agreements are incompatible, the more recent agreement prevails.

4.    Two supported decisionmaking agreements are not incompatible solely due to enabling the named individual to get decisionmaking assistance from more than one supporter at the same time for the same decision.

5.    A supported decisionmaking agreement does not prevent the named individual from:

a.    Getting decisionmaking assistance from someone who is not a supporter in a supported decisionmaking agreement; b.    Making decisions independently without consulting a supporter; or

c.    Getting access to and copies of documents and records about the named individual.

6.    The existence or contents of a supported decisionmaking agreement may not be used as evidence of incapacity or incompetence.

7.    A supported decisionmaking agreement does not give a supporter the ability to act as a surrogate decisionmaker. A supported decisionmaking agreement does not give a supporter the authority to sign documents on behalf of the named individual.