Next Article in Journal
Multiple Competences of Judicial and Social Intervention: Portuguese Public Prosecutors in Action
Next Article in Special Issue
“More Honoured in the Breach than in the Observance”—Self-Advocacy and Human Rights
Previous Article in Journal
Reading Alexander V. Choate Rightly: Now is the Time
Previous Article in Special Issue
Some Parents Are More Equal than Others: Discrimination against People with Disabilities under Adoption Law
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle
Laws 2017, 6(4), 18; doi:10.3390/laws6040018

Prioritising Supported Decision-Making: Running on Empty or a Basis for Glacial-To-Steady Progress?

1
School of Law, University of Sydney, Eastern Ave, Camperdown, NSW 2006, Australia
2
Faculty of Law, University of Technology Sydney, 15 Broadway, Ultimo, NSW 2007, Australia
Received: 15 September 2017 / Revised: 6 October 2017 / Accepted: 10 October 2017 / Published: 12 October 2017
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Disability Human Rights Law)
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [224 KB, uploaded 14 October 2017]

Abstract

Honouring the requirement of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to introduce supported decision-making (SD) has largely been a case of much talk and little real action. As a socio-economic right, actualising support is resource-intensive as well as being fairly uncharted territory in terms of what works, to what degree and for how long benefits last. This paper, drawing lightly on mainly Australian examples, considers unexplored (and sometimes unorthodox) approaches such as the ‘needs-based’ principle for setting social welfare priorities as possible ways of revitalising SD through progressive realisation, whether through civil society programs or under the law. It argues that pure repeal of proxy decision-making on its own is not viable in realpolitik terms so progressive realisation of ‘repeal with adequate support’ must instead be devised for SD implementation to progress. View Full-Text
Keywords: supported decision-making; socio-economic rights; progressive realisation; program priorities supported decision-making; socio-economic rights; progressive realisation; program priorities
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (CC BY 4.0).

Scifeed alert for new publications

Never miss any articles matching your research from any publisher
  • Get alerts for new papers matching your research
  • Find out the new papers from selected authors
  • Updated daily for 49'000+ journals and 6000+ publishers
  • Define your Scifeed now

SciFeed Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Carney, T. Prioritising Supported Decision-Making: Running on Empty or a Basis for Glacial-To-Steady Progress? Laws 2017, 6, 18.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Laws EISSN 2075-471X Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top