KWC (Guardianship) - [2015] TASGAB 17

GUARDIANSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION BOARD
HOBART

Application for Guardianship

KWC (Guardianship) [2015] TASGAB 17

REASONS FOR DECISION

Wendy Hudson (Chair)
Date of hearing: 15 October 2015

Guardianship – need for a guardian

Guardianship and Administration Act 1995 – s. 6, 20, 25

On 15 October 2015 the Board made an order appointing The Public Trustee and the Public Guardian as KWC’s administrator and guardian. The Public Guardian has requested a statement of reasons for decision in relation to the guardianship order.
Dr Matthew Warden (psychiatrist), KWC, IE (KWC’s grandmother), NC (KWC’s mother), Ms Christine Healy (the applicant and case manager), representatives from The Public Trustee and the Public Guardian, and Ms Elizabeth Dalgleish (investigator for the Board) attended the hearing.
In appointing a guardian, the Board must be satisfied of the elements in section 20(1) of the Guardianship and Administration Act 1995 (the Act) being whether KWC:

(a) is a person with a disability, and
(b) is unable by reason of the disability to make reasonable judgements in respect of all or any matters relating to his or her person or circumstances, and

The Board had the following documents available to it prior to the hearing:
- Application completed by Ms Healy
- Health Care Professional Report completed by Dr Warden
- A timeline of KWC’s health concerns taken from his Health file
- Letter from NC received by the Board on 11 September 2015.
Dr Warden provided an opinion in the health care professional report that KWC had a psychiatric disability (schizophrenia) and also noted an intellectual disability as ‘unconfirmed but appears to have difficulty’. Dr Warden indicated that KWC’s disability had been evident for 10+ years and that it was static. NC disputed the diagnosis of intellectual disability but accepted the diagnosis of schizophrenia. There was no other objection from any other party to Dr Warden’s diagnosis and the Board considered that section 20(1)(a) was satisfied.
According to the health care professional report, KWC’s disability results in an impairment of his impulse control and he is susceptible to influence. This has lead to a history which includes KWC involvement with drug dealers, buying drugs and alcohol, taking out loans, selling personal items and getting into debt. As a consequence of his drug and alcohol intake, KWC’s mental health is worse and often leads to aggressive and intimidating behaviour.
Ms Healy reported, in the application to the Board, that KWC has consistently declined referral to alcohol and drug services, he does not see that there is a problem with his use of drugs and alcohol, and he does not acknowledge that his behaviour is inappropriate. NC stated that she had tried to influence her son but she had not been able to break the cycle; KWC was still able to sell his possessions at Cash Converters and the drug dealer had allowed KWC to run up an account of $700.00.
The Board was therefore satisfied that KWC was unable by reason of his disability to make reasonable judgments regarding his person and circumstances and considered that section 20(1)(b) was satisfied.
Dr Warden informed the Board that there had been a long running history of very significant crises caused by KWC at his grandmother’s home involving KWC being aggressive and threatening, then, following those periods, a belief that those events did not happen. Dr Warden referred to 3 incidents:
·     September 2014 when he had been called to the house but by the time he had arrived, KWC had been taken away by the police; KWC’s grandmother was extremely distressed and upset. Whilst KWC was in hospital, they discussed the matter with the family, expressing concern for KWC’s return, however NC and IE, indicated that they would be happy to have him back
·     October 2014 another incident occurred where KWC was reported by NC as threatening and abusive to his grandmother and they were advised to call the police. Later, during discussions with KWC, he admitted to being threatening to his grandmother because she wouldn’t give him money
·     January 2015 another report was made by NC regarding KWC’s behaviour; the police were called to take him to hospital.
The timeline of KWC’s health concerns record further incidents where the police were called and KWC was taken to hospital, these included February, May, and September 2015. Dr Warden noted that the incidents appeared to be connected to KWC demanding money and that the situation may get worse; he did not see that changing the legal emphasis (ie appointing an administrator) would curb KWC’s behaviour.
Ms Healy advised that KWC was socially isolated, he was not involved with community organisations; and thought that if KWC was integrated into the community, he would be able to form more social groups. She also stated that she had significant concern for IE and NC’s welfare.
NC did not agree with the history provided by Dr Warden and Ms Healy. IE stated that there’s been ‘no problem at all’, he had been in her home for over 20 years and she questioned whether people were thinking about the impact on her, when they were considering alternative accommodation for KWC. When asked about whether he had demanded money, KWC stated that he had asked to borrow money, ‘sometimes they can afford it and sometimes they can’t’ and when this occurs he gets angry, not at them, but at the situation, because he does not have the money.
It is clear that NC and IE care deeply for KWC and have strong views about his best interests. However, in relation to the history provided regarding the past incidents involving demands for money by KWC and aggressive behaviour, the Board preferred the evidence provided by Dr Warden and Ms Healy which was consistent with the timeline summary of KWC’s health concerns.
NC was of the view that the administration order was sufficient and no further order was required at this stage. However, the pattern and history outlined above did not satisfy the Board that with the appointment of The Public Trustee, the management of KWC’s ongoing person or circumstances will be free from the issues that have characterized his situation since at least September 2014. Dr Warden advised the Board that ‘it would not take a hugely different scenario to enact itself for there to be a potentially tragic outcome’. To this end the Board was mindful of the potential impact of the order appointing The Public Trustee to administer KWC’s estate.
All parties present at the hearing agreed that KWC had been in a cycle of debt, alcohol and drug intake, and periods of hospitalization. A key factor throughout this period has been the decision–making for KWC. The appointment of a guardian will provide a mechanism whereby personal decisions can be planned and executed with the certainty that is required to ensure that KWC has the best opportunity to break this cycle and that decisions are made in his best interests.
The Board was satisfied that, on balance, taking into account KWC’s pattern and history and the potential impact of the administration order, that KWC is in need of a guardian and it was appropriate to make a plenary order.
The applicant nominated the Public Guardian as guardian for KWC. There was no alternative person proposed at the hearing. The Board considers that the Public Guardian is the most appropriate person to appoint as guardian for KWC.

CONCLUSION:

After hearing an application for a guardianship order in respect of KWC (hereinafter called the ‘represented person’)

The Board was satisfied that the represented person

•is a person with a disability, and
•is unable by reason of the disability to make reasonable judgements in respect of his person and circumstances; and
•is in need of a guardian;

THE BOARD ORDERS

That the Public Guardian be appointed as the represented person’s guardian.
That the powers and duties of the guardian be those conferred by Division 3 of Part 4 of the Guardianship and Administration Act 1995
That the order remains in effect to 14 October 2016.